Human Resources Committee on April 20th, 2026

[Scott Andison]

They're leaving the industry. They're leaving the jurisdiction as well. They're following the jobs. Ontario is not building. It has had the largest hit in the residential construction industry in all of Canada, so they are leaving.

They're either going into other industries or going into commercial. For example, if they're a welder, they can leave one industry and go into another. It would be very difficult to attract them back. In other cases, they're leaving and going out west or south of the border—wherever those jobs are.

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

When you say they are going places like out west, what are they doing out there? Are they using the trade skills they have and staying in the same kind of vein, but maybe in a different industry?

[Scott Andison]

These are generalizations on my part.

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

That's fair.

[Scott Andison]

Where they can, if they're trained in the residential construction industry with a particular trade ticket, they're going to look for jobs in a similar area. They went into that sector for a reason.

When you look out west at places like Alberta, Manitoba and others, they are still building. Their numbers are going up. Ours are not.

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

What will the bureaucracy of Build Canada Homes accomplish that the previous federal housing bureaucracies couldn't or did not?

[Scott Andison]

I'll speak to the potential. The potential here is that they are hyperfocused on how to create an environment that allows builders to build and allows Mr. Baird to increase inventory built by the private sector as he takes over to manage those—

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

Yes, but what's unfortunate about that is that it's just potential.

[Scott Andison]

That's potential.

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

There's a lot that will have to be in regulations.

We've heard from witnesses that there are no timelines in this legislation. From the precedents of other things the government has done and other legislation it's passed, even in previous Parliaments, we've seen issues with things not getting done because they're not instructed in the regulations. The concern I have is that it's a hope we're going to get it done, without having the details inscribed in either the legislation or the regulations.

Thank you so much for your testimony today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Falk.

Mr. Joseph, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Natilien Joseph, Liberal, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I must admit that I was touched by what Ms. Larouche said. She praised co-op housing models for seniors and empathized with low-income households. She also told us about her approach to homelessness and shared her concerns. On the subject of funding to enable the construction of social and community housing, however, I think Ms. Larouche missed a major opportunity. Indeed, as Quebeckers watch housing projects move forward, they understand very well that the measures in the 2025 budget have a lot to do with it.

My next question is for you, Mr. Baird.

Non-market housing seems to be at the heart of the current approach. Do you think this priority meets the most pressing needs of Canadians and Quebeckers in the current context?

[Sean Baird]

The country as a whole is facing housing crises of different kinds. One is the lack of affordable market housing, and another is the lack of affordable non-market housing. The lowest-income individuals are unable to participate in market housing, and that lack of supply is a huge concern for us.

I would also reiterate that when you invest in public housing, it is an investment in productive infrastructure. It has a direct effect on GDP, the labour economy, health care and the justice system. All of these things are made better by making investments in supporting our lowest-income residents in attaining access to non-market housing.

[Natilien Joseph, Liberal, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

I'm going to ask you another question.

With regard to the planned investment in transitional and supportive housing, is funding being appropriately targeted to meet the current needs? Can you tell us why?

[Sean Baird]

Continued investment in transitional and supportive housing is critical as well. That's not the area that TCHC, my organization, focuses on. However, I will say there are likely thousands of individuals currently living in Toronto community housing and likely thousands more living in social housing all across the country who would theoretically qualify for access to supportive housing.

Most people would argue that our lack of community housing is probably about half. We're meeting half the needs of the market all across the country.

When you look at supportive housing, we're probably meeting less than 10% of the need all across the country. It's critical that we focus on providing supportive housing. It is more expensive to provide; there are higher operating costs associated with doing it. I commend the government for focusing a portion of the funding directly on providing more supportive housing. It's a critical area of need that we see.

[Natilien Joseph, Liberal, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

I have another question for you, Mr. Baird.

Build Canada Homes has already signed major agreements with a number of authorities and announced various affordable, transitional and supportive housing projects. Do you think this swift action meets current expectations?

[Sean Baird]

I'm not familiar with the totality of the agreements you're referring to, but what I will say is that the current available capacity in the supportive housing industry simply isn't adequate.

Regardless of historical approaches to encouraging more building of supportive housing, the reality is that it hasn't come to fruition. We continue to see extraordinary need in that market, and any additional funding for and focus on that market are certainly going to be well received.

[Natilien Joseph, Liberal, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Baird, we know that Build Canada Homes has already signed an agreement with Quebec for transitional housing and housing for low-income families. In your opinion, is this agreement a very good thing for Quebec and for families currently struggling to find housing?

[Sean Baird]

The reality is that non-market housing operators and builders across the country, whether they're in western Canada, Ontario or Quebec, lack access to unencumbered capital and financing in order to build more capacity in both non-market community housing and supportive housing. Any agreement or approach that brings more availability of capital to operators that already have the experience and know-how to operate community housing would be well received by our industry.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Joseph.

We'll conclude with you, Ms. Larouche. You have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

My takeaway from what I've heard is that it's good to have housing projects, but that some of the responsibility is being shifted onto cities, which is hurting them. In Quebec, for example, there have been delays relating to the agreement on infrastructure projects to support housing initiatives. I thank the witnesses for reminding us how crucial this is, but I also want to point out that cities know their own realities and housing needs best. They also know their limits. However, they need support, not only for housing, but also for infrastructure. I wanted to point that out.

To conclude my last turn, I'm going to turn to Mr. Andison.

At the end of the day, is the bulk of construction costs related more to taxation or to land? Should the provinces retain full control over housing solutions? Our understanding of the agreement is that Quebec will have the last word.

Prefabrication could quickly reduce costs. In my riding, in Saint‑Anne‑de‑la‑Rochelle, there's a company called Les Industries Bonneville, which has beautiful prefabricated home models.

I'd like to hear your opinion on these issues. You have about a minute to share it with me.

[Scott Andison]

In very simple terms, I think government has three opportunities to help reduce the cost of homes. The first is to provide land at lower-than-market cost. The second is to invest in the shovel-ready infrastructure that's required. We've made reference to the $8.8 billion deal that Ontario and the federal government have recently signed onto to help reduce the costs of infrastructure. The third is to stop taxing homes like a luxury item. If those three things come together, we can reduce the cost of homes across the board, both market and non-market.

If we go further into helping individuals who require low-income assistance for housing, the best way to administer those programs would be directly on the income side and not try to artificially adjust the cost of building the home.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Larouche.

That ends the second hour of the committee's business on Bill C-20.

I want to thank the witnesses for appearing and for providing testimony to the members present.

We will suspend for a few moments while we move in camera to do another scope of business.

[Proceedings continue in camera]