44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 19, 2024 10:00AM
- Sep/19/24 10:16:47 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, indeed, we cannot ignore the fact that there is a housing crisis, and our out-of-control migration policies have something to do with this. In Quebec we know this only too well, since we are the ones receiving the majority of the temporary residents. These policies certainly have something to do with this.
I do not believe, though, that the solution proposed by the opposition leader, namely to insult city mayors who are in a position to build housing, is ideal. What Ottawa could do is reach an agreement with Quebec and transfer funds that would be used to build homes.
I would like to hear what my colleague has to say about the insults his leader has directed at mayors. Does he think they are constructive?
130 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 10:19:26 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend my colleague from Parry Sound—Muskoka for his excellent contribution. He did a good job explaining and presenting what we are discussing today. This subject is of interest to a great many Canadians and Quebeckers too. The housing crisis we are facing today was caused by this government, which has mismanaged its files since it came to power in 2015.
My colleague spoke about this government's incompetence, which I believe takes many forms. I hope to have the opportunity to point to some of the factors that led us to this housing crisis, which has sadly affected all of Canada and all of Quebec, including in places where homelessness would have been unthinkable. This has caused terribly unfortunate situations in our cities as well as in our small towns.
As my colleague was saying, people are having to sleep on couches. This is a hidden form of homelessness, and even our small towns are not immune to it. In fact, this is happening in my riding and pretty much across Quebec. Other forms of homelessness are increasingly visible, and that is so unfortunate to see. It is truly sad that people in Canada, a G7 country, a G20 country, are not even able to put a roof over their heads. Plenty of ordinary Canadians are now finding themselves on the streets, homeless.
This week I heard a man on a call-in show describe his situation, which was pretty cut and dried: He was forced out of his home because the landlords were taking over the property. This is allowed in Quebec. He found himself on the street because there is no housing. He bought himself a tent and that is where he lives today. Does anyone think we have palm trees and sunny skies year round in Canada? October is coming. November too. In December the snow comes, along with temperatures in the negative twenties and thirties.
These people will be sleeping outside. As parliamentarians and members of this legislature, we cannot simply look away. It borders on the criminal to do so.
Thomas Mulcair, a well-known former politician who used to lead the NDP, is now a high-profile political commentator in Quebec. He said that the Prime Minister and his government promised affordable housing in 2015. They promised they would build homes so that everyone would have a roof over their head. Where are we today? The situation, as my colleague pointed out, is worse than it was nine years ago, when this Prime Minister came to power.
Many people of all backgrounds and circumstances have entered our country in recent years, and it was the Liberals who did this. However, they built less housing. How can it be that they did such a poor job? Let us crunch the numbers. Fewer homes were built in 2022 than in 1972, despite the population having doubled. How can they have done such a poor job? I repeat, fewer homes were built in 2022 than in 1972, despite a doubling of the population. In my opinion, someone somewhere is not doing their job. Someone, somewhere, on the other side needs to wake up, because this is not working.
The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, or CMHC, has indicated how many homes must be built by 2030 if we are to try and get a handle on the situation.
We will need 8.5 million housing units. I am not the one saying this. It is the CMHC. They are the experts. Here are some figures. I do little summaries like this on every sector in Canada. I can also talk about the budget and a whole host of other things, but since I only have four minutes left, I am going to focus on the housing question. Rent has doubled since 2015. Mortgage costs have doubled since 2015. Of all the OECD countries, Canada is the slowest to build. Of the G7 countries, based on our land mass, Canada has the fewest homes, and yet, if one looks at a map of Canada, it is not for lack of space.
In Toronto, it takes 25 years to save for a down payment, when that should be the repayment period. That is unbelievable. I repeat: Fewer housing units were built in 2022 under this government than in 1972. Something is not working. Right now, money is being spent left and right. We do not know what is happening with that money. Right now, we are seeing just how overwhelmed Canada's big cities are with what has been happening, especially in Montreal. Does anyone feel like going to Montreal these days? Shots are being fired, there are guns everywhere and people are sleeping outside. That is the current situation.
Our leader introduced a bill to build housing and encourage the use of federally owned surplus buildings and land, but it was voted down. The bill stipulated that municipalities would have to build 15% more housing and meet housing construction goals. How could anyone think that voting against that bill was a good idea? I will tell the House why they voted against it. They voted against it simply because it came from the Conservatives. That is the only reason. It is a matter of partisanship, when what we are trying to do here is to take care of Quebeckers and Canadians, to put a roof over their heads. That is what we are trying to do here—
918 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 10:35:14 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I do not disagree with my colleague. Elections are held, and the democratic will is expressed. That is perfectly true.
However, I would note that, when my leader pointed out what was happening in some cities, particularly in Quebec, including homelessness, things started to move a little. Neighbourhoods mobilized, people made decisions and long wait times for permits were shortened. The situation changed.
I think those are all good things. When people feel like others are watching, things get moving, and that is helping to resolve the housing crisis.
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:15:40 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I assume the member is talking about fully subsidized social housing, which is, in essence, supported by the federal and provincial governments. Usually, it is the provincial government that plays the lead role.
Does the member have any indication from the Province of Quebec of its intent, in the short term or even the long term, with respect to the development of social housing, and if it has approached the federal government to contribute more directly to a social housing project where, let us say, a tenant would only have to pay 30% of their income?
98 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:16:19 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would return the question to him. He is completely right that Quebec is in charge of housing. As far as federal agreements are concerned, the federal government plays a supporting role, but it cannot go over Quebec's head.
What I am saying is that social and community housing are not the federal government's priority right now. Of the hundreds of programs that it put in place under the national housing strategy, only one worked really well, and that is the rapid housing initiative, or RHI, a rapid housing creation program under which community and housing organizations can apply for subsidies. That is what it should focus on. We have proposed all kinds of solutions. The CMHC's current strategy focuses on affordable housing. However, affordability is not clearly defined, since the definition varies from one program to another. We need to review that definition. Affordability should mean no more than 30% of an individual's income, not the median income of a community.
168 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:17:35 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois regularly says that it listens to the Government of Quebec. It says that it listens to the Government of Quebec and its demands regarding federal files.
We know that the Liberal government has been piling up failure after failure over the past nine years, which is causing a lot of dissatisfaction.
An hon. member: Oh, oh!
Mrs. Dominique Vien: I am getting to—
73 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:18:20 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government keeps piling up failure after failure, especially on housing.
The Government of Quebec made its wishes very clear this morning. It wants the Bloc Québécois to support the confidence motion the Conservatives will be moving next week. Will the Bloc members listen to the Government of Quebec and vote with us, yes or no?
63 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:22:43 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that we are taking up this report on the housing crisis by the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. We have not really talked about this yet. Yes, Parliament is only just back in session, but we have not yet talked about it, despite it being such a major issue. Everyone is affected by this situation and people everywhere are talking to us about it. They are talking to us about it a lot, in fact, in LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, where the Bloc Québécois won the by-election not too long ago.
I would like to begin my remarks with an anecdote about my riding and local initiatives. There are often housing developers who say they would like to receive support from Ottawa, such as subsidies in connection with programs in place to promote housing construction, and even social housing.
There was a social housing project in the city of Contrecoeur. The idea was to build or buy back homes. I think it was about 30 homes. An administrative problem arose, however, with the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, or CMHC. All the towns in the regional county municipality, or RCM, were deemed to belong to the Montreal metropolitan area, and were thus entitled to the same subsidy level as that of the other towns in the Montreal metropolitan area.
For those who do not know, Contrecoeur is not very far from Montreal. Contrecoeur was placed in a separate category. It was the exception that was not entitled to the same level of subsidies, which made the project totally unsustainable. Contrecoeur was considered a rural community like anywhere else in Quebec. People need to understand that the price of housing in Contrecoeur is not the same as in many other remote regions.
The city of Contrecoeur wrote to the CMHC and was essentially told that the criteria were the criteria, and that they should deal with it. Municipal officials reached out to me, and I went to see the Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities to tell him it was ridiculous and that Contrecoeur had been wrongly categorized. I told him that Contrecoeur met all of the same criteria as the other towns in its RCM, and asked him to do something about it.
The Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities, who is sitting on the other side of the House, is supposed to defend housing and support construction. His response was a carbon copy of the CMCH's letter. That says a lot about the government's real vision and real desire to solve housing problems. It would have many opportunities to take concrete action that would result in projects getting off the ground, but it lacks the will to do so.
I have another example that proves the same point. Not too long ago, the federal government announced funding for housing. We thought there would be money for housing across the country. We were thrilled. We wondered when Quebec would get its share. However, the federal government sent no money to Quebec. No, it fought for over a year with the Quebec government because it wanted to set its own conditions and procedures for our province. Finally, the federal government was more interested in encroaching on Quebec's areas of jurisdiction than in its priority, which should have been building housing units quickly. Why did the government hold back the money for more than a year in an emergency situation, during a housing crisis, when we needed it? Because the federal government's priority is to stick its nose where it does not belong.
Here is another example. My colleague from Longueuil—Saint-Hubert toured every region of Quebec to learn about the housing problem on the ground. Two problems emerged, and he was told pretty much the same thing in every region.
The first problem that came to light was the federal criteria. The federal government believes that housing that costs $2,000 a month is inexpensive. However, in Quebec, housing that costs $2,000 a month is quite expensive. There is a disconnect between the federal vision of reality in Vancouver, for example, and its vision of reality elsewhere, like in Quebec. It seems as though the federal government cannot comprehend that it is not the same everywhere, that we cannot apply the same model from one coast to the other, and that there is something unique to Quebec that must be respected.
The second problem raised was that there has not been any money for housing for 30 years. There is not enough money for housing. It is chronically underfunded. In that context, it is clear that there is a housing crisis. Even if the government were to invest money today, there is so much catching up to do that it would take a lot more money than has been put on the table to be able to solve the problem.
Obviously, there is another problem underlying the housing crisis. When we talk about it, there are consequences to it. The National Bank has talked about it. I quote the National Bank because we are not allowed to say that. If the Bloc Québécois says that there are too many newcomers, we are automatically labelled as racists. English Canada, however, ended up saying the same thing, that the numbers were too high.
There is a record number of foreign students. There is record number of asylum seekers. There is a record number of temporary foreign workers because of the labour shortage. All of this puts more pressure on housing. These record numbers mean that all these people coming in from elsewhere need to be housed somewhere. When Quebec said that it was too much and that solutions were needed, it was automatically considered a racist province that did not care. When the other provinces made a point of saying that there was a problem, suddenly they were heard. Suddenly, there was a problem to address.
What I find odd is that the other provinces that are saying there is a problem do not want to help solve it. That is at least true of the Conservatives. It seems as though some Conservative premiers are willing to acknowledge there is a problem, for example, the fact that Quebec is receiving half the asylum seekers when it represents about 20% of the Canadian population. That is having a disproportionate effect on services in Quebec compared to the rest of Canada. Why are the other provinces refusing to co-operate? That is odd, because the Conservatives are the ones who moved the motion to adopt the report we are debating today. However, the Conservative premiers are refusing to help with asylum seekers. There is a bit of a disconnect there.
I will take this a step further. When we talk about housing, we talk about the construction of housing. That means that investments need to be made in the construction of housing. That requires infrastructure. I will give two or three fairly recent examples.
Let us talk about the Canada-Quebec infrastructure program agreement, a bilateral agreement. It is like a treaty, when two countries—or, in this case, a country and a future country—sit down together. Canada says that it will transfer money because Quebec is still paying taxes to Ottawa and that Quebec will be entitled to a funding envelope for infrastructure. The problem is that Ottawa unilaterally decided to hold back $350 million, just like that. Ottawa decided to use that money elsewhere. Unbelievable. Cities in Quebec protested. The Government of Quebec said it was ridiculous. Ottawa told them they could protest as much as they wanted, but Canada intended to keep the money for itself, even though the money it decided to hold back was Quebec's share.
We should also talk about the community assistance fund known as the TECQ program, or the gas tax and Quebec's contribution. The 2024‑28 version provides 30% less funding for cities than the 2019‑24 version. If cities have 30% less funding specifically for their infrastructure—because this program funds water infrastructure—adding new housing is complicated, since people need water. Unfortunately, cities have lost 30% of their budgets.
Cities have another problem too. Not long ago, I was talking to members of the Union des municipalités du Québec. They told me that the federal government had announced $6 billion in new funding for housing infrastructure. Everyone was happy. Members of the Union thought they would get a little more money for housing infrastructure. In Quebec, it is quite a bit less than that, between $1.4 billion and $2 billion. While it may not be a game changer, it will help.
However, when it comes to the conditions, Ottawa will now decide on the urban planning rules in exchange for this money. Ottawa will give money, but it will also come and manage the cities on their behalf. It boggles the mind. Cities have their own elected officials. The people of Quebec have elected their local representatives. Ottawa is saying that these people do not know how to manage things and that it will decide for them. What is even more peculiar is that this is exactly the same Conservative policy that the Liberals put in their last budget. How, then, do we deal with this?
First, we have to start by listening to the people on the ground who are talking about solutions, like the ones suggested by the City of Contrecœur, like the ones suggested by the people who spoke to Denis Trudel during his housing tour. It is important to listen to people and stop thinking that Ottawa always has all the solutions, when, in the end, it is often Ottawa that causes the problem in the first place.
1671 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:33:15 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, what I find interesting about my colleague's question is that it has nothing to do with cities in Quebec. Cities in Quebec would totally disagree. In fact, representatives from Quebec cities told me that they are already working with the federal government. Money is already being directed into housing-related infrastructure through the TECQ program, and that money comes from the gas tax and Quebec's contribution. The money is actually being used for water infrastructure.
Why not just take that $6 billion and send it to the TECQ program?
The problem would be solved. However, that is not what is happening. Instead, Ottawa has to invent new programs and new criteria and stick its nose into other jurisdictions.
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:34:59 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my colleague's question is extremely interesting. It brings the Conservatives' hypocrisy to light. In fact, my colleague's question is not about the motion or the report on the housing crisis we are discussing today, despite the fact that the Conservatives are the ones who started the debate. If they really wanted to resolve the housing problem, I think they would ask questions about housing. That is not what they are doing. Instead, they are asking whether we will vote with them or against them in a non-confidence vote to bring down the government.
I find that interesting because it gives us a glimpse into their priorities. Do they really want to resolve the housing crisis, or do they want their leader to sit across the aisle in the Prime Minister's seat?
Let me explain something. We in the Bloc Québécois are not Conservatives, and we are not Liberals, so we are not obliged to vote for one or the other. What we decide, who we decide to vote for and why we decide to vote is based on what is good for Quebec and what will improve living conditions for Quebeckers.
201 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:36:06 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, there is something that bothers me in the debate on housing and that I have heard too often; that is, for the Bloc Québécois, it is always the federal government's fault and, for the Liberals, it is always the Quebec government's fault. We lost three years in the federal-provincial agreement, and Canadians with inadequate housing or no housing at all are paying for it. I do not want to play the game, which the leader of the Conservative Party is also playing by attacking the mayors of Montreal and Quebec City.
Can we please stop pointing fingers and looking for someone to blame? Can we work together to build housing Canadians can afford?
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:36:43 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to applaud the statement made by my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie. I totally agree with him.
That is similar to the solution the Bloc Québécois is promoting. Oftentimes, there are already agreements and arrangements, whether we are talking about the TECQ, the gas tax and Quebec's contribution program, or infrastructure agreements.
Why can they not just extend the existing agreements, send the money and avoid the endless red tape instead of fighting over jurisdictions, like the federal government always does, sticking its nose where it does not belong?
101 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 12:06:04 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we in the Bloc Québécois completely agree with the expression used by my colleague from New Westminster—Burnaby. In fact, it was my colleague, the member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, who talked about a sort of Marshall plan, a wartime-style effort to invest in housing.
My colleague spoke at length about investments in housing. I think it is important to recognize that, when it comes to housing, what the federal government can do is invest. It must not withhold funding based on any conditions. His party supported the federal government while it was withholding the $900 million owed to Quebec. Then again, it is no better if cities' jurisdictions are not respected and if Quebec's municipalities are punished, like the Conservatives want to do, despite the fact that many, like Granby, have great plans.
What we need to do now is support the cities that have plans, not punish them and withhold federal money. That money needs to flow to Quebec and the provinces. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on that.
186 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 2:16:08 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, as the saying goes, all good things come in threes. Quebec City's baseball team, the Capitales, took that to heart and won their third consecutive Frontier League championship. Fans were treated to quite a show.
On Saturday, in an exhilarating and spectacular game, the Capitales won the finals against the Washington Wild Things, thanks to magician Anthony Quirion, who hit a three-run homer.
This is the 10th title in the history of the franchise, which is celebrating its 25th anniversary this year. This title is the result of the talent, consistency and hard work of all the players and the entire organization, including manager Patrick Scalabrini and president Michel Laplante.
Congratulations, and thank you for being the pride of our town for another year running. Until next year.
132 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 2:17:13 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, what is the “Liberal Bloc”? It is the most centralizing, costly and divisive Liberal government in history. It is the Liberal government that has no respect for Quebec, imposing programs, claiming that the Liberal occupant of the big federal seat knows best and can do better than the elected members of Quebec. It is a government that breaks ethics rules without facing the consequences, that lets authoritarian countries interfere in our elections, that gives Canadian citizenship to a terrorist.
What is the “Liberal Bloc”? It is the Bloc who voted to keep this minority government in place more than 200 times. It is the Bloc who authorized this Liberal government to spend $500 billion, fuelling inflation and increasing the cost of everything. It is the Bloc that supports the Liberal government that wants to radically increase fuel taxes, ban hunting rifles and allow house arrest for violent criminals. It is the Bloc that is going to prop up the Liberal government next week against the interests of Quebec.
The Bloc Québécois has gotten absolutely nothing for Quebec in exchange for its unconditional support of the Liberal government. The Bloc Québécois is the worst negotiator that Quebec has even seen. That is the “Liberal Bloc”.
221 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 2:20:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Premier of the Quebec nation said today that the Liberal government's decision to double the number of temporary immigrants to 600,000 individuals poses a threat to social services for Quebeckers.
Will the leader of the Bloc Québécois do what the Premier of the Quebec nation is asking, and reconsider supporting this Liberal government next week? Will he defend the interests of Quebeckers and the Quebec nation?
77 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 2:20:19 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, like you, I was a page in the House of Commons a few years back, and I would like to congratulate and thank the new cohort of pages we are fortunate to have with us this year. We know how important their responsibilities are. Members of the House appreciate their service. I thank them for being with us in the coming months.
As for the Leader of the Opposition, what he is saying is laughable. He is saying that we should just keep cutting back on programs to help Quebeckers and the Government of Quebec, including health care, child care and day care.
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 2:21:16 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is not just the Premier of the Quebec nation. The Bloc Québécois's political cousin, Parti Québécois leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, is also condemning this costly, centralizing government.
He said, quote, “Quebec was deliberately destabilized. This is an abuse of federal power.” According to the PQ, the governing party is hurting Quebec, and the Bloc Québécois is keeping that party in power.
Why did the leader of the Bloc Québécois turn his back on the Parti Québécois and all Quebeckers to keep the most centralizing and costly prime minister in Canada's history in power?
121 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 2:22:20 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the last time Mr. Legault got in bed with the Conservatives, Quebeckers put him in his place. It will be the same thing this time.
I find it rather strange that Mr. Legault and Paul St-Pierre Plamondon are supporting a party that is bent on destroying our most important institution in Quebec, an institution that defends the French language, Quebec culture and Quebec's cultural creators, namely CBC/Radio-Canada. It is shameful.
Those of us on this side of the House will always fight for Quebeckers, for the right to our language and for the right to our culture.
103 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 2:22:59 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the Prime Minister has lost his Quebec lieutenant, who has now become a provincial candidate.
Fortunately for him, he found another Quebec lieutenant, and it is the leader of the Bloc Québécois.
The Bloc voted to increase inflationary bureaucratic spending by $500 billion. It voted to hire an extra 100,000 public servants. It voted to keep a government that broke the immigration system in office.
Is it not true that the Conservatives are the real defenders of Quebec?
87 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
