Human Resources Committee on June 8th, 2020

[Tim Richter]

There are a range of measures. I think we could set up a fund that allows the non-profit sector and others to buy up the housing. The mayor of Montreal created a right of first refusal for the city to buy properties that might be distressed or up for sale. We could do that nationally.

I think we should explore taxation or other regulatory measures to prevent the rates and large funds from taking over this housing.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Richter.

Thank you, Mr. Turnbull.

Mr. Trudel, welcome to the committee. You have the floor for six minutes.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank both witnesses for their presentations.

It's an understatement to say that a housing crisis exists in Canada, as Mr. Richter said. Obviously, it exists in Quebec as well. This crisis existed before the pandemic, and it will no doubt continue. In April, 50,000 households in Quebec were unable to pay their rent, despite the CERB. This is an issue.

The current issue in Quebec is the signature of the housing agreement. We know that $4.5 billion has been spent on housing across Canada since the signature of the agreement. However, in Quebec, nothing has happened. The agreement is stalled.

Let's start at the beginning, Mr. Cimon. Quebec has a community-based and comprehensive approach to housing, which sets it apart from the rest of Canada.

Could you elaborate on this?

[Éric Cimon]

After federal funding was discontinued in the 1990s, Quebec created its own programs to fund community housing. So today, half of the country's cooperatives are in Quebec.

Housing associations, federations and offices have formed an ecosystem that is integrated into the health system and that includes all community partners [Technical difficulty—Editor] and Crown corporations.

I know that there is a lot of catching up to do in the country, and a model must be rebuilt. That's quite necessary. However, if the federal government comes back with a plan to invest money in a pre-established ecosystem that must work and that works well, and whose primary issues stem from funding, we can expect tensions to rise.

As I was saying earlier, when the house is burning, we don't think about who owns the water, we just put out the fire. Things must go beyond that. The money is the same for the same citizens, who have different representatives, but the need is the same. I am talking about homeless people, for instance, or single mothers who have to work two or three jobs to take care of their child. Those projects will ensure to get people off the streets and away from poor housing conditions.

So I want to re-emphasize the importance of this agreement. The amount of money is good, and these are things we agreed on. However, as Mr. Richter said, the money is totally insufficient to meet the housing needs of a modern society. Massive investments must be made, and there must be more mobilization to properly house people, get them off the streets and provide them with a decent quality of life. Housing is a primary need.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Cimon.

There seems to be a stalemate in the negotiations stemming from the national housing strategy, while money is being spent across Canada, with the exception of Quebec.

The National Assembly is unanimous. Even the Quebec Minister of Finance, Mr. Girard, said last week there was no doubt about housing being a provincial responsibility, and Quebec wants to control that area. Why is it so important for Quebec to be the only master of its housing strategy on its territory?

[Éric Cimon]

All partners in housing know that the ecosystem and intervention methods exist. However, we are worried about creating something of a parallel network or operation. We want to ensure that the money gets into the system to meet the needs.

I can already tell you that we currently have in the system 10,000 homes ready to be built and funded through Quebec government programs. That represents 180 projects, which are lacking funding.

If the federal government is providing the money, we want that money to come into the system as soon as possible, as it is urgent to achieve success and obtain results. As we were saying to you, that takes three years.

If Quebec had an agreement with the federal government, housing would potentially be available soon to meet those needs. However, we don't have an agreement right now. To come back to that agreement, we must choose the fastest method and ensure that the money quickly makes its way into a system that works as it should.

Even though it is not perfect and there are issues, we deserve credit for having a housing system that takes some pressure off vulnerable individuals, both in homelessness and in all housing areas, during the 1990s and up until today.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

If that agreement was signed tomorrow morning, we would be talking about $1.4 billion. That's a lot, Mr. Cimon, but you told us earlier that it would not be enough to meet the current needs in Quebec.

Three hundred thousand Quebec homes are inadequate, and 82,000 individuals are spending more than 80% of their income on housing. Those people have immediate needs, as they are living in true poverty, in terrible dark despair, as we say in Quebec. So we must take care of those people. Moreover, once the pandemic has passed, we will have even bigger needs.

Provided you are able to quantify housing needs over the coming years, specifically for Quebec, how much would they be?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Could you keep your answer brief, Mr. Cimon?

[Éric Cimon]

The current average cost of housing in a program funded half by the government and half by municipalities and mortgages or tenant rents is about $115,000. However, I should remind you that the figure we are now providing is in anticipation of next year's budget, while construction costs will have increased and inflation will have adjusted.

The problem is that we are always relying on today's figures, but costs are going up. However, figures are never adjusted accordingly, so we are always behind in terms of true project costs. For our 10,000 homes, we will need an investment of about $1 billion.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Cimon.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you very much, Mr. Cimon and Mr. Trudel.

Next we have Ms. Kwan, please, for six minutes.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for their presentations.

Absolutely, it's correct to say that the federal government cancelled the national affordable housing program back in 1993, and as a result of that, our country lost more than half a million units of affordable housing. Quebec and British Columbia were the only provinces that carried on with housing initiatives. Consequently, we have the crisis we have today, even before COVID-19.

In dealing with the situation, while it is good that some monies went out from reaching home to some community groups, I also want to note that many other organizations that do not receive funding from the government did not receive any support and, consequently, were struggling to find personal protective equipment and other measures to support people in need of housing.

Going forward, what are your thoughts with respect to the national housing co-investment fund? As it stands, it is hugely stuck in the bureaucracy. Many of the projects didn't get approved. If we're to build 300,000 units of affordable housing, Mr. Richter, what do we need to do to fix the situation so that we can get the housing actually built on the ground?

[Tim Richter]

I think there are three things that I would do.

First, I would effectively double the national housing strategy investment. I would move the investment forward so that a lot of the money is spent over time, with more of it at the back end than at the front end. I think you need to move that forward.

I think one of the challenging things in the design of the co-investment fund is that it doesn't have a specific prioritization for people experiencing the greatest risk of homelessness, so you end up spending a little bit of money a mile wide and an inch deep. In order to achieve rapid success and protect the people in greatest need, those whose lives are at risk from homelessness and those in the most extreme core housing need, you need to prioritize the investment to those in the greatest need—first on homelessness and those in the extreme core housing need—and to target the investment fairly precisely.

It's also a fairly challenging program to get through. The application is 200-plus pages. In our sector, not a lot of organizations have the ability to do the housing and to do the work that goes into that. There's some work and investment that I know has been done on capacity in homelessness and housing systems around the country. Not everybody has Quebec's history and Quebec's experience in developing housing. B.C. and Quebec, I think, are probably about the furthest ahead in their ability to use the money appropriately.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you. Even then, I think there has been a challenge in terms of moving programs forward and, more to the point, moving projects forward to get that housing in place.

I want to ask this question. As it stands right now with COVID-19, many people are homeless. In British Columbia, they are, and our provincial government has been very proactive in trying to do something around that. They went ahead and purchased an old hotel, or a motel, if you will. The federal government provided zero dollars towards that.

If we are to actually escalate the availability of housing for people who are homeless, for those who have the most urgent need, what role do you think the government should play in terms of helping communities, provinces, municipalities and NGOs purchase these assets? Do they need to contribute money, or should they just remain “business as usual”?

[Tim Richter]

I think the federal government has a very important leadership role in housing and in ending homelessness in Canada. That's why we've been asking for that leadership in supporting the national housing strategy.

There are no silver bullets in ending homelessness. There are a lot of different housing forms. You can buy and convert a hotel, or you can use modular housing—which B.C. has done very well—or you can build new permanent supportive housing. There's a range of options that are unique to a community and the opportunities that are there.

I would say that the federal government has a role to play in working with the provinces. Like it is in Quebec, where they have their own approach, I think it's a partnership between the federal government and the provinces. If B.C. needs federal investment to purchase and convert hotels or to develop affordable housing, that's subject to negotiation between British Columbia and the federal government. But the federal government needs to have that leadership role, in my opinion, and to say, “Look, we are going to eliminate homelessness in Canada, we're going to prioritize our resources in achieving that objective, and we're going to make the funding investments necessary.”

That's also about understanding that provinces, when we think about the cost savings of ending homelessness, are actually the net beneficiaries. The provincial health systems, justice systems and social systems will save money, so there has to be a push for provinces to also invest, along with the federal government.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Absolutely, and some provinces are more ready, willing and able to do so than others. It's a not a fixed formula. Not every province should engage in the same formula, if you will, in terms of that.

British Columbia, for example, is asking the federal government to contribute 50% towards the purchase of hotels and development, whether it be any other kind of development, in terms of addressing the homelessness crisis. In other communities, 50% may not work for them, especially in the smaller communities with more limited resources, for example.

I think flexibility is the name of the game, isn't it, in terms of moving forward?

I would like to ask Mr. Cimon that question, because I think Quebec has led the way in terms of this effort.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

I ask you to please keep your answer short.

[Éric Cimon]

I will just tell you that flexibility is definitely the answer, because with the co-investment that we have we're trying to make two programs work together, and they don't. We're trying to get the AccèsLogis in to fund the program, and we're trying to go to co-investment to get the money that we missed, and it doesn't work easily. It doesn't work the same way throughout Canada. We need to have the flexibility to make sure that we can help those communities get those projects up fast and easily.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Cimon.

Thank you, Ms. Kwan.

Next we're going to go to Mrs. Kusie, please, for five minutes.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Thank you to both witnesses for being here today.

My first question is for Mr. Richter. I'd like to know if he sees an increase in homelessness as the economy reopens, following the COVID-19 pandemic.

[Tim Richter]

I think there is a very real risk of that, as COVID-19 seems to be impacting those with lower incomes and more precarious employment more. When we see eviction bans lift and we see the CERB stop at some point and income supports stop, I think we may well see a surge in homelessness.

The Americans are apparently worried about a 40% increase in homelessness as a result of COVID-19. Similar analysis hasn't been done here, but I think it's certainly a very real risk, which is one of the reasons we're arguing for increased investment in the housing benefits. For example, that money can get into people's pockets very quickly and keep people housed. The vast majority of people on waiting lists for housing are waiting in housing that they can't afford.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Would you say that the increase would be amongst those who chronically face homelessness, or would you say these are individuals who have fallen on tough times as a result of COVID-19 and will be able to rebound and rebuild? As we plan our response, we have to consider the situations that Canadians are in.

[Tim Richter]

I think it could be both. For the vast majority of people—about 85% of people who experience homelessness in Calgary and across Canada—they're in and out really quickly. It's usually a disruption of income in some form, a loss of a job or something like that, and they can usually resolve it themselves fairly quickly. It could also be that we end up creating a new surge in chronic homelessness a bit further down the road, as people who are struggling with different disabilities or different challenges, and who would struggle to get themselves out of homelessness, fall into the system and maybe get trapped there, longer term.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

We are hearing already about the number of mortgage defaults, which are increasing, and of course there was the announcement from the CMHC last week in regard to tighter restrictions for lending. What types of effects do you think these things will have on the housing continuum, most specifically, homelessness?

[Tim Richter]

I think you'll probably see increased pressure on the rental market. People who aren't able to own their home anymore may find themselves renting, and that would put pressure on the rental market and may make it more difficult for people to move out of rental into housing. In places like Calgary, we know we need at least 15,000 units of rental housing in order to make some progress. We've seen this movie before in Calgary. We've seen the impacts of housing prices and challenges in the economy for sure.