Finance Committee on April 17th, 2020

[Jim Bell]

Our social enterprise per se is relatively new. We started it in October. We see it as something that already has tremendous momentum here at Siloam. We're speaking to government agencies and seeking their input in terms of what could be next.

To give you an idea of it, we started a social enterprise laundry. It's all about putting back to work the people who are experiencing homelessness. We're paying them. Let me also tell you first-hand that, yes, there's a financial impact to them, but the self-esteem piece, the dignity piece in terms of getting people back to work, and the help they receive with housing and some of the other supports are critical to this whole matrix.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

I'll be honest; although he's not up on this thing right now, I could see Pierre Poilievre clapping, because we do know that the dignity that comes from one working is very, very important. Thanks for adding that.

I want to switch it over to you, Paul Taylor. We talk a lot about making sure things are getting built. Part of the issue we're having right now with COVID-19 is the restrictions in terms of new builds not being able to be built. Here in Ontario, permits are not able to be granted. When we're talking about the existing stock and wanting to grow more, what do you think are some of the steps we need to take to be prepared for this?

[Paul Taylor]

That's a very good question. I think in normal times, I would have approached that response with a red-tape reduction and an expediting of processes to make sure that permits could be issued more quickly. Currently, considering just the safety of the individuals who will be creating those buildings and be on the construction sites, I would want to put that first and foremost.

I might recommend, actually, because there will be a reduction in the issuance of some of those permits, that now might be a really good time for municipalities to take a look at their own processes and streamline them. Everybody else is adopting technology, as we are now, to find other ways to get things done without necessarily incurring all of the travel expenses, as just one additional benefit here. Perhaps they could do the same. But definitely, the time from project to groundbreaking, just because of permits, is quite a consideration today.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Okay. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you to all.

Paul, you wouldn't be suggesting that we get to results rather than process....

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

That's a very good suggestion.

We'll turn now to Ms. Koutrakis, then Mr. Ste-Marie, then Mr. Julian.

Annie, you're up.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Before I begin, I would like to thank all our witnesses for taking the time to appear before the finance committee today. Now more than ever, Canadians facing homelessness and precarious living conditions are exceptionally vulnerable due to the spread of COVID-19. Ensuring that these individuals have safe and continued access to essential resources and supports is one of our government's top priorities. We are all incredibly grateful to you for the selfless work you do in this area and for your input and perspectives on how our programs are being delivered and are directly supporting Canadians facing homelessness. Thank you, and I look forward to our discussion this afternoon.

I have two questions. One is for Madam Arbaud and the other is for Mr. Clement. In the interest of time, I will say both.

Ms. Arbaud, the economic action plan contains a number of measures that address the problems of homelessness and, indirectly, housing. For instance, income replacement measures, such as the Canada emergency response benefit, will provide shelter for some recipients. Other measures, such as funding for the A Way Home program, specifically address these issues.

Do you think it's better to address homelessness and housing issues through specialized programs, rather than generalized measures such as the CERB?

To Mr. Clement, although this is not entirely related to homelessness and housing, while you are here I would like to discuss the $9 million in additional funding for the new horizons program that is being delivered through United Way Centraide.

It is critical to identify vulnerable seniors facing isolation or poverty as particularly vulnerable to COVID-19. Could you provide some details on how that funding is being distributed to meet the needs of vulnerable seniors, especially those facing poverty and precarious living conditions? What priorities or criteria are in mind, and has a plan been put in place to ensure consistent distribution standards?

[Cécile Arbaud]

To answer your question, I would say that they are both important: both assistance to individuals and assistance to the organizations that are going to help those individuals.

As I mentioned earlier, there are actually a lot of things to be addressed around homelessness. It's not only having revenue and a home. As Shayne Williams and Jim Bell were talking about, it's also addressing mental health.

It's addressing addiction. It's addressing recovery, trauma recovery. It's addressing also the situation of a young person who never went to school, who was bullied at school, who is really behind and really wants to go back to school. All these issues have to be dealt with at the same time. It's really important that they have the support of people who can help them.

Yes, sure, the revenue side is really important, because when we see people living on welfare, which in Quebec is $648 a month, how can they do that? You can't even find a room for that amount, let alone the food and everything. Both programs are really important.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

The second question was to Mr. Clement of the United Way Centraide.

[Dan Clement]

It's a great question. It was around the new horizons for seniors program and the $9 million that the federal government is mobilizing in support of vulnerable seniors.

First of all, thank you for that contribution to Canadians. It's incredibly important today.

We all know that our seniors are the most at risk and vulnerable as a result of COVID-19. We know that means isolating at home and taking significant precautions. We also know that our most vulnerable seniors often are those who were using things such as community support programs and day programs for physical and social activities. That's where they were accessing nutritious food supports. Those programs have had to close because of social isolation, so the very infrastructure that was supporting our seniors isn't there. That means we have to actually bring those supports to them and our most vulnerable. That's really important. Not the least of that are things such as food.

I would name one more issue. If you think about meals on wheels programs, those are also often supported by volunteers who are seniors and at risk. Not only are some of the programs having to close because of social isolation, but some of the volunteers who have been supporting them have had to isolate. Therefore, it's a bit of a double whammy.

To answer your question about the methodology for distribution, we've been asked to make sure that those dollars are supporting all parts of Canada. The first thing we did was make sure there is a minimal viable amount of money that can go to communities across Canada. We also used a population distribution model. Where the seniors are and the distribution of seniors was used to then inform each region of the country in terms of their allotment of those dollars. Those dollars are being deployed through local United Way Centraide organizations, our 79 member organizations that serve all regions and all communities in Canada. They are accountable organizations with expertise on the ground, with community relationships and strong senior support relationships, that are going to be delivering that funding to community support and senior-serving organizations—

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We will have to end it there, Dan, or we will not get the rest of the questions in.

We will turn to Mr. Ste-Marie, then Mr. Julian and then Mr. Morantz.

Go ahead, Gabriel.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to welcome all the witnesses, and I sincerely thank them for their testimony.

Ms. Laflamme, could you explain to the members of the committee the difference between affordable housing and social housing? Then, could you explain to us again the suggestions for measures that could be implemented by the federal government?

You mentioned a contingency fund where grants could be administered by CMHC. You also talked about the importance of refinancing social housing; you gave the example of the 300 shuttered units in Montreal. You also mentioned the rent supplement.

Please explain the difference between affordable and social housing and then the measures you are recommending.

[Véronique Laflamme]

Good afternoon.

The difference between social housing and affordable housing is very important. Social housing is housing that does not belong to the private market. It therefore belongs to society or communities. Public housing often belongs to municipalities or the government, or non‑profit organizations and housing cooperatives. There are three forms of social housing in Canada, which in the past were funded directly by the federal government, before it was withdrawn in 1994.

Under current provincial programs, there are different formulas that are still funded and others that are less so. Since the withdrawal of the federal government, there is no longer any low‑income housing or public housing. This is housing that is very much in line with the needs of low‑income people, particularly tenants who are seniors, many of whom currently live in low‑income housing.

In the national housing strategy, the government talks about affordable housing, which can be anything and everything. It can include housing that can be rented for $2,000 a month, according to the rates set by the various programs.

At the moment, there is no definition of affordable housing. Depending on the various initiatives of the national housing strategy, it may be based on a percentage of income or a percentage of the median rent in the area, which often results in very expensive and unaffordable housing for the average core housing need renter, which includes 1.2 million Canadians. If memory serves me correctly, the median income of these Canadian households is about $18,000, and in Quebec it's even a little less. Therefore, they can't afford most of the private rental housing that has been built under the national housing strategy.

That's why we're calling for investments to be focused on social housing, in order to get out of this wave of real estate speculation, which is excluding people from city centres. We think that the only way to produce housing with guaranteed occupancy and not to encourage real estate speculation is to get out of the private housing market and to build more housing outside the private market in various forms, whether it is co‑operative, non‑profit or public housing.

With regard to your second question, in the economic situation we're facing, we need that kind of infrastructure, among other things, to encourage the local economy. In Quebec, a number of studies have been done on the financial benefits in the local economy, but I'll save those arguments for another discussion, perhaps.

You're probably going to be interested in what we're recommending, Mr. Ste‑Marie. I learned this morning that there are also shuttered housing units in Joliette. That said, it is mainly in Montreal that there are federally funded housing units that are now shuttered because they need to be renovated. Of course, they are everywhere in Canada. They can be renovated quickly. We think that would be a concrete measure to take, and it would not prevent investment in the development of new social housing. Such a measure would, at the very least, make these units available to people who need them. In Quebec, 40,000 people are waiting for public housing or low‑rent housing. We believe that we cannot do without these 300 housing units that are currently shuttered and that are still, for the most part, under federal responsibility.

The second measure we are asking for is a contingency fund. This is what other groups across Canada are asking for as well, and there are all kinds of petitions going around. We think this could easily be implemented on the CMHC side. It could be complementary to income support measures for people whose income is not enough to pay their rent, even with the $2,000. We know that there are people who are suffering further income losses because of the pandemic.

At FRAPRU, we do not recommend a private rent supplement; we prefer social housing. However, in the current circumstances, people need quick support, and rent supplements can be a way to keep tenants in their homes. Because the federal government has funded such programs in the past, this is manageable. In Quebec, there is already a program in place that would send a clear signal to the provinces to help tenants, for example.

The last measure does not pertain to homelessness, but has more to do with the medium term. Plans for the recovery phase should include investments in social housing. That way, we won't find ourselves in a worse situation after the pandemic than we were in before the pandemic, in terms of the housing and homelessness crisis facing cities big and small across Canada and Quebec.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We will have to end it there.

We will now turn to Mr. Julian and then to Mr. Morantz.

Peter.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to our witnesses for being here today. This is a very important panel, and we shout out to all of the shelter and supportive housing workers across the country who are putting their lives at risk in providing vital supports at shelters and in supportive housing. These people are Canadian heroes. That's why the NDP caucus has been calling for a courage bonus. It's to ensure that those front-line workers receive appropriate levels of financial support at this critical time.

I'd like to address my first questions to Mr. Williams.

Shayne, thank you for being here. I really appreciate your being available for this panel. I want to ask you a couple of questions.

First, what would Lookout need right away to deal with COVID-19?

Second, to what extend does opening the CERB to make it a universal benefit to people who are left out.... Seniors, students and people who are unemployed are all left out of the CERB. If we made it universal, as Jagmeet Singh has proposed and as it is already structured to be, what kind of difference would that make for the people you are working with?

Third, coming out of this crisis, a number of our witnesses have talked about the importance of not going back to the way we were before. You flagged in your presentation a national dental program—and national pharmacare is something that many people have stressed—and starting to build housing again, social, co-operative and affordable housing. How important is it to have a game plan coming out of this crisis so that we don't go back to a normal that had so much inequality?

[Shayne Williams]

Thank you, Mr. Julian. I appreciate the questions.

As to your first question on the immediate need, Lookout and other service providers across the country, like my peers on the call today, are looking for a myriad of ways to help people socially isolate, whether they're symptomatic or COVID-positive, in places that get them off the streets. There is co-operation with municipal governments and provincial governments to identify places, and then COVID Reaching Home dollars help operate places like the Roundhouse, the local gymnasium here in New Westminster and the church in Abbotsford. These are places where folks can come, and as we're going to inevitably see folks get diagnosed, they will have a spectrum of places where they can self-isolate and have their own bathrooms.

We've escalated a few different ideas to the province, and we're hopeful that we'll get some federal support for RVs, hotels and university dorms to have an inventory of places that would be suitable for that spectrum and relieve our health friends in their emergency response in emergency rooms so they can reserve their hospital interventions for folks who are COVID-positive and require ventilation and hospital expertise. The ones who can socially isolate and get well on their own could move into other places, and we can be kind of creative around that. That's an immediate need outside of the stuff in my presentation, such as PPE, best practices and cleaning, those types of things.

As for the CERB, we're seeing different folks accessing our shelter continually, and now there seems to be more seniors and students—folks who won't be able to access the CERB. Opening that up could be a massive prevention tool for individuals. It's a huge cost to government, I realize, but I think that it's putting the shingles on the roof rather than trying to mop the rainwater off the floor. This prevention tool would have an incredible long-term impact and would keep people out of the cycle of homelessness. We know that every additional day that somebody is homeless, it's more and more difficult to make the journey back to wellness. We want to prevent folks from becoming homeless or facing barriers, and I think that's a really smart approach to this crisis.

As for not going back, we're putting investments in and we're going to see a healthier community as a result of this pandemic. Hopefully the virus is not going to go through the shelters like wildfire and we're not going to see a huge loss of folks. That's the risk at this point. For the ones who are not in that situation, I think the nutritional value, the connection to health care, the relationship with non-profits and the fact that they're not being exposed on the streets right now are going to have a profound impact on their access to health care in the future and their ability to be well.

We absolutely have to put mechanisms in place like pharmacare and a national dental program, make a true investment in social and affordable housing, as our peers have said, and invest in getting current housing out of the hands of for-profit entities and into the hands of non-profits. The speakers today have articulated a lot of that stuff, and I think it's very necessary to have a plan coming out of this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you both.

While we're with you, Mr. Williams, you mentioned PPE earlier, personal protective equipment, and that there were problems. What we hear from the national side is that there's availability. Is there a distribution problem? What is happening? Why is PPE not getting out from the supplies? We're hearing there are supplies. There are planeloads coming in. Jason Kenney had some and distributed them. How come they're not getting down to the ground? What do we need to do there?

[Shayne Williams]

We have about 100 different programs across three different health authorities, as well as B.C. Housing, which is our housing entity here in the province of British Columbia. They're all great supports, trying to do the best thing and asking for inventory and what we need for PPE.

We're not an organization that's going to require N95 masks or that type of thing, but having just your regular disposable masks or cloth masks, goggles, hand sanitizer, gloves, those kinds of things, are all super important in what we do in sheltering and providing food for folks.

With the sheer volume of people and sites we have, our PPE requests are quite great, so we put those requests to our funders and we get a response saying, “We can't get as much as you need. We can only give you pieces of that.” We're then put into the situation of working with suppliers and volunteers. We have a great immigrant program here locally that's made cloth masks for us for a small donation towards materials, so we're cobbling it together. I'm telling you that's a full-time job plus at this point, for the one person trying to pull it together.

Recently, B.C. Housing announced here in the Downtown Eastside that there would be a distribution centre to procure community donations and then spread that out to non-profits. I think it has started. We're starting to see a little more support, but our PPE asks have largely gone unaddressed. If it weren't for that full-time worker, our local connections and great champions in the community, we would probably be in a much worse situation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you. That's something we have to put a flag on, definitely.

We'll turn to four-minute rounds and try to get everybody in—Mr. Morantz, Ms. Dzerowicz, Mr. Cooper and Mr. McLeod.

Marty, you're up.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

My questions are for Jim Bell.

We only have a short period of time. I just want to thank you for all the great work that you and Siloam do in Winnipeg. I got to know the organization personally when I was on city council. I toured the facility. It's truly an incredible work in progress, so I thank you for all that you're doing.

You mentioned in your opening statement that you wished you had more time, so I think I'm just going to let you take this time as that “more time”. Perhaps you could touch on what you think is going to happen in the aftermath of COVID.

In your comments, I would like you to just address more fully the concept of dignity in work—the program that you talked about—how important that is in breaking the cycle of poverty and homelessness, and also the crunch between reductions in charitable donations and people on the brink, which will increase demand for your services.

With that, I'm going to cede my time to you.

[Jim Bell]

Thank you for the questions. I will make the best use of the time to answer parts A and B of that.

Right now, as with everybody here participating in this call, it's all hands on deck. Every day is a risk in terms of trying to implement best practices. We've had to make some changes operationally in terms of how we serve people meals and social distancing of beds, and the like.

We're paying attention to that, but—to your question—we're also paying attention to COVID's aftermath. What's it going to look like? I pay attention to numbers. Did I read right that there are up to six million people in the EI queue? That's the number I've recently been reading.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Yes.

[Jim Bell]

I'm anal about numbers. I have a finance background, so I pay attention to the numbers.

To give you some scope very quickly, our plan here at Siloam before COVID hit, and even while it exists, is that we're opening.... Right outside my building right now, I could show you a new building expansion. It's a paradox, where it's sited, because we're going to have space available for all the services I've described to you in the coming months. We'd be opening at the end of May, had COVID not come upon us. I say that it's a paradox. We're grateful for the space, but it also tells you the need. We need the room because the needs continue to expand, and COVID is going to put more pressure on that. We're going to have more beds in addition to the 110 we have right now.

We responded to an RFP recently. We've been awarded, based on the need, an increased number of supportive recovery beds for people coming out of addiction recovery. We have room in our current building after we make the move, so we're paying attention to that and we're expanding on our social enterprise. With all those things, given that we expect donor fallout, we're going to need resources, and I would love to work with government to show a business case to say, “Look, here is what we need. Hold us accountable and here are the outputs you can expect.”

You made a comment about the dignity and self-esteem of people. By investing in people who have been down and out, with hardship leading to homelessness, I can tell you first-hand that people want to work. They want to be trained or retrained so that they can get back into their own place and back into the job market. We have stories and experiences. When people come through the front door of Siloam, they will come back and share their experience because they came out ahead when they came out the other door. I trust it's the same for some of the organizations that are on the phone today.

The last comment I would make is that as we pay attention to the post-COVID future, the need is going to go up. We anticipate that our donor contributions and other revenue contributions are going to go down, and therein lies the rub. We know that we can work together with the community to expand upon the services, but we're going to need your help. We're going to need the help of government, and in return for that, I know we can provide you with some comfort in terms of the metrics to say, “Here is how many people are going back into housing; here is how many people are going back to work as a result of job training; here is how many people have participated in health care and are being taken care of for whatever illness they might have.”

We don't want to be irresponsible when we say this, because we're dealing with it with all hands on deck today, but with my leadership team, we're saying, “Okay, when we come out of this—and we are going to come out of this collectively, as a nation—here are going to be some of the challenges.” I hope we can have another opportunity to talk about things like that, and I hope it's in the short term rather than the long term.

I trust that answers your question. I could really go on, but thank you for the opportunity.