Mr. Speaker, while I am not opposed to a national strategy on housing, I am opposed to the way this bill is written.
I think people come to this House and after a time they think that because they say something it is true.
I want to comment on my friend from the Liberal Party's comment, who said the Liberals were just getting ready to put in a strategy after 13 years, that they were so close, and that this government scuttled that and it did not happen.
Once again, just because members stand in the House and say something, that does not make it so.
I look at my friends across the way from the NDP. We were talking about free trade with Colombia yesterday and they were talking about numbers that were totally fictitious. They were talking about things that happened before the president actually came into power in Colombia.
But we are not here to talk about free trade with Colombia today; we are here to talk about this housing strategy bill.
I certainly want to thank the member for Vancouver East for raising this issue. This is an important issue. At the human resources committee right now we are working on looking at a poverty study, and housing is an important element of that. It is something that does inspire a great deal of passion, and I can see why. Canada's housing industry is a powerful engine for economic growth and job creation in this country. Having a safe, affordable place to call home is vital to the health and well-being of each and every Canadian family in the communities we live in.
However, in the face of all the heat that inspires this issue, I think it is important that we create some light. While I thank the hon. member, for Vancouver East for raising this issue, I cannot support this legislation, for the simple reason that the government is already deeply engaged in delivering most of the items mentioned in this bill. Additionally, this government is already providing housing options in a way that respects the jurisdictions of the provinces and territories while reflecting the unique needs of local communities.
I would like to use my time today to address two of the key issues the hon. member has chosen not to address in this bill.
The first is the underlying assumption that Canada is not carrying out many of the items that are identified. That is simply wrong.
The fact is that our government already has a multi-pronged approach that provides housing. Our government is providing housing for Canadians from all walks of life and in all parts of the country. We already have an extensive framework of legislation policy and programs in place at each of the national, provincial, territorial and municipal levels. We already have established a clear federal-provincial-territorial consultation process, with rotating co-chairs and a strong working relationship. We are already working closely with the provinces and the territories, municipalities, first nation groups and housing organizations across the country to address each of the needs identified in the bill. This action-based multi-pronged approach has allowed for the housing needs of 80% of Canadian households to be met in the marketplace while offering targeted assistance to those whose needs are being met privately.
Unlike the strategy advocated by this bill, this approach respects the jurisdictions of the provinces and territories to administer their housing programs in ways that work best for individual Canadians and communities.
Bill C-304 does not recognize this jurisdiction, nor does it recognize the differences in local needs that require solutions. Instead, Bill C-304 would provide the federal minister with a free rein to implement a national housing strategy in any way the minister saw fit, irrespective of the needs of our provincial and territorial partners.
How should the provinces and territories interpret proposed subclause 4(2) of the bill, giving the federal minister the power to take any measures the minister considers appropriate to implement the proposed legislation? The attitude implicit in this clause is naive at best, and it aims for a one-size-fits-all strategy when in fact one size fits none.
The second area I would like to focus on is the litany of errors and inconsistencies made in the House in April by my hon. colleague and other members of the opposition who rose in support of this bill.
The member for Vancouver East stated that about three million Canadian households live in housing insecurity. That statement is simply inaccurate. However, Bill C-304 does not even go so far as to define what that means. By housing insecurity, we must surmise that the hon. member is referring to the accepted definition of “core housing need”. If this is indeed the case, the latest figures show roughly half the numbers suggested by my hon. colleague are indeed in core housing need.
My hon. colleague also stated that Canada has fallen behind other countries in the OECD, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, in developing a national housing strategy, and that is wrong. Canada's approach is actually very similar to that of the vast majority of G8 and OECD countries, including the United States, Australia and New Zealand.
The hon. member also suggests that our government has never recognized the need for a homelessness strategy. While this may play to the NDP caucus, the facts inconveniently get in the way of the hon. member's story. In 2007, the national homelessness partnering strategy was launched under this Conservative government. In 2008, our government approved five year funding of nearly $2 billion for housing and homelessness programs.
Last, the member thanked those organizations she says are supporting this bill, but she failed to take into account the long list of organizations that are opposed to this unnecessary bureaucratic legislation. This includes the Canada West Foundation, in the member's own backyard, which has advocated for a decentralized approach.
Clearly this is a more sensible approach whereby the provinces and territories, supported by federal funds, are responsible for affordable housing and homelessness. This is precisely the opposite of the rigid and arbitrary national approach advocated by this bill.
The member for Brampton West also spoke in favour of this bill, claiming the federal government cut $200 million from affordable housing in budget 2006. However, the facts show that in budget 2006, we included an investment of $1.4 billion in affordable housing trusts to the provinces and territories.
The hon. member went on to accuse this government of cancelling the supporting communities partnership initiative in 2006, but again ignored the national homelessness partnership that we announced shortly thereafter.
Our government is already making significant investments in housing in the areas mentioned in Bill C-304. This bill provides nothing new beyond a promise of endless discussion, additional bureaucracy and ideological pandering. This government prefers timely actions with defined and measurable goals.
In partnership with provinces and territories, first nations and other stakeholders, our Conservative government is taking meaningful action across the entire range of housing requirements and needs.
Mortgage loan insurance through CMHC helps provide mortgage financing to Canadians, wherever they live, at the best possible terms and conditions. Our mortgage securitization activities also help to ensure there is an ample supply of low-cost funding for housing. Access to homeownership is supported through the home buyers' plan and the GST rebate to reduce the cost of a new home.
The $300 million first nations market housing fund is helping to create home ownership opportunities on reserve. The fund was launched in May 2008 by our government. For low to moderate income households, the federal government provides $1.7 billion in subsidies annually to some 625,000 existing social housing units.
Furthermore, in 2006 this government made a strategic investment of $1.4 billion to help Canadians find safe, sound and affordable housing and increase the supply of transitional and supportive housing in all provinces and territories.
CMHC's renovation programs help low-income households, landlords, people with disabilities and aboriginal Canadians bring their homes up to acceptable health and safety standards.
Building on these concrete initiatives, in September 2008 the government committed more than $1.9 billion over the next five years to improve and build new affordable housing and help the homeless.
In addition, Canada's economic action plan commits another $2 billion over two years to build new social housing, repair and retrofit existing social housing and help create stronger communities.
Should Bill C-304 become law, the federal government would be exposed to a risk of undetermined, significant long-term spending in addition to the extensive investments we have already made.
The provision of credit without discrimination to all Canadians would, for example, make the government liable for subprime loans. In terms of housing subsidies, the annual cost is estimated to be over $3.5 billion.
I, for one, cannot support this private member's bill the way it is, first and foremost for the reason that the Government of Canada is already deeply engaged in the precise activities the bill proposes be addressed.
We heard today during question period the concern of what Canada is doing in terms of poverty. I find it interesting, once again, that when we look at what the conference board says on Canada's failing grade on poverty, it relates back to what happened in previous governments.
This government is not talking about doing things; this government is actually getting things done.
For these and many other reasons, I urge the House to reject the bill.