Human Resources Committee on May 27th, 2021

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Raquel Dancho]

Thank you, Ms. Young.

We're going to go on to the Bloc Québécois, with Monsieur Trudel, please.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ms. Bowers, I'd like to come back to the rapid housing initiative.

In the first round of the RHI, the projects that were submitted across Canada totalled $4 billion. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities called for a reinvestment of $7 billion in the same program. Clearly, they felt that the funds allocated to the program were not sufficient to meet the needs, as the agencies also testified.

Are you at CMHC considering asking the government to put more money into this program in the near future?

[Romy Bowers]

At CMHC, we are very committed to addressing homelessness in Canada. We view this as something that is very important to address. We're very pleased to have been entrusted with delivering the first $1 billion of the rapid housing initiative. We're very pleased again to receive an additional $1.5 billion, given the need, and we're here to follow the direction of government and are prepared to make sure that, whatever funds are made available to address homelessness, we get this money out to the communities and organizations that are serving homeless people on a day-to-day basis.

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

Okay.

Let's talk about the second component, of $1.5 billion. Organizations are waiting to know the details.

In Quebec, most of the people who submitted a project under the first component have received negative responses. They were told to wait and see if there would be new funds. Yes, additional funds were injected in the new budget and the second component now totals $1.5 billion.

I have heard from people that they have invested thousands of dollars to prepare and submit projects for CMHC programs. Will people who submitted a project before Christmas, under the first component, automatically be reconsidered in this second component, which was increased to $1.5 billion as a result of the budget?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Raquel Dancho]

Ms. Bowers, please provide just a short answer.

[Romy Bowers]

The final terms and conditions of version two of the rapid housing initiative are still being developed, and as soon as we have clarity on that, we'll provide them to the public. Under all circumstances, we want to make sure for all proponents that the application process is simple and that we reduce any rework or any additional administrative burdens.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Trudel.

Now we'll go over to the NDP for two and a half minutes.

Ms. Gazan.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you so much, Chair.

Madame Bowers, it's abundantly clear. It's becoming clearer that housing is no longer something that serves as a shelter and home for Canadians, but an asset for investors on Bay Street. This has happened and continues to happen at the expense of people, especially low-wage workers and racialized individuals who, as you've indicated, see a greater proportion of their disposable income go towards housing, sometimes up to 75%. That's something that's actually very common in my riding.

At the CMHC, we need leadership to correct this trend and to ensure that housing is a basic right that all Canadians can enjoy without taking on absurd levels of debt.

Are you committed to restoring housing as a basic human right, and if so, how?

[Romy Bowers]

As you know, an essential aspect of the national housing strategy is a national housing strategy act, which makes the commitment that Canada views housing as a right, and we're working towards the progressive realization of that right.

In the last year, we saw the establishment of the National Housing Council. I was very pleased to participate in that council as part of one of my first meetings when I became the CEO. I think the process is under way to appoint the national housing advocate, which is also a key component of looking at housing as a right.

When you look at the national housing strategy programs, which are diverse in nature, you will see that there is a focus on the most vulnerable in our society. We have programs such as the RCFI, but that is more of an exception. The vast majority of the programs under the national housing strategy focus on the most vulnerable. At CMHC, we're committed to working especially with Canadians who are not well served by the private market, and we make every effort to ensure that every dollar of investment for Canadians who are made most vulnerable has the most positive impact.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I asked that question because I understand, for example, that CMHC provides mortgage loan insurance to private lenders such as commercial—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Raquel Dancho]

I'm sorry, Ms. Gazan. Your time is up.

We will go back to the Conservatives for five minutes.

Mr. Vis.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to go back to the point I raised at the end, last time, and the motion I moved.

I believe I was in order, because you are able to move a motion on the floor related to the subject matter at hand, so I'd like that motion to stand and I'd like to have a recorded vote or a—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Raquel Dancho]

Mr. Vis, I believe the clerk and I thought you had presented the motion, rather than moving it. It was my mistake. My apologies.

You have moved the motion and it is in order. We have all received it in our inboxes and it has been translated.

You are calling for a recorded vote. Is that correct?

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

That is correct.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Raquel Dancho]

Thank you.

Mr. Vaughan.

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Spadina—Fort York, ON]

I have a bit of a concern about the motion as presented. It asks for detailed listings of all the applications, including the addresses and the price points that have been quoted as part of the application process.

This would put in jeopardy every single one of the applications, as they are all now currently on hold, waiting for the new dollars to arrive. If we simply produce the list of 700 assets across this country, with price points, and disclose that information, as well as the municipal address, we would be effectively putting out a shopping list to competitive bids that would undermine the integrity of the program, and also would put every one of these projects at risk of not being realized in real time.

The reason the property information is redacted is to protect the proprietary interests of both the vendor and the seller. The way this motion has been drafted is incredibly irresponsible and, as I said, would violate the trust that many of the applicants and many of the vendors have invested into this process. As I said, it would put in jeopardy our even being able to hopefully recognize some of these projects as being viable.

Therefore, I would ask that the committee defeat this motion.

I think what the member is looking for is a list of applicants, not the details of the financial information. If Mr. Vis could redraft the motion, I think we could find a way to support it, but as it's currently drafted, it would blow this whole process right out of the water and destroy the opportunities for housing providers from coast to coast to coast to realize these projects.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Raquel Dancho]

Thank you, Mr. Vaughan.

Ms. Falk.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

What's frustrating is that when there are Order Paper questions asked by the opposition, we see a lot of documents come back redacted. If there wasn't a trend on this, maybe there would be a little more trust there, but the opposition is just doing its job of holding the government to account.

Therefore, I would hope we'd vote for this so that we could get the information that Mr. Vis requested in the first place.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Raquel Dancho]

Thank you, Ms. Falk.

Mr. Vis.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The purpose of my motion today and what I'm looking for is transparency. I'm open to a friendly amendment to take away some of the information on pricing, but I believe Canadians have a right to know the list of projects.

I'm not asking for a lot here. I am asking for information about who applied, who was accepted and who was rejected. The basis behind that is that one of the applications from my riding in the St'át'imc Nation was rejected, and I don't think they received adequate information.

The second reason refers to my earlier testimony. With the mayor of Burnaby and chair of Metro Vancouver Housing indicating that despite Burnaby being one of the least affordable places in Canada, they receive no money for shovel-ready projects in that community.

I'm prepared to hear a friendly amendment from Mr. Vaughan to take away maybe the price point of that information, to make sure we can stay within the bounds of privacy. Ultimately, I'm just asking for which projects were accepted and which were rejected. I'm not asking for the world here.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Raquel Dancho]

Thank you, Mr. Vis.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Ms. Gazan is next.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair.

I don't seem to have a copy of the motion in my mailbox.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Raquel Dancho]

We can ensure that it gets to you. I believe the clerk can make that happen.

I believe Madame Chabot was next.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair. This is quite a meeting for you today.

With regard to the motion put forward unexpectedly by our colleague Mr. Vis, I must say that I am sensitive to the transparency argument. Who is not in favour of transparency and access to as much information as possible? I do not know if our colleague has had bad experiences with other requests in other committees. Having said that, I am also very sensitive to issues of contracts, finances and confidentiality.

If the objective is to find out which projects have been rejected or accepted in a constituency or territory, I think that necessarily requires an amendment. I am compelled to say that, if the motion were to pass in its present form, some information could be disclosed that is not necessary or even safe.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Raquel Dancho]

Thank you, Madame Chabot.

Mr. Tochor.