I agree in principle, but there is not enough money to meet all the needs. Do we agree on that? As I understand it, the federal housing allowance program is looking at 300,000 households. But right off the bat, we know that 1.7 million households have core housing needs. So we are in a deficit situation.
Would it be possible, in the period that we hope will be short, for rules of that kind not to be imposed, so that the needs expressed on the ground can be met? Additional conditions can then be imposed once a sufficient number of units has been reached.
I just want to point out that, according to that logic, housing has been built in some communities that does not meet the needs. I am sorry to say this, but adapted or adaptable housing is a little more expensive than other kinds because they are a little bigger and the costs are calculated by square-footage. We absolutely must not get into that kind of discussion. Currently, the greatest urgency is to get projects done, to build housing that is truly affordable and to subsidize it with an eye to the household income.
I am not saying that we should not have objectives, but could we please not fit them into too tight a framework?