Human Resources Committee on March 26th, 2026

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

From my perspective, the benefit is the reliability of the system. I gave you some really high-profile international examples of what happens when legacy systems aren't updated. In fact, that was the warning that the Auditor General gave the Harper Conservatives in 2010. Nothing was done. I'm glad they care about seniors now, but at that time, clearly there was less care about the regular stability of income payments to seniors. In 2017, the Liberal government at the time decided that we would do something about it, and we began this very difficult process.

Our experience is quite similar to other international experiences, by the way. It's hard to estimate how much it will cost to do this because of the different ways that systems have been shaped and transformed. Don't forget that in OAS's case, it was a 60-year-old system.

The benefit for me is that Canadians who are receiving benefits don't have to think about whether there's going to be a disruption. They don't have to panic when something happens, as in the case of New Jersey, where all of a sudden people weren't getting the benefits they needed in order to pay their rent or buy their food. That's not going to happen with a modernized system.

A modernized system will also reduce the amount of time it takes to process systems, because it's digital. Before, on the old system, everything was hand-entered. There were lots of opportunities for errors. People can type and misplace one letter. It can change a person's name, which can deeply impact their ability to cash their cheque.

These are, overall, the kinds of things that Canadians expect. They expect to be able to trust the systems that are there to serve them.

[Leslie Church, Liberal, Toronto—St. Paul's, ON]

Minister, in your opening statement, you mentioned that it is normal and expected that estimates of projects of this magnitude “evolve as the work progresses”. Can you speak to the factors that influenced the evolution of those estimates? Maybe Mr. Groen can as well.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

I had the department draw some international comparatives from the U.K., Australia and the United States. Oftentimes they began with estimates that were much lower than the final price tag. They had very similar reasons, because the systems were very old. They were, in some cases, not on any kind of programming that people even had knowledge of anymore and knew how to unpack and figure out how to change.

We took a very conservative approach at the beginning. In fact, the Auditor General noted that. She thought we had underestimated things. She also said that this was reasonable, because we didn't really know what we were getting into. As we unpacked the legacy systems and understood what it was going to take to transform these systems, the estimate approvals went up based on a regular flow of information among ESDC, Procurement and other partners.

Do you want to add to that?

[Cliff Groen]

There are three main reasons for the evolution of costs.

One is cybersecurity. The cybersecurity reality of 2017 was not the same as it is in 2026. These are crown jewels of the Government of Canada. We pay out billions and billions of dollars. We are constantly under cyber-attack. We've had to up our game related to protections for cybersecurity, to reflect the reality of 2026.

Second, the system is 60 years old. Coding for many pieces of the system was done in the 1960s and 1970s. When you open the hood, you find things that you had no idea about, because they weren't documented properly back in 1971. As you're looking at them, that's fully expected, and that was part of the original plan.

The third element is that the scope has changed. Right now, part of the scope of BDM is the migration of 14 different contact centres that answer more than millions of calls every year. That is now part of this program, which it was not, back in 2017.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mrs. Church.

Thank you, Minister.

Thank you, Ministers and officials, for being in this morning.

This concludes the first round.

We'll suspend for a couple of moments while we transition to the second hour.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Welcome back, committee members. It's the second hour of the committee meeting.

Everybody is the same, so I will not go through the technical items, except to say that you have the option of participating in the official language of your choice. Please familiarize yourself with the earpiece and ensure you're on the right channel to participate in the language you wish.

With that, I would like to welcome the Honourable Gregor Robertson, Minister of Housing and Infrastructure, from the Department of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities. We also have Paul Halucha, deputy minister, and Lindsay Boldt, director general, Build Canada Homes transition office.

Before we begin with the minister, I believe I have a motion from Ms. Falk.

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

Yes. Thank you, Chair.

I move:

That, regarding the committee's consideration of Bill C-20, An Act respecting the establishment of Build Canada Homes:

a) Following the appearance of the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure on March 26, 2026, the committee hold three additional meetings on April 16, April 20 and April 23, 2026, before proceeding to clause-by-clause consideration of the Bill;

b) Parties be invited to submit witness lists to the clerk of the committee by Tuesday, April 7, 2026, at 12 p.m. ET.

I believe you will have unanimous consent for this, so we shouldn't even need to go to a vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

You've heard the motion. I see a thumbs-up from everybody.

(Motion agreed to)

Before I go to the minister, I would like to welcome you, Mr. Ste‑Marie.

Mr. Minister, you have up to five minutes for your opening statement.

[Gregor Robertson, Liberal, Minister of Housing and Infrastructure]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

It's good to be back with you to talk about the Build Canada Homes act. With the invitation to appear today, I'm welcoming the opportunity to speak to Bill C-20. I'm pleased to be joined by our deputy minister, Paul Halucha, and Lindsay Boldt of the Build Canada Homes transition team.

This new Crown corporation would be a key tool in our tool box to tackle the affordable housing crisis and deliver on the government's plan to build more homes faster for Canadians who need it the most.

With the creation of Build Canada Homes as a permanent builder of affordable housing, the bill introduced today marks the next step in addressing Canada's housing crisis.

The work already under way at Build Canada Homes is helping to initiate a new phase of transformative growth in Canada's homebuilding sector. The legislation being discussed today will provide BCH—Build Canada Homes—with the flexibility and authority to continue the work to build more affordable housing for Canadians and to spur a more innovative and productive homebuilding industry.

By empowering Build Canada Homes to build affordable housing, our government is taking concrete action against the housing crisis while preparing for the future.

To restore affordability, we need to drastically increase our housing supply of all types, from supportive housing that gets people off the streets and out of encampments to missing middle-income housing that can meet the needs of young Canadians and growing families.

While the housing crisis has been several decades in the making, with a chronic underfunding of non-market and affordable housing and of purpose-built rentals and with a lack of scaled innovation from the industry, housing continues to be one of the primary concerns when it comes to affordability.

Federal efforts have been spread across multiple departments, agencies and programs on affordable housing. While we've seen some positive results through programs like the housing accelerator fund, the affordable housing fund and the apartment construction loan program, this program-by-program approach has not fully maximized the impact.

This legislation fully grants Build Canada Homes—as a lean, purpose-built organization—the ability to provide partners with a flexible mix of financial tools, including grants, low-interest loans, loan guarantees and equity investments. It will also give Build Canada Homes the ability to acquire and develop property and build housing on public land. This new approach will allow us to accelerate construction timelines, improve productivity in the industry and support a more innovative homebuilding sector.

With the initial investment of $13 billion, Build Canada Homes is a key part of the federal government's commitment to accelerate housing construction, restore housing affordability and reduce homelessness. Build Canada Homes will have the operational independence that it needs to get shovels in the ground and to crowd in private capital while remaining accountable to Parliament.

As a Crown corporation, it will have the oversight, powers and functions it needs to deliver on its mandate as an affordable housing builder. It is also designed to act as a developer, financier and convenor to accelerate the construction of affordable housing.

Build Canada Homes will be equipped with the tools and authorities to take a leading role in the planning, development and construction of housing on public lands. The act enables the transfer of land holdings and other key elements of the Canada Lands Company Limited to Build Canada Homes to streamline and consolidate federal efforts to develop housing on public lands all under one roof.

Recognizing that Canada's housing crisis cannot be solved by any one player alone, as a Crown corporation, Build Canada Homes will have the autonomy and authority to bring all partners to the table, including all levels of government, first nations, indigenous communities, industry, private and non-profit actors, and organizations, to accelerate the delivery of safe, affordable homes.

The work is not just about housing people. This work also drives the larger economy. Build Canada Homes will be a champion and driver of the buy Canadian policy, prioritizing projects that use Canadian materials, strengthening domestic industries and creating good jobs all along the homebuilding supply chain.

Build Canada Homes is investing in the technologies needed to build more quickly, more sustainably and more affordably. We are also creating good, well-paying jobs across the country.

Our government is committed to building a future that Canadians deserve. Let's give ourselves the tools we need to succeed, and let's build.

I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Minister.

We will begin with Mr. Aitchison for six minutes.

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for being here.

Minister, I have a couple of very quick questions.

Would you agree that the majority of housing in this country is built by the private sector, so 80% to 85% is actually market housing?

[Gregor Robertson, Liberal, Vancouver Fraserview—South Burnaby, BC]

Those in the private sector are instrumental in building housing, and that's why they are critical partners in the Build Canada Homes approach. They will be building, effectively, the majority of the housing.

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

That's not what I asked. I asked if you would agree that 80% to 85% of the market is market housing, not that Build Canada Homes would be involved.

[Gregor Robertson, Liberal, Vancouver Fraserview—South Burnaby, BC]

It's actually higher than that. In Canada, we have about 4% non-market housing, which is down from about 10% 30 years ago.

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

That's great. Thank you.

[Gregor Robertson, Liberal, Vancouver Fraserview—South Burnaby, BC]

It's much lower than in peer countries.

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

You would also probably agree, then, that non-market housing, like co-ops, supportive housing and deeply affordable units, requires some more direct and probably sustained investment by public entities like this government, provincial governments, etc.

[Gregor Robertson, Liberal, Vancouver Fraserview—South Burnaby, BC]

By nature, deeply affordable housing needs to be supported by all levels of government, including the federal government. The challenge we're in regarding homelessness and the lack of affordable housing is because of decades of underinvestment in non-market housing.

In these times, we do a mix of housing. On many projects, there will be a mix of affordability in the same project. That's how we leverage both below-market and middle-market housing.

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Would you say, then, of market housing—which is more than 85% of the housing stock in this country—that the biggest barrier to getting more of those homes built is a lack of government agencies, or would you say that it's zoning, regulatory approvals and local charges and fees?

[Gregor Robertson, Liberal, Vancouver Fraserview—South Burnaby, BC]

The housing market is complex in Canada. We see lots of different markets, depending on the city and province.

The federal and provincial governments have critical roles to play in ensuring that non-market housing is available and affordable. Canada has underinvested in that for many years.

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

That's great, but I specifically asked you about the delays at the local level. You said that it's complex. Let's just leave it at that. We agree that it's complex to get permission to build a home in this country.

I'm going to ask you specifically what your government's plan is to reduce the complexity of getting permission to build homes in this country for the market, which, as we have established, are the vast majority of homes on the housing continuum.

[Gregor Robertson, Liberal, Vancouver Fraserview—South Burnaby, BC]

There are existing approaches to ensure that we are getting more housing permitted and approved, which is typically done at the local level. In some cases, it's at the provincial or territorial level.

The housing accelerator fund has enabled a significant number of homes to be approved at those levels. As an example, last year, in 2025, we saw over 300,000 homes permitted. We saw roughly 260,000 building starts. There are many more units permitted or in the pipeline—approved at the local level—but the market is not building those homes.

We have to stay ahead of that curve and make sure there is always a supply of approved...that can be acted upon and built. Certainly, all levels of government have a role to play in helping to support the market.

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

The CMHC said that we need to build about 500,000 units a year for a sustained period in order to restore affordability. Clearly, the vast majority of those need to be market homes, if that's the biggest chunk of our market. You said that Build Canada Homes is still focused specifically on non-market, which is fair.

If we're only investing in non-market housing and not reducing the barriers to market housing, how can we ever hope to achieve affordability in market housing?

[Gregor Robertson, Liberal, Vancouver Fraserview—South Burnaby, BC]

We need to do all of the above. Build Canada Homes is about focusing on affordable housing, starting with non-market housing and the deep affordability needed for supportive and transitional housing, in order to tackle the challenge we have with homelessness.

However, we need to be building across the continuum of housing and into affordable market rentals, which takes all levels of government co-operating, collaborating, working with industry and working with community housing proponents to get that type of housing. We lack housing that is more affordable than market—not necessarily deeply affordable. That missing middle housing is going to be critical to deliver in the years ahead.

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Minister, about five months ago, you were on the Herle Burly podcast. You were asked directly about reducing or eliminating the GST on all new homes under $1.3 million, which was our proposal. At the time, you said that it was a big, large sweeping change to make that was kind of risky. You wanted to see if the other things you were doing would work first. Now I see that the government has decided to waive the GST on all new homes under $1 million for a year in Ontario only.

That begs two questions, one of which is this: Are the other things not working? You wanted to see how they would work before you did this. If they aren't working and you made this move, why did you do it for Ontario only? The average cost of a new home in Vancouver is about $1.2 million. That's $62,500 in GST. Why don't the people in Vancouver get that break?