44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 13, 2023 10:00AM
- Jun/13/23 11:11:20 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would first like to point out that I will share my time with my charming colleague from Longueuil—Saint-Hubert.
I thank my Conservative colleague for presenting this report to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, which proposes accelerating the construction of housing.
Presenting this report to the House enables us to talk about a situation that is of great concern to us. This will not be the first or the last report to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities on the subject of the dire need for housing in Quebec and Canada.
This report dates from October 2022 and is about the housing accelerator fund and the $4 billion that has been invested. Since then, we have tabled another report, which focused more specifically on the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation, or CMHC. A motion was moved in committee because we wanted to get ideas to determine what the fund would be used to finance. We received around 40 witnesses, several briefs and 17 recommendations.
The point of getting concurrence in this report is to take stock of the 17 recommendations that were made. In our view, the government is well behind in implementing some of these recommendations.
The interesting thing is that, at the very start, the report provides context and cites the Scotiabank analysis that was published in May 2021. It reads as follows:
Canada has the lowest number of housing units per 1,000 residents of any G7 country. The number of housing units per 1,000 Canadians has been falling since 2016 owing to the sharp rise in population growth. An extra 100 thousand dwellings would have been required to keep the ratio of housing units to population stable since 2016.
Even if Canada managed to build them, we would not reach that ratio. That is troubling. The responsibility for building housing, including the affordable and social housing that we consider to be the most important, lies with Quebec and the provinces. The government brought in the national housing strategy, which has become an $80‑billion plan with several programs. It is incomprehensible. How can we make every effort to ensure that the right choices are being made in these housing creation programs administered by the CMHC? That was the question in this study, which included evidence from several witnesses.
However, one question remains, that of the housing crisis, which is very real. We are not talking about supply and demand, or housing built by private companies; the current market is doing that quite well. The concern is how the public funds allocated to the national housing strategy are being used. That is our public money. Does this funding meet the real needs of Canadians, that is, prioritizing social and affordable housing and ensuring that affordable housing remains affordable?
Sometimes, we hear that, thanks to the national housing strategy, some of the housing built by the real estate industry is affordable housing. However, the percentage of affordable housing they build is based on the average income of the population this housing is intended for.
We are way off the mark. If affordable housing is calculated based on the income of a population rather than household income, we are completely off-track. These are all issues that have been discussed and are still relevant to determine whether our strategy is effective in meeting these glaring needs.
This report contains several recommendations, including some that warrant being implemented very quickly. As there is a housing accelerator fund, the first recommendation asks that the government accelerate its implementation. That is self-evident. This first recommendation must have been a wise choice at the time. There are several measures aimed at ensuring that housing remains affordable.
The report includes evidence that is still relevant today. The Conservatives and the Liberals keep passing the buck, but I must tell the Liberals that they are the ones being questioned in the report. Where are the Liberals with regard to the 17 recommendations in the report? Have there been any results? What are the targets? Is it possible to properly monitor all the investments made? Is that improving peoples’ lives?
Several witnesses said that, if any administrative burden were added to construction projects on the market, they would not be completed. The government should prioritize solutions such as the construction and renovation of affordable rental housing. It should prioritize off-market housing and stimulate the supply of properties and housing for low- to modest-income households. There should be door-to-door incentives. The government should invest in partnerships with municipalities, the community housing sector and developers to increase the supply of off-market housing.
In our communities, whether rural or urban, there are many co-operatives and not-for-profit organizations that are very familiar with the local situation and local needs. They had good things to say about the rapid housing initiative, saying it was efficient and fast, even though they sometimes did not have time to apply, since the market just keeps heating up.
The government must speed up the process and consider each project individually. There are all sorts of recommendations, programs and funds, but are they getting the job done? How can they do better? The following are significant findings outlined both in this report and in an upcoming report about the CMHC that the government will receive. The Auditor General just said that we are spending funds, but we have no way of knowing who received them regarding homelessness. That is a serious problem. How do we house the homeless?
With its new immigration policies, the government wants to increase Canada's population even more. It does not even realize that we already have problems finding enough affordable housing and that housing must remain affordable so that the entire population can benefit. Its preferred immigration policy totally fails to consider social services and associated social programs such as health, education, community services and housing.
I asked the question myself: Now that the government has reached the mid-point of the national housing strategy, would CMHC and the government like to take stock and shift strategies to assess how, over the next five years, we can raise the bar and meet people's needs?
The housing crisis is a reality, not some intellectual conceit. Social housing and affordable housing must be the priority.
1084 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 12:20:39 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary. We know that she is sincere in her intent to do whatever it takes to meet needs.
My colleague cited examples of organizations or groups in her community that are taking action and making a real difference for people experiencing homelessness, low-income individuals and people in the greatest housing need. There is a committee in my own riding that is working to implement this type of co-op housing to serve residents. However, we know that it can be slow going sometimes.
This fund was promoted to our towns and municipalities, but we know that it is really for municipalities with a population of 10,000 or more. The Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities was concerned about that. In our opinion, the fund should be for both rural areas and big cities. Should the scope of the fund not have been expanded in terms of support for municipalities?
167 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 12:34:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there are two things I touched upon. One is the rapid housing initiative, which is for a quick turnaround. It has already accomplished the objectives we had and is now generating up to 15,000 homes. Second, is the housing accelerator fund, which looks much more into the future and builds up a reward system.
Making it exclusive to one particular need, in my view, is not the right approach. It also has different objectives, which are very defined and provide more answers to housing affordability needs in the medium to long term.
95 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 12:34:51 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as a federal government, it is important that we acknowledge that, yes, we have a lot of work to do and we need to make a difference in housing nationally. We have come forth with wonderful programs, whether it is the co-investment fund, the rapid housing initiative, the housing accelerator fund, the Canada housing benefit and the right to housing, which the Conservative Party voted against.
My question for my colleague is this. Which one of those federal programs is having the most impact in his riding?
90 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 3:06:41 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my colleague, the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development, was in Montreal yesterday to announce a significant contribution to social finance, not only for Quebec, but also for the rest of Canada.
Can the minister tell us more about how the social finance fund will help increase the positive impact that social purpose organizations have on our society?
61 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 3:07:13 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, yesterday we celebrated the launch of the social finance fund, a $755‑million initiative to advance the growth of the social finance market.
Social finance plays a crucial role in tackling issues such as access to affordable housing, food insecurity and poverty. By increasing access to flexible financing opportunities, the social finance fund will help social purpose organizations grow, innovate and enhance their social, economic and environmental impacts.
71 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
