Evidence of meeting #134 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was know.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

12:20 p.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The other thing I'll mention on this point is how rent continues to get more expensive for Canadians. We know that Rentals.ca published their national rent report, which showed the consequences of this government's policies. Canada's average asking rent reached a record high of $2,093 in September. On top of this, the cost of rent is 13.4% higher than it was two years ago, and 25.2% higher than it was three years ago. This means that the cost of rent has really massively outpaced Canadians' paycheques.

We know that the situation is even considerably more difficult in Canada's largest cities. For example, in Vancouver, British Columbia, the average asking rent for all unit types reached $3,023. Canadians are having to pay $2,668 in Toronto. With rent costing as much as it does, many Canadians are having to live in shared accommodation. We know that many, in particular young adults, are still living with parents. I know myself of some constituents of mine where a family has had to move back in with one of the parents just in order to get by, so that maybe they can work on saving for a home one day.

On that topic, we know that it used to take 25 years to pay off a mortgage. It now takes 25 years to save for a down payment. I remember being in my early twenties, like many of us in this room here, when, as long as you had a decent job, you could have a decent car. You could go on the odd holiday. You could save up, within a short amount of time, a down payment for your first small place to start out. That doesn't exist anymore, which is why you're seeing so many young adults still living with relatives and family members, and families living together. They just can't afford to either live on their own or save up for their first place. This is the reality that people are in.

We also know, in talking with seniors, that in order for them to even consider downsizing.... I talk to seniors quite often in my riding. They're saying, “I could sell my home, but where do I go? Prices are so high now that even if I downsize, everything is so expensive.” The cost of housing is affecting everyone in all demographics. We know that housing costs have doubled in nine years. Those are substantial numbers.

We know that the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation has made it clear that the number of homes being built isn't enough to reduce the existing supply gap and improve affordability for Canadians.

Actually, on that, when we're talking about affordability and housing through CMHC, we had a number of people testify here at some recent housing studies. They were saying that the bureaucracy, the red tape and the costs that the CMHC itself is imposing are making housing less affordable. As an example, we heard from more than one not-for-profit talking about the fact that CMHC will impose extra ways of building that are above the regular, if you want to call it that, building code standards, therefore adding costs. They will also impose that you need different experts to come in. Even though it meets all the building codes and you might even get a building permit, you have to have these extra consultants come in. We heard testimony from some of these not-for-profits that this could easily add at least $15,000 per unit.

That is a huge amount. They also expressed how, with CMHC, the delays they're experiencing, when they do these applications with CMHC, can actually add to costs. We heard testimony from one witness who was saying that, depending on where the building is, if you don't have approvals, you might miss the whole season because of the weather. Therefore, you may not be able to start or to move along whatever stage it is. We heard that policies from CMHC are actually impeding building these affordable units and adding to costs.

Also, going back to some of these consultants who have to come in, we did hear that, particularly in rural communities, they may not have these consultants readily available, so they have to bring them in from a major municipality. Again, that adds delays and costs. In fact, some of the policies of the Liberal government and those through CMHC are actually not helping to build affordable homes due to the bureaucracy, the red tape and the additional costs.

We also know that, at the same time, Canadians' paycheques are just not keeping up with inflation. We had a report recently, through the Parliamentary Budget Officer, which showed that inflation and sky-high interest rates had “eroded” the power of Canadians' paycheques over the last two years. This is especially hard on low-income workers, while the wealthiest Canadians saw their wealth appreciate thanks to their investment income.

I don't have it here, but I was reading an article last night. I think it might have been in the Financial Post. I was just reading something last night that talked about this. Again, during this time, and even in recent times, the people who are getting the farthest ahead are the wealthiest of the wealthiest because they've seen their investments go up. If you're not at that level.... The people in the middle class and the working class—or, as we call them, “the working poor”—have really been among the hardest hit.

Going back to this Parliamentary Budget Officer report, it described that “inflation and the accompanying tightening of monetary policy have affected household purchasing power disproportionately, depending on income level.” On top of this, Canadians' incomes have not kept up with Trudeau's rampant inflation.

In fact, RBC predicted recently—this would have been in September—that Canada's GDP per capita will decrease “for a sixth consecutive quarter.” This means that the personal income of Canadians has now fallen back to the same level that we've seen previously, while unemployment has increased. We also know that even the government's own reports have said it's expecting unemployment on a trajectory to continue to rise.

We know that Canadians have seen price increases of more than 15% on a typical basket of goods and services. The costs of food, shelter and transportation have grown especially quickly, which again has made it really tough for those in the lower income percentiles and for a lot of the working Canadians. We know that inflationary deficits and taxes have resulted in a wealth transfer, so we're seeing that the wealthiest of the wealthiest really have gotten ahead, especially over the last few years. Unless you have a considerable amount of assets, a considerable amount of stocks, you haven't seen your wealth grow. In fact, paycheques have been reduced during this time for most Canadians. Even if they saw a moderate paycheque increase, it is not enough to offset the increases that we've seen.

We've also seen numbers from Statistics Canada that show that the greatest cost increases have been on the essentials. The biggest cost increases have been on housing, food and fuel. When you look at where the big cost increases are that are affecting people and that are affecting small businesses, you see that they're actually on those essentials.

I'll continue talking about where Canadians' incomes are and how the costs have been affected. In 2014—the year before this current government took office—The New York Times wrote that Canada was “Home of the World's Most Affluent Middle Class”. This is what I was just mentioning. Now the per capita economic output in most of our regions across the country lags behind those in the United States.

The state of Canada's economy was confirmed again by the Fraser Institute, which reported that Canadians' incomes have drastically fallen behind the incomes of Americans and that Fraser Institute research shows that “Canadian provinces are getting poorer relative to their US peers.”

When you're looking at some of these comparisons, you're seeing that it's more difficult for people here in Canada. We are falling further behind. As I mentioned, this RBC report does predict that Canada's GDP per capita will continue to decrease. When we're comparing Canada to other countries, we see that this is a made-in-Canada issue.

The other thing we've seen at this committee is how people with disabilities are struggling. We've had a fair amount of testimony here. We've almost completed the disability study that I was mentioning earlier, and we know that persons with disabilities are disproportionately affected by the cost of living crisis. We've heard some testimony from their family members. Being the shadow minister, I know that my shadow ministry includes disability inclusion. I do talk to families and organizations all the time that talk about how persons with disabilities are affected. This also really affects many of their families because, depending on the situation, sometimes the families are the primary caregivers and are having to assist their family member or look after their family member. The cost of living crisis really has disproportionately hurt persons with disabilities.

I know that when we were debating the Canada disability benefit, we heard about this quite often. We even heard testimony regarding persons with disabilities considering MAID because they couldn't afford to live. It is incredibly heartbreaking and incredibly sad that someone would be considering that. We know that many Canadians are feeling quite hopeless when they're looking at being able to just afford basic necessities.

In spite of all this, the government continues on with the trajectory of its policies, of its high-tax, high-spend agenda. We haven't seen any indication of a reprieve from this. We know that any time this government puts out a fall economic statement or a budget, it does still include deficits. We know there are reports that the deficits are higher than what was expected by the government. It just shows how this government isn't able to manage its fiscal house—when every time we have a budget come out, it continues to be in deficit.

We have to remember that when this government got elected, back in 2015, they talked about how they were just going to have a little deficit.

Michael Coteau Liberal Don Valley East, ON

I have a point of order.

12:35 p.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

They were going to do some investing in Canadians—that was the sales pitch—and they were going to—

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Mrs. Gray, we have a point of order.

Michael Coteau Liberal Don Valley East, ON

You said that the subject is what the member talks about. There have been several subjects. Maybe you can ask the member what subject she's actually discussing at this point.

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Thank you, Mr. Coteau. It is at the member's discretion.

Mrs. Falk, do you have a point of order?

Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK

Just in response to what Mr. Coteau said, because this has been brought up several times, we were supposed to be in camera.

Michael Coteau Liberal Don Valley East, ON

That's not a point of order, Mr. Chair.

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Thank you, Mrs. Falk.

12:35 p.m.

Conservative

Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK

Mr. Long moved a motion to put us in public, which gave us no agenda.

Michael Coteau Liberal Don Valley East, ON

That is not a point of order.

12:35 p.m.

Conservative

Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK

It gave us no agenda whatsoever, so we don't actually have a specific topic—

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Mrs. Falk—

12:35 p.m.

Conservative

Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK

—that we are supposed to be chatting about today.

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Order.

Mrs. Falk, that is not a point of order, but you did give her a pause.

Mrs. Gray.

12:35 p.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This just shows that members of this government don't want to talk about what's important to people and how there was a promise made in the 2015 election to have a very small deficit, as I was saying. That was blown out of the water. You know, this government was already going into deficit before the COVID pandemic hit. They were already going into deficit at a time when the economy was considerably stronger, back in 2015. Then, of course, through deficit spending, they blew through that. We also know, through an Auditor General's report we saw, that much of the spending this government did during the pandemic wasn't in alignment with the mandates that existed, so they continued on with this high spending.

Here we are now, where the national debt is the highest it's ever been. We know debt-servicing payments are going to be higher than they have ever been. Instead of investing back into Canadians and very important initiatives, whether it be border security or the environment, it's now going towards servicing the debt. One of the numbers we saw is that the annual debt-servicing amount will be very close to the amount of GST brought in every year, so it nulls most of that GST coming in. Another number we saw is that it's more than we spend on the military.

The debt-servicing costs this government has to pay are very concerning because of all the spending they've done. We know, when we look at government spending, that there is so much waste. Look at, for example, giving fridges to Loblaws. I remember when the government did that. I got a call from a local small business in my community—a florist. They said, “Well, I need a new fridge for my flowers. Can I get a new fridge, as well?” I had a small independent grocer call and say, “Can I get new fridges, as well?” Well, no, it only went to one of the largest, most profitable companies in Canada—Loblaws. We know the government gave $50 million to Mastercard, of all organizations, which gets huge interest payments off Canadians.

Of course, there are ArriveCAN and SDTC, which we're now debating in the House of Commons. The money has rolled through on that. We know the Auditor General did an audit of that and found there were 186 instances of conflicts of interest. Absolutely shocking numbers of dollars flew through that organization, where board members who were executives of organizations were the recipients of money coming from the government. I mean, it was absolutely mind-blowing.

When we look at government spending, these are the kinds of things we're talking about. As well, with SDTC, there was a board member who was terminated, one who talked poorly about the government. The Liberal minister of the day appointed someone else. It came out later that it was known that this person was in conflict because their company was receiving money, and yet the minister still decided to appoint that person. They then appointed different board members as well.

You can't say that SDTC was at arm's length, because there were senior officials in the minister's department who were sitting in on board meetings. They were privy to the discussions and the decisions that were happening at that board meeting. It was only because of a whistle-blower who had come forward to bring this forth that we heard about this. They brought it forth and nothing happened. Then they went directly to the Auditor General, who did this audit. This is what has been brought forth. Of course, this is what we're debating in Parliament right now. The government won't release all of the unredacted documents directly to the RCMP. Parliament is seized with this right now.

Here's another example of such a lack of oversight from this government on government spending. We know that, for example, we have the benefits delivery modernization that we did question the minister on the last time he was here. It's upgrading a lot of the different programs that deliver services to Canadians. That has blown through the original budget. We're talking billions of dollars; that was disclosed the last time the minister was here. We know that this minister will be coming again, but we'll have the minister here for only an hour. When you're talking about the spending of billions and billions of dollars, we need the time in order to ask the minister the really tough questions. This is a huge budget that this minister is responsible for. We really need to be asking the tough questions.

Also, when we're talking about homebuilding costs, one thing I didn't mention earlier was the fact that Canada does not have a softwood lumber agreement. The softwood lumber agreement expired back in 2015. During three different administrations, this government has not been able to negotiate a softwood lumber agreement. The former Conservative government did have a softwood lumber agreement. They negotiated a renewal or an extension, and then it expired in 2015. That has not been a priority of this government.

What does flow through this committee is employment and workforce development. As part of that, thousands of forestry jobs have been lost in Canada, in particular in British Columbia, my home province. Many mills have closed. We know that there's not a lack in North America of what they're producing. It's just that the business has been lost to the United States. Without our having a softwood lumber agreement here, the U.S. continues to add tariffs. Because our supply chains are so integrated, that just makes the cost go up here in Canada. People might ask why that is important. Well, it's because our supply chains are integrated. When things are going back and forth, it means that costs are higher. It does add to the cost of homebuilding when you have lumber that is more expensive.

That has not been a priority of this government. I remember one time we were asking the minister when she was having meetings set up with her counterparts in the United States. Shockingly, the trade minister couldn't even answer those questions about when she was having meetings and when formal negotiations were taking place. That was a few years ago, when I was involved in that portfolio, and still to this date nothing has happened. Recently, tariffs have been added on again.

This just shows a real lack of these ministers' and this government's having eyes on their departments and oversight, governance and management of those departments, being able to ask the tough questions and being able to move things forward that are in the best interest of Canadians.

One of the other things that we can look at as well is crime and how much crime has gone up in this country. I know that, when I'm home and I'm in my community, without even looking at the national statistics, what I hear about the most is the cost of living and crime, regardless of whether this is in someone's home or whether it's in their small business. I met with a small business owner recently who had to invest $20,000 in various security measures because of all the damage and break-ins they were having. That's not unusual. I hear from residents all the time. That was one small business.

I met with another small business that is a doctor's office with specialized care, and it was the same thing. They've had so much damage around their building, and they're continually having to call law enforcement. It makes it really tough, to the point that their patients are sometimes scared to come close to the building, and this is an office that's been there for 30 years. She was saying that it's really been only about the last four or five years and, in particular, about the last three years, that it has become far worse. This is where it's affecting people's houses but also their small businesses. For her, she also had to incur extra costs. Someone asked her, “Why don't you just move?” She said, “I've been here 30 years.” Her office is very close to a number of seniors' homes, and they're able to walk over, so it would be a real disservice if she had to move.

This is part of this government's soft-on-crime approach that has really made things a lot more difficult for businesses.

Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON

I have a point of order, Chair.

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Go ahead, Mr. Fragiskatos, on a point of order.

Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON

I recognize very well, Mr. Chair, that it's not in keeping with the rules that I move anything on a point of order; however, I will offer this to the Conservative side and in particular to Mrs. Gray, who has been forced to speak for two hours at the direction of her leader's office to protect Michelle Ferreri, who just a few days ago made the outlandish comment that the poor are naturally bound to commit crimes.

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK

I have a point of order, Chair.

Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON

For two hours, they have forced us to—

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

Kyle Seeback Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

This is not a point of order. Mr. Fragiskatos is engaging in hyperbole in an attempt to hijack this committee.

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK

I have a point of order, Chair.

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Since you were all speaking over one another, I will return to Mrs. Gray.

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

This committee generally does have agendas. This committee has been quite good at having agendas at particular meetings. We did have an agenda for this meeting; however, that agenda was taken away by other committee members, so here we are. The work of this committee has been pushed ahead, not because of anything that the Conservatives have done today. It's been by other members of this committee, and that has now delayed the work of this committee.

Going back again to talking about how people are affected both by cost of living and crime, we know that small business is the backbone of this country. Many of us have small businesses in our communities. I have some larger businesses and medium-sized ones, but the vast majority are small businesses, and they include farmers. Farmers are businesses. Many of the orchardists and viticulturists in my area are small businesses. They have seen the increase in their costs absolutely go up, in particular transportation costs.

I'll go back to what I was just talking about, which is the aspect of crime. As I said, this is something that I hear the most about from my residents. I do a lot of different surveys that go out, and I have thousands of people fill out surveys. The two biggest issues that people respond back on have to do with various aspects of cost of living and crime, because it is affecting many people.

I will mention as well, on the point of crime but also with helping people who are suffering from addiction, that I did have a private member's bill that was called the “end the revolving door act”. When you look at addiction and recovery, there's a lot of health care that is provincial, but there are federal elements that we came across. There are some, and one of them has to do with federal penitentiaries.

My private member's bill would have had, for people who were incarcerated federally, that a judge could offer the person, if they were suffering from addiction—and 70% of people who are incarcerated federally suffer from addiction—to have a mental health assessment and then addiction treatment and recovery while they're in the federal penitentiary. This has happened in other jurisdictions. One of the biggest supporters was someone from the United States. This has happened in other areas, and there has really been a lot of success.

What happens is that people go to the federal penitentiary, and they don't deal with their addiction issues. They come out, and then they reoffend, so they're caught in a really bad cycle. While they're there, for however many years, we could offer them treatment and recovery.

Unfortunately, my private member's bill wasn't supported by all members in this House, and it did not pass at second reading. I think it's a real miss. Any time that I talk about this in relation to crime, I do hear huge support from people saying, “Geez, I wish that had passed.” It's not going to solve everything, but it definitely would have helped some people who were going through addiction issues.