Evidence of meeting #212 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was process.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
—when in fact we actually need some action. It's a little disappointing that this is what the UN has to offer on housing.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
1:45 p.m.
United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing, As an Individual
Your interaction with me is unfortunately rather predictable.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
All right. We're going to end that discussion there.
Mr. Fragiskatos.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Let me tell you, Ms. Farha, that at least on this side of the table—and I'll even speak for my colleague on the other side, Mr. Dusseault, with his permission, of course, and he has nodded his head—we genuinely respect the work you do. We recognize that you have an international focus. Your advice to us here at the committee today, and indeed to the government, is to be valued and appreciated.
I've tried to sift or distill from your presentation what I believe are the key points. Because time is limited, I'll phrase my questions very succinctly. If you could, just reply with yes or no.
For the housing advocate that's been proposed, should the housing advocate be independent of CMHC and the minister, and therefore, the government?
1:45 p.m.
United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing, As an Individual
It would be essential that the housing advocate be independent because they would be reviewing the policies and programs of CMHC and the ministry.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
Thank you.
Do we need an amendment that allows the proposed advisory panel and the advocate to investigate systemic complaints?
1:45 p.m.
United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing, As an Individual
Absolutely, and I would iterate that it should only be systemic complaints, actually.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
Okay.
Should the legislation include public reporting criteria, including tabling findings in Parliament?
1:45 p.m.
United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing, As an Individual
Absolutely. I mean, that's simply just good practice of accountability and transparency.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
Okay.
Are you seeking a bill here at all that would give people a justiciable right to sue for housing to meet individual need? I just want to clarify that.
1:45 p.m.
United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing, As an Individual
Yes, that's a common misperception of how this all works. The short answer is no. It's important that people have recourse mechanisms for systemic barriers to accessing the right to housing. That's very different from being able to knock on government's door, and say, “Hey, give me a house.” That's not what this is about at all.
1:45 p.m.
United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing, As an Individual
Of course, my colleague Michèle Biss already has mentioned the notion of progressive realization. That's how housing works. The right to housing is progressively realized. The adjudicative mechanism that's been suggested, both in the legislation as it stands and in amendments that I've seen kicking around, is one that would allow people a voice and allow people to say, “Here is a systemic barrier to my enjoyment of the right to housing.” It would not permit them to just bring an individual complaint about their particular housing need.
One thing I should say is that there are elements of the right to housing that are already justiciable in this country. If you have a discrimination claim in the area of accommodation, you can go to your provincial or territorial human rights body, for example. We have landlord-tenant tribunals in this country.
1:45 p.m.
United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing, As an Individual
Those deal with the sort of adequacy elements of the right to housing.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
There's no need to add layer upon layer here is basically what you're saying.
1:45 p.m.
United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing, As an Individual
That's correct. This is different. This is actually very creative, and really, on the world stage, this is an interesting idea that the government is proposing and that civil society is advocating.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
I have one final question for you. Take the proposed legislation, add to it the amendments that you have suggested here today and the amendments that we heard before us last week in testimony that was given, and combine those two. Would we end up with a piece of legislation where Canada would rank very high internationally? Where would Canada rank compared with other countries if we have the amendments added to the proposed legislation?
1:45 p.m.
United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing, As an Individual
Internationally, we don't give rankings, but I'll put it this way: Canada would be in good company. The European Union—all of those countries— recognizes the right to housing, so you'd be in pretty good company.
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
1:50 p.m.
United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing, As an Individual
This is a major step for Canada and one that would have to be applauded, at least in my opinion, because Canada has long been completely out of step with international human rights obligations and other countries in denying that the right to housing exists at all. The government, in my opinion, and in a fairly short period of time, has come a great distance.
I am often approached by different governments asking what my country is doing, because I'm from Canada. I don't represent Canada, obviously; I'm independent. Whenever I start mumbling that they're in the midst of thinking about adopting legislation that would recognize the right to housing and they have a national housing strategy with a rights-based approach, other governments are very heartened to hear that—for example, parliamentarians in New Zealand, Ireland and Spain.
I think Canada could actually.... I think this legislation is very unique and I think it could serve as a model for other countries.
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
I'm going to have to end it there.
We will go back to Mr. Poilievre for three minutes and then over to Mr. Sorbara for three. We'll let him close off.
1:50 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
What I'm hearing from people who have a housing shortage is that they want the freedom to live where there are opportunities for jobs and good schools. It seems that in many cases, those are the very places that governments prevent them from living.
In Toronto, for example, it takes $185,000 of government cost to build a single unit of housing. Now $186,000 isn't a lot of money if you're a millionaire, but it's a lot of money if you're living close to the poverty line. That could be what prevents you from living near arguably the biggest economic hub in Canada.
It seems to me that if we're going to address the right to housing, we don't need more international bodies with high-priced consultants and lawyers who travel around the world giving lectures like we've seen today. What we need is to get municipal red tape out of the way so that we can allow builders to build and provide the housing that is affordable to the people who want to live in it. Right now, the main obstacles for that construction are the zoning restrictions that drive up the price of housing and prevent supply from coming onto the marketplace.
It is predictable that we would hear from someone like the witness here that all we need are more government programs, grand declarations, offices, speeches and other such bureaucracy—