Evidence of meeting #45 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cost.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Speer, can you speak about the loss of housing opportunities for low-income people that results from red tape, zoning restrictions, and development charges?
11:50 a.m.
Munk Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute
I'm grateful for the opportunity, thank you.
This is a subject that has, I think, become a matter of growing political consensus, similar to many of the things that I talked about earlier.
President Obama's former chair of the council of economic advisers, Jason Furman, has written extensively about the extent to which restrictions on housing supply, urban containment strategies, and exclusionary zoning are not just driving up housing prices, but in turn, precluding low- and middle-income citizens from moving to dynamic job-creating cities because of the cost of housing. Not only is it having an impact on them and their families, it's having a national economic impact to the extent that we don't have people responding to our labour market needs because of the barrier of housing affordability.
11:50 a.m.
Munk Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute
Principally, it's a supply issue. For instance, in Toronto we've had detached home construction at a 36-year low and in Vancouver, similarly, the lowest new detached home construction in a quarter century.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Is that just that the market doesn't think it's profitable to build housing or is some other distortion causing that?
11:50 a.m.
Munk Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute
Principally, it's a matter of government policy, primarily when it comes to zoning or to building and construction rules.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Anju Dhillon Liberal Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC
My question will be for Gavin.
You mentioned co-op housing as being a good approach to affordable housing. Would you agree that the existing program should be extended, including the operating agreements, which provide subsidies for seniors or people with disabilities on fixed income?
11:50 a.m.
MNP LLP, Fort St. John, As an Individual
I agree that's part of the solution. My comment was more that it has been at least moderately successful in a town like this, providing housing that's adequate and affordable. I'd say guardedly, yes, there's some of that, but I think there are much larger, overarching solutions out there, some of which have been briefly discussed here just previous to my comments.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
11:50 a.m.
MNP LLP, Fort St. John, As an Individual
My opinion on subsidies is that.... To refer to what some of the previous guests have said, it's a problem if we're facing such ridiculously high costs because of zoning, because of development charges, and because of other things that are levied by municipalities, and we subsidize to take the sting out of some of those things. Really, that would mean, for example, that a federal subsidy would go directly into a project and would flow out to the municipality that's charging all of these ridiculous charges and forcing zoning that is unworkable for the type of property that is being put in.
Another problem with subsidy in general is that with the problems that are being faced, it would just be a flow-through of subsidies into a municipality's pockets, as was mentioned previously.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Anju Dhillon Liberal Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC
Okay.
Much of the existing co-op housing is old now. Would you support funding repairs that make the units better to live in and more affordable, if renovations also reduced water and energy consumption?
11:55 a.m.
MNP LLP, Fort St. John, As an Individual
I'd support some of that. Speaking from a northern perspective, I think there's an economic gain. This was mentioned by others and I brought it up briefly in my initial comments. I'd support that as long as we can see that there is an economic reason for those subsidies and that it would actually pay off, not just in making properties better places to be, but also, from a larger standpoint, in encouraging people to move to these dynamically growing communities. Typically, it's hard to attract people to such communities, and it's certainly hard to attract people who are in lower-income situations but are looking for opportunity.
If we can argue that doing this would bring those people into communities like mine, cause those people to be likely to come here to fill much-needed employment positions, and make it attractive for them, I'd support that, yes.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Anju Dhillon Liberal Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC
Do you believe that green infrastructure financing, like putting a price on carbon to finance green infrastructure, would save low-income renters money?
11:55 a.m.
MNP LLP, Fort St. John, As an Individual
I think the issue with any carbon tax is that there would be so many layers of costs built into the lifestyle, and certainly there would be an impact to low-income people.
Just from the 30,000-foot view, my comment would be that I'm not a fan of carbon tax in general, and certainly not in areas like this. First, it affects the industries that feed and clothe people here, and which people come to work for either directly or indirectly. Second, the cost of transportation, the cost of building, and any kind of additional levy that goes into that becomes almost a layered cost and builds on incrementally in each step through the supply process. As I said, it probably decreases the likelihood of investment in the area and the natural resource industry in general.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Anju Dhillon Liberal Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC
But do you not believe that it's important for green infrastructure?
11:55 a.m.
MNP LLP, Fort St. John, As an Individual
I believe green infrastructure is important, but I would support other development ideas besides a carbon tax, which would layer over and over into the cost of anything people do.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Anju Dhillon Liberal Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC
Thank you.
My next question will be for Mr. Gladstone. Are your development charges routinely waived to accommodate affordability?
11:55 a.m.
Head of Stakeholder Relations, Reena
Yes, for the most part, municipalities where we have been building have been very supportive in many ways—development charges, taxes, and so on. It's very helpful.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Anju Dhillon Liberal Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC
We were just discussing green infrastructure, affordability, and subsidies. What is your take on this?
11:55 a.m.
Head of Stakeholder Relations, Reena
At this point, there's no question that green infrastructure is vital, very important, and anything we build would obviously fit LEED standards. In terms of having the funds, I think it's imperative that, in whatever way possible, we build additional units for those with developmental disabilities. We're looking at a partnership, public and private, in order to make this work. If that's where the government feels the funds should come from, it's not a problem.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Anju Dhillon Liberal Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC
Regarding public and private funding, have you been using a lot of it?
11:55 a.m.
Head of Stakeholder Relations, Reena
Absolutely. We feel strongly that wherever residences are being built, if there isn't community support, they will not be in a position to thrive. Particularly in Reena's case, inclusivity and community engagement are at the top of our mission. If the community is not involved in funding and with the residents, those we serve will not have appropriate and proper living conditions, and those joining the intentional community consortium have all committed to one-third private funding from local community foundations.
February 21st, 2017 / noon
NDP
Brigitte Sansoucy NDP Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My first question is for Mr. Pegg.
Thank you for educating us on the situation many single unattached people face. A third of them are actually unable to cover their basic needs.
If you don't mind, I'd like more information on something else in your recent report, the series of recommendations on food security for northern residents. It's an area we are more involved in at the federal level, one where we need to find solutions and make improvements.
In addressing the issue, you point to transportation and energy in the northern context. I'd like you to tell us why you chose to tie transportation and energy to food security in isolated northern communities.
