Thank you for all that. I'll leave you alone now.
I will say, for the purpose of my own understanding, that I still struggle—despite your incredibly capable attempt to explain it all, which I appreciate—with the creation of another corporation.
Obviously, it was a simpler time after the war, when it came to dealing with getting homes built. We created one corporation, and it did a truly phenomenal job. What the CMHC did is amazing. I've done a speech in the House of Commons on the scope and scale of the problem back then and on how the government of the day—a Liberal government, no less—recognized the challenge and created the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, as it was then called. It created partnerships, worked with builders and built entire communities. We solved the housing crisis in roughly a decade or a bit less. Its mandate has evolved over time, for sure. It's become more of an insurance agency and a research business.
One of the primary challenges to getting homes built and making them all affordable.... Of course, we run into the problem of the definition of “affordability”. I fundamentally believe all homes should be more affordable, not just the ones below market. We desperately need more investment in social and supportive housing in this country, but I struggle with why we are using up scarce public resources to create a fourth agency or third corporation at the federal level, when bureaucratic delays are a major part of the problem in getting homes built and making them all more affordable.
The ambition and hope behind this thing are completely laudable and admirable, but I don't get it. I think it's safe to say that a lot of Canadians don't get it either. We solved this problem before, and it didn't take three corporations to do it. It was one. They cut through the noise and got the job done. Fundamentally, that's the problem today. We've spent a year on this now, and it's still getting up and going. I still don't really understand why we need a third Crown corporation when we have two that might need more tools or more power. I think it would have been faster to give them those tools. We would be one year closer to solving the massive housing crisis in this country, which is demonstrably worse than it was after the war.
I'll say it again: I applaud the ambition, but I struggle with the time we've spent building more bureaucracy when one of the primary challenges to getting homes built is, in fact, bureaucracy.
I'll leave it at that.
Thank you very much for being here.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.