Evidence of meeting #42 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was homelessness.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Tony Irwin President and Chief Executive Officer, Rental Housing Canada
Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, for the opportunity to be here today.
My name is Tony Irwin. I'm the president and CEO of Rental Housing Canada. I was pleased to speak with this committee in April, with Dr. Whitzman, in fact, on Bill C-20. We've done this before. We've been on television. We could take this committee on the road. I'm not sure who would want to buy tickets, but we could try to sell some.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Rental Housing Canada
I do appreciate the opportunity to return today.
Rental Housing Canada members build, own and manage homes where millions of Canadians build their lives, raise families, work, study and contribute to their communities. A strong housing system is one where Canadians can access the right home for their needs at different stages of life. Students, newcomers, middle-income workers, seniors and people saving for a first home all rely on rental housing. For many Canadians, renting is not a temporary gap in the system; it is the housing that best fits their needs.
Purpose-built rental is closely connected to the rest of the housing system. When rental supply is limited, pressure builds across the market. Affordability becomes more difficult for renters. Mobility becomes harder for families. Non-market housing faces additional pressure when it should be focused on those with the deepest need. That is why purpose-built rental housing must remain a core part of the federal housing agenda.
Over the last several decades, purpose-built rental housing has not always had the policy and investment conditions needed to grow at the scale that Canada requires. In the 1970s and 1980s, Canada built a significant amount of purpose-built rental housing. Since then, changing economics, higher costs, taxes, municipal fees, financing conditions and approval timelines have made many new rental projects much harder to deliver.
It's well documented that Canada has been experiencing a slowdown in home construction in many parts of the country. People often tell me these days that rental housing is the bright light and refer to project starts to make that point. For example, in the greater Toronto and Hamilton area, purpose-built rental starts reached nearly 10,000 units in 2025, a 42% increase over 2024 and the highest annual total since the 1970s. However, this data does not necessarily reflect what my members are experiencing on the ground. That is why others have testified before this committee that housing starts should be tied to the physical start of construction on site. Waiting until a project is above grade can miss months or even more than a year of real construction activity, particularly on larger rental projects with significant foundation or underground work.
We cannot make decisions on housing based on data points and assumptions that do not fully reflect what is happening in real time. For rental providers, lenders, and investors, every project depends on the same basic question: Can this building be financed, built and operated over the long term? That is why project viability has to remain at the centre of federal housing policy.
Rental Housing Canada supports federal government policy action, including the acceleration of over $7 billion in the CMHC apartment construction loan program to support up to 16,500 new rental homes; mortgage insurance reforms to unlock financing for three- to eight-unit housing, including smaller-scale rental; the Canada-Ontario municipal development charge reduction program; GST relief for new rental housing; and the launch of Build Canada Homes. These are positive, practical and supply-focused measures.
We have heard directly from our members that tools like MLI Select and ACLP have significantly helped rental projects move forward by improving access to financing and strengthening project economics. These tools matter because of the important role they play in determining whether a rental project proceeds or not.
At the same time that the federal government moves forward with Build Canada Homes, it will be important to maintain clear roles across the housing system. Build Canada Homes can make an important contribution to non-market and community housing, while CMHC should remain a key financing partner for private-market, purpose-built rental housing.
The federal government has taken important steps. My message today is that the policy direction is encouraging and that practical refinements can help turn that momentum into more homes. The test for federal housing policy should be this: Does it help good projects become real homes, and does it support the full range of housing that Canadians need? We should all want a housing system where public, non-profit and private partners are each able to do what they do best. Canada needs all forms of housing delivered faster, with better coordination and with policies that make projects viable.
Rental Housing Canada is ready to continue working constructively with governments, CMHC, municipalities and all housing partners across the country to help turn policy momentum into homes that Canadians can live in.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Thank you, Mr. Irwin.
We'll begin the six-minute round of questioning with Ms. Falk.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK
Thank you very much, Chair.
It's nice to see both of you here again. It's ironic that it's at the same time on the same panel. That's wonderful.
Ms. Whitzman, I'd like to start with you.
You did allude to this in your opening remarks. In your brief, you stated that housing completions are a more meaningful measure than housing starts, noting that “people can't live in a construction site” and that many projects are stalled. I'm wondering if you could explain why you believe housing starts are a problematic indicator of housing supply and housing outcomes.
Senior Housing Researcher, University of Toronto School of Cities, As an Individual
I would say that housing starts, with the provisos that Tony just said, are useful. I think the abandonment of measuring housing completions was a poor decision, which fortunately has been changed by the CMHC. It's important to measure the difference in the length of time between housing starts and housing completions, but there are quite a few stalled projects across Canada, hundreds of thousands.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK
Has CMHC ever stated why they stopped measuring completions?
Senior Housing Researcher, University of Toronto School of Cities, As an Individual
I believe they were trying to cut costs. It was a poor decision of where to cut costs.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK
Yes, data is usually a good indicator of if things are on track or off track. I would agree that it's important to collect that information.
In your view, what are the main reasons that housing projects are delayed or fail to reach completion?
Senior Housing Researcher, University of Toronto School of Cities, As an Individual
As my colleague has said, whether you're a non-market or a market developer, you're influenced by construction costs, which have been affected by the trade war going on with the U.S., by labour costs, by land costs—well, not once the construction has started, so I'm going to walk that one back—and by ever-increasing development charges.
Let me be clear that development charges need a solution. The solution isn't just to say that municipalities can sort it out, because they have less than 10% of the tax dollar. Some things are going to need to be uploaded to provinces and the federal government, but putting the onus on newcomers or people interested in a new apartment or a new owned home is a really regressive form of taxation.
Conservative
President and Chief Executive Officer, Rental Housing Canada
In terms of why projects are stalled, I agree with much of what Dr. Whitzman said in that regard, if not all.
When I speak to members, there are all of those same challenges around construction costs, which have been quite volatile. Also, around government fees and charges, there's been a lot of discussion. I've talked to some of you about that outside of committee.
The number of variables.... When we go back a few years, projects got started and then economic conditions changed from that time, or they were well through the development pipeline and perhaps did break ground, but then economic conditions, interest rates and some of these things we're talking about changed.
It does impact how a project moves forward when, in real time, you've started a large project that has taken you several years to get to, you've spent millions of dollars getting to that point, and then economic conditions change. We can't necessarily predict those things, but they do impact whether a project can go forward. That certainly has been the case over the last few years and continues to be the case.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK
Yes. It seems crazy that you could be planning and getting everything lined up and it's taking several years and you're not breaking ground yet. That's crazy. That's absolutely crazy.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Rental Housing Canada
Well, there are a number of reasons when you say that you haven't broken ground yet. In some cases in terms of stalled projects, they have broken ground and are stalled. They have started, and they wouldn't be considered a start yet, based on what we've been talking about in our remarks. By the definition, it wouldn't be considered a start yet. Excavation permits have been received and ground has been broken, and then things do change that impact how a project can move forward. It's not necessarily that it won't be completed, but it might take much longer because the developer has to make some adjustments and figure out how they can adapt to changing conditions.
As for the ones that haven't started, that's a whole other conversation entirely in terms of how long it takes to get through the process, to get the necessary approvals and to get the permits. As that's happening, as we've been talking about, the number of conditions that can change, that can impact whether a project can in fact go forward, are different now, perhaps, from maybe five years ago when the project was first envisioned. That's why we advocate for faster approval times and we need to cut red tape. We need to get through some of these predevelopment processes more quickly to capitalize on better conditions, hopefully.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK
Even just tax.... You have these different levels of government that all need to have some type of revenue. Whether that's at the federal, provincial or municipal level, you have different governments that are saying, “That's not my jurisdiction; it's your jurisdiction.”
Then, to your comment about offloading onto the municipality and the municipality being the one in charge or responsible in that avenue, you have the taxpayer who is being taxed on tax, on tax, on tax. They're taxed literally to death, and literally after death, they're still being taxed. Then you have these projects to try to build or to even to invest for jobs and that type of thing that aren't happening because of the amount of taxation, regulation and red tape. They all touch one another.
Senior Housing Researcher, University of Toronto School of Cities, As an Individual
I just want to give a non-market perspective on that.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
We're well over time. You can respond to that later.
Mr. Villeneuve for six minutes.
Liberal
Louis Villeneuve Liberal Brome—Missisquoi, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Whitzman, when we focus narrowly on housing starts without giving sufficient consideration to measuring completions, what aspect of reality do you think policy-makers and lawmakers might overlook?
You talked about this at length, but I'd like to give you the opportunity to tell us more about it.
Senior Housing Researcher, University of Toronto School of Cities, As an Individual
I'm sorry that I'm not answering in French, Mr. Villeneuve, but I use a lot of jargon, and it's easier for me to talk jargon in English.
One very important aspect for non-market developers is that they're operating on a much smaller margin and with less equity. The federal government is often the last funder to come on board. You have to wait for municipal approvals. You have to wait for other forms of funding. I don't know of a non-profit project that's had fewer than four funders. The federal government, first through the CMHC and now through Build Canada Homes, appears to be the last people to assume risk.
We heard in the last session about the importance of the continuity of federal funding for programs like Reaching Home. The lack of continuity has been an issue, and the fact is that the federal government are the last folks in instead of the first folks in. There are so many cases of developers who have put in $1 million in predevelopment costs—and that's true whether you're a non-market or a market developer—who then are left hanging because the agreement that they'd worked out with the federal government doesn't reflect the current realities of building.
It's really important to absolutely speed up the process and for the federal government to be the folks who assume the most risk. That's the only way that private equity is going to be unlocked, certainly when it comes to non-market housing and, I suspect, for market housing as well.
Liberal
Louis Villeneuve Liberal Brome—Missisquoi, QC
In your opinion, to what extent is close collaboration between the federal government, the provinces, the territories and municipalities essential to resolving this difficult situation?
Who is best positioned to address the various aspects of the current challenge?
Senior Housing Researcher, University of Toronto School of Cities, As an Individual
That is an excellent question.
It's really important to have only one straightforward definition of affordability, because quite often, with the cobbling together of different programs, you end up having to do some very complex math indeed in order to reconcile different definitions of affordability.
It's really important to have targets and have overall goals such as we will end homelessness by X date, we will end the low-income rental housing need by X date, and we will ensure that there's an affordable home for all Canadians by X date. The only level of government that can do that is the federal government.
Then there's a question of how much leeway should be given to provincial, territorial and municipal governments. I would agree with a lot of what was spoken in the last hour about innovation and about the differences between rural and urban housing, but the outcomes and the targets need to be clear. That should be the basis of any agreement between the federal government and provincial-territorial governments or city and regional governments.
We want to see homelessness go down by 20% over the next five years. You sort it out, track it every year, and you get back to us. I'm a great believer of flexibility in terms of program delivery and of absolute clarity, which frankly has been missing from the federal government, about what's meant by affordable housing and what would be necessary to create the kind of Canada that we all want in terms of year-on-year reduction of homelessness and year-on-year reduction of housing stress.
Liberal
Louis Villeneuve Liberal Brome—Missisquoi, QC
Mr. Irwin, do you believe that Build Canada Homes will have a positive impact on housing starts in Canada and the increase in off-market housing?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Rental Housing Canada
Yes, absolutely, Build Canada Homes will have an impact. When we talk about ensuring that all Canadians have homes that meet their needs and budgets, there's no question that affordability is an issue for many Canadians. We all know about that. We all talk about it in this place every day and in all of our communities. Obviously, housing is a big part of the conversation.
The goal, as I believe Build Canada Homes has set out, in order to provide support through government land, through preferred financing and to be able to unlock affordable homes, is a goal that I certainly support and we need it. We do need more housing that is more affordable.
Market housing is not affordable for all. There are ways we can make market housing more affordable. I think Build Canada Homes' mission to use tools that it has been provided to be able to unlock more affordable homes is very important and one that we should all be supporting as best we can.
Liberal
Liberal