44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 19, 2024 10:00AM
- Sep/19/24 11:05:23 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will just focus on the leader of the official opposition who was in the previous Conservative government and, in fact, was minister of housing. While he was minister of housing, he was very successful in building six houses in a country of 30-plus million people. To contrast that to what we have done, we are talking six-digit figures of renovating and building homes, and the numbers continue. We have a very ambitious plan. In fact, if the Conservative Harper regime had had a plan half the size of our plan, the issues we are having today would be nowhere near as severe.
107 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:06:23 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will begin by saying that I will be sharing my time with my fantastic, esteemed colleague from Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères. I have had the pleasure and honour of sitting on the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities since 2019. Why is my Conservative colleague, who sits on the same committee, bringing up a motion now that was adopted by the committee on October 16, 2023? There may be several reasons.
I should be in committee right now for an important study on the benefits of unionization, but instead I am here, discussing the merits of this motion that was passed by the committee in 2023. I would remind members that the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities recognizes that “Canada is in a housing crisis that requires urgent action by the federal government to end homelessness, and that this motion be reported to the House”.
Let me recap the context in which this motion was unanimously adopted. Following its late summer caucus retreat, the current government said it would be prioritizing the housing issue. It did not clarify what concrete measures it would take, however. At the same time, the current housing minister stated that there was a housing crisis. Our committee was acknowledging the minister's own words about the fact that there was indeed a housing crisis. We did not just dream this up.
Since then, the committee has had multiple studies on the national housing strategy. One of those studies, a very important one, dealt with the financialization of housing. We are finalizing the report for another, which highlights the disengagement of the two parties that have formed government since 2006, namely the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party, as well as the repercussions this disengagement has had on Quebec and the provinces, as the minister himself recognized. These are major, important studies. What we have trouble understanding is why the need for urgent action on housing is not informing the federal government's policy-making in this area.
I would like to say a few words about homelessness because, clearly, this issue really relates to homelessness. The Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer released a very informative report in May 2024 that provided an update on federal spending to address homelessness. The report summarized the impact of the national housing strategy on homelessness. This 10-year strategy, from 2018-19 to 2027-28, aims to reduce chronic homelessness by 50%. In his report, the Parliamentary Budget Officer said the following:
We estimate that interventions funded by Reaching Home are reducing the point-in time count of homeless persons by about 6,000 individuals (15%), relative to what the count would have been without those interventions.
The situation in Quebec alone is unprecedented, with roughly 10,000 people experiencing homelessness. The Parliamentary Budget Officer goes on to say:
We estimate that achieving a 50% reduction in chronic homelessness would require an additional $3.5 billion per year, approximately a 7-fold increase in funding over the National Housing Strategy average.
These are serious warnings. Does the current government have any idea how bad the current impasse is or how it is depriving entire families and individuals who live alone of the most important thing in life, the right to a home? The answer is no.
I said earlier that homelessness is on the rise in Quebec. My colleague from Shefford just spoke about the urgent need to take action in these regions to meet these needs. All of my colleagues here today could talk about extremely low vacancy rates in every region and the rising rates of homelessness. Today's debate is important because, if the government wants to set priorities, if it wants good press, it needs to recognize the role it could be playing in dealing with these issues.
My colleague from Longueuil—Saint-Hubert toured all the regions of Quebec to shine a light on these issues. He even took it up again this year. The Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities has been hearing from groups of witnesses. The government appointed a federal housing advocate, who recently came to tell us about her shocking reports on the issue of tent cities and the financialization of housing.
To deal with the current housing crisis, my colleague and the Bloc Québécois now have 12 measures that I could read out or let my colleague present. However, one of them applies everywhere, and it is our suggestion to prioritize the construction of social housing managed by non-profit housing groups, social housing that truly meets people's needs. Most witnesses, including the federal housing advocate, said that we need to increase the percentage of social housing by 20%. There is a difference between social housing and affordable housing. The housing crisis will not be solved purely through supply and demand by creating more housing units that are supposely affordable. In my riding, Thérèse-De Blainville, an affordable one- or two-bedroom home costs $2,000. For a single-parent family, for a single mother, for low-income individuals, that is not affordable. That is why we need social housing. We need to increase the stock of social housing by 20% to 30%. That applies everywhere.
In conclusion, the Liberal government has re-committed to investing in the national housing strategy. However, this strategy is already a failure because the government is not meeting people's real needs. It has invested $82 billion, but if we look at the construction of housing units that really meet the needs of the low-income individuals who need them the most, the impact is minimal.
The government needs to change course, focus on tackling the homelessness crisis, and focus on increasing social housing managed by non-profit organizations and housing co-operatives.
1013 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 11:18:07 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
I would like to check that the member's comments are relevant to the matter at hand, which is homelessness and housing.
31 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:18:16 a.m.
- Watch
I think the member is getting to that.
The hon. member for Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis.
20 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 11:18:46 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.
9 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:18:56 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. I also appreciate the brevity of her answer just now.
I do have a question for her, though, because the Liberals suddenly have a new-found passion for co-op housing. They displayed a glimmer of interest in more housing co-ops six months ago in April 2024, but, since 2017—
61 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:19:22 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that, after the response by my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville and before leaving the room, my colleague from Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis mentioned a lack of courage. I find that offensive and I would like her to withdraw that remark.
57 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:19:34 a.m.
- Watch
I did not hear that. We will continue.
The hon. member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie.
17 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:19:46 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I certainly hope those remarks were not made by Conservative members. That would be extremely unfortunate. The point of order is a very good one.
The question I started to ask concerned housing co-ops—
38 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:19:59 a.m.
- Watch
The hon. member for Terrebonne is rising again.
8 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:20:01 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, other people in the room probably heard the remark. If I heard it, others would have, too. I would like the member to withdraw her remark.
28 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:20:09 a.m.
- Watch
The hon. member for Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis.
12 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:20:11 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have known the member for Thérèse-De Blainville for a long time. I know she has ideas. I am extremely surprised that she did not answer, other than to say that it was an excellent question.
43 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:20:25 a.m.
- Watch
I did not ask for an apology. I will listen carefully to what was said in the House.
The hon. member for Drummond.
23 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:20:33 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise on this point of order.
First, the question from the member for Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis was completely off topic. Her question was not relevant at all. Second, I can confirm that we clearly heard the comments made following the member for Thérèse-De Blainville's response, or lack thereof.
This is also a matter of honour in the House. If the member has any honour at all, she will apologize and withdraw the remarks she made about my colleague.
92 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/24 11:21:02 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, as to this point of order, we are all honourable people in this House. How dare our colleague from the Bloc challenge the honour of our colleague here.
30 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
