Debates of Dec. 9th, 2024

Access to Parliamentary Precinct

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

I thank the hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

It being 12:20 p.m., pursuant to the ruling of Monday, December 2, the House will now proceed to the business of supply.

Opposition Motion—Federal Sales Tax on New Homes

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

moved:

That, given that, after nine years of this Liberal Prime Minister,

(i) monthly rent and mortgages payments have doubled,

(ii) the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) finds that Canada has the most unaffordable housing market in the G7, and the second most unaffordable in the entire OECD,

(iii) Habitat for Humanity finds that almost one-third of Canadian millennials would consider relocating to another country to find affordable housing,

(iv) the PBO says that chronic homelessness is up by 38% across Canada since 2018 despite Liberal promises to eliminate it by 2030,

in order to save Canadian homebuyers up to $50,000 or $2,500 per year in mortgage payments, the House call on the Liberal government to immediately eliminate the federal sales tax (GST) on new homes sold under $1 million and call on the provincial premiers to match this proposal.

Mr. Speaker, I want to let you know that I am going to split this time.

Today we are here, once again, to discuss the economic vandalism of the Prime Minister and his Liberal-NDP partners and what they have inflicted upon Canadians. Nowhere is that vandalism clearer than in the housing crisis today in this country. All we have to do is look at a real estate listing or talk to someone with a mortgage to realize that, after nine years of the government, the dream of home ownership in this country is simply dead.

My parents came to this country looking for opportunity and they found it. They worked hard. They made countless sacrifices. They saved up. They were eventually able to buy a home for about $150,000 in the place that I grew up, in Thornhill. That was on a taxi driver's salary. Today, a house in that same neighbourhood is selling for close to $2 million, but one could get a deal at $1.5 million, a more than tenfold increase. I can assure members now that taxi drivers, small business owners and nearly everyone else who works for a living is not earning a tenfold increase in salary to match that tenfold increase in housing prices.

Because my parents had an affordable place to live in a safe neighbourhood, they could raise a family. They could start a business. They could live the life they dreamed of after fleeing one that we would never know. That dream is being cruelly taken away from too many in this country.

In Toronto, it used to take 25 years to pay off a mortgage. Now it could take more than 30 years to save up for a down payment. The average salary needed to afford the average home in this city is $263,300. That is not a mansion or a palace, but an average home, a bungalow, in a place like Scarborough.

Who makes $263,000 a year? It is certainly not most people in Toronto, where the average salary is $60,000 a year. It is certainly not a new immigrant to this country who is coming here to look for a fresh start and to forge new horizons. It is certainly not new graduates, looking for a place to start their careers and thinking that maybe they will be able to start a family. It is not even a parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Housing.

The Liberals have made this country so unaffordable that even their own MPs could not afford a home in the place where they came from or in our nation's capital. That is not a knock on them, but a reality that their boss has inflicted upon Canadians right across the country. That is not just in Toronto. It is in Brampton, where home prices are up 139% in just 10 years, in Burlington, where they are up 101%, and in rural places like Prince Edward County, where prices are up 211%. In fact, 24 out of 28 areas in Ontario, as defined by the Canadian Real Estate Association, have seen price increases over 100% in the last 10 years alone.

I also want to tell members that it is not just in Ontario. In Prince Edward Island, housing prices are up 137% right across the province. In British Columbia, they are up 90%. Even in Quebec, which used to have some of the country's most affordable homes, they are up 81%.

Actions have consequences and the Liberal-NDP government is certainly finding that out now as the results of its economic vandalism become clearer and clearer. This is what happens when we pump a half-a-trillion dollars of inflationary spending into the Canadian economy, disproportionately benefiting asset holders and not the people who are looking for somewhere to call home. This is what happens when we ship billions of dollars off to municipalities with no strings attached to how that money is used or what it goes to. The government sent $471 million to Toronto, but since then housing starts are down 40% and, get this, development charges are up 42%.

That is what happens when our immigration system is broken by a government that cannot do the simple math. In 2022, we accepted 437,000 new citizens and 607,000 permanent residents, but we only built 219,000 new homes. Anybody who would do the basic math on this could have anticipated what would happen next.

However, the Minister of Immigration at the time did not. In fact, he ignored the recommendations from his own department that warned about a housing shortage. This guy is now the Minister of Housing. The man who helped break the immigration system, in addition to losing track of all of the people that he let in, is now responsible for fixing housing in this country. It is going exactly how we might expect. Housing prices continue to rise and housing starts continue to go down.

We know the Liberals try to distract Canadians with what is happening in other countries as a way to somehow minimize the valid concerns of the people in our own country, so let us talk about some of these foreign countries for just a moment. Housing in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal was deemed much more unaffordable than cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York. Toronto and Vancouver were also deemed “impossibly unaffordable” when compared to Australia, China, Ireland, New Zealand, Singapore, the U.K. and the U.S.

What do we do about all of this? The Liberal answer is to continue to keep funnelling money into an accelerator fund that has built exactly zero homes and to keep shovelling cash into the infrastructure bank, which has completed exactly the same number of projects. They are doubling down on the same approach that got us here and are not willing or are unable to make new housing available while, at the same time, continuing to mess with the immigration system, a mess that has the weak Prime Minister staring down the barrel of a 25%-tariff threat from the U.S.

Common-sense Conservatives have a different approach. We are going to cut the GST on new housing construction so it is cheaper, not more expensive, to build the units Canadians need. We are going to make life more affordable by increasing the supply and availability of places to live from coast to coast.

The current Liberal housing minister loves the photo ops. Most of his job is big, fancy photo ops but no meaningful results, because we cannot argue with the facts. We are going to quit the photo ops and the posturing and replace them with actual negotiation that ties the number of infrastructure dollars that cities receive to the number of homes they build. We will make sure that high-density housing gets built near critical infrastructure like public transit.

It is a common-sense approach. What we incentivize, we get. The government incentivizes inaction and delay, and that is what they are getting. We will incentivize results for Canadians so they can achieve the dream of home ownership.

Even Liberals approve of the plan, Liberals like the Prime Minister's adviser, Mike Moffatt, who called it “bold”. He said he was a big fan of the idea. He knows that it is time for real action, as do most other Canadians. It seems like everyone except the ones who sit on the other side of the House know exactly what the solution is. Conservatives are going to axe the tax, build homes and finally bring home a country where hard work pays off once again and where affordable housing gives way to that Canadian dream.

There is much more I can talk about. I could go on about the lowest projected growth among advanced economies, the 1.5 million Canadians seeking work who cannot find it, the rapid growth of our bureaucracy and the red tape here in Ottawa, the impending quadrupling of a carbon tax that will delete more than $30 billion from our GDP or the new capital gains tax, which will send all that money down south.

I could go on and on. Unfortunately, I will run out of time. I would much rather have four years to come up with the solutions to address the problems created by the Liberals and the NDP instead of the 10 minutes that this debate affords.

All Canadians needed a carbon tax election yesterday, which is what we are hearing right across the country, so we can have a common-sense Conservative majority government led by the member for Carleton, who will fix this mess, axe the tax, build homes, fix the budget and stop crime. It is within our reach. We are going to build homes that Canadians can actually afford. We are going to bring it home after the next election, after we have a Conservative majority government in this place, led by the member for Carleton.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Madam Speaker, I come from the riding of Saint John—Rothesay, which has benefited greatly from programs we have brought forward, such as the coinvestment fund, the rapid housing initiative and the housing accelerator fund.

One thing I noticed over the last few weeks was the Leader of the Opposition calling mayors across this country “incompetent”. Does the member opposite agree with calling mayors across this country incompetent, and will she get behind the housing accelerator fund, which is helping to transform communities and setting the table to build houses across this country?

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Madam Speaker, first of all, the member should remember that the accelerator builds exactly zero homes, and that is an admission by the Liberals' own housing minister.

The second thing I would ask him is this: What kind of city takes $470 million from the federal government only to see housing starts fall by 40% and development costs go up by 42%?

We believe that money belongs in the pockets of Canadians rather than in big bureaucracies. That is exactly what we are going to do after Canadians elect a new government, after throwing out the most unpopular government in my lifetime.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Madam Speaker, the Conservatives want to eliminate sales tax on new builds, and they are also calling on Quebec and the provinces to do the same, in other words, eliminate tax on new homes.

Does our esteemed member realize that that in no way concerns Parliament, much less the Conservatives? It is a provincial jurisdiction.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Madam Speaker, what we are talking about here is taking the tax off of homes under $1 million for individuals right across the country. Not only will that spur a tremendous amount of housing construction around the country, which this government has failed to do. It has seen housing starts right across the country go down in municipalities in which it has pumped millions and millions of dollars, and it has seen development costs go up.

I think that is a responsibility of the federal government, one that this federal government has failed Canadians on over the last 10 years, which is why we are in this crisis, but we are going to fix it.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am a bit concerned that, in all of the slogans and the one-liners, we are missing quite a lot of detail in terms of the Conservative plan. I am concerned that, when the Conservatives are talking about taking the GST off of homes under $1 million, in one breath they are talking about that and in another breath, when we have tried to reduce the GST off of some home essentials, they call it inflationary.

I am concerned that people would be confused in terms of that double standard or that hypocrisy, and I would love to hear the hon. member address that.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Madam Speaker, nobody is confused about any of the hypocrisy here. What they are confused about is the hypocrisy from the NDP, which continues to vote with the Liberal government to raise taxes for all Canadians on everything.

Our solution is pretty simple. We are going to take the tax off of everything, for good, for everyone. The member from the NDP can go back to her people and have a carbon tax election, where one option is that she can continue supporting the government of the day, like she has, being another part of the Liberal Party, which she was not elected to do, or she can offer a permanent tax cut on everything for everyone.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, some of us were concerned that the member was not going to get her stars because she was not using the slogans, but she caught it at the very end.

It is amazing. When we talk about housing, the gentleman she is sitting beside, the leader of the Conservative Party, was the worst minister of housing in history, well, at least since World War II anyway. Six homes is how many houses he built. Now the Conservatives say, “We got an idea. We're going to dump all over affordable housing”, and that is for sure.

How can the member say with a straight face that the accelerator fund is not doing anything to construct new homes? That is absolutely ridiculous. Does she not understand the principles of infrastructure?

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am glad that the member opposite is concerned about my career trajectory, but I am not going to take lessons from him.

What I will say is that, for $89 billion in an accelerator fund on housing, the government has doubled the price of a home in 10 years, doubled the price of rent and doubled the price of a mortgage everywhere right across the country. That is awesome.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Madam Speaker, we just learned that the Minister of Finance will finally present her economic statement on December 16. This will be the first time in the history of our country that the fall economic statement is presented so late. The government dragged its feet because it wants to avoid revealing that this Prime Minister is weak and has lost control of spending, deficits, taxes and the cost of living.

We have one message. We are asking for only one thing in this economic statement. We want the government to stop its inflationary spending that is driving up the cost of living, stop its job-killing tax hikes, stop putting Canadians in debt and stop threatening our social programs by making irresponsible decisions. That is what the Conservatives are asking for.

We rise today to call on the government to eliminate the taxes on houses and condos. The bulk of housing costs for Canadians are not incurred to pay carpenters, materials or land. It is the taxes and red tape from all three levels of government that increase housing costs and make it impossible for young people to purchase a home. That is why common-sense Conservatives will get rid of the GST on new homes and save Quebec families up to $50,000 when they buy a nice home.

This is where we differ from the other parties. They believe that the government should take the money and give it to next level of government, which would give it to yet another level of government, which would, in turn, give it to the bureaucrats, who, in the end, would approve the housing. We feel that there is a faster route between two points, and that is a straight line. That is why we propose putting the money straight into the pockets of homebuyers by lowering their taxes.

Based on the data published by the government about the GST exemption for rental property, we estimate that our proposed measure would help build 30,000 more homes per year. Lower taxes on housing means more home construction. This is the solution that will really deliver results for ordinary Canadians.

The part I am most proud of is that we will do away with the housing accelerator fund, because this program actually slows down the construction of housing. I am very proud to announce that we will eliminate this program and save the $8 billion the Liberal government is planning to pump into it, because this Liberal program will only increase bureaucracy and give more money to greedy politicians. I find it a bit pathetic that the Minister of Housing is calling mayors to tell them he has sent them big cheques. He is telling them they must send a letter asking for his program to remain in place, even though it has slowed down housing construction. Obviously, these politicians are agreeing to this because they want taxpayer money. Politicians want money, but we are not here to work for other politicians. We are here to work for taxpayers and for young people who want to buy a home.

That is why I will be very proud to cut these programs. That is not because these programs do not help. It would be incorrect to say that, because, in fact, the programs actually cause harm. Every time that bureaucracies receive money, the problem is not that they do not help. The problem is that they cause harm. Multi-layered bureaucracies prevent the building of new homes. We know this because, in the past 20 years, municipal revenues have ballooned twice as fast as inflation and population growth combined. If giving more money to municipalities was enough to speed up the construction of affordable homes, we would have the most affordable housing in the world. That is not the solution.

The solution is to get rid of the bureaucracy, cut taxes and leave money in the pockets of the people actually doing the building and buying the homes. That is what we intend to do by cutting the GST on new homes sold, which will help every Canadian family save up to $50,000.

We now learn that the Minister of Finance is finally going to introduce her fall economic update on December 16. She calls it a “fall update”. Santa Claus will already have been preparing to lift off from the North Pole and the snow will have been falling. The leaves have long disappeared into the earth, they have disintegrated and biodegraded because it has been so long since those leaves fell, yet we are waiting until December 16 because she wants to hide that the weak Prime Minister has lost control of deficits, spending and our economy. We will see if she keeps her solemn commitment to a $40-billion deficit or if that promise will also go by the wayside.

That is why we have only one request: stop, just stop, in the name of God. The Liberals can stop the inflationary spending, stop doubling debt and stop driving up taxes on starving Canadians. They can stop everything they are doing until we have a carbon tax election, at which time common-sense Conservatives can axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. Also, they can stop taxing new homes. That is why common-sense Conservatives are proposing to get rid of the GST on new homes to save up to $50,000 on a home for a young family trying to start out. After the Liberal government doubled the cost, it is the least we could do.

Liberals would rather have the money go to bureaucrats. They believe in trickle-down government. They take from the people and give it to one government, which gives it to another government that gives it to a third government that gives it to some bureaucrats. These bureaucrats, apparently, are going to start shuffling papers more quickly to eventually approve some homes. It is not that the housing accelerator program, which I plan, with delight, to get rid of, has not helped; it is that it has made the problem so much worse. When more money is given to bureaucrats, it is not that they do not do helpful things; it is that they stand in the way and cause even more harm.

One developer said just the other day, “Over the last 10 years, the list of application requirements has increased exponentially, and so has the number of bureaucrats looking at your application. And there’s often a pattern of staff waiting till the last day — say on Day 29 of 30 — they write back with a comment (pertaining to) something minor, which triggers another cycle. Imagine three or four such review cycles.”

The more of these bureaucrats, the more layers and the more delay. By getting rid of this program alone and doing nothing else, we will speed up housing construction. Yes, there will be greedy, fat-cat, big-city politicians who will whine and complain because they had expected to have that money to build their empires. My message to them is, “Go on whining and complaining because I am not here to build your empire. I am here to build homes for Canadians.”

That will be the choice in a housing tax election: either the NDP-Liberals, who fund local bureaucracies, or common-sense Conservatives, who axe the tax to build the homes.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Madam Speaker, as I say often, I am from the beautiful riding of Saint John—Rothesay, where the Leader of the Opposition has frequently visited recently. One thing I want to talk about is the pride I have in our programs, like the housing accelerator, the rapid housing initiative, the national housing co-investment fund, that have benefited my riding greatly. One thing that has certainly come to notice of late is the Leader of the Opposition calling mayors across this country “incompetent”, among other things.

Will the Leader of the Opposition stop calling mayors across this country incompetent? Is the mayor of my riding of Saint John incompetent?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Madam Speaker, I do not know the member's mayor, so I cannot comment on that, but I know that his mayor's MP is incompetent. We know that because since he became the MP, housing costs have doubled in Saint John. He was not able to get the Energy East pipeline approved. He squeals away that he does not like the carbon tax but then votes to quadruple that same tax. I do not know if that is duplicity or incompetence, but it is probably a combination of the two.

One mayor was complaining the other day. The mayor in Aurora said he wants me to give the GST from new homes to him. Can members imagine that? He said to do away with this idea of axing the GST on new homes and just give him the money. Every time someone buys a home in Aurora, the GST would go to the mayor instead.

If that was going to help build homes, it already would have. His revenues are up 192% while population growth and inflation have been 62% in the last 15 years. What has that done? It has driven up housing costs. We need less money for politicians and fewer taxes for home buyers.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Madam Speaker, I find it very sad that the Leader of the Opposition would stoop so low as take cheap shots at the Liberal member.

I would like to remind him that there is no proof that eliminating the 5% GST will reduce house prices. For example, since September 2023, there has been no GST on the construction of rental housing, and this has had no measurable impact on house prices.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Madam Speaker, he says that eliminating the GST on apartments has not yet reduced the cost of houses.

That is because houses are not apartments. There is a difference between an apartment and a house. Eliminating taxes on apartments is about reducing the cost of apartments. Eliminating the GST on houses is about reducing the cost of houses.

Does that help the member?

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, last week, the leader of the Conservative Party actually told on himself. He stood up and he called a picket line a rally for striking workers, and yet he cosplays as though he is a working-class hero.

My question to him is quite simple. Is the leader of the official opposition still adamant about turning back our labour laws and making Canada a right-to-work nation, or will he stand with New Democrats and force the Liberals to end the section 107 ministerial directions that undermine charter rights and privileges for unions and workers?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will answer the member's questions very directly. We are not going to be bringing in a right-to-work law.

The second question is whether we will stand with the New Democrats for unions. That is exactly what I am asking him to do today. We have a motion in the House of Commons today that condemns the government for robbing workers of the right to strike and votes non-confidence in the government that the NDP leader has said is greedy, corporate-driven and anti-worker.

We are ready to stand up today on that vote. The question is whether the NDP will stand by its own words, stand by workers, or will it sell out once again for the Prime Minister?

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Madam Speaker, I am glad we are having a debate on a substantive motion, and I will talk a little more about it. I will be splitting my time on this important issue with the hon. member for Kings—Hants.

I am glad we are having a debate on the substantive issue of how we build more homes in Canada. We have that challenge because of the fact that Canada is growing in size. We are at 40 million people, and it is a good thing that we are growing as a country. We have an aging population and we need to ensure that we have more young people who are working and are able to populate our country from coast to coast to coast.

However, that comes with challenges on the infrastructure. We obviously have to keep pace with the growing population. We have to build more homes. We have to build more roads and public transit. We need to ensure that the infrastructure necessary to serve these homes, like water and sewer and electricity, is there as well. Of course, all of it costs money and it takes time to build.

How we go about doing that is a really important question. That is what we are debating through this opposition day motion. I will put aside all the name-calling and the personal insults, which is beneath this place and beneath all of us. I want to give credit where credit is due. For the very first time, the Conservative Party, on this substantive issue, has put forward a policy idea. Whether we agree or disagree is obviously up to all of us. However, I am glad to see that the Conservatives have put forward the idea of eliminating GST from home purchases under a million dollars. This idea merits a debate, but from my perspective, it is really not going to help build more homes. Therefore, I will be voting against this motion, and I will lay out my reasons for that.

As I see it, what is being proposed is basically to cut 5% of the GST from all new homes that are being built at a million dollars or less. According to the Conservative math that would save about $5,000, but it does not create any incentive whatsoever to build more homes, whether they are homes are to own or to rent.

It definitely does not create any incentive whatsoever to build homes that are affordable for people who are not able to rent or own a home and who need some sort of subsidy or support to have a roof over their heads. That particular element is missing. In fact, what we have just heard from the Leader of the Opposition is that the Conservatives would cancel all existing programs, all kinds of existing supports and funding that would help build affordable homes across the country. In a very quick moment, I will speak to affordable housing that is being built in my community of Ottawa Centre alone.

The Conservative proposal would basically cut the GST and at the same time cut all programs that allow municipalities to build the necessary infrastructure like water, sewer and electricity, all those things that are necessary to then ensure that people can live in these homes. It is hard to make a house a home without plumbing or electricity. That is a very significant challenge. This is why we are seeing other levels of government, provinces and municipalities, which play a bigger role in building homes, opposing the Conservative idea. They do not support it because they see the challenges it would cause.

The Leader of the Opposition can make it all about how he does not want to support politicians creating empires, etc, but he, as we know, has no experience in building anything. When he was the minister of housing, I think he was able to build six affordable homes, and that is not a record of which to be extremely proud.

However, if we talk to mayors like here in the City of Ottawa, who are responsible for the rules and all the work that happens to build homes, they will tell me that a simple cut in the GST is not sufficient to build the kinds of homes we need. If it were sufficient, this idea would have been implemented some time ago. This it not to mention the hypocrisy we are seeing from the Conservatives.

The member from the Bloc mentioned earlier that when we as a government brought in getting rid of GST from purpose-built rentals, the Conservatives voted against that idea. Therefore, they cannot be speaking out of both sides of their mouths. On one hand, they thought that was not good enough, that we should not be cutting GST from purpose-built rental. Now they think that they have the best idea in place and that everybody should align behind it.

We are trying to do a mix of both those ideas. On one hand, we have cut GST from purpose-built rentals so that we can induce more building of rental properties, and we are seeing the result of that. We are seeing rent coming down across the country. At the same time, we are creating incentives for municipalities to build more homes, and that is the essence of the housing accelerator fund.

We have done two things through that fund.

First, we have been using the money to build more affordable housing in our communities and municipalities. We know that about 15 or 16 Conservative MPs have lobbied the Minister of Housing over time. I can give the full list, if anyone wants me to, but I do not want to take away from my important time. Those members have written letters to the Minister of Housing asking that money be given to their municipalities, because they need those dollars to build more affordable housing in their respective communities.

In Ottawa, for example, if we look at my community of Ottawa Centre, we see affordable housing being built at Rochester Heights, which is maybe a 10-minute drive from here. We are seeing a whole new village being build, the Gladstone Village. We are starting to develop it, and it is being supported through the housing accelerator fund. Most recently, we made an announcement at LeBreton Flats called Dream LeBreton Flats, with the Multifaith Housing Initiative, where affordable housing along with for-profit housing will be built.

In my riding alone, we are talking 1,000 affordable units that are starting to be built because of the housing accelerator fund. That would have not happened without the fund. These are homes for real people, people who can afford market rent and people who cannot afford market rent. These people will be able to call downtown Ottawa their home. However, that would have not have happened if we had not given $176 million to the City of Ottawa.

The second thing we are doing through the housing accelerator fund is saying to cities and municipalities that if they want that money, they need to change their rules to allow for more density. They need to get rid of rules that say, “Not in my backyard.” We need for them to allow for at least four units per lot, for example.

We are the federal government, so we do not have any authority. The provinces have the authority to change their planning acts. As the federal government, we do not have any authority to change municipal rules as to how much housing they should allow for. However, through the housing accelerator fund, we have created that incentive for municipalities to change the rules to allow for more density. That is exactly what we are seeing right now.

Not only are we able to build more affordable homes, but we there are for developers. Builders and developers like more density, so we have required municipalities to change their rules so that they can create and build more housing. That is smart policy. That is why the approach we have put forward is paying dividends. We are starting to see more housing starts as a result. We are starting to see more affordable housing being built as a result.

The solution that is being put forward is worthy of debate. I am glad that the Conservatives have finally put an idea together, but it will not solve the problem of housing. It is a great slogan. It is great for the Leader of the Opposition to give fiery speeches and do his really bad acting, and he needs to get some lessons, but it is will not build the kind of housing nor the magnitude of housing we need. For that reason, I will be voting against the motion.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I listened with interest to the comments of the parliamentary secretary. He told a much different story than what the Leader of the Opposition had to say. The Leader of the Opposition is being very accusatory, saying that bureaucracy and red tape at city halls are preventing building from occurring, and nobody is really denying that. He gave the example of a developer and a planning application being be reviewed and then reviewed again. Nobody is denying that.

We are saying that the housing accelerator fund is specifically designed. I know that in Kingston, the money that was given to the municipality was tied to reducing that red tape to ensure that more houses would get built quicker and to reduce exactly those kinds of problems that the Leader of the Opposition indicated.

I am wonder if the parliamentary secretary can provide some of his thoughts on that, and why it is so important. More important, over 15 Conservatives want this and have been advocating for this money for their ridings. Clearly, the Conservatives must see that it works. At least, the correspondence that they sent to the minister indicated that they thought the money would work for the intended purpose. Otherwise, why would they be asking for it?

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Kingston and the Islands is absolutely right, and he cited Kingston as an example. I can cite Ottawa as an example. In fact, the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Carleton, and I share the same city as home. I wonder whether he has spoken with our mayor, Mark Sutcliffe, about this issue and what the mayor's response would be. A very small part of the money that we have given is going toward streamlining the entire process for approving projects, which builders and developers want. They want a simpler process. We are able to use that money to create that incentive to change the bylaws to build more density, so not just one house goes up but up to four houses go up by default, as well as even higher density on bigger sites, so builders can leverage the infrastructure that is available. Then a larger proportion of that money is going toward building affordable housing.

That is the point. We are able to accomplish both. What the Leader of the Opposition would be doing, essentially, by cutting the GST only is raising the margin of profit for developers because they would not pass those savings to the consumers.

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Madam Speaker, I have two quick questions and a comment for the member opposite. He was expounding on the importance of the housing accelerator fund. It is supposed to be an equitable fund for all ridings across the country.

First, I would like the member to name one Conservative-held riding in Ontario that got a single penny of the housing accelerator fund. Second, because he thinks this is such a great fund, how many houses have been built in his riding with the housing accelerator fund?

My last point is a comment. The member mentioned that the Leader of the Opposition's proposal would save $5,000 on a million dollar house. Five per cent of $1 million is $50,000, not $5,000.

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I enjoy working with the member opposite, and I appreciate his public service. There are a lot of examples, and I can take him on a tour of my riding one of these weekends, if he likes. I mentioned Gladstone Village, which is right at Somerset and Preston. We can see that the cranes are up. That affordable housing is being build because of the housing accelerator fund.

We can go to Rochester Street and Gladstone Avenue by Adult High School and see housing being built. Phase 1 is already up and phase 2 is going up now. That is because of the housing accelerator fund. I can take the member to LeBreton Flats, just down the road. Two cranes are up right now and two towers are going up. That is called Dream LeBreton Flats, and Multifaith Housing Initiative is the not-for-profit housing provider. That is because of the housing accelerator fund.

If the member opposite would like, I can go through many other lists of actual housing, and I will get him a list of all the Conservative ridings that are benefiting from the housing accelerator fund as well.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Madam Speaker, the Conservatives are currently proposing to eliminate the goods and services tax, or GST, on the construction of new houses and condos. The question now becomes, will this actually do anything to address the skyrocketing demand for social housing?

The Liberal Party touts its various programs, including the housing accelerator fund and the public lands acquisition fund. Many programs are also available through the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. However, one of the problems with these programs is that the results are so hard to gauge because these things take such a long time and because, when the federal government does decide to invest, it attaches 56,000 conditions, even though housing falls under the jurisdiction of Quebec and its municipalities.

How can my colleague say that the Liberal government's strategies are more effective than a proposal like cutting the GST?

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will say that we have a big challenge right now in terms of building housing across this country, and we need all three orders of government working together.

The hon. member is absolutely right, of course. Rules around how housing is built, the actual housing, are a provincial and municipal issue, but we are working with provincial and municipal governments to create those incentives so that we can increase the supply to reduce the demand on housing.

[Kody Blois, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Madam Speaker, we are here today to discuss an opposition day motion from the Conservative Party in relation to housing. I welcome the opportunity to rise in this place and talk about the importance of housing, because this is a national conversation right now.

I want to give some context from my own riding of Kings—Hants. I was elected in 2019. I remember going to communities, particularly in rural parts of my riding, in Hants County and Kings County, and we would have conversations. We would knock on the door, and people would say they were worried that they would not be able to actually sell their home. It had been on the market for a year or two, and no one seemed to want to buy it.

Fortunately, that is no longer a problem in Nova Scotia, at least in the Annapolis Valley and in Hants County. There has been a growth and an interest from people who want to live in rural Nova Scotia and, I would say, also rural Atlantic Canada. Particularly during the height of the pandemic and afterward, we saw large migrations across Canada. People from Ontario and western Canada wanted to come live in Nova Scotia for the quality of life our communities offer. This is a very good thing because, for years, our province has been chasing, desiring and wanting to welcome newcomers.

It may sound like a very modest number, but we just eclipsed a million people about a year and a half ago in our province. This was a number that came after projections showed that our population was going to decrease. As Nova Scotians, we should be welcoming the fact that people want to live in our communities. I live in East Hants, one of the fastest-growing municipalities in Atlantic Canada.

At the same time, we need to make sure that we have the proper housing, infrastructure and social services to keep pace. This is what the conversation is about today. The Conservatives have put on the table a suggestion that the government should move forward with a GST cut for newbuild homes in the country up to a million dollars. I will be honest; in and of itself, that idea is not a terrible one. The catch is the fine print that the Conservatives do not put in the opposition day motion, which they have said outside this place. That is the way they would go about paying for that type of expenditure, which would be to cut the programs that are driving supply.

It is extremely important for Canadians at home to understand that, when we rob Peter to pay Paul, that is not getting us any further ahead. In fact, it is actually narrowing the portion of Canadians who could benefit from a housing initiative. I am one of the younger members of Parliament in the House. There are a lot of people in my age bracket who are looking to buy their first home, looking to get in and start a family. They may not be in a position to purchase a brand new, just-built home.

One thing I have not heard the Conservatives address so far in the debate is why we are going so narrow on just newly built homes. Why is this not an affordability measure that is extended all the way across? Why are they proposing to get rid of the programs that are increasing supply, which could help support this initiative in the first place? By stunting the ability to build the supply, they are narrowing the benefit they would even be offering as part of their public policy choice to Canadians.

First and foremost, the Conservatives have to be clear on why they are cutting the programs that are important for the supply that is needed. We have heard premiers and, frankly, all members of Parliament on all sides of the House say that we need more supply in this country. I agree. Why are we taking away the programs that are giving us just that?

This gives us an opportunity to examine the programs the government has put out. I am not the housing minister, but I would suggest that the government has four different cadres of initiatives. We have put out support directly to developers to build, whether that is in very low-cost financing for developers to be able to build either new homes or new rental units, or whether it is in money given directly to the provinces to support public housing.

Part of the reason we are in this situation is that, for 35 years, starting with the Chrétien government, there was an exodus of federal involvement in social and public housing. I have a lot of respect for Mr. Chrétien. His government was good for this country. However, it is the current government that has sought to actually return these things. These things do not turn around overnight. This is part of the reason we find ourselves in the situation that we do.

The third element is working directly with municipalities, whether that is providing the infrastructure needed for housing or putting money on the table that is tied to incentives. We have heard a lot that the Conservatives want to sit down and negotiate with the municipalities and withhold federal funding. On the positive side of the stick, that is exactly what the government is doing. It is sitting down with municipalities and putting in funding that is conditional on homes getting built in their local area. It is not pulling back federal funding if they do not hit a 15% target. I will get into more of what the member for Carleton's plan entails; experts have said that it would build less housing in this country, not more, and it is actually a very benign policy.

Finally, we are also working directly with the people who would buy the homes, primarily young Canadians, via the first home savings account. There are a number of initiatives to try to help support young Canadians in getting into a home, with ways they can save up tax-free to do just that.

What is the evidence of our plan working? In Nova Scotia, we have good news. In 2023, Nova Scotia had the most housing starts since 1940. I want to repeat that. By virtue of federal leadership on this file, our province of Nova Scotia had the most housing of the last 83 years. Even better news is that Nova Scotia is actually on pace to exceed that this year.

I can see concretely, in my own backyard, the work that the federal program is doing to increase supply. We know it cannot just be supply. Yes, that is important and that, in and of itself, will create more of an affordability context for Canadians, but we have targeted programs to actually help with affordable housing units. What the Conservative Party is offering my constituents is to cut the programs that are promising to help deliver almost 5,000 new housing units in Kings—Hants over the next decade.

The leader of the official opposition stands up and calls mayors incompetent. Does that extend to Mayor Dave Corkum in Kings County? Does that include the warden, Eleanor Roulston, in East Hants? Is he going to come into the place and tell her that she is incompetent? How about Mayor Abraham Zebian in Windsor-West Hants? Is he incompetent? How about his council? How about the Conservative candidate in Kings—Hants who was a municipal councillor? Is the leader of the official opposition suggesting that he is incompetent as well? I would like to know the answer on that because, of course, he was part of the Kings County council that welcomed the federal investment in housing to build more housing in Kings—Hants.

It is not constructive to have someone who wants to be the prime minister of this country going around trying to beat up every other level of government. That is not the type of leadership we should expect in this country. It is not the way we should be going about it.

I want to get to the leader's plan and talk about the ridiculousness of his plan. His private member's bill, which has been widely critiqued by housing advocates in this country as being ineffectual compared with the government programs, actually proposes that if municipalities do not build 15% more housing, then they do not get federal funds. There is irony in that.

We may have a municipality that is doing very well, working in a pro-development way to build new housing. Let us say it built 100 houses this year. Under the leader of the official opposition's program, if it did not build 115 next year, he would not give the municipality any federal money to help support the continued growth.

However, what if a municipality was perhaps underperforming, doing terribly and standing in the way? With the big bureaucracy that the leader screams against, if it built five houses, it would only have to build one more in order to get his 15% funding on the Government of Canada side. It makes absolutely no sense, and it is the result of policy and slogans being written on the back of a napkin. It is not good public policy.

I welcome a conversation on housing, as the member for Ottawa Centre said, but let us have a conversation about concrete ways to get out of this situation. It is not going to be by cutting programs that are helping to build more housing in this country. It is not by cutting programs that are helping with affordable housing units. The Conservatives suggest that they will cut funding to municipalities that, in many cases, need the critical infrastructure to build out. It is easy to say that we want to build a house, but if we do not have the waste water and water infrastructure to do it, it is not going to happen.