Human Resources Committee on Nov. 17th, 2020

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

I am the Bloc Québécois member.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Yes, over to you.

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

Pardon me. That is good news.

I have a question specifically about the reality [Technical difficulty—Editor] in urban areas.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

I think Ms. Chabot's screen is frozen.

If so, no one can hear her.

Madame Chabot, I'm not sure if you can hear me, but we are going to go to Ms. Gazan. If you can get your technical problems resolved, we'll come back to you for a question before we wrap up.

Ms. Gazan, you have two minutes.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I want to go back to the distinctions-based indigenous housing strategy and the numbers. This is really inadequate funding. It sounds like big numbers, but it's grossly inadequate. There are 634 reserves, so $600 million over three years is a little over $300,000 per community, not even the cost of a house in some communities.

The funding that's targeted for the Inuit communities is $400 million. With 53 communities, that's $500,000 per community over a period of 10 years. Again, we know there are 15 people living in a house. Lives are on the line. Going back to the Métis, over 10 years, it amounts to approximately $100 per registered Métis person.

Why are decisions being made that knowingly underfund housing, when we know the situation is dire now, certainly with COVID, and that it's going to cost lives, particularly in remote and rural communities?

[Chantal Marin-Comeau]

I would answer by saying that more needs to be done. As I indicated in my opening remarks, it's the start of an investment made in 2016-18 for Inuit, and 2018 for Métis Nation.

I would like to also clarify some of the statistics in writing that you're using in terms of the communities and the dollar figures. I can provide those to the committee in writing.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Certainly, for Inuit Nunangat, 39% live in overcrowded homes; 33% are in need of major repairs; 33% are in core housing needs. We know this contributes to poor health, including mental health, and puts people at risk during the pandemic. Would you agree, yes or no?

[Chantal Marin-Comeau]

The housing crisis has a lot of impacts. You've mentioned health, and previous speakers have mentioned education. Obviously, that's why the government is looking at strategies to address the housing crisis for all communities.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Gazan. We're out of time.

Is Ms. Chabot still there?

No. All right.

Colleagues, we have some committee business to attend to, and we have about 14 minutes left in our allocated time.

I'm going to take this opportunity to offer a sincere thank you to the witnesses. This is obviously a vast study that impacts many departments. We appreciate the patient and professional way in which you've answered the questions today.

In the COVID era we—you knew it all along, but I think Canadians generally and parliamentarians especially—have developed a renewed appreciation for what you do. Thank you for being with us today, and thank you for your service to your country.

I wouldn't be surprised if we were to come back to you once we get some of the answers that you've committed to provide us in writing.

Thank you to all the witnesses. You're free to go, but you're welcome to stay. We're going to move now to committee business.

Colleagues, we're moving now to committee business, although we are not in camera; we're still in public, so that you know. There are a couple of matters that we want to deal with.

First of all, in terms of the schedule going forward, you will have received a notice of meeting for our next meeting, with a short witness list. That's because there are still witnesses to be confirmed, but they are coming from the lists that have been submitted by the parties in furtherance of the study we have started today.

Next week we will have Minister Tassi and Minister Schulte on supplementary estimates.

That's the plan for the next three meetings.

The one thing in particular that we need the committee's guidance on today is that we received a letter from the Parliamentary Budget Officer on November 2 outlining a proposed scope for the PBO's assistance with the study. What I require is some feedback from the committee and ideally a formal motion as to what our response to the Parliamentary Budget Officer should be.

Are we happy with the scope that has been provided, or do you wish to make a response or delegate me to do so? That's the question and the main reason for setting aside some time for committee business.

Would you please use the “raise hand” function to give any comments with respect to the scope of the involvement of the Parliamentary Budget Officer and ideally to put forward a motion for direction?

Mr. Kent.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Thanks, Chair.

I'm just trying to recall the PBO's point with regard to scope. Was he saying he is limited in his ability? I don't think he delineated that exactly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Kent, I can summarize. I have the letter before me.

He indicates that his office would be happy to provide the committee with an analysis of indigenous housing needs and of homelessness in urban, rural and northern areas. This would include the number of households that are in housing need or are homeless and the demographic, economic and geographic characteristics of those households.

His second item is on current federal spending to address indigenous housing needs and homelessness. This would include spending dedicated under indigenous housing programs and spending to support indigenous housing under programs not specifically targeted to indigenous people.

The third element of the analysis he's offering is a unit cost of addressing indigenous housing needs and homelessness through various policy options, including the cost of providing rent subsidies or social housing and a discussion of the key factors.

Those are the areas he specifically referenced. He basically left the door open to analysis or other opportunities.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Conservatives would accept the gracious offer, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Kent.

Mr. Vaughan, please.

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

Thank you.

In a follow-up to my question to some of the officials, there are block transfers made to the provinces that include accommodation for things like housing operation subsidies and some of the legacy programs that were downloaded in the early 1990s.

Could we also have the PBO report back to us on what transfers are made by the federal government to provinces, which provinces have reported, what that reporting looks like, and, if there are provincial supports that are above and beyond the federal ones, what do they look like? Then we can understand exactly what the full scope of federal and provincial spending is on this file, so we don't duplicate. I think that would be very helpful.

The last time the PBO looked at the national housing strategy, they excluded any program that was cost-shared, even though federal money was largely funding it. I'd like him to look at the national housing strategy—because the programs have been opened up to all urban, rural and northern housing programs—to get a full understanding from the full national housing strategy, not just the 100% federal dollars. What allotment of the programs has gone to urban, rural and northern? That will let us get an understanding of how they're currently accessing the program, even if it's not necessarily identified up front as indigenous.

There are two points, to be clear. First would be to ask for a full assessment, or as close to a full assessment as we can, of provincial transfers and provincial expenditures on indigenous urban, rural and northern housing. Second is a full assessment of the national housing strategy, whether it's 100% or cost-shared programs, to understand the draw that's being made on those programs by indigenous urban, rural and northern housing programs.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Vaughan.

Mr. Vis.

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

Actually, to Mr. Vaughan's point, I don't think it's unreasonable to understand the scope of provincial transfers and how that impacts areas of joint responsibility. That's a reasonable amendment or addition to the scope of work.

I would point out that in my first round of questioning today I was seeking to understand administrative costs by departments in administering housing programs. I would like that to be included in the scope of work as well.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Vis.

Are there any further submissions?

I think I'm hearing that I should write back to the PBO to say we wish to add to the scope of his work the points raised by Mr. Vaughan and Mr. Vis regarding expenditures made by the provinces and administrative costs associated with the various programs. Is that the will of the committee?

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

I'd add the full NHS programs, whether they're 100% or cost-shared, to understand what is currently inside the national housing strategy attributed to the urban, rural and northern streams.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Yes, understood.

I think we have consensus.

Mr. Clerk, are we clear enough to be able to draft a letter that captures this discussion, or do we require a formal motion?

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Andrew Wilson]

It would be better if we had a formal motion, but we can work without one. Sorry, the procedure list....

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Any wordsmithing volunteers? I can't propose the motion, but I can tell you my understanding and somebody can adopt it.

I'm looking for a motion to direct the chair to respond to the Parliamentary Budget Officer to expand the scope of his analysis as contained in his November 2 letter by adding an analysis of the transfers from the province and provincial supports for urban, rural and indigenous housing to better understand the full scope of the federal-provincial contributions; that an analysis of sums for the national housing strategy allotment to urban, rural and indigenous housing be included; and, further, that any and all administrative costs associated with the various housing programs form part of the analysis.

If I could have a motion to that effect, I think that does it, unless you tell me that it doesn't.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

Mr. Chair, could I ask a quick question?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Absolutely.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

You referred to urban, rural and indigenous. Is the study northern, urban and rural?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

I misspoke, if that's what I said, Mr. McLeod. The study is urban, rural and northern indigenous housing. That's what I should have said.