Madam Speaker, this is the second time that the Bloc Quebecois has put forward a motion on social housing. This is the second time that I have risen to speak against it.
The first motion deplored the fact that the government had not increased or re-established funding for social housing construction programs. However this time its concern is more emotional.
In the first motion debated on February 16, the Bloc declared that it was interested in social housing support for all Canadians. Let me be clear, the Bloc carries a singular agenda. The only care that the Bloc has for Canada is to take what it can and separate post haste.
The motion before us is terribly wrong minded. It fails to appreciate the economic reality our country faces today. The taxpayers of Canada, you and I, Madam Speaker, my children and my grandchildren will pay for this folly of overspending.
The combined debt is now over $600 billion and the federal deficit is predicted to be about $40 billion. Despite this colossal financial lodestone, the Bloc Quebecois is saying the government has not yet spent enough. It is urging the government to spend more, to increase the deficit and the debt, to climb aboard this runaway debt train, giving no thought to fixing its brakes.
It is important to clearly establish what is needed before we blindly commit to throwing around millions of dollars.
A 1992 study stated that the majority of people on welfare received adequate support to meet their basic housing needs. It stated that the traditional solution has been to spend a fortune on these programs and if things are not improving, throw more money at them.
In its 1991 annual report the CMHC agrees that social housing needs can be met under the existing funding plan. The report states that more of an effort must be made to achieve greater cost effectiveness so that more can be done with the available budgets.
I recognize that we need a major social revenue in Canada. However, throwing money at a singular and specific problem is not a good resolution. We need to assess what the problem is and then address it specifically.
The clamour for federal funding support is not decreasing. The demand is there but there are fewer dollars to spread around. Given this, new innovative ideas are needed to ensure sound fiscal management at all levels of government.
In 1988 all three levels of government spent under $3 billion on housing or $114 for every person in Canada. That is up from just $366 million or $17 per capital in 1970. Yet poverty advocates claim the housing problem is as acute as ever.
Given that this funding spiral cannot continue unabated, it is more important than ever that housing subsidies, like other forms of assistance-and we said this over and over again-be targeted to those in need. The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation ensures that all Canadians, regardless of who they are and where they live in Canada, have equal access to federal resources allocated for housing. CMHC currently administers more than 652,000 units.
Despite these enormous holdings, my hon. colleague would have us believe that more money yet needs to be spent on social housing programs in Quebec. In the fiscal year 1994-95, according to the main estimates for public works and government services, CMHC will receive $2,033,779,000 for social housing alone. Of this approximately $366 million will be going to the province of Quebec. That represents about 18 per cent of CMHC's total budget for social housing.
In comparison, Alberta, my province will receive approximately $150 million. For every dollar that Alberta receives, Quebec gets $2.25.
Believe me, Albertans question this transfer payment ratio even more so as they work through a seriously difficult time, difficult days of deep, deep cuts to our provincial programs.
While we are doing comparisons, let us take a quick look at the United States provision for social housing. When the leader of the Queen's Loyal Opposition visited the U.S. I wonder if he discussed social housing spending habits with the Americans. Canada may not yet be a paradise of social housing but we are sure not doing too badly in comparison with the U.S.
We spend approximately $114 a year per capita on social housing while in the U.S. that expenditure is about $40 per year per capita. We spend almost three times as much right now.
Therefore Canada is not facing serious social housing problems. It is facing serious economic problems. This government fails to recognize that we are facing a financial crisis. This motion shows that the Bloc also fails to recognize it.
Canadian and international money markets are hugely unstable because this government cannot keep its spending under control and shows scant interest in doing so. The Canadian dollar is in a sinkhole, interest rates are rising and despite a decrease in the unemployment rate the dollar remains unstable, an indicator that investors have lost faith in our economy.
In principle the solution to the problem is simple. The government needs to put a cap on spending. The government needs to clearly demonstrate to the financial communities both within and without Canada that it is serious about reducing the deficit.
I can assure the government that if it introduced measures of this kind it would find support from my side of the House. All members of this Parliament should be mindful that we cannot spend ourselves out of a recession. Governments have tried this for 15 years and it has not worked.
It is for these economic reasons that Gordon Thiessen, the head of the Bank of Canada, stated on April 5 that to inspire consumer and market confidence this government will have to address its debt and deficit situation by cutting spending.
Given this, when members in this House put forward matters for debate, especially when those matters involve the spending of taxpayers dollars which are at a premium, they must ask themselves: Who will pay? Where will the money come from? Could this be done better and more cheaply?
I see no indication that the Bloc either heard what Mr. Thiessen said last week or that it considered even asking questions such as these. It must be too busy figuring out strategies for separation.
We cannot condone yet more money being siphoned off by Quebec. Constituents from my riding are getting very tired of seeing their tax dollars inequitably flushed into the province of Quebec, especially given the Bloc's mandate for separation.
Alberta's transfer payments have been capped and the need to cut spending has been recognized there. But here is the Bloc yet again with its hand out asking for extra money.
In its strategic plan for 1992 through to 1996 CMHC does not mention a need for increased funding nor a need to increase programs in Quebec. However, in a businesslike move in keeping with the private sector, the CMHC is promoting cost effective programming and management.
Finally, this demand for social housing support is an indicator of a larger economic problem. Simply spending more money to alleviate social housing problems is like trying to tend to a fever of 105 by rolling someone in the snow. You may cool the body for a short period of time but surely you have not found out why that body is sick.
Quebec needs to look more closely at this problem. The Bloc Quebecois is showing that as a province said to be on the verge of separation, it clearly lacks an appreciation for its own economic, social and political upheaval.