Evidence of meeting #42 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was division.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
We're not seeing it yet. Housing starts are, roughly, pretty flat.
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Okay.
Since Build Canada Homes was announced, and this government supposedly began building “big” and “bold”, as we heard last night, have national housing starts improved or weakened?
Advisor-Analyst, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
I would say that, in the last six months or so, the housing starts have been on a downward trend, generally.
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Okay.
Is Parliament currently being given a clear breakdown showing how much Build Canada Homes will spend on admin versus actual housing construction, yes or no? Have we been given a number?
Director, Budgetary Analysis, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
Yes. In our report we had an estimate. I don't remember the number off the top of my head, but the administrative and overhead costs were in the report.
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Okay.
Can Parliament currently determine the projected cost per housing unit under Build Canada Homes?
Director, Budgetary Analysis, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
We could potentially go back to the numbers in the report, take that administrative cost and divide it by the number of units we believe are going to be built.
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
This is what I have here. If Parliament doesn't have a clean dollars-to-doors breakdown of the $13-billion project, and housing starts are drastically falling across the country, could we say this program isn't performing as promised?
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
I think the target of 500,000 homes has not been met yet. However, with the fact that Canada's population is now in decline, I think that comes against market forces of whether the drop would have been smaller—
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
I'm sorry. I have a very short time.
If housing starts are weakening while federal housing bureaucracy expands, should Parliament question whether the current approach is working? I think that's what you were speaking to. Should we question it?
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
That's absolutely the role of Parliament.
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Would it be fair to say Canadians were promised a housing construction boom, but Parliament is currently being asked to approve billions of dollars without clear evidence that those targets will actually be met—or should be met?
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
We'd certainly like to see more on the plans and the specific target path, yes.
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
I have just one more question. Should Parliament expect clear performance metrics tied to housing completions before approving large increases in housing-related spending?
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
It would be good to see targeted performance metrics.
Conservative
Liberal
Pauline Rochefort Liberal Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for this opportunity to chat. I was glad to hear your comments recognizing that the spring economic statement spoke to the fact that Canada is resilient. That's an excellent comment.
I'd like to come back to the questions raised by my colleague a moment ago, when he spoke about the Global Infrastructure Investor Association's recent poll, which places Canada at the top of the list—in fact surpassing Germany, and surpassing the United States for the first time. That's pretty remarkable. In the report, the association highlights Canada's nation-building program and the government's announcement of a new sovereign wealth fund. I spoke in the House recently on this particular topic, the opportunity for Canadians to be all in and support Canada. The wealth fund will partly be used to co-fund infrastructure projects alongside private sector partners.
We must remember that we're one year into the mandate of this new government. As we speak, sometimes I sense the impatience, but it does take time, as there is a natural evolution to all of these various initiatives.
I do want to point out that today the Prime Minister is in New York. He said yesterday that he would be there for exactly that particular reason, meeting with the business community and for investment purposes. I was impressed in recent weeks when Shell announced the $22-billion purchase of ARC Resources. Yesterday, in my own riding, the International Tactical Training Centre announced the purchase of six advanced jet trainers.
I find there's a lot of evidence of support and interest in Canada from an investor's perspective. This fall we will be holding a very large investment summit, the first ever.
I'm interested in your thoughts. I know you've touched on it, but I think it is worthy of further elaboration. It's such an important development for our country, and so many parts of the world are paying attention to Canada and the opportunities here. I think, when we talk about expenditures and so on, this has to be an important element in that discussion. I'd like your thoughts, please.
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
The government has been clear that it intends to use available fiscal room in a way that favours investment. I think it is absolutely good news that international investors' sentiments are starting to turn towards Canada. That investment activity looking towards Canada is good news.
What we have been trying to highlight is that the translation of that investment and financial space into real projects, jobs and investments for and within Canada is the piece that we would really like to see more about, so that we can provide more concrete analysis of how it's playing out in Canada's real economy in addition to what's going on with sentiment in the financial world.
Liberal
Pauline Rochefort Liberal Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON
Thank you for that. Certainly for me it does support the notion that it is time for our country to be bold.
I want to come back to the spring economic statement, which suggests that we have a strong platform on which to be bold as we move forward as a country. The spring economic statement pointed out that we have a AAA credit rating from S&P and Moody's, the lowest net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7, the most competitive long-term interest rates and second-fastest-growing economy in the G7—growing twice as fast as Germany and Japan and three times faster than Italy—and the second-lowest deficit-to-GDP ratio in the G7.
You touched on the IMF. Basically, the IMF does most of the economic assessments of most countries in the world—I think with the exception of four—so they do take into consideration the nuances, as you pointed out, between countries as they provide statements overall.
What are your thoughts on Canada's position overall from an international stance?
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
Good news is good news, but in terms of the real economy picture, the government set as a priority to improve productivity and competitiveness, and other similar statistics—such as Canada's productivity, business investment, research and development and a whole suite of measures of how Canada's real economy is doing—paint a less rosy picture. We look forward to working on that translation of strategies and objectives to real plans and projects in specific parts of the country and specific industries.
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Let's talk about this. It's one thing to have ambitions and a medium‑term and long‑term vision. However, COVID‑19 came along. These days, we have the war in Iran and the whole geopolitical situation, not to mention Mr. Trump.
In all seriousness, do we have a strong enough backbone to face another period of turbulence? Things aren't going well. We can say that we're currently in a position to respond. However, people are worried.
What are your thoughts?
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
I think that it comes down to different margins.
Regarding tax room, we already talked about the fact that we need flexibility to respond to shocks.
To understand the point of the government's argument, I think that we need to look at whether the goal is to build broader prosperity and to increase GDP in order to provide more flexibility. That's the government's strategy.
I think that the parliamentarians' questions concern the implementation of these objectives and strategies and the process of making sure that they actually work in reality.
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
I find one thing a bit difficult to see and understand. I'm the only one who can talk about it. I'm not looking for power. I don't care whether I have it or lose it.
We're currently studying the “buy Canadian” policy. I asked a question to find out where things stand with development of our industrial sovereignty and all that. We're really talking about a purchasing mechanism here. Yet we know that, in a democracy, many changes occur. Basically, we make medium‑term projections. How can we follow up on them when another election comes along and we need to start all over again or rebuild what has been done? Personally, this really scares me. People are worried about this too.
Do you think that having a good amount of leeway is important?
