Brad Vis
Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford, British Columbia · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, the third petition I would like to present today is on nicotine pouches. This petition is being presented on behalf of small businesses, including convenience stores.”
“Mr. Speaker, I have a number of petitions to present today. The first is petition e-7198, which has 5,746 signatures. It calls upon the Minister of Fisheries to not remove the recreational access to chinook and coho salmon in the allotment of salmon allocation.”
“Mr. Speaker, earlier today, I asked a Liberal member a very simple question: Could he confirm or deny the rumours in British Columbia that, under the new security partnership between Canada and China and the government's desire to sell federal airport assets, Chinese companies would be able to buy those assets?”
“Mr. Speaker, the second petition I would like to present today is with regard to the elimination of the federal apprenticeship incentive. The petitioners call upon the Government of Canada to reinstate the apprenticeship incentive grant for Red Seal trades, index it to inflation, link it to the successful completion of technical training…”
“Mr. Speaker, Bill C-30 contains proposed new provisions under the Privacy Act and the Canada Transportation Act to assess the full value of our publicly owned airports. Rumours in British Columbia dictate that part of the new security agreement with China would allow Chinese companies to buy airports in Canada.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honour the life of Mel Zajac, a remarkable British Columbian whose compassion and generosity left an enduring imprint. Mel's life was marked by a profound tragedy that ultimately inspired a legacy of extraordinary philanthropy. In July 1986, he lost his son Mel Jr.”
The complete record
Every one of 622 lines we hold for Brad Vis, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 13.
“Expenditures by Indigenous Services Canada and Crown Indigenous-Relations and Northern Affairs Canada are not covered in this report. Expenditures of Infrastructure Canada were not examined since it does not provide significant funding for housing Chapter 2 is called “How Much Does Canada Spend on Housing Affordability?” It states: From 2008-09 to 2017-18, CMHC spent [on] average...$2.4 billion/year on the activities now included in its “Assisted Housing” business segment. From 2018 to 2027-28, CMHC plans to spend $2.8 billion/year on these same activities. Under “National Housing Strategy Breakdown”, the chapter continues: As noted previously, the National Housing Strategy was marketed as a “$40- billion plan” or as a “$40-billion federal investment”. In reality, the Strategy committed...$16.1 billion in new federal planned spending....”
“The National Housing Strategy Act, found in clause 313 of the 2019 Budget Implementation Act...would require the government to maintain similar strategies and national goals. The National Housing Strategy focuses on program expenditures by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) and Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC). CMHC administers most program expenditures relating to housing affordability, while ESDC provides transfers to communities and service providers to help address homelessness. The focus of this report is direct federal expenditures by these two organizations outlined in the Strategy. This report does not include federal tax expenditures. Details regarding federal tax expenditures related to housing can be found in the Department of Finance’s Report on Federal Tax Expenditures.”
“It was also undertaken under the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s mandate to estimate the financial cost of a proposal over which Parliament has jurisdiction upon requests from a parliamentarian. In this case, a Member of Parliament requested an estimate of the incremental [financing] costs arising from Canada’s National Housing Strategy and the cost to achieve the targets of that strategy. Then, under “Scope of Report”, it states: The National Housing Strategy was announced in Budget 2017 and elaborated upon in a subsequent policy document. This is something I have already read. It was presented as an “ambitious $40-billion plan to help ensure that Canadians have access to housing that meets their needs and that they can afford” by making “unprecedented investments” in housing.”
“Overall, Canada’s National Housing Strategy largely maintains current funding levels for current activities and slightly reduces targeted funding for households in core housing need. CMHC’s assumptions regarding the impact of NHS outputs on housing need do not reflect the likely impact of those programs on the prevalence of housing need. From chapter 1, the introduction, under “Purpose of Report”: This report is intended to help parliamentarians understand federal spending on affordable housing and the results that spending is likely to achieve. [The] report is undertaken under the Parliamentary Budget Officers’ mandate to prepare reports concerning the government’s budget and estimates.”
“Within the Assistance for Housing Need portfolio, there is a $167 million/year (12%) reduction in funding for transfers to the provinces and territories and a $175 million/year (30%) reduction in funding for federal community housing. These reductions are partially offset by $200 million/year in new spending on rent subsidies. The decline in funding for Assistance for Housing Needs programs is offset, in terms of aggregate spending, by a $664 million/year increase in funding for Financing for Housing programs which are not necessarily targeted to low-income households. It is not clear that the National Housing Strategy will reduce the prevalence of housing need relative to 2017 levels.”
“Taking into account existing and subsequent commitments, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) plans to spend an average of $2.8 billion/year on assisted housing programs over the [ten years] of the NHS. This represents a $0.4 billion/year (15%) increase in nominal spending over the 10-year historical average. Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) plans to spend $225 million/year on homelessness programs, which represents a $86 million/year (62%) increase in nominal spending over the five-year historical average. In the overall allocation of funding between CMHC’s core responsibilities, there is a $325 million/year (14%) reduction in funding for Assistance for Housing Needs programs intended to help low-income households compared with the 10-year historical average.”
“However, the scale and design of these initiatives are critical. As the PBO analysis shows, the current measures are insufficient to address the magnitude of Canada's housing challenges. Ultimately, the gap between promise and reality reflects a deeper issue in policy design. I think that warrants us to look at some of the PBO reports that have been issued by the Parliamentary Budget Officer on federal program spending on housing affordability. The first one was on June 18, 2019. The executive summary, on page 1, states: Canada’s 2017 National Housing Strategy...provided new funding for housing affordability programs over its ten-year term from 2018-19 to 2027-28.”
“That is not all bad, but the national housing strategy is still the official policy of the government on the books and should be taken in the context of these changed policy metrics. When viewed in the context of the government's original promises, the divergence becomes even more pronounced. In 2017, the Liberals committed to prioritizing vulnerable Canadians. These commitments implied not only increased spending but also a sustained focus on outcomes for those most affected by the housing crisis. By 2026, however, the policy framework appears to be moving away from these priorities. (1235) This does not mean that all elements of the current approach are without merit. Investments in housing supply are necessary, and efforts to modernize construction methods or leverage public land can contribute to long-term improvements.”
“The PBO explicitly notes that the addition of new units will only partially offset the decline in overall affordability support. Compounding these issues are plan reductions in funding from the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the federal agency responsible for administering many housing programs. The report identifies $2.4 billion in cuts to CMHC funding over several years. This raises concerns about the system's capacity to deliver effective housing support. Reductions in funding for programs, administration, financing tools and sector development can weaken the overall effectiveness of housing policy. Taken together, these trends point to a broader pattern, a contraction in federal housing policy combined with a reorientation toward long-term supply measures.”
“Another important aspect of the current policy direction is the trade-off between short-term support and long-term investment. By shifting resources toward capital development, the government is prioritizing supply over immediate affordability, which warrants more discussion. However, this does create a timing mismatch. Housing construction takes years to complete, and its impact on prices and rents is gradual. In contrast, affordability challenges are immediate and acute for many households. Renters facing high costs today cannot wait for long-term supply responses necessarily to materialize. It is something to consider. The reduction or expiration of direct supports, many have argued, leaves a gap in the policy framework.”
“This represents a relatively small contribution in the context where millions of Canadians face affordability challenges. More concerning is the definition of affordability itself. The PBO highlights that some units classified as affordable under the program may have rents significantly higher than historical market benchmarks. For example, illustrative calculations suggest that rents deemed affordable for median-income households could be substantially higher than the national median market rent observed in previous years. This raises a critical concern: The policy risks conflating affordability with relative pricing metrics that does not reflect the lived reality of low- and moderate-income households. In effect, units may be labelled as affordable without being meaningfully accessible to those most in need.”
“These figures underscore a key limitation: The program's contribution to overall supply is incremental rather than transformative. The government has also stated an ambitious goal of doubling the pace of housing construction, yet the PBO explicitly states that no detailed plan has been provided to achieve these objectives. This disconnect between stated targets and concrete policy mechanisms weakens the credibility of the government's approach and raises questions about its capacity to deliver meaningful results. The limited scale of new supply is further compounded by issues related to affordability targeting. Of the 26,000 units expected to be created under Building Canada Homes, only about 13% are projected to be affordable for low-income households.”
“Rather than providing immediate relief to households struggling without housing costs, it focuses on financing construction, developing assets and encouraging new housing supply over time. In principle, increasing housing supply is an essential component of any housing strategy. However, the effectiveness of the shift depends on both the scale and the timing of the resulting construction. On both counts, the PBO's assessment raises concerns. The report estimates that Building Canada Homes will generate approximately 26,000 new housing units over a five‑year period. While this is not insignificant in absolute terms, it is modest relative to the scale of housing shortages. The PBO notes that this output would increase housing completions by only 2.1% and addresses just 3.7% of the projected housing gap.”
“It is almost as if the government is afraid to admit the fact that its strategy was not working. (1230) The implication is clear: Despite earlier commitments to long-term leadership, the federal role in housing is set to diminish precisely when demand for intervention still remains incredibly high. This decline in spending is closely tied to the exploration of key programs under the national housing strategy. This creates some structural problems. The policy architecture that supported the government's original affordability goals is being dismantled faster than a new policy can be approached. As a result, the overall footprint of federal housing policy is changing without direction. The flagship initiative under budget 2025, Build Canada Homes, exemplifies this shift.”
“However, when these promises are compared to the current trajectory of housing policy, particularly as outlined in the 2025 report by the Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, a significant gap emerges between what was promised and what is now being delivered. One of the most striking divergences lies in the trajectory of federal spending. The national housing strategy was built on the premise of sustained, long-term federal investment. In 2017, the government emphasized that consistent funding over a decade would provide stability, enable planning and ultimately improve affordability outcomes, yet according to the PBO's 2025 analysis, federal housing spending is not being sustained. It is actually declining sharply. Planned spending falls from $9.8 billion in 2025-26 to just $4.3 billion by 2028-29.”
“The Liberals' housing agenda, first articulated in 2017 through the national housing strategy, was framed as a historic and transformational shift in federal policy. The quotes I just outlined from the budget debate in 2019 reinforce that. The former minister from the Quebec region presented the strategy as a long-overdue correction to decades of federal withdrawal, promising not only significant new investment, but a reorientation of housing policy toward affordable, equitable and measurable outcomes. Housing was to be treated as a human right. Vulnerable Canadians would be prioritized, and hundreds of thousands of households would be lifted out of housing need. The rhetoric was expansive and ambitious, setting expectations for systemic change rather than incremental improvement.”
“About Bill C-97 , he said: In concrete terms, it will require the federal government to give priority to the housing needs of the most vulnerable Canadians. The government will also be required to report back to Parliament on the progress made in implementing the strategy and in achieving the desired results with respect to housing. These targets, such as cutting homelessness in half in this country and building 100,000 new units, as well as repairing and renovating another 300,000, will make a real difference in the lives of many Canadians.... I think it is time for the federal government to take responsibility for housing and make a bold, ambitious comeback. That is what the national housing strategy does.”
“I hope that the way we are doing it, under our new national housing strategy, is going to help decrease the number of homeless people. More important, it is to help people find alternative forms of housing compared to what they currently have. The member for Humber River—Black Creek went on to prop up the first-time homebuyers incentive. She said that it: will certainly help a lot of young people in their mid-thirties who are having significant difficulty just getting into the housing market. Once they can get into the housing market and stay employed, they will have lots of opportunity to build equity in that house and then can later on move into a larger house as their family grows. The then parliamentary secretary to the minister of finance, a member from Quebec, talked about many measures in budget 2019 as well.”
“This has been having a tremendous effect in my community in Brampton. We are working directly with our municipalities to ensure that essential projects move forward. I am proud to be part of a government that is working with municipalities on behalf of Canadians and delivering for them. Brampton will be receiving close to $50 million through this fund so that it can invest in services that Bramptonians rely on most, such as public transportation, recreation centres and our parks. I could go on. The member for Humber River—Black Creek , on June 4, 2019, said: We are not just talking about the homeless. We are talking about seniors who cannot sell their houses because they have nowhere to go, and they are struggling as it is. There are a lot of people who are struggling and looking for housing.”
“This gives future homeowners greater options when looking at the housing market and makes housing accessible to more people than ever before. (1225) In budget 2019, we are taking another step to support first-time homebuyers, including new immigrant families in Brampton West. To help make home ownership more affordable for first-time homebuyers, budget 2019 introduces the first-time homebuyer incentive. This incentive would allow eligible first-time homebuyers, who have the minimum down payment of an insured mortgage, to finance a portion of their home purchase through a shared equity mortgage with the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Later in her speech, she says: It is unfortunate that the provincial government in Ontario is impeding the flow of federal dollars to our municipalities.”
“However, our government knows that these changes cannot, unfortunately, take place overnight. This is why our government has introduced new measures in budget 2019 to help relieve the pressures on Canadians.... We will continue working hard to ensure that...middle-class Canadians [can afford a home, that] home ownership is not a pipe dream, but rather, an achievable goal. The then parliamentary secretary to the Minister of International Development talked about this, saying: Today in Canada, especially where my constituents live in Brampton West, once affordable properties are now out of reach due to high demand. Therefore, in budget 2016 and in budget 2017, we established Canada's first-ever housing strategy that would invest $40 billion over 10 years to build and repair affordable housing units.”
“He stated: By listening to the needs of Canadians and encouraging dialogue, I am proud to say this government has continued its commitment to improving housing affordability in this country, and this is exemplified in budget 2019.... The government is...committed to working in partnership with the province and the municipality to ensure a tri-levelled affordable housing strategy for Surrey residents. In conjunction with British Columbia's affordable...plan and Surrey's affordable housing strategy, the government's new homeowner incentive is a proactive measure to ensure that a future in Surrey is possible for young people and families. He stated in his speech: Our goal is to cut chronic homelessness in half, remove 530,000 families from housing need and invest in the construction of up to 100,000 new homes.”
“It is a portable fund that will follow them wherever they choose to live to ensure they have greater access to affordable housing. She talked about the National Housing Strategy Act, which I just read from and which: ...would create a national housing council supported by CMHC, which will act as a focal point for housing policy discussions on the national housing strategy and will advise the minister on how to improve housing outcomes. With [these] amendments, we are empowering the national housing council with even more freedom to support the federal housing advocate and to report on the findings to the minister responsible. She talked about being very proud of the housing investments and about upholding the rights of Canadians. The member for Surrey Centre also spoke about the 2019 budget with respect to housing.”
“Maryam Monsef, in May 2019, talked about more funding in budget 2019: ...we took our commitment to housing even further. We are investing an additional $10 billion in the rental construction financing initiative, which will help people who rely on rental and social housing to find more housing opportunities. We have introduced the first-time homebuyer incentive, which will help more Canadians achieve the dream of owning a home. Thanks to these and other investments, the national housing strategy is now a...$55-billion plan, and we are seeing the fruits of our commitment in new and renewed housing units across the country. Next year, the Canada housing benefit will come into effect. This is an additional $2,500 a year for low-income Canadians.”
“I will admit that was a good policy, but none of the Liberals' measures improved affordability. (1220) Budget 2019 talked about job experience and employer-relevant skills. None of that panned out. This is interesting: The parliamentary secretary at the time talked about attracting more foreign students to Canada by promoting Canadian educational institutions as high-caliber places to study. One of the biggest and most negative impacts on housing affordability in Canada has been the immigration policies of the current government, where demand completely outstrips supply due to unfettered immigration targets. Just a few years ago, the members opposite praised the government for increasing those numbers. What a short-sighted policy idea that was.”
“Average home prices today are about eight times larger than the average full-time income of Canadians aged 25 to 34. That is markedly different from a few decades ago, when they were about four times larger. To address the difficulty that young families may be having in buying their first home, through Bill C‑97, budget 2019 proposes a new first‑time home buyer incentive. With this extra help in the shape of a shared equity mortgage through the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Canadians can lower their monthly mortgage payments, making home ownership more affordable. I would note that the government scrapped that program pretty quickly. It was an abysmal failure. She continued: Through budget 2019 and Bill C‑97, our government is also increasing the home buyers' plan withdrawal limit for the first time in a decade.”
“During the debates, because this was part of the budget bill in April 2019, many Liberals spoke highly about what they were doing. Jennifer O'Connell, the parliamentary secretary to the minister of finance at the time, talked about how the Liberal approach was going to help young Canadians who “want the chance to work in a good career, buy a home and build a better future for themselves, their families and their communities.” That was never realized. She talked about their approach to housing, and stated: Many Canadians might feel that because of high house prices in some of Canada's largest cities, buying a home is increasingly out of reach. We know that young people especially are being priced out of some house and condo markets.”
“(f) receive submissions with respect to systemic housing issues; (g) provide advice to the Minister; (h) submit a report to the Minister on the Advocate’s findings...and; (i) participate in the work of the National Housing Council as an ex officio member. The act established a review panel, and it goes on and on about the review panel. It talks about accountability on page 10, which states: The Minister must respond to the annual report of the Federal Housing Advocate. I would be remiss as a member of Parliament to not note that we ask general questions on the state of housing in Canada every day, and we never get clear responses. We hear only that everything is okay and Canada has never had it so good. That is essentially the strategy.”
“The legislation created a federal housing advocate on page 6, with specific duties to do the following: (a) monitor the implementation of the housing policy and assess its impact on persons who are members of vulnerable groups, persons with lived experience of housing need and persons with lived experience of homelessness; (b) monitor progress in meeting the goals and timelines... (c) analyze and conduct research, as the Advocate sees fit, on systemic housing issues, including barriers... (d) initiate studies, as the Advocate sees fit, into economic, institutional or industry conditions... (e) consult with persons referred to in paragraph (a) and civil society organizations...”
“It states: 6 (1) A council, to be known as the National Housing Council, is established for the purpose of furthering the housing policy...by (a) providing advice to the Minister, on its own initiative or at the request of the Minister, including, among other things, on the effectiveness of the National Housing Strategy This sounds familiar. Is it another bureaucratic body to do the job of the minister. It talks about the membership of the council, which I will not go into, as well as ex officio members and the appointment terms. This was a very common thing under Trudeau. Every legislation had a corresponding council.”
“Content (2) The National Housing Strategy is to, among other things, (a) set out a long-term vision for housing in Canada that recognizes the importance of housing in achieving social, economic, health and environmental goals; (b) establish national goals relating to housing and homelessness and identify related priorities, initiatives, timelines and desired outcomes; (c) focus on improving housing outcomes for persons in greatest need; and (d) provide for participatory processes to ensure the ongoing inclusion and engagement of civil society, stakeholders, vulnerable groups and persons with lived experience of housing need, as well as those with lived experience of homelessness. The act sets out a national housing council.”
“(1215) In section 5, under “National Housing Strategy”, on page 3 of the bill, it states: 5 (1) The Minister must develop and maintain a national housing strategy to further the housing policy, taking into account key principles of a human rights-based approach to housing.”
“In section 4, it reads: It is declared to be the housing policy of the Government of Canada to (a) recognize that the right to adequate housing is a fundamental human right affirmed in international law; (b) recognize that housing is essential to the inherent dignity and well-being of the person and to building sustainable and inclusive communities; (c) support improved housing outcomes for the people of Canada; and (d) further the progressive realization of the right to adequate housing as recognized in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.”
“It was very big legislation for the government at the time. I will outline what it says in the preamble: Whereas housing is essential to the inherent dignity and well-being of the person and to building sustainable and inclusive communities as well as a strong national economy in which the people of Canada can prosper and thrive; Whereas access to affordable housing contributes to achieving beneficial social, economic, health and environmental outcomes; Whereas improved housing outcomes are best achieved through cooperation between governments and civil society as well as the meaningful involvement of local communities; Whereas national goals, timelines and initiatives relating to housing and homelessness are essential to improving the quality of life of the people of Canada, particularly persons in greatest need; Whereas a national housing strategy would support a common vision, key principles and a coordinated approach to achieving...housing outcomes; Whereas a national housing strategy would contribute to meeting the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations; And whereas a national housing strategy would support the progressive realization of the right to adequate housing as recognized in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, to which Canada is a party; Importantly, the legislation includes a housing policy declaration.”
“In some of the debates, I will talk about how, in conjunction with this plan, the government's solution for that was allowing the Government of Canada to co-invest in mortgages or have a portion of Canadians' mortgages. That plan failed drastically. Chapter 10 is about “Gender-Based Analysis Plus”. I do not know what that means or what it has done to improve housing affordability in Canada. I hope it has made some improvements but I do not think it has. Chapter 11 talks about the government's journey to reinvest in housing. Great. I could go on. There are more statistics, more failed investments, zero progress to date and a move in the complete opposite direction from the direction the strategy said it would go in. The next document I will quickly take a look at is the National Housing Strategy Act.”
“Chapter 5 talks about “Progress Through Partnership: Enhanced Support to Provinces and Territories”. Again, what progress have we seen? The report mentions the same statistics I read at the beginning, over and over again. Chapter 6 talks about “Letting Communities Lead”. I do not know what that means. Chapter 7 is titled “‘Nothing About Us, Without Us’”. Housing starts for first nations have only eroded under the government. Chapter 8 talks about “Evidence-Based Housing: Research, Data and Demonstrations”. They developed a research agenda around their own work. The research, as I will show, shows that the plan was an abysmal failure. Chapter 9 is about “Improving Homeownership Options for Canadians”.”
“(1210) The plan talks about “Making Federal Lands Available for Affordable Housing”. The government is still talking about that. It still has not done anything. I do not think it has made any measurable difference. The only success we have seen on that is when we removed all federal barriers and granted federal lands to indigenous people, to the outcry of many residents in Vancouver. We have seen massive new housing developments take place. It is only when the federal government is not involved that we see results. Chapter 3 talks about “Maintaining a Resilient Community Housing Sector”. I do not know what that means. I do not think it has made a difference. Chapter 4 talks about “A New Canada Housing Benefit” for low-income people. The government is removing that benefit now.”
“The plan created a new national housing council, new initiatives, new public campaigns, new legislation and all sorts of new agencies and councils. None of it has made a difference. None of the metrics were met. Chapter 2 talks about “Federal Re-Engagement Through the National Housing Co-Investment Fund”. I do not know what to say. It talked about 60,000 new units and new shelter spaces. Poverty in Canada has grown at such an exponential rate under the government over the last 10 years that even where the government might have made an incremental improvement, the foundation of our economy, our socio-economic status and the erosion of civil society that we have witnessed over the last 10 years have eroded any good that any of these policies could have completed. While more money was pumped, fewer results were achieved.”
“In chapter 1, the strategy outlines that: Housing Rights Are Human Rights Canadians deserve safe and affordable housing. That is why the federal government is taking these additional steps to progressively implement the right of every Canadian to access adequate housing. Our plan is grounded in the principles of inclusion, accountability, participation and non-discrimination.... None of that has taken place. The plan talks about new legislation, the National Housing Strategy Act, which I will get to in just a minute, and a new federal housing advocate. I will note, on a positive note, that at least the federal housing advocate has been willing to call out the government accordingly and hold it to account for some of its failures, like the 1,000-year statistic I gave earlier, which outlines that the plan is a complete failure.”
“Page 6 of the strategy outlines some targets, including “530,000 households removed from housing need”, “385,000 community housing units protected and another 50,000 units created through an expansion of community housing”, a “50% reduction in estimated number of chronically homeless shelter users”, “300,000 existing housing units repaired and renewed”, “100,000 new housing units created” and “300,000 households provided with affordability support through the Canada Housing Benefit”. I do not think they have succeeded in any of those metrics. On page 7, it says the $40-billion initial investment, which has since doubled, will be a “Once-in-a-Generation Joint Investment”. I find it sad that the government has spent so much money and has so little to show for what it said it wanted to do.”
“It has not happened. Housing investments should support Canada’s climate change agenda and commitment to accessible communities I agree, but with regard to the impacts of natural disasters and what the government scientists have said about climate change in Canada and in my riding, there was never that alignment or prioritization, as I have outlined in the last hour. That is another big fail. Communities should be empowered to develop and implement local solutions to housing challenges I agree. I do not think it is happening, though.”
“The government notes in its strategy on page 5 that: Housing is more than just a roof over our heads It says: Every Canadian deserves a safe and affordable home I agree. They have not done it. Housing investments must prioritize those most in need, including: women and children fleeing family violence; seniors; Indigenous peoples... I might read, later on, the Auditor General's report on the state of housing on first nations reserves. It is complete failure, again. Housing policy should be grounded in the principles of inclusion, participation, accountability, and non-discrimination I agree, but the government has completely failed on that, too. Housing programs should align with public investments in job creation, skills training, transit, early learning, healthcare, and cultural and recreational infrastructure I wish that were the case.”
“The National Housing Strategy invests in the provinces and territories, so all regions can achieve better and more affordable housing. It invests in municipalities, to empower communities to lead the fight against homelessness. It also creates new opportunities for the federal government to innovate through [community] partnerships.... (1205) I could go on. Page 5 of the report is about “A vision for housing in Canada”. It reads: Canadians have housing that meets their needs and they can afford. That vision has failed. Affordable housing is a cornerstone of sustainable, inclusive communities and a Canadian economy where we can prosper and thrive. I agree with that. The government has done the opposite.”
“Expanded and reformed federal homelessness programming, a new Canada Housing Benefit, and a rights-based approach to housing will ensure that the National Housing Strategy prioritizes the most vulnerable Canadians including women and children fleeing [from] violence.... I will note that since this strategy was implemented, violence against women in Canada has more than doubled. Cases of sexual assault and intimate partner violence have skyrocketed under the government. The Liberals said housing would fix it. They were wrong. They misled Canada. They misled our entire nation. The statement continues: The National Housing Strategy is truly a national project, built by and for Canadians. The success of our plan requires collaboration from many partners.”
“This will include a 50% reduction in chronic homelessness, and as many as 530,000 households being taken out of housing need. The National Housing Strategy will result in up to 100,000 new housing units and 300,000 repaired or renewed housing units Through new initiatives like the National Housing Co-Investment Fund and the Canada Community Housing Initiative, the National Housing Strategy will create a new generation of housing in Canada. None of that has taken place. Our plan will promote diverse communities. It will build housing that is sustainable, accessible, mixed-income, and mixed-use. We will build housing that is fully integrated into the community—close to transit, close to work, and close to public services.”
“I consider the member to be an honourable one, but I will note that every metric and group outlined in his introductory letter to the national housing strategy has failed, every single one. Not one thing has been done as they said it would be done when the plan was announced. The first-ever national housing strategy went on: The Government of Canada believes every Canadian deserves a safe and affordable home. Affordable housing is a cornerstone of inclusive communities.... Canada’s first ever National Housing Strategy is a 10-year, $40-billion plan that will give more Canadians a place to call home. Canada’s National Housing Strategy sets ambitious targets to ensure that unprecedented investments and new programming deliver results.”
“We will track and report on our success, and adapt our approach as needed as the Strategy unfolds. Our primary focus will be on meeting the needs of vulnerable populations, such as women and children fleeing family violence, seniors, Indigenous peoples, people with disabilities, those dealing with mental health and addiction issues, veterans and young adults. The release of the [national housing strategy] marks the beginning of a new era for housing in Canada. We have a Strategy that all Canadians can be proud of and support. I encourage you to become part of this nation-wide effort to ensure that all Canadians have the safe and affordable housing they need and deserve.”
“Across Canada, 1.7 million people are in housing need, living in homes that are inadequate or unaffordable. Another 25,000 Canadians are chronically homeless. This needs to change. Building on investments announced in Budgets 2016 and 2017, [this strategy] signals a meaningful re-engagement by the federal government in housing. It is a key element of our Government's plan to help strengthen the middle class, promote growth for everyone, and lift more Canadians out of poverty. Important learnings emerged from last year’s Let's Talk Housing consultations, and our Strategy is stronger for it. Now the work of implementing these ideas begins. He continued: We have set clear goals for the [national housing strategy], including removing 530,000 Canadian families from housing need and reducing chronic homelessness by half over the next decade.”
“He stated: It is my great honour and pleasure to present Canada's first ever National Housing Strategy (NHS), an ambitious $40-billion plan to help ensure that Canadians have access to housing that meets their needs and that they can afford. Bringing this Strategy to life has been a priority for the Government of Canada for the past 18 months. We are making historic investments in housing—and planning for transformational change—because we understand the value of home. Safe, affordable housing is a launch-pad for better socio-economic outcomes for our citizens, a more inclusive society where everyone has the opportunity to be well and to succeed, a stronger economy and a cleaner environment. But for too many Canadian families, a decent home is simply not affordable.”
“It's got nothing to do with the so-called climate change, as some try to suggest.” I could go on, but those testaments are clear. My constituents have not received the type of federal support they deserve. They have not received the type of flexibility that the government is showing in Bill C-26 and in this programming motion to accomplish its goals. It has not done anything for the Fraser Valley region, which is integral to maintaining Canada's supply chains in 2026. In my next hour, I am going to look a little more closely at what the government has done on housing since it was elected. It starts with the national housing strategy, which came out in 2016 or 2017. (1200) The member for Québec Centre wrote a message as the minister of families, children and social development.”