Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to speak to the NDP's motion.
It brings to my mind the two individuals who I have met who are the most committed to social, affordable housing. Those people are Claudette Bradshaw and Adam Vaughan. For reasons I will explain, the two are linked.
Claudette Bradshaw was the driving force for affordable housing in two Liberal governments. She had her SCPI program. She pushed and pushed to make it happen. It did happen. It had results until the NDP brought it down in 2005.
Now we have the new Claudette Bradshaw on the horizon, and I speak of Adam Vaughan, the Liberal candidate for Trinity—Spadina. Adam Vaughan is such an enthusiast for housing that he called me before he was even a candidate and lectured me, or educated me on the importance of housing. Last night I spoke to him, so I am able to impart to the House the wisdom of Adam Vaughan on the subject of housing.
I believe Adam Vaughan will be the new Claudette Bradshaw because I have every confidence that in the not too distant future, he will be pushing a new Liberal government, as an elected member, to do for housing what Claudette Bradshaw pushed an old Liberal government to do. With the force, the character and the argumentative skills of Adam Vaughan, I am convinced the Liberal Party and the Liberal government will carry this through.
I will quote what Adam Vaughan told me last night, “The NDP is more interested in building its party in the House than in building houses for people in need. That's their record”. That is a powerful statement. The NDP would prefer to build people in the House and its party than build houses for people in need. Adam Vaughan does not just say that out of the air; he has two very strong pieces of evidence.
The first piece of evidence is, as we all know, in 2005 when the Liberal government of Paul Martin produced a budget which had $480 million extra for housing, the NDP brought it down. Instead of getting $480 million for housing and so many billion dollars for affordable child care, we have had almost 10 years of the current Prime Minister, thanks to the NDP.
This is Adam Vaughan's second point, and it shows he has his finger on the pulse of Ontario that he would bring this to our attention.
More recently, the NDP members did it again. They brought down the Wynne government, including that budget. What was part of that budget? Money for housing, $80 million. They brought down the Martin government at a cost of $480 million for housing and they brought down the Wynne government at a cost of $80 million for housing. They bequeathed to Canada almost 10 years of the current Prime Minister, and I hope this will not be the case, but the consequence of their action could be that they bequeathed to Ontario some years of Mr. Hudak. I thank the NDP.
I would go so far as to say that the NDP record on housing is even worse than the Conservative record on housing. The Conservatives do not like affordable housing; they hate it. Just read their 2006 fiscal imbalance document. At least they put a few dollars into housing.
The NDP members have put nothing into housing because they have never been a government. They have produced a silly private member's bill and because it is a private member's bill, it spends no money either. On the positive side of the ledger for the NDP on housing it is zero. On the negative side of the ledger, it is minus $480 million at the federal level and $80 million more at the provincial level. Therefore, on the plus side they have zero and on the minus side they have a minus $560 million contribution to housing.
The Conservative record is pathetic but I would rather go for a few Conservative dollars than the NDP's minus $560 million for affordable housing.
Let me continue with a bit more on the wisdom of Adam Vaughan because he is truly passionate on this subject. I am convinced that the citizens of Trinity—Spadina would prefer a Liberal candidate who is passionate on housing rather than turn to the NDP, whose record is minus $560 million on housing.
He says that the “NDP is more interested in building its party in the House than in building houses for people in need. That's their record”. I repeat his comment because it is so wise. He also said that smart investments in housing reap major benefits in other areas. It is not just about helping the homeless as the NDP seems to believe, there are other benefits. He then gives three examples. This is straight out of the mouth of Adam Vaughan during my conversation last night.
First, he said that housing constructed near hospitals for nurses is a positive thing because it saves on traffic gridlock, which costs a lot of money and frustration, and it also strengthens the health care system. There are spillover benefits and Adam Vaughan has drawn them to the attention of the NDP and to all members of the House.
The second thing he said is that housing constructed for people with mental health problems and other substance abuse problems will be good for those people, but in addition it will save the government money that it would otherwise have to spend on health care and even social assistance, because if you put a roof over somebody's head you equip that person much better to deal with the future, even if that person has some mental challenges.
The third example he gives is that housing built for students on or near university campuses results in lower student debt, a healthier graduating student population but in addition it leaves a legacy of houses for future generations of students. It's not just a one-time thing. The houses don't get built one year and then disappear the next. They are there for many years to come to support future generations of students, to strengthen the middle class, and to strengthen equality of opportunity in building up our post-secondary education system.
I would recommend to the NDP, and more particularly I would recommend to the citizens of Trinity—Spadina, these wise words from our candidate Adam Vaughan, who not only sees through the negativity of the NDP historically on this record since 2005, but also has strong, sensible, vigorous ideas of his own. We can be sure that once he is a member of the Liberal caucus, housing will be even more on our agenda going forward than it is today.
Adam Vaughan would agree with us and even with the NDP that this business where the government lets these long-term mortgages run out and does nothing to support renters in need or support the co-op industry, is really a recipe for disaster, a recipe for many people becoming homeless. The Conservatives are totally responsible for that. We would urge them to change that misguided policy. It is for that reason that, perhaps principally, we in the Liberal Party will support today's motion by the New Democrats.