Evidence of meeting #36 for Finance in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was shelters.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Boromir Vallée Dore  Coordinator, Réseau SOLIDARITÉ Itinérance du Québec
Bill VanGorder  Chief Operating Officer and Chief Policy Officer, Canadian Association of Retired Persons
Melpa Kamateros  Executive Director, Shield of Athena Family Services
Charlie Ursell  Practice Lead, Watershed Partners
Lise Martin  Executive Director, Women's Shelters Canada
Ben Brunnen  Vice-President, Oil Sands, Fiscal and Economic Policy, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers
Michel Tremblay  Senior Vice-President, Policy and Innovation, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation
Pierre Céré  Spokesperson, Conseil national des chômeurs et chômeuses
Ian MacPherson  Executive Director, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association
Gisèle Tassé-Goodman  President, Provincial Secretariat, Réseau FADOQ
Paul Kershaw  Founder, Generation Squeeze
Danis Prud'homme  Director General, Provincial Secretariat, Réseau FADOQ

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

No problem.

Thank you.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

—we're going to get broken up in the next panel by a vote. We're always short on time it seems around here.

On behalf of the committee, I do want to very sincerely thank all the witnesses for connecting up. I'm glad your battery lasted, Mr. Vallée Dore.

With that, thank you to the witnesses for their presentations and answering our questions.

We will suspend for a couple of minutes to go to our next panel.

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

I will reconvene the meeting.

Welcome to the second panel of meeting number 36 of the Standing Committee on Finance.

We are meeting on COVID-19 spending, programs and related monetary policy.

Witnesses, we are going to be disrupted by a vote. We will come back. The bells will ring at 5:45 and the vote should be at 6:15 Ottawa time. If we have authority from the committee, we can probably keep meeting until about 10 minutes before the vote, but we'll see when the time comes.

We'll start with the first witnesses.

Welcome to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, Mr. Brunnen, vice-president, oil sands, fiscal and economic policy. You have been before the committee before. A strong welcome to you, Ben. Go ahead.

5:05 p.m.

Ben Brunnen Vice-President, Oil Sands, Fiscal and Economic Policy, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairperson and members of the committee. Thank you for having me here today.

I am vice-president of oil sands, fiscal and economic policy with the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers. We represent the upstream oil and gas industry.

COVID-19 significantly impacted our sector. Reduced energy demand led oil and gas companies to reduce capital spending by $10.8 billion, or 31%, last year. Oil and gas job losses are estimated at approximately 135,000 in 2020.

Three specific federal programs provided support to industry in 2020. First is the Canada emergency wage subsidy. StatsCan estimates the program paid out a total of $69 billion to date for all industries. We estimate that our industry received $694 million, or 1%, from the program in total. Our members accessed the program during the first six months, from March to August, and largely stopped accessing it after that.

This program was critical to the upstream industry at a time of crisis, was likely responsible for the preservation of thousands of jobs and was well designed so that when the crisis had passed from an acute perspective, it would no longer provide support to our sector.

Second is the orphaned and inactive oil and gas wells program, which provided $1.72 billion in federal funding to the western provinces. This program has been critical in terms of its ability to provide upstream oil and gas and service companies with additional revenue during the crisis, which preserved jobs while supporting investment in closure and reclamation obligations.

To date, the multi-year program is approximately 50% allocated and has leveraged roughly $600 million in industry funds. It is estimated that the program has created approximately 2,000 jobs across three western provinces.

Third, Export Development Canada and Business Development Canada provided liquidity to companies through the BCAP programs.

Through its direct lend program, EDC joined bank syndicates for reserve-based borrowing companies on an equal basis. Limitations included prohibitions on dividends, debt repayment, share buybacks and executive compensation increases. Companies were also required to report climate disclosures consistent with the guidance of the TCFD.

EDC also provided bonding support for companies to free up cash flow under its existing programs. The BDC provided short-term subordinate loans to companies with fixed repayment terms to assist with access to credit.

All in, the BCAP programs provided $1 billion in liquidity support to between 10 to 15 companies, based on market-aligned lending terms. These programs proved to be critical for companies that found themselves in acute distress due to sudden and significant liquidity constraints arising from the pandemic.

CAPP and its members are appreciative of the federal government for its support of industry during this challenging time.

With the worst of the pandemic likely behind us, now is the time to think about measures to advance the economic recovery. In our 2021 forecast, we anticipated that a 14% increase in upstream investment would occur. This year's forecast represents the stabilizing of industry investment and the beginning of a longer-term recovery.

With global oil and gas demand expected to increase under IEA forecasts, combined with an increased focus on GHG emissions reduction, government can work with industry to position Canada as the supplier of choice and lead a strong economic recovery for Canadians.

The federal government has adopted an approach to drive objectives through strategic and targeted subsidies for all industries, aiming to decrease GHG footprints and improve environmental performance through national interest in industrial policy. Key measures in the 2021 federal budget that could be instrumental relate to clean-tech investment and sustainable finance.

Regarding clean tech, the proposed investment tax credit for carbon capture, utilization and storage is a welcome commitment. The design of this credit will need to reflect the economic realities of implementing CCUS on a commercial scale, particularly when it comes to achieving the government's stated goal of reducing emissions by at least 15 megatonnes of CO2 annually, up from four megatonnes currently.

The government indicated that consultation would be forthcoming, and we look forward to the opportunity to contribute.

Second, the incremental $5 billion added to the net zero accelerator fund has the potential to stimulate material investment in other GHG-reducing technologies, such as methane, facility efficiency and electrification. We believe there is potential for material emissions reduction, depending on the availability and design of the program.

On the issue of sustainable finance, the government committed to increase climate-related disclosures and to publish a green bond framework, issuing its first green bond worth $5 billion. The issue is a top priority for CAPP, particularly in the areas of emissions reduction, indigenous engagement, diversity, air, land and water use and process and personal safety. CAPP is supportive of Canada creating its own sustainable finance green bond framework that accommodates oil and natural gas in the economy.

We also support a global sustainability reporting standard that is universally recognized and builds on existing frameworks, such as what the IFRS has proposed sustainability standards for.

Finally, we encourage the government to prioritize the need for better comparability of international ESG data. Significant independently verified data exists in Canada but does not in many other jurisdictions. As a result, our industry is perceived to have poorer performance than our peers, largely due to the incompleteness of their data.

Thank you for the opportunity to present today. I look forward to the discussion.

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you very much, Mr. Brunnen. It's always a pleasure to have you before the committee.

We're now going to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation and Michel Tremblay, senior vice-president.

The floor is yours.

5:10 p.m.

Michel Tremblay Senior Vice-President, Policy and Innovation, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I’d like to acknowledge that I’m joining you from Ottawa on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabeg people.

I 'm pleased to speak to you on behalf of Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.

As Canada's national housing agency, we are guided by an ambitious goal: to ensure that by 2030, everyone in Canada has a place to call home they can afford and that meets their needs.

This goal has never been more relevant. Housing affordability is a top concern for Canadians—and it has only been heightened by the COVID-19 pandemic.

At CMHC, our work to improve affordability is driven largely by the national housing strategy, a 10-year, $70-billion-plus plan to give more Canadians a place to call home.

Most national housing strategy programs focus on those Canadians who are most vulnerable. The strategy also focuses on addressing the biggest challenge to affordability, which is the lack of housing supply. As such, it includes large-scale programs to encourage projects that build new rental homes and renovate existing ones.

The national housing strategy also includes significant funding for housing innovation and research. We recognize that we cannot achieve our aspiration simply by doing things the way they have always been done. Innovative, new ideas and approaches are needed.

One way we are looking for new ideas is through our solutions labs, a $30-million, 10-year program approved by Parliament as part of the national housing strategy that examines persistent, complex housing issues. solutions labs brings together diverse stakeholders, including experts in the field, housing providers, developers and people with lived expertise to quickly develop potential solutions to some of the most difficult challenges facing our housing system today. These project teams are supported by expert consultants, who help design and implement labs that provide a safe space for diverse perspectives to come together, for assumptions to be questioned and for new ideas to emerge and be tested.

It’s within this context that CMHC worked with Generation Squeeze and other stakeholders to establish a Solutions Lab to examine issues relating to housing, wealth and inequality and how to improve housing affordability for Canadians. As of December 31, CMHC had provided funding to a total of 47 solutions labs. I would like to share some examples with you today.

One of the most advanced labs is examining how we can help increase access to suitable housing for Canadians who are released from the federal prison system after completing their sentences. These individuals are often released with no identification, no money and no supports in place. You can imagine the challenges they face in finding a place to live, especially with a criminal record. This lab is also exploring opportunities for ex-prisoners to find jobs in the housing construction industry, including possibly helping to build tiny homes they might one day occupy themselves.

Another lab is creating a road map to remove barriers to shelters and other services for women and transgender people who have been victims of violence. The ideas and materials generated by this lab will help to develop adaptable housing and supports for these vulnerable groups.

We are also funding a Solutions Lab entitled “Housing through an autism lens: A pathway from crisis.” Supports for people on the autism spectrum typically end when the individual reaches age 18, so access to affordable housing is a major issue for autistic adults. Barriers can include everything from knowing what to look for in a suitable house to understanding leases and how to share space with others. The end product of this lab will hopefully be an integrated set of flexible housing-related supports, services and bricks and mortar solutions that will be broadly adopted so that autistic adults have better experiences with housing.

These are just a few examples of the close to four dozen solutions labs that have been supported by the national housing strategy. Each is unique, and each is doing groundbreaking work that will lead to better housing outcomes for Canadians.

Mr. Chair, thank you for the opportunity to speak about this unique approach to solving complex housing challenges across the country.

I’d be happy to take questions from the committee.

Thank you.

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you very much, Mr. Tremblay.

We will turn to the Conseil national des chômeurs et chômeuses, Mr. Céré, spokesperson.

Mr. Céré.

5:15 p.m.

Pierre Céré Spokesperson, Conseil national des chômeurs et chômeuses

Ladies and gentlemen members of Parliament, thank you very much for your invitation.

You have received my notes, but I had to make some adjustments to my testimony as a result of Monday's budget.

We all know that since March 2020 the pandemic has shaken the labour world and the economy, forcing, in 2020 alone, nearly nine million people into unemployment. This number should never be forgotten. Almost nine million people received the Canada emergency response benefit in 2020. Last year, 45% of the workforce lost their jobs at some point. The world of work and the economy was hit with a shock almost unheard of in recent history, other than the 1929 crash and subsequent Great Depression.

There are two key lessons from last year: first, the crisis has exposed the flaws in the employment insurance program, which should have immediately played the role expected of it and helped people who lost their jobs. Instead, employment insurance collapsed and had to be quickly replaced by emergency programs, such as the Canada emergency response benefit and the Canada emergency wage subsidy.

With the CERB ending at the end of September 2020, the employment insurance program was put back on track. People had time to think. Flexible measures were created that were ingenious and welcome. Other income support programs were put in place, administered by the agency—

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Mr. Céré, hold on if you could for a minute. I really hate to interrupt, but the bells are ringing.

5:15 p.m.

Spokesperson, Conseil national des chômeurs et chômeuses

Pierre Céré

I understand.

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

We need support from the committee to continue to about 10 minutes before the vote. Are we okay with that? Are there any complaints?

Mr. Clerk, sometimes the vote counts down faster, so just really watch it. None of us wants to miss this vote. It's a confidence vote.

Okay, Mr. Céré, we have the authority to go ahead, so the floor is yours.

5:15 p.m.

Spokesperson, Conseil national des chômeurs et chômeuses

Pierre Céré

Beginning in September 2020, the government introduced programs to replace the Canada emergency response benefit, known as CERB, including the Canada recovery benefit, or CRB. Administered by the Canada Revenue Agency, the CRB provides income support to those who are not eligible for employment insurance, or EI, meaning, self-employed workers.

The second thing we have learned is this. Last year's collapse of the EI program—a serious situation—is mostly due to the numerous cutbacks made in the 1990s, specifically from 1990 to 1996, under two different governments. The past 25 to 30 years have been spent under something of a leaden blanket. All that time, the government had the EI program in a straitjacket, if you will, to keep the program from doing its job. We saw what happened last year.

Without the emergency measures put in place in the spring of 2020—CERB, the Canada emergency student benefit, the flexible EI regime, the CRB, and the Canada emergency wage subsidy, or CEWS—we would have seen misery in our towns and villages, as our grandparents saw in the 1930s. The support measures have helped people not only pay the bills and keep their heads above water, but also inject a considerable amount of money into the local economy. The government has been there to help people and avoid what could have been even worse.

To our knowledge, this is the first time in the country's history that a government has responded so strongly to support its population in the face of such a serious crisis. The government introduced streamlined programs, while covering sectors previously overlooked by the EI program. It is, in a way, a true social Marshall Plan that the government has put in place since last year.

Some elements have yet to be fixed. First, the administrative delays for EI are still very long. Second, the Canada Revenue Agency and Service Canada work in silos. The poor communication between the two agencies is resulting in longer wait times and mistakes.

In addition, a March 2021 study by the International Monetary Fund, or IMF, suggested avoiding a premature withdrawal of support programs, while underscoring that the lessons learned from the crisis provide an excellent opportunity to review the EI system, including its role as an economic stabilizer. I don't say this kind of thing often, but the IMF is right. Until the crisis is over and as long as EI is not reformed, support programs to help self-employed workers must continue. The measures in Monday's budget appear to move in that direction, but the changes to EI need to go beyond temporary fixes.

The government has had time to make up its mind. When it comes to EI, no stone has been left unturned, every problem has been identified and all the solutions have been on the table for 25 years. Now is the time to permanently reform the system.

A crisis like the one we are experiencing can become the necessary trigger to rethink the importance of our social safety net. It happened in the past, during the dirty thirties and after the Second World War. This crisis should lead us to rebuild the foundation of the EI program, with two objectives: expanded coverage for self-employed workers, with better access for seasonal and precarious workers, indigenous communities and part-time workers; and improved protection.

Something else we must reflect on is the environmental transition and the need for determined actions. This COVID-19 pandemic may just be a big rehearsal before the next crisis, the climate crisis. We have huge challenges ahead of us and we must be up to the task.

We believe that this government has demonstrated its capacity to initiate such a shift and that it can do so by reaching out to constructive opposition and civil society.

Thank you.

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you very much, Mr. Céré. I'm sorry for the interruption.

We'll turn now to the Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association, and we have Ian MacPherson, executive director.

Ian, the floor is yours.

5:20 p.m.

Ian MacPherson Executive Director, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association

My name is Ian MacPherson. I am the executive director of the Prince Edward Island Fishermen’s Association.

We appreciate the invitation to present and will be speaking to the support programs that have been put in place for harvesters and the impacts of these programs during the past year.

We would first like to acknowledge the ongoing and heroic efforts of our front-line workers across Canada and all those who are working toward assisting our industries in a return to a more normal situation.

I would like to acknowledge the many companies and individuals who were negatively impacted and continue to be impacted by the pandemic.

Our sector was in a very unique situation in that the seasonal start-up was scheduled at a time when most industries in Canada were scaling back or shutting down.

The PEIFA represents over 1,260 captains who are core licence-holders on Prince Edward Island. Most fleets employ two additional crew members for day-to-day operations.

For the close to 4,000-plus harvesters and crew who were preparing to start a spring fishing season, quite simply March 2020 was full of uncertainty. On Prince Edward Island, our harvesting sector is intrinsically tied to the processing sector primarily on the island and in New Brunswick. As air travel between many countries was at a standstill, sufficient staffing at the production plants was also a challenge.

On the harvesting side, questions such as would there be a season, and if so, how long, what are the protocols for safety, and would they be able to meet their financial obligations were front and centre on everyone’s mind. A two-week delay to the start of an eight-week spring fishing season added to this anxiety.

Another primary concern was the availability of traditional worldwide markets from both a transportation and market demand perspective. As the world was on an uncharted path, market outlooks were uncertain and unpredictable. To address these uncertainties, a number of harvesting sector organizations developed contingency plans for various scenarios. In the case of the PEIFA, this included ongoing dialogue with our board, committee members, other harvester organizations, provincial ministers, MLAs, processors, buyers, federal members of Parliament and federal fisheries minister Bernadette Jordan. The focus of these numerous calls was to organize a spring fishing season and ensure that support programs could be developed to address any economic shortfalls.

On P.E.I., winter and ice conditions restrict us to the spring and fall seasons for our major lobster fisheries. The federal government had a number of programs in place to address more traditional businesses, but the fishing industry has some unique aspects that did not make these programs workable. To address these gaps, the PEIFA and other fishing organizations listed and detailed programs that could assist fishers in vulnerable areas. In addition, the provincial government also worked closely with industry to provide additional programs that could address gaps the federal programs did not cover. After much discussion and hard work, a suite of programs was launched that did assist most of the harvesters. In a number of cases the program parameters did need modifications to be more effective, and we appreciate that our concerns were listened to.

It is important to note that some programs contained a clawback or qualification provision if harvester revenues were stronger than anticipated. The programs that assisted with crew wages, CEWS, and the fish harvester benefit and grant program were heavily subscribed. Based on the feedback I received, the Canada emergency business account, CEBA, did not receive the degree of uptake it could have due to business number and expense thresholds. The program was modified several times, and the program did have the net equivalent benefit of the fish harvester benefit program. However, access to more operating funds would have been a significant help to some fleets.

It is important to note that most if not all first-year captains were not able to take part in most or all of these programs due to program qualification criteria. The PEIFA and other organizations lobbied for changes and offered up ways to establish a previous year’s income, but without success.

Although the outlook for 2021 is more positive, we are still not free of the COVID-19 virus. The Prince Edward Island Fishermen’s Association suggests these programs be made available again in 2021 with some suggested changes to once again support a major food sector in Canada.

Last year brought some immense challenges but also provided an opportunity for industry and government to work together towards a common goal.

Thank you again for the opportunity to present. I would welcome any questions at the appropriate time.

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you very much, Ian.

Turning to Réseau FADOQ, we have Ms. Gisèle Tassé-Goodman, president, and Mr. Danis Prud'homme, director general.

The floor is yours.

5:25 p.m.

Gisèle Tassé-Goodman President, Provincial Secretariat, Réseau FADOQ

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Members of the committee, my name is Gisèle Tassé-Goodman and I am the president of the Réseau FADOQ. With me today is Danis Prud'homme, our chief executive. I would like to thank the members of the committee for inviting us.

The Réseau FADOQ is an association for people 50-plus and has over 550,000 members. All of our political outreach is aimed at improving seniors' quality of life. As we have all seen, seniors were the first victims of COVID-19. A number of programs and expenditures were undertaken to support seniors during the pandemic.

The federal government is fond of pointing out that it provided nearly $1,500 in additional support to low-income senior couples. First, a payment was made in April through the GST credit, but was provided to all Canadians. Second, payments came in the form of one-time top-ups to old age security, or OAS, and the guaranteed income supplement, or GIS. As far as implementing those measures is concerned, the payments were slow in coming.

In fact, Canada's seniors had to wait until July 2020 before receiving financial support through the OAS pension and GIS. If the government had kept its 2019 promise and increased OAS payments by 10% in March 2020, senior couples would have received more than $1,500, just through the OAS.

Nonetheless, the Réseau FADOQ applauds the Prime Minister for keeping his 2019 budget commitment. Our association did, however, recommend that the 10% OAS pension increase apply to everyone eligible for the pension, so as not to create two classes of seniors. The federal government's ad-hoc payments to the provinces and territories in support of health care were also welcome, but the government would have done well to specifically address the enhanced indexing of the Canada health transfer in the recent budget.

While funding was earmarked for long-term care and palliative care, it will no doubt be tied to conditions. We are eager to see how and when the funding will be allocated in Quebec.

Our organization was pleased to see that support was provided to community organizations in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Réseau FADOQ appreciates the new horizons for seniors program, which provides direct support to various organizations, and welcomes the additional investment to expand the program.

Similarly, the Réseau FADOQ was happy with the $90 million earmarked in the recent budget to directly support community groups that provide home services. Another way the government has helped seniors during the pandemic is to temporarily extend GIS and allowance payments for eligible seniors whose income information had not yet been received at the time of the budget.

The Réseau FADOQ supports a grace period for GIS recipients who do not file their income tax returns on time, and that grace period should always be in effect. In our 2019 election pamphlet, our organization recommended a period of up to three months. In the same pamphlet, we recommended extending a deceased person's OAS payments to their surviving spouse for three months. Currently, the payment can be received only for the month in which the death occurs, and any payments received after that must be repaid. Such a measure would give grieving seniors time to reorganize their finances.

Lastly, the Réseau FADOQ applauds the pandemic support measure to reduce the required minimum withdrawal from registered retirement income funds, RRIFs. Our organization appreciates the measure but called for a further reduction, if not suspension, of the mandatory withdrawal requirement for 2020.

Many seniors rely on RRIFs to support their retirement goals, which the pandemic has upended. Even though their plans have been put on hold, some seniors were forced to withdraw their hard-earned savings, which they had spent their entire careers building.

Thank you to the committee members for this opportunity.

Mr. Prud'homme would be happy to answer your questions.

Thank you.

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you very much, Ms. Tassé-Goodman.

We'll turn to our last witnesses, and then we'll have to go do a vote.

Dr. Kershaw with Generation Squeeze, the floor is yours.

5:30 p.m.

Dr. Paul Kershaw Founder, Generation Squeeze

Thank you very much.

I have been requested today to speak about a solutions lab I lead in partnership with the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation called Wealth and the Problem of Housing Inequity across Generations in Canada. I do so as a UBC professor and founder of Generation Squeeze, a university community collaboration.

Our lab is an exciting one because it's searching for solutions to Canada's housing affordability challenges caused by the fact that we have a growing, even skyrocketing, gap between local earnings and average home prices. That wider gap between home prices and earnings creates wealth inequalities, especially between owners and renters, and also between generations that bought homes decades ago and those who are starting out in the housing market today. In addition, the gap imposes dramatic unaffordability barriers, especially for younger generations of renters and aspiring owners, newcomers of any age and seniors who are renters. Within those groups the barriers can be particularly great for indigenous residents and Canadians of colour.

Given all of that, the growing gap between home prices and earnings turns out to be a major impediment to the CMHC's ambitious goal that all Canadians can afford a home that meets their needs by 2030. At Generation Squeeze, we think that goal is so important that we've embraced it as our own, and we encourage all in Canada to do the same. In pursuit of the goal, we aim to disrupt a root cause of the growing gap between home prices and earnings.

Our lab starts with the recognition that if a pandemic-induced recession does not deflate home prices, then we can no longer ignore the probability that our housing system is actually structured, even if unintentionally, to grow housing values out of reach for local earnings. Indeed, our lab is hypothesizing that many everyday Canadians, myself included, are entangled or incentivized by public policies to bank on profits from home ownership to secure our financial future and gain wealth. By being thus entangled and responding to such policy incentives, we reinforce feedback loops in the housing system that further fuel home prices and wealth inequalities.

My personal story is emblematic of this hypothesis. BC Assessment reported that my home increased by $300,000 in the year before the lab started, and that single-year increase is way more than I earn as a hard-working professor. It gave me a lot of opportunity to leverage the additional housing equity for home improvements and even other investments in the stock market, which I have taken advantage of with the support of the remarkably low interest rates available amid the pandemic. I clearly benefit from rising home prices, but that rising home price is a double-edged sword.

What's been great for my personal finances is hurting some of my other family members who, as renters, struggle to afford an apartment with enough bedrooms for their kids. It's hurting my younger colleagues, who are just as smart as me and just as hard-working as me but who now cannot afford to live where I do. It's hurting my community and country because evidence shows that wealth inequalities and pervasive unaffordability barriers make our economy less efficient while compromising our population's health.

By putting everyday Canadians at the centre of our lab, we know our lab's focus is provocative and potentially uncomfortable. Too often I have participated in housing dialogues where we hear Canadians say that unaffordability is simply the result of others, people over there, like a foreign investor, a money launderer, a speculator, a NIMBY, a developer, a landlord or a realtor. Yes, all of those actors do play a part in Canada's housing unaffordability saga, but our policy-makers have increasingly focused on those other actors as low-hanging fruit. There exist now foreign buyers taxes, speculation taxes, empty homes taxes, new measures to address money laundering, new efforts to address NIMBYism, new rent control policies, new expectations for developers, new regulations for realtors and a lot of efforts aimed at building more housing. Unfortunately—

5:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Dr. Kershaw, I really hate to interrupt. We are down to nine minutes before the vote, so we are going to have to break out. I'll give you two minutes when we come back to sum up.

5:35 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Mr. Chair, this was just getting interesting.

5:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

I know.

5:35 p.m.

Conservative

Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC

This is so good we have to keep going.

5:35 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

I don't think anybody needs time to get to the chamber, unless I'm mistaken. I'm looking on the call, and I think all of us are—

5:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Are we okay?

5:35 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Absolutely.