SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 233 - Oct/17/23

Oct/17/23 12:02:49 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member for Elmwood—Transcona made a couple of good points. One is that we cannot trust the Liberal government to provide affordable housing. I could not agree with him more, and I would like to give him the opportunity to expand a bit more on how the government has reneged on its promise to look after the people who need its help.

66 words

Mr. Daniel Blaikie

Oct/17/23 12:03:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, when we look at the national housing strategy, there is a lot of fanfare. Some big numbers were announced. One of the really important things to note is that at the beginning of the housing strategy, the big number announced was actually a multiplier that took for granted a bunch of provincial funding that had not been committed. The Liberals were taking credit for money that had not even been announced, except unilaterally by the federal government on behalf of the provinces, which is something it had no right to do. The national housing strategy has been a bit of a smokescreen from go. Yes, some units have been built along the way, but they pale in comparison to what we need. One of the compelling proof points of that is from Steve Pomeroy, who is a housing expert in Canada. He has said that for every one affordable unit we are building in Canada today we are losing 15. How do we make up the ground that has to be made up in order to get people out of tent cities and back into homes if we are losing 15 units of affordable housing for every one being built? We cannot do it. We are not even treading water in Canada today.

215 words

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

Oct/17/23 12:04:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, what he just said is very interesting. He talked about the affordable housing we are losing in Canada. This brings me to a topic that does not come up very much when we talk about the housing crisis: the financialization of housing. We are talking about affordable housing because large investment trusts, often international, investment companies, are buying up affordable housing. Often, they demolish the housing, or they renovate it and then double the price. That is important. When the federal government withdrew from housing in 1993, this phenomenon did not really exist in Canada. Now, we see that between 20% and 30% of the housing stock is owned by these corporations. We do not see the government legislating against that. We will not be able to build the 3.5 million housing units. They will not appear out of thin air. We will have to protect affordability any way we can. I would like my colleague to elaborate. Are there any measures that could be taken right now to counter this financialization that is hurting Canada's housing market so badly here?

186 words

Mr. Daniel Blaikie

Oct/17/23 12:05:29 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for his question. I would say that there have been two phases of significant federal disengagement from housing. In the 1990s, the Liberals cancelled the Canadian housing strategy. Later, the Harper Conservatives made the decision not to renew operating funding for affordable housing mortgages once those mortgages matured. Since these buildings could longer offer affordable rents, large corporations began buying them up and raising rents. It would be really helpful to have an acquisition fund for non-profit organizations, to make sure that it is not just big business that has the resources to buy these buildings. Other organizations that are committed to offering affordable rental housing need to be able to access these buildings and take over the work that the previous owners were no longer able to do.

141 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.)

Oct/17/23 12:07:09 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I listened with great interest to my colleague's speech, in particular when he was talking about how Conservatives are being muzzled by their leader. He is absolutely right. A take-note debate occurred in this House in early September, and we were discussing a Canadian citizen who may have potentially been murdered by a foreign government. The Conservatives chose to be absolutely silent. They did not stand and give one speech, other than their House leader speaking for five minutes at the beginning. They did not ask a single question the whole time. Then, about a week later, there were protests on the streets in front of this building regarding the LGBTQ movement, and once again the Conservatives were told not to speak. As a matter of fact, a leaked email from their leadership told MPs not to make any comment on it whatsoever. What does that say to the member about the “freedom” the Leader of the Opposition purports to express to the country?

170 words

Mr. Daniel Blaikie

Oct/17/23 12:08:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, what it says is that when someone is making accusations of Orwellianism, Canadians cannot just take it at face value. They have to do their homework. I remember when the leader of the Conservative Party was at the cabinet table and was the author of the so-called Fair Elections Act. There is nothing more Orwellian than that. That was a bill designed to disenfranchise whole swaths of Canadians, and they called it the Fair Elections Act. I think it is an act of psychological and political projection that the Conservative leader runs around talking about how other people are engaging in Orwellian language all the time. He read Nineteen Eighty-Four as a bloody guide book, so he imputes to everyone else that they are doing the same, but not everyone has done that. The Fair Elections Act is just one example. I would say my Motion No. 79 is another, where the leader of the Conservatives has the opportunity to go after the Prime Minister's gatekeeping power and has refused to do it. We do have to be wary of the use of Orwellian language in politics, but we cannot take it at face value from the Conservative leader when he accuses others of it. He should be looking in the mirror.

217 words

Ms. Lori Idlout (Nunavut, NDP)

Oct/17/23 12:09:29 p.m.
Watch

Uqaqtittiji, I completely understand what my colleague says when he says not to take this motion at face value, because Conservatives have a history of making it seem like they want to help but they do not. I have a specific example. When the Conservatives were in government in 2010, they made cuts to two things that were very important to indigenous peoples: funding to the Aboriginal Healing Foundation and to the Native Women's Association of Canada. This was at a time when Nunavut had a Conservative MP. I wonder if the member can explain why we must not trust this motion to be as it appears to be.

110 words

Mr. Daniel Blaikie

Oct/17/23 12:10:22 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I think Canadians should be suspicious anytime they see a motion that talks generally about government spending without anyone having done the homework to identify the real waste. There is sometimes waste in government spending. We have seen our fair share of that with the ArriveCAN app and the tens of billions of dollars that have been shunted out the door to big consulting companies to do the work that properly belongs in the civil service, padding the pockets of KPMG and others. There is waste in government, but a motion like the one before us should be singling it out. I think also of the massive investments in child care that I ran on in 2015 and that the New Democrats supported for a long time. They are actually helping to make room in Canadians' household budgets. There is more than one way to tackle inflation, and in the NDP we believe the best way is to work collectively to lower the cost of things Canadians cannot do without rather than simply cutting taxes when we know grocery stores and oil companies will gladly raise their prices to eat up the extra disposable income.

197 words

Mr. Warren Steinley (Regina—Lewvan, CPC)

Oct/17/23 12:11:28 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that was a tall tale my friend from Elmwood—Transcona just told the people of Canada. He is acting like he and his NDP party have no responsibility for what has happened in Canada over the last two years. I realize how— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

51 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Oct/17/23 12:11:48 p.m.
Watch

Order. I want to remind members that once I have recognized an individual, that does not allow others to ask questions or make comments. If they wish to ask questions or make comments, they should wait until the appropriate time. The hon. member for Regina—Lewvan.

47 words

Mr. Warren Steinley

Oct/17/23 12:12:01 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want the member to explain how the New Democrats have no responsibility for the inflation in grocery prices, as they vote with the Liberal Party 95% of the time. How do they have no responsibility for interest rates going up so that people cannot afford their homes? How do they have no responsibility for mortgage rates going up so that Canadians cannot afford their homes? Rental rates are going up too so that they cannot afford their homes. It is so funny that those members want to say they have the answers. The only answer they have is playing lapdog to the Liberals and keeping the Prime Minister in power. It is pathetic.

116 words

Mr. Daniel Blaikie

Oct/17/23 12:12:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, folks in the whip's office may be concerned that the member did not quite get his speaking notes right, because Conservative MPs for a long time now have been saying it has been an NDP-Liberal government for eight years, which is palpably untrue. It speaks to the fact that the Conservatives are not interested in getting to the truth; they are interested in getting into office, and they are prepared to say whatever it takes to get them there. Beware, Canada, because when they get there, it is not going to be what they are saying it is going to be.

105 words

Mrs. Anna Roberts (King—Vaughan, CPC)

Oct/17/23 12:13:15 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, Everywhere I go, people come up to me and say, you know, we're losing faith in the Liberal Party... I've had people tell me they can't afford to buy groceries. They can't afford to heat their homes, and that's hard to hear from, especially seniors who live alone and tell me that they go around their house in the spring and winter time with a blanket wrapped around them 'cause they can't afford the home heating fuel and they can't afford to buy beef or chicken. It is heart-wrenching when you hear someone say that you. This is a quote from the lone Liberal member who was brave enough to vote for his constituents instead of this high-inflationary Prime Minister. These are the same sentiments I hear day after day as I tour the country hearing from seniors. Last week, I had the opportunity to spend time with a group of seniors from the Northumberland—Peterborough South area. Their concerns mirror the same concerns as our friends from the Atlantic coast. I will be sharing my time with one of my favourite MPs, the member for Calgary Forest Lawn. After eight years of the Liberal government, the Prime Minister has added more to the national debt than all previous prime ministers combined. A half a trillion dollars of inflationary deficits has directly led to a 40-year inflation high. Prior to budget 2023, the Minister of Finance said, “What Canadians want right now is for inflation to come down and for interest rates to fall. And that is one of our primary goals in this year’s budget: not pour fuel on the fire of inflation.” Then she proceeded to usher in $60 billion of new spending. In order to combat inflation, the Bank of Canada has been forced to increase interest rates 10 times in just 19 months. These rate increases have increased mortgage payments. Since the Prime Minister took office, monthly mortgage payments have increased 150% and now cost $3,500 on a typical family home. I want my colleagues in this place to think about a few statistics I found on the nesto mortgage company website. In Toronto, as of 2021, the average house price was just over $1 million. The down payment required to purchase a home was just in excess of $232,000. It would take an average person 42.2 years to save for the down payment. To make a comparison, it took roughly 4.2 years to save up for the minimum down payment on a home in Toronto 10 years ago when our country enjoyed a Conservative government. In Vancouver, there is a similar situation. The average cost of a home is just in excess of $1.2 million with a minimum down payment of $242,000. The time to save for a down payment in Vancouver is 44.3 years. Just 10 years ago, it took an average of only 5.2 years to afford the minimum down payment for a home in Vancouver. On June 5, CTV News Toronto reported that the National Bank of Canada released its housing affordability report, indicating that it will take Torontonians about 25 years to save for a down payment on a house and the qualifying income level to purchase a property is in excess of $236,000. Does the average Canadian earn $236,000? I do not think so. If this does not make it clear, this Prime Minister just is not worth the cost. Let us think about it. According to TransUnion, the average credit card balance for Canadians in the second quarter of 2023 was $4,185, which is up from $3,909 in the second quarter. That is up from average monthly credit card spending of almost $2,447 in the third quarter of 2022, which is up 17.3% from the same time in 2021, and up 21.8% from 2019. From another report, Canadian consumer debt has risen to $2.4 trillion, with an average debt load of approximately $21,131, excluding mortgage payments. Canadians are using credit cards more as there was a 9% increase in credit card balances in June 2023 compared to the same time last year. These trends are a repeat of the past. Let us reflect on the 1980s when the lending rate for a five-year fixed mortgage was 22.75%. This caused homeowners with mortgages to struggle with high interest payments, resulting in foreclosures. Let us do some comparisons. In 1981, the average price of a home was $110,000. At an interest rate of 22.75%, the monthly payment was just under $2,000. Today, the average price of a home in Toronto is $1.2 million. At an interest rate of 7%, the mortgage payment is $6,724. What was the similarity during these two periods? Can anyone guess? Both prime ministers shared the same last name. In my previous life as a bank manager and mortgage specialist, I witnessed the hardship of many Canadians, friends and neighbours who lost their homes to the inflationary, out-of-control spending by the Trudeau Liberal government.

870 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Oct/17/23 12:21:09 p.m.
Watch

I believe the hon. member mentioned the name of the Prime Minister, so I just want to make sure that—

21 words

Mrs. Anna Roberts

Oct/17/23 12:21:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am speaking about Pierre Elliott Trudeau. I apologize.

11 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Oct/17/23 12:21:28 p.m.
Watch

I appreciate the clarification. The hon. member for King—Vaughan.

11 words

Mrs. Anna Roberts

Oct/17/23 12:21:32 p.m.
Watch

Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. History continues to repeat itself today as we see the Liberal-NDP government force the Bank of Canada to raise interest rates due to their out-of-control spending habits. This Liberal Prime Minister is just not worth the cost. The Liberal-NDP government must exercise fiscal discipline over its inflation-driving deficits, so that interest rates can be lowered in order to avoid a mortgage default crisis as warned by the International Monetary Fund and to ensure Canadians do not lose their homes. The government must introduce a fiscal plan that includes a pathway to balanced budgets in order to decrease inflation and interest rates. Alternatively, it needs to get out of the way, so that Conservatives and our Conservative leader can fix what the Liberals have broken and bring hope back to Canadians.

141 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.)

Oct/17/23 12:22:41 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I know the member was talking about inflation. What we have seen and what we know with the numbers that have come out today is that the only sector of the economy that continues to experience significant growth in terms of inflation and indeed is pushing up the inflation numbers is the transportation sector. I wonder if the member can comment on how she sees the government bringing in policy that will help to decrease inflation, specifically in the transportation sector.

83 words

Mrs. Anna Roberts

Oct/17/23 12:23:21 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is an easy response. Let us get rid of the carbon tax. The Liberal member for Avalon stated that his constituents in Newfoundland cannot afford to heat their homes or feed their families. Let us get rid of the carbon tax. Let us give those Atlantic provinces the opportunity to live.

54 words

Mr. Mario Simard (Jonquière, BQ)

Oct/17/23 12:23:46 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the real carbon tax is the $83 billion the government is giving to oil companies between now and 2035. At the natural resources committee yesterday, the member for Lakeland responded to that ineptitude by asking the other members not to give the Suncor representative a hard time. Worse still, a Conservative member apologized to Suncor on behalf of all Canadians because the committee was asking questions about what the company was doing with public money. If there is one thing that is not common sense, it is the $83 billion the government will be giving the greedy oil and gas industry between now and 2035. If my colleague really cares about what happens to people who cannot afford groceries and rent, the first thing she should do is demand that the government stop funding the greedy oil and gas industry.

144 words