Monique Guay

[Social Housing, February 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, to my great regret, I must admit that our friends opposite lost their social awareness when they left the Opposition benches.

How can the minister maintain that the budget meets social housing needs, when the mayor of Montreal stated yesterday that all the mayors of major Canadian cities agree that the federal government cannot withdraw from its commitment?

[Social Housing, February 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, this morning, we learned that the Minister of Finance recognized yesterday at a meeting with representatives from the Front d'action populaire en réaménagement urbain that he had failed to keep his word by not providing any funds for social housing in the budget.

Would the Minister be willing to keep his word and reconsider his decision in order to restore the funds allocated to social housing?

[Social Housing, February 24th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign, the Minister of Finance made the following promise to groups and I quote: "There is no question that a Liberal government would see to it that funding was restored to these areas". What happened to this nice promise?

[Social Housing, February 24th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

When the Liberals were in opposition, not only did they condemn the cuts to social housing made by the Conservative government, they also pledged, if elected, to restore funding in this area.

Can the minister explain to us why the budget contains no measures to restore funding for co-operative and non-profit housing? Why is he reneging on commitments he made during the last election campaign?

[Canada Post Corporation, February 18th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. The government has announced an indefinite moratorium to the effect that no new post office will be closed in the rural areas of Canada.

In view of this moratorium, does the government intend to rectify the past errors and re-open some post offices, such as the one in Saint-Clément, which was criticized by the Liberal Party when it was sitting in the Opposition?

[Deputy Prime Minister, February 17th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, this morning the newspapers reported on comments made by the Deputy Prime Minister about our party and the Mohawks.

As Bloc Quebecois members, duly elected by the people of Quebec and duly recognized as the Official Opposition, we

strongly object to the absolutely blasphemous comments made yesterday by the Deputy Prime Minister.

How can the Deputy Prime Minister suggest that "the Mohawks are right to be offended by the Bloc's comments", when we have always made a clear distinction between certain warriors involved in smuggling and the other Mohawks who live in a climate of terror created by the warriors.

Who is the real culprit here: the Deputy Prime Minister or Bloc members who are just doing their job by representing their constituents?

[Business Of Supply, February 16th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciated the speech by the hon. member for Pierrefonds-Dollard. I agree with my colleague from the Bloc Quebecois, the member for Hochelaga-Maisonneuve, that the RRAP program is for homeowners. If you want to buy a home, you cannot be poor, you have to have some money. The problem today in our major urban centers is that some people cannot get clean, decent accommodation. The problem is very serious. These people will take whatever they can find. Often, they are on welfare and will have to pay steep rent for unhealthy, dirty lodgings. We must realize that the RRAP program is not for those people.

I have been fighting for social housing from the very beginning, because these people need help, not the homeowners. We can give part of the money to homeowners, but there are still a lot of people that we are not helping at all. Often, these people are not able to defend themselves, because they are uneducated, illiterate and unable to face reality and speak for themselves.

These are the people I fight for, these are the people we have to help. We cannot do it with such programs as RRAP.

[Business Of Supply, February 16th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to answer the member in English. Maybe he will understand me better and he will not need the translation.

The hon. member should know it is not the first time I have spoken about social housing. I have talked about aboriginal people also and their problems. He probably was not here to hear it. I always talk about social housing across Canada not only in Quebec. I gave statistics about Quebec because we are from Quebec. However I always speak for every Canadian in every riding everywhere.

[Business Of Supply, February 16th, 1994]

moved:

That this House condemn the government's inability to re-establish and increase budgets for social housing construction programs.

Mr. Speaker, it is with a great deal of pleasure and satisfaction that I rise today to take part in this debate on social housing.

Since I first rose in this House on January 21 to make a member's statement, I have taken every opportunity to remind the other members that 1.2 million Canadians have urgent housing needs. These people scattered in every one of our ridings are facing an intolerable situation. They are living in appalling housing conditions and their rents are eating up an excessive part of their income.

For several years, elected members of the government have been claiming left and right that Canada is a highly-rated country where living conditions are the best. I sincerely believe that we must come down to earth and look at reality. Comparisons between countries are no longer valid. They are often dangerous because they breed indifference and hamper the recognition of real problems. They create false impressions on real life.

In June 1993, the UN committee on economic, social and cultural rights published a report on poverty in Canada. It painted an devastating picture of the housing situation and expressed surprise that despite the obvious existence of homeless people and the inadequate housing conditions, social housing expenditures only amounted to 1.3 per cent of public spending.

So this international, high-profile organization has cut government big guns down to size by saying that Canada is not meeting one of its first obligations, namely to provide adequate and affordable housing for everyone.

What is true for Canada is even truer for Quebec as 44.3 per cent of Quebec households live in rental housing, compared with a Canadian average of 37.1 per cent. So the problem is more acute there. The poorest provinces are also confronted with this difficult situation.

In the face of this strongly denied reality, the government must act quickly and responsibly in this regard. It is now putting its head in the sand by constantly repeating that it does not have the money.

It recently informed us that it will spend money on residential rehabilitation. But this money does not do anything to help the homeless because they have no residence to rehabilitate in the first place.

While this kind of program creates jobs, these jobs too often lead to a rise in the cost of private rental housing. By improving housing, owners raise rents. This, in turn, makes it worse for low-income households who must shell out more money.

The Liberal government's declarations clearly show that it is moving toward maintaining the policy put in place by the Conservatives in this area. The Liberals' first 100 days are nothing to reassure poorly housed Canadians. They are following in the footsteps of the Conservatives whose policies and decisions could be called the "social housing massacre".

Available figures confirm beyond question that a massacre occurred between 1984 and 1994. Until 1984, some 25,000 new social housing units were being built in Canada every year. It took the Conservatives 10 years to kill that formula so that, since January 1, 1994, the federal government no longer contributes to the construction of a single social housing unit. It is quite a record to go from 25,000 to zero. We can see that their decisions helped them to break another record, from 152 to only two members in this House.

These alarming figures show the abdication of the federal government in this area.

The government also asked the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation to become more efficient, in other words to cut costs. There are worrying indications that CMHC is looking for ways to save and is contemplating rent increases in social housing to increase its revenues. Basically, they would be taking money out of the pockets of the less fortunate, attacking their slender income to help other people with housing problems. What a shameful thing to do.

That is what we are headed for with the government's silence. The members opposite are not reacting. It is as if there were no housing problems in their ridings, and all their constituents had decent housing. I think that is hardly the case. I would ask them to go out in their riding and see how things really are. Then come back and get in touch with your Minister of Finance to apprise him of the situation and urge him to make funds available in his next budget, on February 22, to re-establish and increase budgets for social housing programs.

Of course, the Minister of Finance has been going on and on with the same story for weeks. He is putting us to sleep. He is trying to make us bite the bullet of austerity. This budget will be a tough one, we are told over and over. But the money is there. It is only a matter of making the right choices. The government must take its responsibilities and act with courage and fairness.

We, in the Bloc Quebecois, have suggested that the government go over each program, each item of government expenditure to cut the fat, the squandering, the costly duplication within the federal administration. This process could have allowed us to find funds to help provide housing for the less fortunate segment of our society. Unfortunately, the minister opted for travelling across the country to hold meaningless pre-budget consultations instead. During that time, public funds are spent lavishly and inefficiently. Year after year, the Auditor General has a lot to say on this subject.

Here in this House and the Hill, we can see examples of squandering of public funds every day. Apparently, the sky is the limit. Simplicity and efficiency are not commonplace. Specific examples: Public Works are repairing roofs in winter and rebuilding stone walls in minus 30 degree Celsius temperatures. To carry out summer jobs during the winter comes at a premium and certainly does not do much for the productivity of the workers. It is shear squandering!

Other departments are literally devouring public funds. The Department of National Defence for instance, with a $12 billion plus annual budget. Piggish! Incredible amounts are swallowed up by that department's equipment programs. The Canadian patrol frigates will end up costing us $9 billion, while the ADATS air defence system initially designed for our military bases in Germany, but which will not be used and has been classified as non operational, has cost us all of $1 billion.

Governments will soon embark upon infrastructure programs that will require substantial funding.

How can we tell the less fortunate that the government does not have any money for social housing when it is spending all this public money, often astronomical sums of money?

How are we to explain to Mrs. Johanne Lepage from Châteauguay who is spending 46 per cent of her monthly income of $1,524, or $700 a month, on rent, heat and hydro for herself and her four children, how are we to explain to her and her four young children that the government spent $1 billion on useless radars but does not have money to build decent social housing that she could rent for just 25 per cent of her income? This lady is not the only one in such dire straits. In Quebec, 404,000 households spend over 30 per cent of their income on rent and there are 273,000 more Canadian households in the same situation. And there is worse: 194,000 Quebec households are spending over 50 per cent of their income on rent. In Canada, there are 584,000 in that situation.

Mr. Speaker, this situation is scandalous and unacceptable. Canada, a supposedly wealthy and developed country, has a poor record in this area. The Liberals have no choice but to re-establish the budget for social housing.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs is very familiar with and has always been a staunch advocate of social housing. On May 5, 1993, the hon. minister rose in the House to call upon the former government, and I quote, "to act as soon as possible to save the social housing and co-operative housing program in Canada". Not even a year ago, the minister was claiming that the government was trampling the fundamental right of every individual to decent housing.

I would hope that the Minister of Foreign Affairs will continue to champion this cause. I challenge him to press his colleague, the Minister of Finance, to untie the purse strings and make funds available for social housing. I challenge him to make his colleague aware of the plight of the poor in Canada. At the time, other ministers, including the Minister of Human Resources Development and the Minister of the Environment and Deputy Prime Minister, also defended social housing programs. I hope that they have not had a change of heart, simply because they are in power. I challenge them to prove that they are concerned about social housing and to take some concrete action!

Other options must be explored in order to find the funds to help the most disadvantaged in society. The government will make major savings by eliminating certain tax shelters. It is important, if not essential, that large corporations and the wealthy contribute to our society. How can we say to the poorest people that the government's coffers are empty when the wealthy do not contribute anything?

Every month, hundreds of thousands of tenants ask themselves the same question. How am I going to pay the rent? They wonder how they will manage when their income consists of social assistance, unemployment insurance or old age benefits, or derives from a precarious, low-paying or part-time job. These households are forced to make desperate choices, which can mean cutting either their food, clothing, transportation or basic care budget.

How can we stand by while young people go hungry every month? The members opposite and the Minister of Finance should give some serious thought to this question. We must never lose sight of the fact that these children are the generation of the future. We have a responsibility to provide for them. Moreover, the government must not shirk its responsibility. It must work to eliminate social and economic disparities between members of our society.

Social housing is the only way to provide affordable housing for all Canadians in need. It offers much better housing than the private market, housing which can be adapted to specific needs and requirements. Co-operative housing, especially, helps people pull themselves up and take greater control over their living conditions. It helps physically improve old neighbourhoods, keep the resident population and generally enhance the quality of life.

Social housing also creates jobs. According to Clayton Research Associates Limited, building 1,000 co-operative or social housing units creates 2,000 jobs; renovating them creates 800. Furthermore, very significant savings on health and social services can be made. Families will be better housed, better fed and better clothed.

Economy and employment-that is what the Liberal platform is all about. What are you waiting for to act? We, in the Bloc Quebecois, feel that the Government of Quebec should have full responsibility for housing. The Société d'habitation du Québec should be the only one in charge.

As along as Quebec is part of the federal system, we will demand a major and equitable financial contribution from it.

The Liberals, and especially their leader, kept hammering away on the theme of dignity and pride before October 25. Dignity and pride everywhere and always. Now we need action. It is time to prove that you yourselves have pride and dignity.

I conclude by telling you about Jacqueline Cayen, a 32-year old mother of three children, who lives on $1,442 a month. She went back to school recently and intends to obtain a high school diploma in January 1995. She says, "My rent costs me $350 a month, and electricity is $150 a month. In winter, it is cold near the windows and I heat the shed. To pay $500 on rent, I have to cut on food and clothing and especially hope that nothing unforeseen will happen".

So it is up to the government to act.

[Social And Co-Operative Housing, February 16th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, before the budget preparation is over, can the Minister of Public Works

assure us that he will address the concerns of 1.2 million low income Canadian tenants who are in urgent need of affordable and adequate housing?