Human Resources Committee on Feb. 4th, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

We will go to Mr. Vis, please, for five minutes.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Just quickly, what dataset does the CMHC use to measure rural and remote homelessness?

[Romy Bowers]

I'll have to get back to you on that question. Thank you.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Okay.

The National Alliance to End Rural and Remote Homelessness, which I mentioned, said there is no dataset to measure this, so we need to be very careful about making any assumptions about the reality, especially in indigenous communities, and extent and severity of homelessness. We cannot always base the measure of homelessness solely on the total number of people, but we have to look at the proportion of people who are homeless in conjunction with the rest of the community. Failing to recognize that is a failure to recognize the societal impact and the other factors related to homelessness that need to be addressed, too, for communities. That's just the point to start.

On decision-making, I'm very pleased to hear that there have been 678 applications. Who is going to make the final decision on which projects are approved? Will there be an equitable regional disbursement between all regions of Canada in that final decision-making process?

[Romy Bowers]

On the first point, thank you very much, Mr. Vis, for noting that there are data gaps in understanding homelessness. I think that's a very valid point. It's something that CMHC is willing to look into and invest in, into the future, in alleviating it.

In terms of the applications under the project stream, we published a scoring grid that we are using to evaluate the projects. We've just gone through the process. With regard to the 678 projects you refer to, we've put all them through that scoring grid.

Given the demand on this project stream, obviously, there are a lot of projects that are not going to meet the qualifications, because the bar has been set very high. We are in discussions right now with our minister's office on the final decision-making.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

It's likely to be Mr. Vaughan, Minister Hussen and officials from CMHC who will be doing the final decision-making on those projects that pass the threshold according to the grid score you've established.

[Romy Bowers]

Yes. One of the things that we are—

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Is that correct?

[Romy Bowers]

Yes, that's correct.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Okay. Thank you.

[Romy Bowers]

One of the things I also wanted to mention was that we do have a host of other programs under the national housing strategy. If a proponent is not successful under the rapid housing initiative, our specialists will be in touch with them to offer other financing tools that may be useful for them in getting their projects off the ground.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

I would love to have more information on that. I understand there's just over $7.5 billion committed to the co-investment fund, and, as you have mentioned, $4.2 billion for the 678 applications. Given that there remains about $3.7 billion in projects that won't be funded, either we're going to have a funding gap remaining there or we're going to have to wait for a commitment from the federal government in its upcoming budget. So, I look forward to more details on that.

Because I have you here today, Ms. Bowers, I'd like to follow up from our previous committee meeting. On November 4, I asked Minister Hussen for proof about the number given by the government that they've housed or helped house one million families. On December 7, the day before the minister was due back in committee, CMHC tabled their response. It consisted of a table with a single row, claiming to have helped over 1.1 million, but which contained a small asterisk and a caveat that, unfortunately, annulled everything. It said that this table does not include “projects at the letter of intent stage (conditionally committed)”. On December 8, I did ask you for clarification, which was promised, but I haven't received anything. Is it safe for me to assume that the government hasn't, indeed, helped 1.1 million families, but that it only intends to help 1.1 million families? Would that be a correct understanding of the data provided by CMHC?

[Romy Bowers]

I give you my most sincere apologies that your request has not been responded to. If you will give me a little bit of time, I will look into this to see if I can provide you with the information you requested.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Okay.

Finally, as one more point, I will commend CMHC for some of the good work you've been doing to allocate staff and to provide information on other points I've asked about, such as helping indigenous communities and the service delivery model that you're moving to. On that front, I did submit an ATIP request about the major cities stream of the rapid housing initiative. I had to write a personal cheque and send an application by snail mail with Canada Post.

Can CMHC commit to coming into the 21st century and establishing an electronic ATIP system? It's not only me; there are a lot of other Canadians who want to have information. Right now the process at CMHC is prohibitive to Canadians trying to get that information.

In my own personal experience, I was told that I couldn't even have information that I received today here until May.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Give a short answer, if you could, please. We're well past the time.

[Romy Bowers]

We'll take these comments into consideration and provide a response.

Thank you.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Thank you.

I appreciate your time today, and I look forward to a further understanding of the 678 applications. That was very helpful.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Bowers.

The last questions for this evening will come from Mr. Dong, for the Liberals, for five minutes.

Mr. Dong, you have the floor.

[Han Dong, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I want to thank all of the presenters and the staff for coming to today's committee. I know it goes without saying, but I just want to be on record that under the COVID situation, all of the staff have been working extremely hard. I see many working from home, just like we do, so I want to acknowledge that and make sure that this appreciation is felt, especially considering the rollout of support for small businesses and support for first-time home buyers. I will save that for the next time to ask about. Your work has been appreciated, so thank you very much.

Just as a follow-up on MP Vis' question, can you tell us the difference between the co-investment fund and the rapid housing initiative?

[Romy Bowers]

Yes, I certainly can.

We view the rapid housing initiative as a response to the COVID crisis. The focus is on the rapid construction of housing. I think it's been mentioned that we anticipate that all projects will be completed within 12 months of funding. It's 100% contribution-based, and for this reason we were able to have a very streamlined application process.

The co-investment fund is more of a long-term funding program. It comprises both contributions and loans, and it's very important to note the word “co-investment”. It requires proponents to find other funders for projects. In an average project, the co-investment fund provides about 40% to 45% of the funding, and other sources of funding come from municipalities and provinces, and also from the funds of a non-profit or other organization.

[Han Dong, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

So your agency has less control of the overall timeline for those projects.

[Romy Bowers]

That's right, and as old construction, it takes a longer time, especially when you're working outside the modular space.

[Han Dong, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

Of course.

In my riding, Don Valley North, homelessness is not as obvious. We do witness some homeless in the ravines during the warmer months. It is an issue that many constituents and especially the local organizations have flagged for me. Some have been involved themselves for decades in trying to solve this problem in different parts of the city.

One overall feeling they have is that every time there is a housing initiative announced by the federal government, the funding being provided for that housing unit to actually be built takes years for them to see. They're really frustrated with that fact. Quite honestly, with the political climate, if there is a change of government, there is a lot of uncertainty tied to these types of investments.

How is the rapid housing initiative different from that, and what exactly has CMHC put in place to avoid the traditional delay in the flow of funding? If you have multiple levels of government involved, it seems to be the symptom that you always have those stoppages in the flow of funding. What have you done that's different? Is there any early evidence to show that the plan is actually working to solve urban homelessness?

[Romy Bowers]

I think I have one minute.

As I mentioned previously, the RHI is a 100% contribution-based program, which creates a certain simplicity in terms of its implementation.

In addition to that, we have relied on very strong partnerships with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. We are also partners in the larger municipalities and with the various proponents on the project stream. I believe those strong partnerships are absolutely crucial in getting the money out the door quickly and making sure that the most vulnerable Canadians have housing that meets their needs.

[Han Dong, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

Can you remind me how many units will be built in Toronto?