Bill C-20

Build Canada Homes Act

An Act respecting the establishment of Build Canada Homes

This enactment establishes Build Canada Homes as a Crown corporation. The purpose of Build Canada Homes is to promote, support and develop the supply of affordable housing in Canada and to promote innovative and efficient building techniques in the housing construction sector in Canada. The enactment, among other things,
(a) sets out the powers of Build Canada Homes and its governance framework;
(b) authorizes the Minister of Finance to make payments out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund to fund the operations and activities of Build Canada Homes; and
(c) provides that the Governor in Council may transfer to Build Canada Homes the property, rights, interests and obligations held by any Crown corporation or subsidiary of a Crown corporation and may issue directives for measures to be taken in relation to the reorganization of Canada Lands Company Limited or any of its subsidiaries.
It also includes transitional provisions, makes a consequential amendment to the Financial Administration Act and contains coordinating amendments.

Build Canada Homes Act

[Gregor Robertson, Liberal, Minister of Housing and Infrastructure and Minister responsible for Pacific Economic Development Canada]

moved that Bill C-20, An Act respecting the establishment of Build Canada Homes, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Madam Speaker, the Build Canada Homes act would establish Canada as an affordable housing builder. The Build Canada Homes act is landmark legislation that would establish Build Canada Homes as a Crown corporation with a mandate to deliver affordable housing at scale. The work Build Canada Homes would do is essential to the federal government's ability to build the affordable homes Canadians need and would initiate a new phase of transformative growth in Canada's economy.

The legislation would provide Build Canada Homes with operational independence and flexibility. As a Crown corporation, Build Canada Homes would have the powers, functions and new tools it needs to deliver on its mandate. Equipped with these new tools, it would be able to act nimbly as a developer, financier, convenor and innovation driver in the housing sector. As I said, with this legislation Build Canada Homes would become a Crown corporation focused on building affordable housing in communities right across the country. This is important, essential and meaningful work, and it would tackle something even bigger than just the crisis that is facing our housing sector, because investing in building the affordable housing that Canada needs would in turn help grow our country's economy and strengthen our industries.

We know that housing is not simply about having a roof over one's head. The stability that a home provides builds the foundation for mental and physical health, for community involvement and for personal success. Everyone in Canada deserves a safe home, a place where stability takes root so opportunity can blossom.

I will put the housing crisis in context.

Even though some progress has been made, many Canadians still struggle to find affordable housing. The pandemic complicated things by disrupting the supply chain, and tensions with the United States have added further challenges.

This pressure is being felt across the country, in big cities and small communities alike. Canadians are experiencing rising prices, a lack of supply, and greater inequality. That is why our new government is working to make housing more affordable, to offer more options and to help every Canadian have a place to call home.

Budget 2025 includes generational investments of $25 billion over five years for housing. This strategic investment will build homes and create lasting prosperity, empowering Canadians to get ahead.

Solving Canada's housing crisis requires immediate action to build homes that meet Canadians' needs: homes they can afford, built as soon as possible. That is why, in September 2025, our government launched Build Canada Homes as a special operating agency within the Department of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities Canada, with an initial investment of $13 billion. Build Canada Homes is part of a broader set of measures by our government to accelerate housing construction, restore housing affordability and reduce homelessness.

As a lean, purpose-built entity, Build Canada Homes would leverage public lands, deploy flexible financial tools and promote modern methods of construction, like factory-built housing components. These new approaches would allow us to accelerate construction timelines, improve productivity and support a more productive homebuilding sector.

Build Canada Homes would fund multi-year agreements, providing increased certainty for housing providers, builders and manufacturers. In the immediate term, Build Canada Homes is prioritizing shovel-ready projects. Over time, Build Canada Homes would shift to funding large-scale, portfolio-based projects, delivering measurable impacts to Canada's supply of affordable housing, which brings us here today.

This legislation would provide Build Canada Homes with the tools and authorities of a Crown corporation to deploy capital at scale, partner in greater capacity and make investments in new and more productive approaches to housing construction. This is how we would expedite the delivery of more affordable homes on public lands and in communities across Canada.

As a special operating agency, Build Canada Homes has already launched the initial phase of work to build thousands of homes on federal lands in six communities across Canada, and we are getting shovels in the ground this year on those projects. In Ottawa, we would build approximately 1,100 homes just 20 minutes from the downtown core. We would deploy the same rapid approach across the country, in Dartmouth, Edmonton, Longueuil, Toronto and Winnipeg, to get homes built for Canadians as quickly as possible on these lands.

The bill authorizes the transfer of just over $1.5 billion from the Canada Lands Company to Build Canada Homes, once the agency is established, to ensure that this capital is ready to unlock construction on these sites. This is just the beginning. The Build Canada Homes act represents a major step forward in strengthening the federal government's ability to respond to Canada's housing crisis.

This legislation makes it clear that Build Canada Homes would be Canada's affordable housing builder going forward. As such, as a Crown corporation, Build Canada Homes' mandate would be to build affordable housing across Canada while modernizing the homebuilding sector.

By focusing on modern construction methods like prefabricated housing and the use of lumber, Build Canada Homes will stimulate a homebuilding industry that is more innovative, resilient and productive. Off-site construction will extend the construction season year-round, creating a steady supply of factory-produced housing components and quality year-round jobs. Over time, this will speed up project delivery, reduce costs and improve sustainability.

With manufactured panels and prefabricated components produced off-site, construction teams can work faster while minimizing waste, noise and required labour.

With the trade tensions hitting our industries such as steel and softwood, we have to be our own best customer. Mass timber, as an example, has tremendous potential for supporting greater densification. Mass-timber designs, especially those incorporating prefabrication and modular components, can accelerate the construction of multi-unit residential structures. The wood construction also provides natural insulation that reduces heat loss, increasing energy efficiency.

The carbon capture by mass timber can also be significant, especially in taller wood buildings. When used as a substitute for or complement to concrete and steel, mass timber delivers significant climate benefits, cutting embodied emissions in buildings by as much as 25%.

Canada has the third-most extensive forested area on earth. If we manage our forests sustainably, our country has a significant supply of timber available to meet the growing demand for building with wood and mass timber. Greater demand can strengthen Canada's softwood lumber industry while helping to reduce reliance on our southern neighbour and reducing the climate pollution caused by the embodied carbon and building materials.

I want to talk about core partnerships next. Build Canada Homes has already formed key partnerships with provinces, territories, indigenous partners and local governments. Notably, we are forging commitments to ensure that supportive and transitional housing is matched with the wraparound services residents need.

For example, these partnerships would support the creation of 30 supportive and transitional homes announced in Nova Scotia and 54 at Dunn House phase 2 in the member for Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park's riding in Toronto, with further negotiations under way to ensure critical services to the most vulnerable Canadians. Just last week, we announced a partnership with the B.C. government in Victoria to build 700 supportive and transitional homes, setting a new bar for the scale of the supportive and transitional homes that are needed to tackle homelessness.

Build Canada Homes is also committed to building indigenous partnerships that further self-determination and contribute meaningfully to meeting the needs of indigenous communities. Through Build Canada Homes, the governments of Canada, Nunavut and Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated reached an agreement in principle to support the development of 750 homes for non-market housing in Nunavut. These homes will be designed and delivered in collaboration with Inuit, for Inuit.

The Build Canada Homes act would establish a Crown corporation with a legislative mandate to engage with partners and deliver on projects that meet the needs of the communities they serve. As with Inuit, we look forward to strong partnerships with first nations and with Métis as well. The act would unlock the tools for Build Canada Homes to forge these new strategic relationships that would drive coordinated action and establish modern development models that could scale affordable housing like never before. This is how we move from the incremental progress we have seen in recent years to transformative progress.

By changing how Canada builds, Build Canada Homes would be delivering speed, scale and innovation. Communities across Canada are ready to work with us. Since releasing our investment policy framework and launching our national submission portal in late November, we have seen very strong interest nationwide. Proposals have come in from every province and territory. Many are under review, and hundreds more are in progress right now, building a robust pipeline of projects ready to break ground this year. These partnerships are central to Build Canada Homes' strategy to grow community housing and ensure long-term affordability. We will do this while growing our economy and making it more resilient and stronger.

Build Canada Homes would implement the Government of Canada's buy Canadian policy by prioritizing projects that use Canadian materials, strengthen our domestic supply chains and create good jobs. From softwood lumber in B.C. and New Brunswick to steel in Ontario and aluminum in Quebec, homebuilding connects Canadian materials to Canadian jobs. This is exactly why the government's approach to buy Canadian is exactly what it is about: becoming our own best customer.

It is also about shockproofing our economy. Buying and building domestically strengthens Canadian industries, supports Canadian workers and creates a stronger and more dynamic economy. The buy Canadian policy announced in December 2025 fundamentally changes how the federal government purchases goods and services. It prioritizes Canadian suppliers and requires the use of Canadian-produced steel, aluminum and wood in large federal projects so the dollars we invest drive demand here at home, strengthen our supply chains and support our workers and communities. That is how we move from reliance to resilience in a world where trade uncertainty is real.

This bill is about more than just building more housing. It focuses on something even more important. It is a key element of how we are retooling Canada's economy. When we invest in Canada, we are not just creating jobs. We are also strengthening domestic supply chains, reducing our dependence on foreign markets and ensuring that Canada remains competitive in a global economy where instability in international trade has become the new normal.

For workers, this would mean increasing economic security and opportunity. For businesses, it would mean demand and predictability. For our country, it would be another step in a nation-building strategy that invests in Canadian industries and communities. We are prioritizing Canadian content in major procurements, building with Canadian materials and partnering across the country to strengthen our supply chains and keep people working.

Build Canada Homes would finance and build housing, which would drive demand for Canadian lumber and steel, encourage innovation in the construction sector and make investments that directly support Canadian workers and businesses. It is a model for how we build homes, infrastructure and prosperity using Canadian materials, creating jobs today and laying down the foundation for long-term economic growth.

As for measurable results, since its launch, Build Canada Homes has moved quickly to get housing projects off the ground. I identified public lands that are being converted into housing right now. We have partnered with local governments to cut red tape, waive fees and fast-track approvals as well. This means up to 3,000 new homes right here in Ottawa and up to 1,430 homes in Nova Scotia, and recently we signed a partnership with Quebec to accelerate approvals and identify even more housing projects in the province. In total, nine Build Canada Homes deals are now in place and are expected to deliver nearly 9,000 new homes. There are many more projects coming in the months ahead. With private, public and government partners all showing up, we are ready to build.

There is lots more work to do, but the progress we have seen in just a few short months gives me confidence that we are moving in the right direction. Build Canada Homes has already demonstrated what is possible when we combine speed, innovation and collaboration to get homes built for Canadians. With the passage of the Build Canada Homes act, we would have the flexibility, autonomy and accountability we need to deliver more affordable homes. We would have the tools and authorities of a Crown corporation to scale our progress even further, move faster, partner more effectively and deliver more affordable homes on federal lands and in communities across the country. This is a pivotal step that would transform our early momentum into long-term capacity.

That is exactly what the Build Canada Homes act is designed to deliver. The act is a major milestone in the government's plan to build more homes faster and help ensure that every Canadian has an affordable place to live. It is about building more homes now, but it is also about reshaping the future for Canadians, making sure the next generation can make choices about the communities they want to live in. It is about giving families stability and supporting Canadian manufacturers and supply chains to grow Canada's economy strong. It is about creating new careers and giving communities the tools to grow sustainably.

In conclusion, with this legislation, we are marking a new chapter in Canada's history. We are transforming the housing system with intent. We are building the right partnerships and innovative financing models by design. We are shaping Canada's future to create communities that are stronger, fairer and leave no one behind. Much like the Major Projects Office, Build Canada Homes would enable nation-building housing projects that would help make our country's economy the fastest-growing in the G7. We are investing in Canadian workers, Canadian jobs and Canadian industries.

The Build Canada Homes act is a milestone step that would strengthen Canada's self-reliance and resilience. It would empower Canadians with more opportunities to get ahead and build the life they want, where they want, in a home they can afford.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, I can confirm that housing affordability is a major concern for young people. I have spent a lot of time over the last eight months speaking to young people on university campuses, many of whom fear that their life will be worse than that of their parents, owing largely to concerns about accessing homes and jobs.

One of the big issues, we know, in housing construction over the last 10 years under the Liberals, when housing prices have more than doubled, has been the proliferation of bureaucracy. The high cost of government is getting in the way of the construction that needs to happen in order to keep up with the needs of Canadians. The approach of the government is to create more bureaucracy: to add another arm to the federal government, yet another Crown corporation. It is proposing to continually expand bureaucracy, when actually we need a plan to reduce bureaucracy.

I wonder if the member can explain why, under 10 years of Liberal government, there has been such dramatic growth in the price of housing and why, rather than address the problem of out-of-control bureaucracy preventing housing construction, the Liberals are proposing to add to housing bureaucracy rather than reduce it.

[Gregor Robertson, Liberal, Vancouver Fraserview—South Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his concerns. First and foremost, to speak to the challenge that young Canadians face with housing, that is clearly a focus of Build Canada Homes: to ensure we are building affordable homes for the next generation. Many of us who sit in the House have children or grandchildren and have great concerns about the escalation of homebuilding costs and the price of housing across Canada.

We have seen the focus of the investments over the last few years into housing and affordable housing starting to bear fruit as the market pressures are easing. We have seen prices come down for several quarters in a row. We have seen rents come down. That does not mean we slow down. In fact, it means we need to step up efforts. The Build Canada Homes act is all about stepping up those efforts to build more affordable housing and to make sure housing is suitable for the next generation, including student housing and housing for young people who are looking for their first homes. It is complementary to the tax break for first-time homebuyers that the House is bringing forward.

We need to have a number of tools. Build Canada Homes is streamlining the process of moving affordable housing forward for Canada with a lean and nimble agency that will deliver that.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. minister for laying out exactly what Canadians have been talking about for quite some time. He talked about the wraparound services and cities like London, Ontario, where we have benefited from funding through the national housing strategy. I was recently at a location where we had funded wraparound services. I want to share with the minister the dignity I saw in the people who lived there. An event had been created and I was invited to speak to them. I am thinking about where they were five years ago and where they are today, with the dignity and the humanity to now be able to think past their problems.

I think about cities like Vancouver and London, where we see a lot of homelessness and people experiencing addiction because they do not have wraparound services. Could the minister talk a bit more about the wraparound services in the Build Canada Homes act?

[Gregor Robertson, Liberal, Vancouver Fraserview—South Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for her concern for those most vulnerable. The importance of supportive and transitional housing cannot be understated. It is a best practice, as part of a housing-first initiative, to make sure that people who are at risk of homelessness or are currently homeless have an opportunity to get into housing that has wraparound health and social supports so they can find stability in their lives and then transition to other housing opportunities successfully.

We have seen great examples of this. I mentioned that Dunn House, in the member for Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park's riding, is really a social medicine example that is proving to save taxpayer dollars. We had people who were spending a lot of time in hospitals and emergency rooms or in jail within the justice system. The cost of all that has been reduced. Those people are rebuilding their lives with great success. We have seen that success in B.C. with the supportive housing I was involved with when I was the mayor of Vancouver.

It is a best practice. We have a billion dollars dedicated toward that. We are looking for the operating funding from the provinces and territories to go forward and build thousands of supportive transitional homes. We will need that support from the leadership at the provincial level in particular. We have had early examples of that in Nova Scotia, Ontario and B.C. We need to scale that up. It is a big part of our work.

[David Bexte, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for introducing the bill. I really appreciate it.

I have spent a lot of time since I came to Parliament visiting my riding and speaking with constituents about their circumstances. The cost of living is palpable across the country, and not just in my home province. A big part of the cost of living crisis is related to the affordability of homes. I do not hear much in the bill's introduction related to affordability, except for the title. There is little substance, other than maybe the monopolization of entry-level housing construction across the country.

I understand this is transformation with intent, as the member has spoken to directly. I wonder if he could comment on how the government intends to eliminate or bring down the cost of housing with respect to municipal fees, taxes, delays, the time it takes to acquire a permit and all the stuff related to building new construction. I do not see any of those benefits in this legislation. I just see additional bureaucracy.

[Gregor Robertson, Liberal, Vancouver Fraserview—South Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, I spoke briefly to the impact we have already had in terms of reducing approval times, red tape and the costs related to both of those with the City of Ottawa. We have an agreement in place with the City of Ottawa to build about 3,000 homes. The homes will be expedited through the city's system and that is a good example of how Build Canada Homes, by bringing new tools to the table, which this act would enable, has the opportunity to leverage that acceleration with city governments, which are responsible for those approvals and for reducing those costs.

There will be other approaches with infrastructure investments that reduce development cost charges, which we will be bringing forward in the weeks and months ahead. With Build Canada Homes in particular, we have that leverage point. What will be really critical for us going forward is also having the tools to crank up the supply of more affordable housing. We can invest, at Build Canada Homes, in affordable housing projects that leverage a range of deeper affordability right to the middle market, like housing for young people that is lower rent. There are opportunities for attainable home ownership as well.

We look forward, at Build Canada Homes, to being able to focus on scaling those opportunities.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the minister a question, one that I often hear when I travel around my riding. There is concern that some smaller communities, which do not have the resources of cities like Toronto or Longueuil, may not be able to access the opportunities provided by this program. Not every town needs 400 housing units. Some communities may need only four or six. The mayors and reeves in my riding are concerned about this.

I would like to hear the minister tell us whether all communities, regardless of size, will have access to the program. They do not have the same resources as larger cities. At the press conference announcing the agreement with Quebec City, there was some talk of competition. It feels a bit like David versus Goliath, so I hope they will also have access to it.

[Gregor Robertson, Liberal, Vancouver Fraserview—South Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for her question.

We are focused on communities of all shapes and sizes. That is part of Build Canada Homes. The act would enable this new, lean, efficient agency to deliver both large-scale projects with larger communities and cities, and smaller projects in smaller and rural communities. We anticipate it being a measure of the impact within the community. In a small community, a small project would have a significant impact. We need to be able to fund and advance those projects in all sizes of communities.

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Madam Speaker, just before my formal remarks, I would like to take one moment to mention that two weeks ago today, I was able to stand in the House and congratulate Megan Oldham from Parry Sound on a bronze medal win at the Olympics in Milan.

I am excited to report that, a week ago today, I had the immense privilege of standing at the bottom of the hill and watching her win gold in the big air event. I had never been to the Olympics before, and I have to say that watching a constituent and family friend win gold is a pretty exciting experience. I just want to report that we are obviously immensely proud of Megan in Parry Sound—Muskoka and all across Canada. The town of Parry Sound is actually planning a fairly large community celebration this Saturday, and I will be there. Singing O Canada as a constituent wins gold at the Olympics is something I will never forget.

I will move on to the debate today:

For the great enemy of truth is very often not the lie—deliberate, contrived and dishonest—but the myth—persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.

The warning President John F. Kennedy delivered at the Yale commencement in 1962 is the warning that we need to hear today. President Kennedy knew that nations could drift because of the comfort of assumptions, systems and myths.

Today, Canada is living a myth. The myth is that we can solve a housing crisis by expanding bureaucracy, that another agency will compensate for a system that is designed to delay, and that process is the same as decision. The truth is much harder. The problem in this country is not a shortage of process. It is a shortage of permission. Until we confront that truth honestly, housing affordability will not return.

Canada's housing crisis did not appear suddenly overnight. It was constructed, layer by layer, over years, over decades, with one additional approval, one new study, one longer consultation, one more appeal mechanism and one more condition layered onto an already complex process. Each individual decision seemed reasonable and each safeguard seemed maybe defensible, yet layered together they produced delay.

Delay is not neutral. Delay is a decision and it has a cost. When approvals stretch from months into years, capital sits idle, risk increases and projects that once made economic sense no longer do. As time expands, costs explode, and either those costs are embedded into the final price or the homes are just simply never built. That is not ideological rhetoric. It is simple math. This paralysis by process is measurable in months, in dollars and in lost opportunity.

The CMHC estimates that Canada must build between 430,000 and 500,000 homes per year for a sustained period to restore affordability. We are nowhere near that pace. In recent years, housing starts have fallen well below that level. Meanwhile, population growth accelerated. Between 2019 and 2024, for every 100-person increase in the adult population, only a small fraction of ownership housing was added. That imbalance compounds annually. Home ownership among Canadians aged 30 to 34 has declined sharply, rents have risen and carrying costs have increased dramatically. Now, nearly nine in 10 Canadians express concern about housing affordability. This is not some cyclical downturn that will just reset itself. It is structural and it is pervasive.

That is not just my diagnosis. I am not just griping as a partisan here. The warnings are everywhere. The OECD has repeatedly identified restrictive zoning, prolonged permitting and fragmented approval systems across levels of government as principal constraints on housing supply in Canada. It has called for as-of-right zoning, predictable and shortened approval timelines, reduced regulatory overlap and alignment between infrastructure funding and housing approvals. Its conclusion is clear: Canada's housing challenge is not primarily a financing issue; it is a supply and regulatory issue.

The International Monetary Fund has gone even further. In its article IV consultation, it has warned that housing supply constraints in Canada now represent a macroeconomic risk. They are not simply a social issue, but a macroeconomic risk.

Housing shortages fuel inflation, restrict labour mobility, suppress productivity growth and elevate financial vulnerability. When workers cannot move to opportunity, productivity declines. When productivity declines, growth slows, and when growth slows, fiscal capacity weakens. This paralysis by process in housing becomes paralysis in economic growth, so when international institutions flag housing supply as a growth constraint, it is wise for us to listen. Canada does not lack capital, talent or expertise; what Canada lacks is permission.

Prime Minister Lester Pearson believed that governments reveal their priorities not through their rhetoric but through what they make it easy to do and what they make it hard to do. In Canada today, it is easier to create a new program than to reform a process, it is easier to announce than to approve, and it is easier to expand bureaucracy than to shorten timelines. That imbalance is not limited to housing, although housing is where its consequences are most visible, which brings us to Bill C-20.

Bill C-20 would create the Build Canada Homes corporation, the fourth federal housing bureaucracy and another governance framework and layer of administration. Let us apply the Pearson test. Would it shorten municipal timelines or eliminate duplication or endless review? Would it impose service standards or reduce the tax burden on housing? The answer is quite simply no, it would not. It would reorganize, but it would not reform, and that matters because the crisis we face is not a shortage of institutions; it is an accumulation of delay.

Build Canada Homes would not change zoning law, eliminate discretionary rezoning, impose firm timelines on reviews, reduce development or remove environmental duplication charges. It would add a new entity; it would not remove a barrier. If we do not fix time, we do not fix cost; if we do not fix cost, we do not fix affordability.

The minister said that we do not need to predict how this new agency is going to work; we already have some evidence. Those first six housing projects on federal lands announced by Build Canada Homes were presented as proof of momentum. They were proof that the new Crown corporation was hitting the ground running and already delivering, yet we know that those lands were already well under development through the Canada Lands Company, an existing federal Crown corporation. The sites had already been identified, transferred and prepared; planning work was already under way; municipal engagement had already begun, and in some cases, approvals were already advancing. Build Canada Homes did not unlock those sites; it inherited them.

We all know that rebranding does not increase supply, shorten approvals or break the chains of our process. If greater authority was required, it could have granted that to Canada Lands Company. Instead, the government has layered on another structure, while the underlying approvals system, with all its delays and costs, remains unchanged.

We have seen this pattern before from the Liberal government. The housing accelerator fund was introduced with similar language, such as urgency, speed and transformation. Billions were allocated, planning studies were funded, consultants were hired and zoning frameworks were reviewed, but did it eliminate discretionary rezonings, impose binding approval timelines or remove duplication? In many cases, it simply funded more planning. It did not remove process. Money was layered on top of delay and actually subsidized the paralysis.

Even the CMHC is not immune. Developers across the country report prolonged underwriting reviews, repeated revisions and changing requirements mid-process. The financing designed to accelerate housing is slowed by administration.

With every new agency or program, the signal from the government is very clear: The system is not optimized for speed; it is optimized for review. Review without discipline becomes delay, and delay without reform feeds the paralysis.

I find it interesting that when the government seeks to assist the auto sector, as an example, it works directly with the producers. It tries to strengthen their competitiveness; it secures investment for them and works to improve their supply chains. When the government wants to support farmers, it does not create some federal body that plants crops and raises cows. It backs producers, reduces risk and tries to expand markets. However, in housing, instead of empowering builders by reducing delays and costs, the government has created a new bureaucracy. Homes are built by builders, not by boards.

At the end of the Second World War, Canada faced a severe housing emergency as well. Nearly one million veterans returned home. Ten years of depression and six years of war had nearly halted construction. By 1946, the country was short more than 200,000 homes. Families were living in temporary huts and converted barracks. The crisis was immediate, yet Canada mobilized. Financing expanded, land was serviced, approvals were streamlined and authority was clear. Housing production increased dramatically through the late 1940s and early 1050s, and within a decade, that shortage was largely overcome. That is not nostalgia; it is a very clear example of urgency a time when the government treated time as the enemy.

It is easy for us today to frame this housing crisis as only about young Canadians. It is about young Canadians, but it is important to point out that scarcity affects every generation, because housing supply affects retirement security. When young families cannot afford homes, household formation slows. When household formation slows, economic growth slows. When that growth slows, pension sustainability weakens. When housing markets become distorted by undersupply, volatility increases, and volatility affects home equity. Home equity affects retirement planning. Reduced labour mobility reduces productivity, and that reduced productivity affects tax revenues, those same tax revenues that fund health care and pensions.

Housing supply is not a generational wedge issue; it is an issue of national stability. Boomers should care, mid-career Canadians should care and young Canadians already do care. Housing supply is tied to our nation's fiscal health. It is tied to productivity, and that scarcity harms us all. We know this is true because residential construction represents roughly 7% of Canada's GDP. With related industries included, nearly one-fifth of economic activity is connected to housing. When housing slows, construction employment declines, material production declines, mortgage lending slows, and retail contracts and government revenues shrink. Housing anchors fiscal health at every level, so when supply fails, the economic ripple is national.

We know that real reform is not about announcing new funds or new agencies. It is about removing friction: expanding as-of-right zoning, imposing building review timelines, aligning infrastructure funding with housing results, reducing the onerous tax burden, coordination across jurisdictions and holding departments accountable for time. None of that requires yet another Crown corporation. It requires government reforming itself at all levels. Following the same playbook of the last 10 years simply will not work.

President Kennedy warned about myths: the myth that comfort can replace courage, that process can replace decision and that more administration equals more results. Canada is living that myth right now. As we are trapped in that myth, prices rise, supply continues to fall, opportunity continues to narrow, growth continues to weaken and confidence continues to erode.

Prime Minister Pearson believed governments are judged by what they make easy and what they make hard. By that measure, we are failing. It is easy to announce, reorganize and create new agencies, yet it remains hard to approve housing, shorten timelines and remove duplication. It is hard to say “yes”, and Canadians are paying the price for that imbalance.

They see it in the cost of every home, the rent paid each month, delayed family plans and slower growth that affects retirement security and public finances alike. That is not abstract. It is absolutely measurable and absolutely reversible. We have built at scale before. We have mobilized nationally before. We have delivered transformative projects before, but the question before this House is not whether Canada can build; it is whether we are prepared to do it again, because when government makes it too hard to build homes, it weakens economic security across all generations for all Canadians. Canada does not lack builders, Canada does not lack capital and Canada does not lack the skill. Canada lacks permission.

We must restore urgency. We must restore accountability for time and restore clarity of purpose, and then supply will follow. Canada can build again, but not if we continue pretending that more bureaucracy is actual reform, and not if we continue layering announcements on top of delay.

For 10 years, Canadians have been promised strategies, funds, frameworks and agencies, and for 10 long years, affordability has moved further and further out of reach for every Canadian. Home ownership has fallen, rents have risen and starts have slowed. The crisis has deepened. This is not a failure of messaging or announcements; it is a failure of government. Repeating the same formula, another agency, another announcement, another layer, will not produce a different result; it will produce more of the same.

If we are serious about restoring affordability, then we must confront the truth. The obstacle is not a lack of government; it is too much government standing in the way. The answer is not a fourth housing bureaucracy; it is the courage to reform the system that created the delays in the first place.

Let us choose reform over reorganization. Let us choose timelines over talking points. Let us choose permission over paralysis. Canada can build again, but only if we stop repeating the costly errors of the past and start removing the barriers that caused this crisis and continue to make it worse.

Canadians deserve this level of urgency, this level of honesty. This nation has done it before, and we can do it again, but Canadians are running out of time. We must do it now.

[Jennifer McKelvie, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure]

Madam Speaker, I agree that we need better timelines. I agree that we need reform, but the way to do that is through partnership, including with municipalities. As a former municipal leader, I think that our colleague across the floor would believe in that as well.

The statement from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities welcomes the federal government's Build Canada Homes initiative as a strong signal of leadership on the housing crisis. This announcement shows a clear commitment to working in partnership with municipalities as well as provinces, territories, indigenous governments, housing providers, non-profits and developers to deliver practical, results-driven solutions that meet the urgent housing needs of Canadians.

I truly believe in partnership. I believe in partnership with municipal and provincial governments. I wonder how the member feels we should move forward in that spirit of partnership, because many of his comments were really talking about overriding the powers and responsibilities of municipal government.

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Madam Speaker, I suppose the FCM can be forgiven for thinking that there may be some results coming from this government after 10 years, but the fact of the matter remains that the Liberals have created a fourth federal housing bureaucracy. There is the department; there is CMHC, a Crown corporation that has existed since just after the war; there is the Canada Lands Company, which is already developing these projects they announced; and now we have Build Canada Homes, which, by the way, is now responsible for one of the other Crown corporations.

My question for the hon. parliamentary secretary is this: How many bureaucracies will we need to solve this crisis? Is it maybe one more? What if this one does not achieve what we want it to do? Will we build another one?

The solution is not more bureaucracy; it is about getting the bureaucracy out of the way. I wish this government would simply understand that and help us get the bureaucracy out of the way.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Madam Speaker, we completely agree that this just adds more bureaucracy, that it adds a new structure. They already had the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, but now they are adding Build Canada Homes instead of optimizing what is already in place.

I would like to know if we can agree that this is another attempt by the federal government to interfere in Quebec's jurisdictions, including in housing. In Quebec, we already have the Société d'habitation du Québec.

I would like to know if my colleague agrees that Quebec should ask for the right to opt out with full compensation for anything having to do with federal housing projects.

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will tell the member right now that, in fact, Quebec is one of the provinces that actually has done fairly well on housing.

There is no question that partnerships between the federal level and the provincial level are important. I would simply argue that those partnerships should focus on getting provinces to reduce the burden of endless reviews and consultants' reports. We have to speed up the process required to get things approved in this country. All that time adds cost, and until we reduce that time, we are not going to reduce the cost. This government could do that in partnership with Quebec, as with every other province.

[Carol Anstey, Conservative, Long Range Mountains, NL]

Madam Speaker, that was one of the best speeches I have heard in my time here. Another piece to this conversation is home ownership, and I wonder if the member would like to expand on the Conservative approach to home ownership versus the piece of legislation in front of us and how it would not really address or further expand the dream of home ownership for Canadians.