Debates of June 11th, 2025

Main Estimates and Supplementary Estimates (A), 2025-26

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has been clear that we will work with our allies to develop critical minerals in a way that benefits Canada.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Chair, can we just get real here?

Can the minister explain what is different between the 2022 critical minerals strategy and the 2025 critical minerals pathway of the current government, which cannot actually develop or produce mines in time nor be competitive with other countries? What actually is the difference, and why should Canadians believe the Liberals now?

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, under the bill, if we designate something as a project of national interest, which many critical minerals are likely to be, we would make sure the projects are approved within two years or less.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Chair, the minister said earlier, and kept trying to claim, that he does not approve projects, but his own bill says he does. Is that not true?

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I think what we said is that we do not pick the projects. As I explained, projects bubble up from consultations between the federal government, provincial government, indigenous peoples and most importantly—

[The Assistant Deputy Chair, Conservative, John Nater]

The hon. member.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Chair, the point is, as was exactly in that minister's answer, that he would pick the projects. It would be a select list from select leaders, and they would pick the projects of national interest. How would that give certainty and confidence to all project proponents and investors, including all of the projects stuck in their federal queue right now that they should fast-track?

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, the member seems to have the assumption that only one project of a kind will get picked. The whole premise of this is that, if there are multiple projects, like if there are multiple wind projects, if there are multiple transmission lines, if there are multiple—

[The Assistant Deputy Chair, Conservative, John Nater]

The hon. member.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Chair, I have asked the minister a number of questions about all the sectors in natural resources, so he does not need to patronize me.

Does he know which sectors have lost the most jobs since May?

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I think that is a question for the Minister of Jobs and Families.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Chair, I will give the minister one more chance. Does he know which sectors have lost the most jobs since May?

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I am not sure how that is relevant to the main estimates.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Chair, it is relevant because it was forestry, fishing, mining, quarrying, and oil and gas workers in Canada who lost the most jobs of any sectors in the entire Canadian economy since May last year and over the past last lost anti-development Liberal decade.

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I am very glad the members on the opposite side of the aisle are worried about jobs. They should help support the one Canadian economy act, so we can get building again and put people back to work.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Chair, as the minister was told before, jobs will be risked in all these sectors by Bill C-50. Since 2.7 million of those jobs are at risk, will the minister just tell us how many Canadians have to lose their jobs for him to consider the just transition, phasing out oil and gas in Canada, a success?

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, again, I disagree with the premise. The Sustainable Jobs Act will create jobs, not kill them.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Chair, the minister can disagree with the premise all he wants, but it is his own government memo that says 2.7 million livelihoods in construction, energy, transportation, agriculture and manufacturing will be lost because of that bill, which is on the books. What we have really seen here tonight is no details, no transparency, no plan and an admission, with the Liberals' own Bill C-5, that all of their anti-development bills are holding Canada back and killing Canadian jobs. They are driving projects away and driving half a trillion dollars into the U.S.

How can Canadians believe anything the Liberals say now?

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, in our consultations with premiers, indigenous peoples and proponents, they are excited about the one Canadian economy act. They are excited about the opportunity to build again quickly, at paces we have never done before. We really hope the member will support us in getting this act on the books.

[Karim Bardeesy, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry]

Mr. Chair, I am pleased to speak to the Housing, Infrastructure and Communities Canada estimates. I will put some questions to the minister at the end.

I am glad to have a group of colleagues here who are from ridings outside of Toronto. I want to tell them about my riding and the housing experiences and challenges we have and engage in a bit of dialogue and exploration around how the items in the estimates and some of the current government actions might support some of the housing challenges and opportunities.

I will start with one of the areas of my riding, which is in the name of the riding, Parkdale. Parkdale is just to the east of High Park. It is a destination for people who have arrived from all parts of the world, people in need who have found a community in that particular part of west Toronto.

Two weekends ago, I spent some time at 30 Springhurst, which is a building built in 1964. Springhurst Avenue, in fact, is an avenue that became developed because of a different development. Many people in this chamber would have travelled on the Gardiner Expressway. It resulted in the removal of a number of housing units in the old part of South Parkdale.

The city of Toronto in the early 1900s was a destination for lots of tourists. Members might be familiar with Sunnyside Pavilion, which still has a pool. There was a very old and large housing development in South Parkdale, and when we built the Gardiner Expressway, that neighbourhood was removed and we ended up building housing and rental housing farther up north of where the Gardiner Expressway was being built.

One of those buildings was 30 Springhurst Avenue. It goes by the name Edge Water Tower. I went to that building a few weeks ago because there is a group of tenants gathering to try to form a tenant group there for the first time. Edge Water Tower at 30 Springhurst is like a lot of buildings in Parkdale, in the High Park area and in west Toronto generally, where there are a lot of purpose-built rental buildings. It is a bit of an older building with good bones, but the stock is becoming a bit aged. The kinds of new buildings being built are not being built in the same way that the older buildings were built. We are seeing more of the smaller, single-unit condos and single-person condos. We are not seeing the kind of development needed for the population in the riding.

Recent census figures show that the population of the Parkdale part of our riding has actually gone down. The net number of constituents living in Parkdale has gone down. That is because not only are we not building enough purpose-built rentals, but the larger multi-residential units, the mansions that used to house the business class of the riding, which then became multi-unit residential, have been turned back into single-family homes. Therefore, the population of the Parkdale part of the riding is going down.

The tenants of 30 Springhurst were coming together to find ways to advocate for themselves, as we are seeing such a great spirit of tenant activity and, in fact, community activity all around Parkdale. We are seeing these buildings and are seeing folks in our riding looking for other residential options, other places to provide themselves with housing.

Another part of my riding is what we call High Park North, which is actually one of the most dense communities in Canada. People are probably familiar with High Park, a destination for baseball players, birders and people to check out the cherry blossoms. We are very blessed to have a number of buildings, a number of towers, again generally built in the postwar era, just north of High Park. There are about two dozen towers there on Mountview, Oakmount, Pacific, Quebec, Bloor West, Glen Lake and High Park Avenue. There is some new building happening there too.

We also have a blessing of different kinds of housing. We have purpose-built rentals, we have some Toronto community housing and we have some different kinds of ownership options there. However, again, we have needs developing in the riding, as they are in a lot of places in west Toronto, and we need a renewal of housing stock. This is generally an older housing stock, especially for families and for people who just need a place to stay, a place they can call home. We are also seeing, as we are seeing in lots of different parts of urban Canada, residents and constituents who have a complex set of health needs or other needs who need more attention.

I took the decision to stand for this riding and to help represent this community in order to represent the wide variety of people and the wide range of housing needs and the wide range of health care needs that people might have that can be supported through different kinds of housing. I am really pleased to report some of the things that are now happening in Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park, thanks to federal government investments. I know that the minister has some awareness of this because of the great work of my predecessor, Arif Virani.

I spoke to the different kinds of needs that my constituents have, and we have some needs. We have some residents who have complex health needs who need not only their housing supports but also a good place to live and other kinds of health care supports.

I want to point out two specific projects in my riding that are being supported by the rapid housing initiative. One is the 90 Dunn Avenue site, which has 51 rent-geared-to-income supportive housing units and a $14-million federal government investment, the first of its kind in Canada. It has a partnership between the University Health Network, the Fred Victor centre, United Way Greater Toronto and the city.

These are 51 lives, 51 families that are going to be changed by this project. This project is now built, and we have residents in that site at 90 Dunn.

We have the 11 Brock Avenue site, which is going to be under construction, with 42 rent-geared-to income supportive housing units, supported by $21.6 million in rapid housing funding. We have this work that is happening, that is being supported by the work shown in the estimates. That is making a real difference in Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park.

We also have other needs beyond supportive housing. We need that affordable housing, and we need the promise of home ownership, which we need to bring back to more Canadians, to more people, in particular in west Toronto. I am very pleased to hear about the “build Canada homes” initiative that will support development at scale, which Canada needs right now, using public lands, catalyzing a new national housing industry and providing significant financing to affordable home developers.

We have a vote, I believe, tomorrow. We are looking forward to hearing what is going to happen on the other side of the House. I know the residents in my riding, especially those first-time homebuyers in my riding, are very much looking forward to the prospect of the complete elimination of the GST for new homes up to $1 million and a cut for new homes between $1 and $1.5 million.

We did hear on the other side, earlier in the week, that one Conservative member thought that this should be available to all homebuyers, not just first-time buyers. I think that it is the responsible choice to limit it to first-time homebuyers. I am looking forward to seeing how that vote will go tomorrow.

The GST cuts also, again, support that affordable housing industry, ensuring purpose-built rentals, with GST off new rental buildings.

These are some of the initiatives that are in these estimates. I know that there are also initiatives that have agreements signed with provinces and municipalities under the housing accelerator fund, and they are expected to support the construction of more than 750,000 new homes over the next decade. I know that this is a result of what is in the estimates, but I think a lot of people on this side of the aisle and, really, Canadians across the country and people in my riding, are really excited about the prospect of the local jobs that are going to come from this housing construction activity.

I heard on the other side of the aisle, earlier this week, the comparison of modular housing with tents. I do not think that this is what we see. I am from a town where there was a proud history of people growing up in modular homes, in trailer homes, places that are decent places to live. We know that this can catalyze an industry and that can create jobs right here in Canada. I am very excited to hear about how that will roll out through the “build Canada homes” program.

I think the set of issues and initiatives that we see in the estimates, that we see in the work that has been done, is having an immediate impact in Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park.

I look forward to asking the minister for a few more details.

[The Assistant Deputy Chair, Conservative, John Nater]

It being 11:02 p.m., pursuant to order made earlier today, it is my duty to end the proceedings. The debate in committee of the whole will continue on the next designated day. The committee will now rise, and I will now leave the chair.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

The House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 11:02 p.m.)