44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 2, 2023 10:00AM
- May/2/23 10:06:24 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition signed by Canadians. The petitioners are concerned about the government's failure to stand up for the rights of victims. This is in the face of the Supreme Court of Canada's unjust decision to strike down a law passed by the previous Harper Conservative government that gave judges the discretion to apply consecutive parole ineligibility periods for mass murderers. As a result of this decision, some of Canada's worst killers have seen their sentences significantly reduced.
The petitioners are calling on the government to use all tools available, including invoking the notwithstanding clause, to override this decision.
107 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 10:31:39 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, when the leader of the Conservative Party sat around the cabinet table, the Harper government did absolutely nothing when it came to housing. If we contrast that with the current government, we have invested literally billions of dollars into housing, developed a housing strategy, and worked with the different provinces and the many different for-profit and non-profit stakeholders.
My question for the leader of the official opposition is this. Will he not recognize that, although Ottawa has stepped up to the plate and contributed in virtually every way, even though the Conservative Party has opposed many of those measures, the provinces, municipalities and other stakeholders also need to step up in order to resolve Canada's housing issues?
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 11:52:54 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to inform you at the outset that I am proud to be splitting my time with the biggest and strongest proponent of affordable housing across the country. I am of course referring to the member for Vancouver East.
We are in a crisis, which has been brewing for many years. I will come back to that. The reality is that even though the Conservatives moved this motion today, they do not put forward much in the way of solutions. For example, they blame the municipalities. However, I know that many municipalities are doing everything they can to ensure they have affordable housing. What is often lacking is the federal contribution. The Conservatives also say that municipalities should plan. Back home, in the greater Vancouver area, municipalities are already doing that.
The Conservatives are also proposing that federal buildings be converted to housing. I would just like to mention that, during the Harper regime, the Conservatives sold off federal government assets. It is a bit rich to hear them say today that they made a mistake during their 10 years in power, that they really ripped Canada's social fabric, but that they now want to make amends and turn the federal government's assets into something useful.
What is missing from their motion? There is no mention of co-operative housing, which has been a long-standing solution in Canada. There is no mention of community housing, which is foundational in helping people access affordable housing.
There is also no mention of the role that the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, or CMHC, has played over the years. The fact is, it has been very slow to provide adequate funding, and instead, it has often served to increase banks' profits. During the financial crisis, the Harper government made sure that tens of billions of dollars went to maintaining bank profits, rather than building affordable housing. We saw the same thing more recently from the Liberals during the COVID-19 crisis. Some $150 billion from the CMHC was used to prop up our big Canadian banks, rather than invest in affordable housing.
These are not solutions. One solution would be to change the aspect of our tax system that encourages investors to buy up affordable housing and convert it into housing units for the rich and wealthy. This is a terrible aspect of our tax system, one that has to change. We need to prioritize and fund affordable housing, ensuring that at least one-third of the new units built are affordable. All the things I just mentioned could improve this motion and ensure that we have a policy based on common sense. I know my colleague from Vancouver East will speak to that later.
We are in a crisis. There are hundreds of thousands of Canadians who cannot find affordable housing, and we have had a federal government that has been very slow in the pickup. The NDP has been pushing, in this minority Parliament, as we did in the last, to force the government to make these investments. We are making some progress, but it is not at all on the scale that is required.
For a time in my life, like so many other Canadians, I simply could not afford housing. I had to couch surf. I fortunately had a second-hand car that I was able to sleep in. These are the kinds of things that Canadians should not have to struggle with. There should be that right to housing, and this is something the NDP has brought forward repeatedly over the course of the last few years, which is to put in place housing policies that actually make sense.
The Conservatives are bringing forward a different motion today, and this is something that we are all rejoicing in. They normally do the carbon tax for every one of their opposition days. Today, they are finally tackling housing. However, what I was hoping to see was the member for Carleton standing up to say, “We are sorry, Canadians. We are sorry about our contribution to the housing crisis. We are sorry that we almost doubled housing prices during the Harper regime.”
Yes, the Conservatives can point to the Liberals for doing the same thing, but this tit-for-tat does not provide the affordable housing that Canadians need. I thought that the member for Carleton would stand up to say that they were so sorry that, in the last five years of the Harper regime, they lost 322,000 affordable rental units. I thought he would say that they are sorry they did that to Canadians, that they contributed, over the course of the 10 years of the Harper regime, to stripping apart the social safety net and allowing the destruction of affordable housing, with so many housing units converted to higher-priced units, so people could not afford them.
I was hoping the member for Carleton would do that, but we have not had any apologies from the Conservatives for their absolutely lamentable record over the course of that dismal decade of the Harper regime, where they stripped apart all of the protections that Canadians needed. The Conservatives basically amplified a despicable decision made by Paul Martin to end the national housing program and, instead of saying it was developing as a crisis and that they needed to address it, we saw the results.
We saw that the Conservatives did not protect those affordable housing units and did not make the investments in social housing, co-operative housing or community housing, which Canadians, seniors, students, families and people with disabilities need. The Conservatives did not do any of that. They had an appallingly bad record.
The first step the Conservatives need to take, as a party, is to recognize what a deplorable, appalling record they have. They nearly doubled housing prices with respect to market housing, and they basically did not protect hundreds of thousands of rental units that were affordable, and those that were lost to higher-priced units in conversions. These are things that Conservatives should acknowledge. These are things for which Conservatives should step up to say that they are sorry, to Canadians, for their very large part in provoking the housing crisis that exists today.
However, not a single Conservative has done that. No Conservative has stepped up to say that they were wrong to do what they did during that dismal decade and to acknowledge their contribution to this housing crisis. Yes, the Liberals are culpable as well, but the Conservatives played a significant, major and disappointing role in the housing crisis that we know today.
After the Conservatives allowed those rental units to be converted, and people with disabilities, seniors, students and families lost their affordable housing, the most reasonable person in this country would say that, really, when the Conservatives are raising in the House on the issue of housing for the first time ever for their opposition day, they should have started off by saying that they are sorry for all the neglect and everything they did that has contributed to so many people being homeless today.
1196 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 12:03:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I do not even know where to start. That was such a strange intervention. It shows that Conservatives are still struggling with the housing issue. They know a talking point, which is that the price of housing has doubled. That is true, except that the price of housing almost doubled on their watch. When that is pointed out to them, they get very sensitive and react. They like to accuse, but they do not like to resolve.
In this corner of the House, New Democrats pushed the Harper Conservatives during that regime. As we know, it was a majority government; unfortunately, a Conservative majority has absolutely appalling results for Canadians. When they basically allowed seniors, people with disabilities and families to have their affordable housing stripped away from them, we fought back.
Of course, in this Parliament, we have been fighting for affordable housing. We make sure that we push the Liberal government to do the right thing and make the investments; in this way, we can hopefully catch up on the years of neglect.
The reality is that this housing crisis is a product of Paul Martin, the Harper regime and the current government. New Democrats are going to continue to speak up for Canadians from coast to coast to coast to make sure that housing is built. Canadians have a right to a roof over their heads at night, and we are going to continue to fight for just that thing.
245 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 12:39:13 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I always enjoy hearing the member speak, but we cannot neglect the deplorable Harper regime record where we lost over 300,000 affordable housing units. These were units to which seniors, people with disabilities, families and youth all had access.
The Conservatives today have presented a motion that would not give one blue cent to housing, and they have just rejected the NDP amendment that would ensure there would be a role for co-operative housing, social housing and community housing.
My question for my colleague is simply this. Is this just the performative arts by the Conservatives, that they are not actually seeking to find the solutions and to put in place the funding that is so critical to ensure that every Canadian has a roof over his or her head at night?
136 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 12:50:25 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the member could tell us why, when the government, in an attempt to help Canadians, brought forward the housing support program, the one-time payment, which ultimately helped over half a million Canadian renters, the Conservatives voted against it.
I look at the resolution today, and it seems to be more about trying to convince Canadians that the Conservatives genuinely care about housing. The member spoke of “taking inspiration from the Harper era”, which did nothing for housing. That was the reality of it. Harper did nothing to expand Canada's housing market.
I wonder if the member could provide her thoughts on those two points.
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 12:51:18 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, in the Harper years, there was half the rent, half the mortgage and half the down payment to pay. Right now, we have a costly coalition that is continuously making it more difficult for Canadians. Houses are built of beams. Right now, the government is cancelling any dreams of home ownership.
The member opposite is suggesting that the Harper government was not putting Canadians ahead. The numbers talk. Facts talk. The continuous lacklustre announcements from the government are failing Canadians, and Canadians have caught on.
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 12:55:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Vaughan—Woodbridge.
I want to take a bit of a different approach to the issue because people who are following the debate should get a bit of a history and an understanding of why we are where we are today, who is responsible for what, and what the current government has done. I believe that the government, in a real and tangible way, has stepped up to the plate. Let me expand by commenting on what I talked about at the beginning.
When I was first elected to the Manitoba legislature back in 1988, I was appointed as the housing critic for the Province of Manitoba. Therefore, virtually from day one, I have had an interest in housing. With respect to public, subsidized housing, the cost was always somewhere in the range of 25% or closer to 30% of an individual's salary, and they would be subsidized in the tens of thousands of non-profit housing units in the province of Manitoba alone.
With respect to federal contributions, one of the biggest ongoing contributions that Ottawa provides across the country is for non-profit, low-income housing, which is there for people with disabilities, seniors, individuals on fixed incomes and individuals who have low income or virtually no income at all. We tie in literally hundreds of millions of dollars every year, and that is how Ottawa, in essence, has that ongoing support.
I want to go to 1991 or 1992. It was during the Charlottetown accord debate. I was in the north end of Winnipeg, and I was debating Bill Blaikie, an NDP member of Parliament at the time. Bill Blaikie was defending why Ottawa does not have a role in housing and why provinces and municipalities should be responsible for housing. I disagreed with that back in 1991. Every political party supported divesting of Ottawa's authority in housing back in 1991-92. That is why I was not surprised when we saw cutbacks in housing in the following years.
I opposed it then, and I would oppose it today, but the difference today is that we finally have a Prime Minister who understands the important role that Ottawa plays in housing. Therefore, I am hoping that members of all political parties will recognize that, whenever there is a constitutional debate, hopefully sometime in the distant future, never again will we see federal politicians not recognizing the importance of housing to Canadians. It is important that Canada, as a national government, does play a role.
Let us go back over the last number of years since we have replaced the Harper regime. We have seen not only hundreds of millions of dollars but also multiple billions of dollars being invested in a national housing strategy, which includes things that are being proposed by the Conservative Party today in its motion. The Conservatives know that. Do we think they would come up with an original idea? What they are doing, in many ways, is taking some Liberal ideas and amplifying them.
We could talk about the accelerator fund to speed up the construction. In the budget, the Minister of Finance and the government have been very clear that we want to double construction over the next decade over what we are seeing today. The accelerator fund is an investment of billions of dollars to speed up the process while working with municipalities.
I would hope that people who are following the debate today would have an appreciation that there are limitations on what Ottawa can actually do. We can use financial incentives, which we are doing. Like no other government in the history of Canada has ever done, this government has stepped up to provide the financial incentives to see more construction and more homes built in Canada.
However, we are only one of several players. I would argue that our municipalities, both rural and urban, need to come to the table in a larger capacity. The zoning issue, the bureaucracy of red tape in construction, is of critical importance. If anyone wants to try to buy a lot in the city of Winnipeg, I wish them good luck. No one can buy an individual lot. If, by chance, someone might discover something, we are talking about huge amounts of money. Around 1990, I purchased a lot for $30,000 or $32,000. A few years later, the lot prices skyrocketed. Now, people cannot get lots. However, in some of the rural communities in Manitoba, people can find those $30,000 lots.
Let us ask the questions. Why? Where is the money being invested? How can we ensure that housing remains more affordable, that there are larger quantities of space for the building of homes, and that there is more construction? In order to do that, as the seconder of the motion, a former mayor, made reference to, cities must play an absolutely critical role and step up. In our case, we are encouraging that. Provinces also play a critical role. When I was the housing critic at the provincial level in the late 1980s, infill housing was really important. We needed to look at ways to build homes on vacant lots, particularly in areas that were in need.
Housing co-ops are another form of housing that Canadians could truly benefit from. There is a difference between a housing co-op and an apartment block. I like to say that people in an apartment block are tenants, and that, in a housing co-op, they are residents. There is a big difference. Being in a housing co-op is similar to being a condo owner of sorts. There are opportunities for us to be able to expand. That is why, when the Minister of Housing indicated that we wanted to see the expansion and supported that expansion of housing co-ops, I saw that as a good thing.
There are organizations, third parties out there, that have done phenomenal work. I am thinking in particular about Habitat for Humanity in the city of Winnipeg and in the province of Manitoba. Habitat for Humanity has built 500 new houses over the years. One of the biggest benefactors has been the community of Winnipeg North, whether it is in The Maples, the traditional north end, Point Douglas, or all over Winnipeg North. Habitat has been there to support people who would otherwise not have had the opportunity, in all likelihood, to become home owners. Habitat is not unique to the province of Manitoba; it is across Canada. The federal government has supported that.
The federal government continues to work with willing provinces wherever it can. The point I am trying to emphasize is that the federal government, like no other government in the history of Canada, with the possible exception of when the World War II war homes were being built, has come to the plate and has been there in a very real and tangible way, with more than just dollars. Our commitment to support Canadians and the housing industry is second to no other in the history of Canada. We do want, and we are prepared to continue, to work with the stakeholders, whether those are private, non-profit, provincial governments, territorial governments or indigenous governments.
The former Kapyong Barracks is a wonderful parcel of land that is being developed today. It was formerly federal lands. There is so much more to say, but I will leave it at that.
1256 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 1:06:34 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, that was an interesting question. The office closures mentioned by the member actually happened in Brandon, Manitoba as well. I think there were nine veterans offices that were closed down coast to coast to coast. I know that my colleagues in Atlantic Canada remember this quite well because of the impact it had there.
What I find interesting is the statement that the current leader of the Conservative Party made when I posed a question to him regarding the investments we put into housing. In essence, his response was that we would have been better off not to have spent the money. I believe that the Conservative Party, if ever given the opportunity, would cut back all expenditures in regard to national housing. Even the member who spoke before me said we should take inspiration from Steven Harper. The leader of the Conservative Party was one of his ministers. He is a former minister of housing, who took inspiration from Harper, who did absolutely nothing, zero, on housing. Now we have the leader of the Conservative Party saying we do not need to provide money. It should concern all of us.
193 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 1:09:28 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, there have been a lot of speeches from the other side of the House today that have been trying to rewrite history. I was a municipal councillor during the years Harper was in government and, as the member pointed out, there were no programs for municipalities. There were no housing programs for not-for-profits. I wonder if the hon. member could reiterate parts of his speech that talked about policy support, the national housing strategy and what that means for not-for-profits and housing providers across the country, versus what we experienced during the Harper years.
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 1:10:06 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative Party actually captured the answer to that today, in terms of the contrast. One member spoke of taking inspiration from the Harper era. The member who is a former councillor understands that the former era had absolutely nothing, zero, for housing. Then, the leader of the Conservative Party, today in the House, in his introduction, said that money is not the issue. He feels that we should not have invested hundreds of millions, going into billions, of dollars. I think that is the contrast.
88 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 2:48:38 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the way we can get good projects built, including the critical mineral projects that are essential for the energy transition and offer an enormous economic opportunity to this country, is to do things the right way by respecting the rights of indigenous communities, ensuring that we are consulting thoroughly, working with indigenous communities as partners in these projects and ensuring that we are doing thorough environmental assessments. That is how we move projects forward.
That is very different from the gutting of the environmental assessment process that happened under Stephen Harper and the Conservatives. We are committed that going forward—
103 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 8:40:02 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, what a pleasure it is to work with my hon. colleague on the status of women committee. We are in different political parties, yet we strive to find common ground on so many issues to fight for women.
Former Prime Minister Harper, at a time when we had to fight for a national inquiry, indicated in this House it was not on his radar when women were coming forward sounding the alarm around the ongoing genocide of murdered and missing indigenous women and girls. That sparked my motivation to start, along with Rain Hamilton, the We Care campaign to fight for a national inquiry and to get allies on board to fight to put in place a national inquiry into murdered and missing indigenous women and girls.
It is very nice to see the member from the Conservative Party supporting our calls for justice regarding a red dress alert. I encourage other members of her party to share her enthusiasm and compassion when it comes to trying to understand and address the crisis of murdered and missing indigenous women and girls.
The crisis continues. One of the areas we know contributes to violence, which is something we talk about a lot in the status of women committee, is the need to implement a guaranteed livable basic income. All gender-based violence organizations have unanimously supported this call. If we want to deal with gender-based violence head on, then we need to implement a guaranteed livable basic income. That is something everybody seems to recognize.
We know there is a direct correlation between poverty and violence. We know that indigenous women and girls and trans women are some of the poorest in this country as a result of violent colonization and violent dispossession.
Does my colleague agree with me? Would she support a guaranteed livable basic income as a means to tackle gender-based violence in the country?
320 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
