House of Commons Hansard #132 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was affordable.

Topics

line drawing of robot

This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Instruction to Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security Conservative members move to split Bill C-22 into two parts to address government surveillance concerns effectively. Conservatives argue that splitting the bill would allow expedited passage of part 1 while providing necessary time to debate contentious provisions in part 2. Liberal members criticize the delay, characterizing Conservative tactics as an attempt to impede tougher crime measures and hinder law enforcement access to modern investigative tools. 4400 words, 1 hour.

Bill C‑20—Time Allocation Motion Members debate a time allocation motion for Bill C-20, which establishes "Build Canada Homes." Minister Gregor Robertson defends the new Crown corporation as essential for the housing crisis. Conservative MPs criticize creating a redundant housing agency without clear targets, while the Bloc Québécois requests flexibility for regions facing unique costs. The House then moves to a recorded vote. 4500 words, 30 minutes.

Build Canada Homes Act Third reading of Bill C-20. The bill proposes establishing Build Canada Homes as a Crown corporation to accelerate affordable housing delivery. Liberal members argue this necessary Crown corporation provides the autonomy and tools needed to increase housing supply. Conversely, Conservative MPs contend the legislation creates a fourth federal housing agency, arguing it imposes unnecessary bureaucracy without clear, measurable targets. Opposition members further claim the focus should remain on lowering construction costs rather than expanding federal administrative structures. 42100 words, 6 hours in 3 segments: 1 2 3.

Statements by Members

Question Period

The Conservatives condemn the government for causing a recession and failing the steel industry amid trade uncertainty. They highlight rising consumer bankruptcies and high rail project costs. Additionally, they call for limiting foreign workers to help unemployed youth and deporting IRGC-linked terrorists to protect the Persian community.
The Liberals highlight Canada’s economic growth, citing 88,000 new jobs and falling youth unemployment. They tout investments in high-speed rail and support for the steel industry against tariffs. They also emphasize affordability measures, cybersecurity legislation, the inadmissibility of IRGC officials, and funding for 2SLGBTQIA+ organizations.
The Bloc condemns the government for sacrificing Quebec culture and francophone identity to digital giants. They denounce selling out to foreign interests, oppose pro-oil stances and new pipelines, and urge passage of forced labour legislation.
The Greens condemn pesticide regulation rollbacks in Bill C-30, emphasizing threats to health and the environment.

Remarks by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry—Speaker's Ruling The Speaker rules on a question of privilege raised by the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, concluding that the dispute over economic data interpretations does not constitute a prima facie case of intentionally misleading the House. 600 words.

Corrections and Conditional Release Act Second reading of Bill C-232. The bill mandates that dangerous offenders and multi-murderers remain in maximum-security institutions. Conservative members argue these serious criminal offenders require strict confinement to ensure public safety and respect victims, whereas Liberals and the Bloc Québécois contend such policies undermine rehabilitation efforts and favor punitive measures over evidence-based correctional practices. 7600 words, 1 hour.

Protecting Victims Act Third reading of Bill C-16. The bill, titled "the protecting victims act" (/debates/2026/6/9/anthony-housefather-2/), aims to update the Criminal Code to address modern crimes, including coercive control and online child exploitation. While the government argues the legislation strengthens protections for children and victims of gender-based violence, the Conservative opposition has criticized the inclusion of a "safety valve" provision (clause 63, /debates/2026/6/9/larry-brock-3/) that allows judges to bypass mandatory minimum penalties, arguing it undermines accountability for serious offenses. 25500 words, 3 hours.

Adjournment Debate - Marine Transportation Gord Johns criticizes the inequitable federal funding for BC Ferries compared to Atlantic Canada, arguing for a new support model. Caroline Desrochers defends the current arrangements, emphasizing the federal government's existing indexed contributions and reaffirming that ferry operations remain, by agreement, a primary responsibility of the British Columbia provincial government. 1400 words, 10 minutes.

Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:35 p.m.

Conservative

Tamara Kronis Conservative Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Mr. Speaker, for his benefit, I would like to share with the member opposite what I am hearing on the ground.

We are also concerned about the fact that there are multiple bureaucracies already in place. We are very concerned about Build Canada Homes and making sure that it does not become another Ottawa-driven program that overlooks the builders and manufacturers already solving problems on the ground in communities such as mine.

We would like a commitment from the government that it will help and support practical, CSA-compliant, scalable solutions such as those found in our communities.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Conservative

Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB

Mr. Speaker, the Parliamentary Budget Officer put out a report commenting that the government was stripping away services to the vulnerable via housing benefits and social housing in order to fund another bureaucracy.

I wonder what the member thinks about the government taking money away from the most vulnerable to fund another bureaucracy that is going to produce, as the PBO says, only “a modest amount” of new housing.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Conservative

Tamara Kronis Conservative Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Mr. Speaker, that is a very timely question, because just last night in my community, our local city council was holding a special meeting about the need for sober housing specifically. All kinds of housing in our communities came up.

The provinces, especially provinces like mine, are really struggling in the context of this economy. Of course, this means that municipalities are struggling as well. If the government is going to allocate funds toward housing, it really needs to work harder to address those issues in communities like Nanaimo—Ladysmith and beyond.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Surrey Centre B.C.

Liberal

Randeep Sarai LiberalSecretary of State (International Development)

Mr. Speaker, the member from Nanaimo knows a lot of the issues that are particular to the island. Market housing works really well in places like Nanaimo, and can probably be the solution that she is expressing would be valid there, but urban markets with the missing middle are a challenging place. Regardless of the red tape and other things, it is very hard for builders and developers to develop there.

How does the member consider developers should be incentivized to build in those areas without a Build Canada Homes-like approach?

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Conservative

Tamara Kronis Conservative Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Mr. Speaker, if the member believes market housing is working well in Nanaimo, he really does not understand British Columbia. We are the missing middle. We have the missing market housing and the missing supportive housing. We are in the throes of an addictions crisis. Last night, we heard testimony about how hard it is for someone to resist the lures of addiction when they are down, homeless and sleeping on the street.

That question was an insult to my communities.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat disappointed by the response to that question, in the sense that, if we look at it, we have seen a great deal of emphasis on collaboration. We want to work collaboratively with municipalities, provinces, indigenous people and so forth.

Does the member not agree that working collaboratively is the best way to deal with the issue that is before us?

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Conservative

Tamara Kronis Conservative Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Mr. Speaker, the member from the other side goes back to the question before and suggests that I was being insulting, when someone was trying to tell me that my community does not need mid-market housing and below, and that we are just fine with market housing. I am sorry, but that is another member who does not understand what is going on in British Columbia or in my riding.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Surrey Centre B.C.

Liberal

Randeep Sarai LiberalSecretary of State (International Development)

Mr. Speaker, this is a great opportunity for me to rise in support of Bill C-20, the Build Canada Homes act.

The challenge before us is significant. Too many Canadians are struggling to find a home they can afford, and too many communities are facing housing shortages that continue to drive up costs. That is why our government launched Build Canada Homes in September 2025 with a clear mandate to build affordable homes, support builders with financing and encourage innovative construction methods using Canadian technology, workers and lumber. In just a few short months, Build Canada Homes has already begun advancing projects and establishing partnerships across the country.

Bill C-20 would build on that early progress by establishing Build Canada Homes as a Crown corporation, providing it with the operational autonomy and dedicated governance needed to scale up efforts to address Canada's housing crisis. By transitioning Build Canada Homes from a special operating agency to a Crown corporation, the legislation would strengthen its ability to deliver on its mandate at scale while maintaining accountability to Parliament and to Canadians.

All Canadians deserve an affordable place to call home. Housing is a fundamental need, and the growing demand for housing across the country requires urgent action, which means that this is about more than creating a new institution. It is about giving Build Canada Homes the tools it needs to build more homes more quickly.

As we consider the legislation before us today, it is worth revisiting exactly what Build Canada Homes was designed to achieve. Build Canada Homes was created to build and finance affordable housing at scale while helping to catalyze a more productive and innovative homebuilding industry. It makes it simpler and faster to get large-scale affordable housing projects off the ground, attracting public, private and philanthropic investment. thus maximizing impact.

Build Canada Homes does more than fund individual projects. It is a new way of doing business. Its goal is to unlock opportunities across the country by partnering with governments, builders, non-profits and investors to identify and scale high-impact housing solutions. It is also helping modernize Canada's homebuilding sector by supporting innovative approaches, including modern methods of construction. Build Canada Homes is helping create the conditions needed to build more homes more quickly and more efficiently.

This is particularly important at a time in Canada when Canada needs to significantly increase its housing supply. Build Canada Homes is helping build the capacity needed to meet that challenge. As a Crown corporation, Build Canada Homes would combine access to federal lands, development expertise and flexible financial tools under one roof.

It would work alongside non-profits, indigenous organizations and all orders of government to help move projects from concept to construction and to accelerate the delivery of affordable housing. It would also work in close partnership with developers, investors, manufacturers and housing providers focused on long-term affordability. This includes non-profits, co-operatives, community housing providers or organizations that promote a variety of housing options for Canadians.

These strategic partnerships would create homes that are affordable to a range of households across the income spectrum. These partnerships are about building capacity, supporting innovation and creating the conditions for more homes to be built across Canada, which is what makes the legislation before us today so important.

By establishing Build Canada Homes as a Crown corporation, Bill C-20 would provide the agency with the operational autonomy and governance structure needed to pursue its mission more effectively. It would also provide Build Canada Homes with the flexibility needed to hold assets, make investments and make long-term decisions that support the delivery of affordable housing. Together, these tools would strengthen its ability to deliver on its mandate and build more homes for Canadians. These are exactly the kinds of tools needed to increase housing supply and accelerate construction across the country.

Partnerships with provinces and territories are central to the success of Build Canada Homes. Whether through land financing, housing expertise or construction-ready projects, provinces and territories play a critical role in increasing housing supply and helping more homes get built.

Allow me to use my home province of British Columbia as an example. Build Canada Homes and BC Housing have partnered to deliver at least 1,100 homes, including supportive, transitional and affordable rental housing. This partnership will make use of standardized designs, Canadian-made prefabricated components and modern methods of construction to reduce costs, improve quality, shorten construction timelines and help increase housing construction at scale. These approaches demonstrate how innovation can play a critical role in addressing Canada's housing shortage.

This is only the first phase of a broader commitment between Canada and British Columbia. By aligning federal investment with construction-ready projects, Build Canada Homes is helping move projects from plans to shovels in the ground, while laying the foundation for thousands more homes in future phases. This is exactly the type of collaboration Build Canada Homes was created to support. It demonstrates how governments can work together to increase housing supply while helping to modernize the homebuilding sector.

Importantly, it also demonstrates the potential of Build Canada Homes as a national institution. In just a few short months, it has advanced projects and partnerships representing thousands of homes across the country. Bill C‑20 is about turning that early momentum into sustained long-term results. By establishing Build Canada Homes as a Crown corporation, we would be strengthening its ability to support more projects, deepen partnerships and help deliver more homes for Canadians.

However, that is not all. In addition to helping build more houses, Build Canada Homes is also helping build a stronger Canadian economy. By prioritizing projects and partnerships that invest in sustainable Canadian materials, strengthen Canadian supply chains and create good jobs through the homebuilding process, Build Canada Homes is helping advance the federal government's buy Canadian strategy. This means Canadian lumber, Canadian building materials, Canadian manufacturing and Canadian construction expertise.

Across the board, Build Canada Homes is helping ensure that public investments create economic benefits here at home. In a changing global economy, strengthening domestic capacity matters. Build Canada Homes is helping increase housing supply while supporting Canadian workers, Canadian businesses and Canadian innovation. The partnerships and projects already under way demonstrate what Build Canada Homes can achieve. Bill C‑20 is about scaling up what is already working. It is about building the partnerships, capacity and innovative construction approaches needed to deliver more homes for Canadians in the years ahead.

By establishing Build Canada Homes as a Crown corporation, the legislation would provide the governance, flexibility and financial capacity needed to build on that progress and to deliver on its mandate at a greater scale. It would allow Build Canada Homes to hold assets, make investments, deploy innovative financial tools and pursue long-term opportunities more effectively, while maintaining a clear accountability framework to Parliament and Canadians.

At a time when Canadians need more homes built more quickly and more affordably, Bill C‑20 would help ensure that Build Canada Homes has the tools it needs to deliver. I urge all members opposite to support it.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2026 / 12:50 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

Mr. Speaker, could the member who just delivered his speech explain to me and to the House why we need a third federal Crown corporation to do what he described it would do? Why can CMHC or Canada Lands Company not do these things?

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Liberal

Randeep Sarai Liberal Surrey Centre, BC

Mr. Speaker, I think this is a Crown corporation that would take a lot of federal lands, provincial lands and municipal lands and build quickly and efficiently. It would actually hold, in a lot of cases, those assets in the Crown corporation, and the revenue from that would hopefully help build more homes going forward. It would also help expedite a lot of the process.

I think it is much needed. Canada has tried many other things, and I think this is a time when more homes are needed more quickly. We need an agency like this that has the agility, the financial firepower and the power behind it to build these homes much more quickly.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Liberal

Louis Villeneuve Liberal Brome—Missisquoi, QC

Mr. Speaker, municipalities and community organizations are asking us for more tools to help them build affordable housing. Can my colleague explain how to create this new Crown corporation to meet those needs?

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Liberal

Randeep Sarai Liberal Surrey Centre, BC

Mr. Speaker, that is a great question, and I apologize for not being able to answer in French.

I think it gives, first, the financial tools. There is $13 billion seeded in it, so it has a lot of financial capability. It has the necessary vehicles, whether that is using CMHC or its own funding, the new building code with pre-approved designs, and encouraging modular design and working with modular providers. These are the types of tools that give it the assets and capabilities to move much more quickly and much more efficiently, and also to innovate in the industry in a time when sometimes the private sector is a little hesitant to do that. That is the ability it has, and as a Crown corporation, it would have more power than a special body.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC

Mr. Speaker, Quebec's Front d'action populaire en réaménagement urbain, or FRAPRU, has raised several concerns about the Build Canada Homes project, especially with regard to the high cost of so-called affordable housing that costs much more than the median housing price.

For example, the folks at FRAPRU note that many of the projects funded in Quebec include affordable and intermediate housing units that cost much more than the median market rent. The folks at FRAPRU fear that the most vulnerable people will be left behind if most of the funding is invested in building this type of housing. What they want is more investment in social housing.

What does my colleague have to say about that?

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:55 p.m.

Liberal

Randeep Sarai Liberal Surrey Centre, BC

Mr. Speaker, that is a great question. The affordability measurement is, I think, 30% of pre-tax income of a household, as a means of affordability. That is the test case, so it varies, obviously.

In areas where perhaps housing costs are lower, there might be less of a need for Build Canada Homes, but I think that in most cases, Canadians are feeling the pinch in having to pay a lot more than 30% of their monthly income toward housing. The goal is to build the type of housing for which people do not have to pay more than 30% of their household income.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:55 p.m.

Conservative

Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB

Mr. Speaker, I have a quote from Mike Moffatt, who is acknowledged as one of the leading experts on the housing crisis. He comments on the program, saying, “Canada has a substantial shortage of three-bedroom and larger homes, and the need for our cities to densify, [but this program's] prioritization of small, low-rise homes is a peculiar choice.”

Why is the government making a peculiar choice to help build the wrong type of houses, not what Canadians are looking for?

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:55 p.m.

Liberal

Randeep Sarai Liberal Surrey Centre, BC

Mr. Speaker, I would disagree with that. When Build Canada Homes makes its judgments, including for the 1,100 homes that are being built in British Columbia, it uses a varied metric of all types of housing, such as three-bedroom units in these buildings, two-bedroom, one-bedroom and accessible units. It is designed and built for a mosaic of the families that need them. If that needs to be adjusted, I would welcome the Conservatives' comments at committee to make sure that Build Canada Homes does that.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

12:55 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting. As we are here to discuss third reading of Bill C-20, the Build Canada Homes act, I have been sort of reflecting a bit. Of course, I have spoken on this issue a few times. I have spoken on housing many times in the House of Commons, in committee and certainly around the country. I guess it is no secret that I spent most of my adult life in local government, in municipal politics. I have sat in municipal council chambers and planning committee meetings, and I have also worked with a lot of local builders and understand the process they have to go through to get things approved.

During my time as a mayor, I devoted an awful lot of time trying to speed up processes, and when things got stalled about 10 years ago, I was part of the charge at our district council to cut development charges by 50%. We were thinking ahead back then. Now, of course, here we are still talking about the development charges in this country. I guess if there is one thing I would regret from my time there, it is that I did not change the systems well enough. I worked within them to keep things moving, but after I left, things slowed down again a bit, I think. It would have been good if I had done things to change the process.

If we fast-forward, we are now here in this place. I thought that, in a time of crisis, this place might work in such a way that we would see what the problems that created the crisis were and that we would work together to find a way to clear the bottlenecks that make it harder and more expensive to build homes.

However, if we look at Bill C-20 today, I have to say I find my patience is a little worn. We are in the middle of a housing crisis that is actively compounding. It is getting worse every single month for young families and young professionals. Interestingly enough, I think it is also getting worse for seniors. We probably do not talk enough about seniors and how the housing crisis affects them. If people cannot afford to buy, that means they cannot afford to get into the market, which means the market is not healthy. This means, for the people who were planning to use the equity built up in their home to help fund their retirement, if they cannot afford to sell, they are kind of trapped there. We need movement in this system. This is something that affects all generations, not just young people, but that is mostly who we talk about.

After all the debates and the discussion in this place, it is really frustrating that the government's response to this crisis of bureaucracy, pace, process and fees is the creation of a brand new, multi-billion-dollar federal bureaucracy called the Build Canada Homes corporation. For the record, I just want to make sure all Canadians know that I am not talking about a new agency. I am talking about the fourth federal housing agency. We are all familiar with the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation and the work it does. It was created right after the Second World War, and it did miraculous things by getting things out of the way and just getting things built. We solved that housing crisis then in about 10 years. We also have, of course, the Canada Lands Company, which was created and actually does development. It uses federal lands to develop. I hear the members opposite talking about how this Build Canada Homes agency is going to build on federal lands, even though there already is one doing that.

We are at a point of real crisis in our country on the housing file. I think people maybe thought that, when they elected this new Prime Minister, there was going to be some kind of shift from the past. They were promised this technocratic competence, a sort of practical delivery. We were told that we were going to get this economic mastermind. He has been the governor of a couple of banks, such as the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England. We thought we were going to get this leader who would move past the superficial politics of the past and bring this cold, hard managerial excellence to federal operations.

Instead, though, it has actually been a bit of a disappointment, a bit of an illusion, I would say. What we see now is the style over substance that we had with the previous government. I can give examples. The first one would be that, like clockwork, on Monday mornings, the Prime Minister puts on a nice, new, clean hard hat, puts on a fancy, brand new, high-visibility vest, and he goes out into the suburbs of Ottawa and stands in front of a housing construction project for a nice photo op.

I have to say that the Prime Minister looks like he is straight out of central casting. He looks really good in that get-up. It looks really exciting, because the image says that the Liberals are getting things done, that they are building. The staging is really immaculate. If members have not seen it, I encourage them to take a look. It is really good stuff. He holds these press conferences, but the interesting thing about press conferences, photo ops, talking points and bureaucracy is that they do not get homes built. They do not pour concrete. As it turns out, posing with a golden shovel does not get a roof over a family's head.

The hard truth is that, while the Prime Minister is out there modelling safety gear for his communications team, actual housing starts in this country, which we are studying at the human resources committee, are declining. They are declining at a time when the first federal housing Crown corporation, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, which does more research than anybody else on housing in this country, has reported that Canada needs to build between 430,000 and 480,000 homes per year just to reach affordability for all homes. We cannot even build 250,000 homes a year, and starts are declining. It is getting worse. This is what I find so incredibly frustrating. I think Canadians find it incredibly frustrating as well.

At committee we looked at the actual structural design of this bill and this agency. We asked housing experts to come and tell us what they thought, and they exposed the reality. Do not get me wrong. We brought in some of the sharpest minds on this. There were builders and experts. Dr. Mike Moffatt was mentioned, who is a well-known expert on this file. Of course, everyone is very polite at committee, because that is what we do. We are polite. However, when we strip away all the polite language and the niceties at committee, their collective verdict was actually kind of devastating. Maybe the Liberal members did not hear this, but I heard over and again that if it were up to them, they would never have created this fourth federal housing agency.

As it turns out, Canada does not suffer from a shortage of housing agencies. We already have the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. We have the Canada Lands Company, which develops on federal land. At the very time that Canada needs less government bureaucracy, costs, processes and painful work to get permission to build a house in this country, the government has responded with more bureaucracy. We saw the limits of this approach even with the launch of this thing. Everyone remembers, I am sure, when the Liberals proudly announcing the first six projects that were going to be done under the Build Canada Homes banner on federal lands. It was very exciting. It was evidence that they were hitting the ground running. Even before they turned it into a Crown corporation, it was an agency of the government. There were six new projects. It was so exciting. There was great fanfare. As it turns out, there were really good photo ops and staging. I will tell members that they really looked good. However, the truth is that those six projects they announced were already well under way by the second federal Crown corporation called the Canada Lands Company. It already had the land. It had already done a lot of the planning. Some of the units had already been built on some of these sites. They were presented as this proof that Build Canada Homes was going to develop faster on federal lands. Build Canada Homes did none of those things. What it did was adopt projects that were already years in the making and already well under way.

If the Liberals slap a new corporate logo on the side of a train that has left a station and is moving down the track and then claim they built the engine, that is ridiculous. It is rebranding. They have rebranded the Canada Lands Company projects and called them Build Canada Homes projects. We are supposed to celebrate that because apparently it is building more homes, when really all they have done is slapped a new logo on it.

If the Prime Minister really wanted to accelerate federal land development, he could expand the existing mandate of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, which is an agency that has broad legislative authority. In 2017, it was handed the bulk of the government's national housing strategy to deliver programs. It was not really used to delivering direct programs anymore, but it scaled up and got things going, and for years delivered on these various different programs.

However, instead of expanding the mandate or giving new directions to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation or the Canada Lands Company, which is already actively doing development, the Prime Minister has created a whole new parallel executive suite with new corporate rules.

It has been a year. The Liberal government has built no homes, yet here we are celebrating. Not only have we created a new agency, but now we are going to jam through a piece of legislation that turns that new agency into a federal Crown corporation, as I pointed out, the third federal Crown corporation. I still do not know why we are celebrating that. The truth is the failure goes even deeper than just the administrative burden of this new thing. Experts like Mike Moffatt told the HUMA committee that they would not have done this either. At the same time, one of the problems with what the government has created is that there is a staggering lack of any concrete targets, clear definitions or binding timelines.

Everybody should think about this for a second. This is a brand new fourth federal housing agency, the third new federal Crown corporation for housing. It has been given $13 billion and there are zero targets for how many units it is supposed to get done. The government says it is going to focus on non-market housing. I asked CMHC about this just the other day. It is the leading researcher on housing. CMHC told us how many units we need to get built in this country. It pointed out that 95% of housing in this country is market housing and 5% is non-market housing.

I asked CMHC about this. It is interesting. It does not seem to have any targets. I asked whether the government had had a conversation with CMHC or its research department about maybe what their targets should be. The president and CEO of CMHC said they had not had those discussions. I asked if CMHC had done any research to send the government some targets. I realize it has taken employees from CMHC, so now maybe CMHC does different things, but it still does research. Maybe it could advise on how many non-market housing units the country actually needs. It has not done that.

Of course, I asked the minister here, just moments ago, whether he had talked to CMHC and its research department about whether it had done any analysis of just how many units needed to be built.

Interestingly enough, the CEO of Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation made a comment about how he did not know what their target would be, but that they had a certain amount of money. I said, “Wait a second, this is just based on how much money they have. Shouldn't this be based on the need for non-market housing?” Colleagues may be surprised, but I did not really get an answer to that question because, of course, it is Build Canada Homes. It is the Prime Minister's baby. Everyone is very excited about it and we do not ask too many questions, even though we have a situation today where a housing crisis has been getting worse. The government's response is to create a fourth federal housing agency and give it $13 billion.

The minister stood here and said the goal is to get as many homes built as possible. Well, I do not find that very promising for Canadians, who are desperately hoping that one day maybe they might own a house. I look at all these pages down here. They are nice, bright, young people who may want to own a house one day. I worry about that.

All we get from the government is more platitudes and more billions of dollars, with no targets. How do we measure success if the government has no goals and sets no targets? It is classic. There is that vast research department there that has advised every agency, the industry, the banks and the government on housing data. The government does not want to talk to CMHC. It is not interested in that. It is not interested in setting targets.

In fact, the minister referred to a target for the Build Canada Homes corporation. He said it was just a random number. He did not like that. We got nothing. Obviously, he does not respect the work of CMHC and the research it does. I was talking about using those experts, who have done more analysis on the housing market in Canada than anybody, to help them come up with a number. Right now, we have this new agency. We are rushing through this bill because it needs to be a Crown corporation, because somehow that is going to make it better.

I have talked to private and non-profit builders across Canada who already have applications in to this Build Canada Homes apparatus. Interestingly enough, with CMHC, when they had this program, there was an apparatus where builders could follow their application online and see how they were doing. They could reach out to get information about the status of their application. Curiously, there is no such thing with Build Canada Homes, so builders are sitting there waiting and wondering what the status of their file is.

They do not know, really, what criteria will be used to adjudicate their file. They do not really know when a decision will be made. There is no way to track the progress. I have to say, as a former mayor who has dealt with this on the front lines, that this uncertainty, this lack of transparency, is a killer. It is a killer of housing development. That investment requires some level of certainty. When a builder does not know where their application stands in the process, capital sits idle. Land loans accumulate interest, because one has to borrow money for the land. Subcontractors cannot be booked.

By building an agency with no timelines, no targets and no tracking framework, the government has not just created yet another bureaucracy at a time when we need to reduce bureaucracy; it has actually fixed in place this paralysis by process. It has institutionalized the bureaucracy, and we just do not know when this process is going to be done.

Homes are built by builders, not by boards and certainly not by prime ministers and photo ops. The housing experts who came to our HUMA committee made it very clear that they would not have built this agency. The tools were there. They existed, and yet here we are. We have wasted an entire year, as the crisis gets worse, adding a fourth federal layer of bureaucracy and administration. It does not solve a crisis that is rooted in regulatory delays.

If we do not fix time, we do not fix costs. Bill C‑20 does not fix time. It simply creates an unaccountable gatekeeper and makes builders wait in the dark. I call it the illusion of competence. We do not need a government that acts like a public relations firm. We need a government that focuses on the quiet, very unglamorous work of clearing the path, eliminating regulatory friction and restoring basic administrative competence. We need to get out of the way of builders and stop subsidizing the bureaucracy.

If we stopped subsidizing and creating new agencies and new bureaucracies with billions of dollars, maybe then we would have the resources left over to invest in those important social and supportive housing needs that exist in our country. Maybe if we spent some time talking to the researchers, to get real data on what is needed in this country in terms of the number of social, supportive and non-market housing units, we could create some targets. We could have given the CMHC the tools it needed to make sure that this was happening.

Instead, we spent one year creating another bureaucracy, and here we are. The crisis is worse than ever, and the minister has the gall to stand in the House and say that the goal is to get as many built as possible. Liberals say not to worry and to just trust them, because it has only been 11 years and they have created strategies. They have another strategy they want to create for housing for young people specifically.

Canadians cannot live on strategies and proclamations and photo ops alone. They need homes. They need governments to stop getting in the way and to reduce the bureaucracy, the cost, the fees and the taxes.

This was an opportunity for the government. I thought that maybe this was a Prime Minister who understood the file and understood the issue, that we need to use federal dollars and leverage federal infrastructure investment to get results at the local level, working with provinces and working with cities to get the job done, and to get out of the way. There is absolutely none of that. All we have now is a fourth federal housing bureaucracy with $13 billion, and anyone's guess is as good as mine as to how many units are going to get built. It is a huge disappointment. It is the illusion of action, and Canadians cannot afford it anymore.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Liberal

Serge Cormier Liberal Acadie—Bathurst, NB

Mr. Speaker, my colleague said that he was a mayor before being an MP. There was a program that was very helpful for municipalities. It was the housing accelerator fund, just like the Build Canada Homes program. This is what their leader was telling them. This article says, “Conservative MPs frustrated after [their leader] bars them from promoting housing fund”. The Conservative leader “instructed Conservative MPs to stop advocating on behalf of municipalities in their ridings who want to obtain funds [for housing].”

The member said that he was a mayor. Was he one of the members who were told not to send a letter of support for a housing project in his municipality?

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

Mr. Speaker, the fundamental difference between that member and me is that I recognize the importance of getting things done. Conservatives have proposed all along that we use federal dollars as leverage to make sure that municipalities are getting the job done. I will acknowledge that, in reality, the housing accelerator fund has been useful in some small and rural communities that are already doing really good things. However, in larger centres, where the epicentre of the crisis is, like the GTA and Toronto or the Lower Mainland and Vancouver, in those areas, they have used that money and they have given billions of dollars to cities on promises that they will be better. It has been a failure. It has been another classic Liberal situation where they give a whole bunch of money to cities, have a photo op and pretend that homes get built. It did not work.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Bloc

Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague on his speech. Today's debate on Build Canada Homes has led me to reflect on why the government created this agency. The fact is that it did so because of the current housing crisis. What caused the housing crisis? It was the surge in immigration and the government's inability to control the situation. What we have is a pyromaniac federal government that decided to masquerade as a firefighter through new programs.

What goes through my colleague's head when he sees that? Instead of admitting that it royally failed and then fixing things, the government chooses to constantly create new programs even though no one knows whether they will work or not.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

Mr. Speaker, I completely agree with my colleague that this is a crisis, in many ways created by the current government. It has been building for years, I grant the Liberals that, but their solutions are, in fact, what the member said: They are building new bureaucracies, creating new agencies, and they give money out based on promises from cities that they will be better. As a case in point, the City of Toronto got the most money of anyone in the housing accelerator fund, $471 million. The Liberals gave it the money and made the deal, and then the City of Toronto, immediately after the ink was dry on that deal, raised its development charges by 40%.

Do the Liberals not understand that rising costs make it less affordable and harder to buy a home? They did not get it, and they still do not get it. They are creating more bureaucracy. They are handing money with photo ops, and it is not getting the job done. They are completely ignoring that they are now a big part of the problem.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Conservative

Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals campaigned on reducing municipal fees. In fact, I quote from their campaign: They said they would be “cutting municipal development charges in half”.

CMHC just recently came out with a report warning of a very significant barrier to building housing, caused by high municipal development fees. The government has not, in fact, even approached reducing or started to reduce municipal fees. I wonder if my colleague could comment on this Liberal broken promise and how it is not helping Canadians in getting the houses they need.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

Mr. Speaker, my colleague always has incredibly insightful questions. That is a very good point.

In fact, what has happened with respect to development charges is that the federal government and the provincial government, in Ontario only, have come up with a program to reduce development charges, but not to reduce them unless the local municipality applies to the program. A local municipality can say, “Yes, we are good; we like our development charges at $100,000 a lot”, and that means nothing happens. Those development charges stay high and no results happen. It is all based on whether the municipality agrees to reduce its development charges.

Conversely, the Conservative plan would be to leverage municipalities to reduce their fees, and to assist them, absolutely, with the costs of housing-enabling infrastructure, but it would be based on results, not on hopes of things getting better.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Trois-Rivières Québec

Liberal

Caroline Desrochers LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure

Mr. Speaker, I really enjoyed working with my colleague on Bill C‑20 at the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. He asked good questions. We really felt that he truly wanted to understand.

After listening to him today, however, I have to wonder whether we were on the same committee or heard from the same witnesses.

I find the premise of the member's speech a bit disingenuous. We heard the committee witnesses, including promoters and developers, talk about how BCH would help, because increasing the number of affordable homes would ease the pressure on the market. We heard, including from the head of CMHC, about how BCH and CMHC are collaborating and how their work is complementary. Most important, the CMHC CEO said that while CMHC does have the legislative mandate to do some of the work that BCH will be doing, it is not set up for it. It would take it quite some time to ramp up to get to that point. I am just wondering if my colleague can really stand here today and say that none of these things were heard at committee.

Bill C-20 Third ReadingBuild Canada Homes ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

Mr. Speaker, I want to say that I am a big fan of that member. We have done some great work together. However, I think she has been afflicted with a very common Liberal problem where she heard what she wanted to hear.

There is no question that builders and developers said they would use Build Canada Homes and work with it, that they have to work with the cards they are dealt by this federal government and they are going to work with them. They also said they would not have created this agency if it were up to them. They did say those words. The fact is that all the member heard was that they love Build Canada Homes, they want to work with it and they want to do these things.

I also heard the president and CEO of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation say that it was not set up to do the work that Build Canada Homes is now going to do. The interesting thing about this is that, in 2017, when the then federal Liberal government created the national housing strategy, the CMHC was not set up to deliver that either, but it scaled up and did it. This is what is so perplexing about this Liberal plan. They gave the housing project to CMHC in 2017, which scaled up, but now all of a sudden it is incapable of scaling up to deliver this stuff. I do not know why we have a fourth federal housing bureaucracy.