CPAC - Monday, May 27, 2024 - 10:00 a.m. (ET) - Segment #6

to engage constructively, cooperatively, with not for profit organizations that want to be part of the solution, with provincial governments that want to be part of the solution, with municipal governments that want to be right there working with us, and there's many examples of where that can work and is working. I salute the efforts of premier David Eby in ever in BC, of mayors across the country that are point of this, in the-for-profit offeringses. But the opposition, by simplifying the debate, are not contributing it in any meaningful way if they go to the encampments that exist across the land. Not without a video, not without a camera around. Leave the camera at home. Don't politicize this issue. Go talk to the people in encampments and you will find that years of trauma underpin their reality, trauma in the form of sexual or physical abuse that led to mental health crisis that has led to homelessness. Or the pandemic. The pandemic and its impact in terms of increased costs and the lack of supply that we find has pushed many of our fellow citizens to encampments as well. What do we do in that context, Mr. Speaker? We can either politically profit off of the unfortunate circumstances faced and unacceptable circumstances faced by people, or we can put solutions, tangible solutions on the table to address the crisis. That's why this government has allocated $250 million in the most recent budget to address homelessness specifically encampments. Nothing from the other side. Zero, Mr. Speaker. And what I would say finally because you've given me that warning of 1 minute, what I would say, Mr. Speaker, is if they want to get serious about housing, let's work together. Are they capable thereafter? I don't think they are. I think the other parties might be. But I don't think the Conservatives are. When I hear the Leader of the Opposition describe co-op housing and let's remember 250,000 Canadians live in co-ops across the country as Soviet-style housing. That's unacceptable. That's what he called T that's what he called it. And when I see continued efforts to obstruct the government's agendas to get more homes built, whether I see as I said he -- the fact he does not want to lift taxes, GST specifically, off the construction of purpose-built rentals for the middle class and this is maybe not surprising as a final point when he was housing minister he was responsible for the construction of six affordable homes. Six, Mr. Speaker. He lost 800,000 units. They don't care about housing. They care about profiting politically so that they can add to their fundraising, to their whatever it is over there they're not serious. We're serious. >> The Speaker: [Voice of Interpreter]: The Honourable member for Abitibi--Baie-James--Nunavik-- Eeyou. >> [Voice of Interpreter]: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am very pleased to rise to speak to Bill C-356 tabled by the Leader of the Opposition and entitled building homes not bureaucracy act. Now, we can see almost immediately that this bill blames the housing shortage on municipalities whereas actually this crisis would be much less serious if the Federal Government hadn't exited housing policy under the Harper government, especially social housing. This bill would prevents municipalities from taking measures to protect their arable land, it would force them to have a minimum of social housing or prevent them from imposing their own social housing minimums or protecting their built heritage. This is a bill that leaves any federal responsibility to the side and means that the Conservative Conservative Party would do nothing about the price physical it came to power -- about the crisis if it came to power. We already have plenty of luxury condos in the market. What we don't have is affordable housing. That's where the Government should be focusing. But that's not in this bill. Instead, C-356 is handing the power to developers for them to build more expensive condos. The Conservatives seem to think the solution to the crisis is to elect big housing developers do whatever they want. It's populist, and it ignores the fact that people need more than just housing; they need communities. They need wastewater infrastructure, they need bike transit, they need public services, they need groceries, schools, municipalities need to ensure that they can do what their citizens need. Additionally this bill would lead to jurisdictional problems.

Since 1973, a Québec bill prevents Ottawa from directly working with Québec municipalities. The Canada-Québec infrastructure framework reflects that reality. But C-356 would tear up that agreement. It took 27 months to negotiate that framework. So this bill would lead to complete paralysis, which is a terrible idea at a time we're in the middle of a housing crisis. If housing starts don't increase as much as Ottawa is asking for, according to this bill, then it would cut transfers from the gas tax and the transit transfer by 1% for every percentage of difference between the objective and the reality. The unilateral objective. For example, housing starts have decreased by 60% in Québec this year instead of increasing by 15%. That would represent a 75% cut in transfers under this bill. That's unacceptable. And additionally this bill would take funding away from municipalities' transit money if they don't meet this unilateral 15% target. This will just mean that car use will be further incentivized and that transit will be developed not in parallel but after housing development. This bill is not a good solution for the housing crisis.Québec was once known as one of the most affordable provinces, but the housing we're seeing in Québec and elsewhere is not just happening in big cities. For example in my region it's been happening for more than 15 years. There's a housing shortage, an affordable housing shortage. The problem is dual in nature. Partly an availability problem and partly an affordability problem. And this isn't just affecting low income households. It's now also affecting businesses' ability to recruit and keep employees. Also let's think about Nunavik in my riding. Half of Inuit and in Nunavik are living in overcrowded housing and nearly a third in housing that requires major renovation. That led to major problems during the pandemic. In fact, sometimes access to communities was even restricted. The housing crisis in the south affects [indiscernible] is much smaller than what we're seeing in the northern part in Nunavut. Often eight people might be living in a two-bedroom home. And if one of them has social problems that can have effects on the entire family. This has been going on since the '90s, but over the last five years Ottawa has stopped funding construction and now Nunavik requires 800 additional social housing units. And this is also causing problems for students in Nunavik because the students who are in overcrowded housing don't have anywhere where they can quietly study. And it can also lead to other problems in the education system because it affects staffing, it affects the school board's capacity to hire, and it affects the school board's capacity to offer specialized programs. And this doesn't just affect students. Entire families are being affected by toxic cohabitation. That's not something that's tracked in housing statistics and it's often neglected when we're looking at the nature of this crisis. We see that for example with separate couples who have to keep living together because they can't find another place to live or houseses where someone has a personal problem, for example addiction, which can compromise security for other people living there. And C-356 won't do anything about any of these problems. Our part of the Bloc Québécois has offered a wide range of possible solutions. For example, for Ottawa, to gradually reinvest in social community and truly affordable housing until 1% of its total annual revenue is used in order to ensure that we have stable, predictable funding and not just ad hoc agreements. We should also ensure that all federal empty housing be used specifically for developing social housing and deeply affordable housing. There should also be a real estate speculation tax. Additionally we should reform the access to housing system in order to consider the fact that different families are in different situations. Additionally the Federal Government should review the national housing strategy and create an acquisition fund. The Federal Government musts

have ensure that Québec offers -- receives, rather, the appropriate amount of funding with no strings attached within federal programs to fight homelessness. These are all great suggestions from the Bloc Québécois, and the Leader of the Opposition should have considered these proposals when he drafted his bill. An unconditional transfer to the government of Québec would have been perfect if this had been done as early as 207 Québec would have been able to start building and renovating a number of housing projects particularly some social housing projects three years earlier and this would have had a major impact in alleviating the current housing crisis. Mr. Speaker, unconditional transfers make the funding process a lot simpler whereas all these agreements complicate the bureaucracy and increase the waiting time that's necessary before the funding is actually unlocked especially given that the programs put in place by the government of Québec are often innovative and effective. It's also important to remember that the Bloc has reiterated on multiple occasions the importance of federal funding being targeted first and foremost at meeting the many social and affordable housing needs because that's where the need is greatest. Mr. Speaker, C-356 is not the trying way to go about building housing and fighting bureaucracy. And that is why we will be voting against C-356. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. >> The Speaker: [Voice of Interpreter]: Resuming debate. [End of Interpretation] if the Honourable member from Port Moody--Coquitlam. >> Rafah experienced the worst horrors of war again last night. Atrocities that defy humanity as human beings from across the globe protested for the terror to end, those in power did not stop it. Shame on every leader that allowed this to continue. Innocent lives have been taken, maimed, and the cars of the children will not be healed -- scars of the children will not be healed. The trauma of war is now imprinted in their DNA and will be a recurring trauma. The last eight months have been unthinkable trauma for Palestinians and Jews in communities all across the globe. Their history forever scarred by the inhumanity of man. No one wins in war, and I implore the Canadian Government to stand up for humanity and peace. The drama beat of war is spreading across the world to the point that the leader of the United Kingdom is now proposing mandatory conscription. It is nine days, Mr. Speaker, till the -- >> The Speaker: The Honourable member from Parry Sound Muskoka is rising on a point of order. >> Mr. Speaker, I'm not entirely sure how this relates to the private member's bill bill before us right now. I'm wondering if you could help us out here. >> The Speaker: The Chair has been very tolerant of the Honourable member's giving of the statement. The Chair would appreciate if there was [indiscernible] to the issue which is before the house at this time of private member's bill regarding Bill C-356. >> -- nine days to the 80th commemoration of D-Day and it seems that the leaders of this world have learned nothing. Now for what we are here to debate today, the Conservatives gatekeeper bill. The Conservatives don't like gatekeepers unless it's them. The leader of the Conservative Conservative Party is the largest threat to Canada's freedoms since Confederation. Little known fact: Me and the leader of the Conservatives went to the same high school. Yes, I am a Calgarian, and when I read this bill it reminded me to revisit the far right manifesto written in Alberta by the members of the far right mentors of the Leader of the Opposition called the firewall. It lays out a plan to gate keep Alberta against Canada, pushing those that believe in a strong united Canada and a reward those who will adopt and manifest its doctrine of power with exclusion. As we speak, Danielle Smith, the leader of the UCP and Conservative premier of Alberta, is passing laws that come directly from this manifesto, making it possible to throw out municipal governments' decisions, throw out the government she doesn't like, limit academic freedoms by gate keeping the research funds, and destroying the Canada Pension Plan to keep people down in retirement. The firewall manifesto envisions that decision-making processes that affect people's lives and freedoms -- >> The Speaker: Lethbridge is rising on a point of order. >> Mr. Speaker, I understand that there's a great deal of latitude in terms of how we address different speeches in this House. The issue at hand right now is housing. Bill C-356, which is a private

Copyright protected and owned by broadcaster. Your licence is limited to private, internal, non-commercial use. All reproduction, broadcast, transmission or other use of this work is strictly prohibited.

Transcripts