It was too good to be true. The Parliamentary Finance Committee had set aside a full hour on Thursday, June 9, to hear from three groups on housing. It would have allowed for ample questions and debate on how the NDP-revised budget would have affected affordable housing. But it was not to be. The Conservatives intervened time and time again with points of order that prevented the presentations from taking place.

Housing advocates took a clear message to Parliament Hill to politely ask that approval be given to the NDP-Liberal budget agreement and its $1.6 billion investment in desperately needed social housing and $100 million in energy retrofit funding for low income households which is long overdue. But, unfortunately, the Conservative members of the committee refused to allow advocates to speak.

The Canadian Housing and Renewal Association (CHRA), Canada’s national voice on housing issues, was joined by Quebec’s Front d’action populaire en réaménagement urbain (FRAPRU) in making a presentation to the House of Commons Finance Committee. The Committee is studying the two budget bills.

“Every single MP on that Committee, and in the House of Commons, represents people who lack safe, decent and affordable shelter,” said Joyce Potter, CHRA President. “We want them to take action on behalf of their constituents.”

Attending for CHRA, President Joyce Potter and Executive Director Sharon Chisholm were not given an opportunity to speak. François Giguère, President of FRAPRU was just able to get his opening comments articulated before being cut off by a point of order. However, he did say that Quebec had exhausted its funding under the current initiative and really needed the additional dollars promised in Bill C-48. By 12:20 p.m., Committee Chair, Massimo Pacetti, gave up on being able to hear witnesses and adjourned the committee.

It was interesting to see the increasing dissention between the Bloc Quebecois and the Conservatives as the committee debate unfolded. The BQ wanted to hear witnesses and the Conservatives did not. CHRA has been pushing to allow Parliament to do its work and approve its budget including the NDP amendment- Bill C-48. Parliament was clearly not doing its work on Thursday.

In terms of next steps, the members of the House of Commons will not get to vote on Bill 48 until they get a report back from the Parliamentary Finance Committee. This report is seen as advice to the House and the recommendations do not have to be followed.

Following are the comments that would have been brought to the Finance Committee.

CHRA presentation to parliamentary Finance Committee June 9, 2005

Thursday, June 9, 2005

Key Messages:

  • There are still 1.7 million Canadian households in need of adequate, affordable housing.
  • There are solutions in the form of housing developments ready to be put in place in each and every riding.

    • For example, in Victoria, a site at 408 Parry Street is ready for the development of 30 new Independent Living units for frail elderly and could begin construction by September 2005. The sponsor groups are bringing in excess of 25 per cent capital equity to the proposal.

    In Toronto, a project to be built by Daniels Group in East York will have 250 units of affordable housing for mother led families. It is stalled until funding is available.

    In St. John’s, Newfoundland, Stella Burry Community Services, the St John’s Status of Women Centre, and the Salvation Army are all actively considering new affordable housing developments that would be contingent on receiving federal affordable housing funding.

  • CHRA is joined by many other groups including: the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, the Co-operative Housing Federation of Canada, FRAPRU, the Federation of Municipalities, the National Anti-Poverty Organization, the Canadian Council on Social Development, the Anglican and United Churches who believe that affordable housing is the solution to building individual dignity, to giving every Canadian a fair start and access to employment and to building healthy and safe communities.
  • Massive cuts to housing programs in 1994 mean that we are ten years behind the demand for affordable housing.
  • Leading Canadian economists have told us that housing investment is good economic policy. Don Drummond, Senior Vice President and Chief Economist, TD Bank Financial Group and Charles Coffey Executive Vice President, RBC Financial Group are a few notable examples.
  • Housing is a pillar of competitive cities. In fact, houses are a form of infrastructure. They are durable physical structures that permit occupants to connect to necessary services. They determine the health, well-being, employability and even learning capacity of their occupants. Poor, overcrowded housing can lead to poor health and poor performance.
  • Low-income Canadian households are ready, projects are ready to go, and a new housing framework is ready to be launched. Let’s not miss this opportunity to move forward.

Quotes from Letters to the Parliamentary Finance Committee:

“I am a volunteer with my local Out of the Cold. From November to April, I am up at 5:30 a.m. once a week to cook breakfast for homeless people. I am also on our steering committee, and I should tell you that we are very much aware that we are taking the heat off government by providing rudimentary shelter for people who have no place to live. We have been discussing how much longer we’ll keep doing this – three years? We can’t keep doing it indefinitely. Sooner or later, government is going to have to pick up the ball. I urge you to do it sooner, by passing the NDP amendment to provide $1.6 billion for social housing. We need it.”
Elizabeth Block, Toronto

“Pass the budget so people can begin to rebuild their lives! Pass the budget so we can get beyond expensive band-aid solutions like shelters and food banks. Pass the budget so we can again live in a country that we can be proud of.”
Dr. Brian J. Walsh,
Christian Reformed Campus Minister, University of Toronto,
Adjunct Professor of Theology of Culture, Wycliffe College

Energy poverty in Canada is a growing concern. Funding promised for energy retrofits for low-income households is critically needed. In Ontario, for example, the lowest income quintile of households pays three times as much of their income (12 per cent) on energy than average income residents (four per cent). Energy efficiency retrofit programs would allow residents to have their housing assessed and make decisions for improvements that will save them money. Not only will these households become more self sufficient, but also greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced.

Quotes on the need for energy efficiency programs:

    Now, since it is our first full winter in the building we realize the heating (electricity) is very high. Our electrical rates increased by 10 per cent in July. I see subsidies for heat as not really a solution. They have to be reissued and re-re-issued … If the money was put into insulating and other needed work it would be a one time fix and the environment would benefit.
    Emma Rooney,
    Coordinator of Namasté Apartments,
    St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador,
    January 2004.

    The Aboriginal tradition is to honour and respect our environment. Protecting our rivers, forests and living places is a sacred trust. Today this includes the air we breathe and the atmosphere that surrounds Mother Earth. As housing providers, we must also ensure efficient and cost effective strategies are in place to keep rents low and modest for the families we house. Balancing our protection of Mother Earth with our mandate to provide families with truly affordable shelter must go hand-in-hand.
    George Devine,
    Executive Director,
    National Aboriginal Housing Association,
    Ottawa,
    January 2005

All politicians are aware of how unaffordable housing and poor neighbourhoods affect the lives of their constituents. Politicians in advanced economies are re-recognizing that poor homes and bad neighbourhoods result in less well-educated children, less healthy citizens, and generally more conditions which foster lower productivity. Today’s difficulties can become future opportunities when private money, public support and community energy are aligned to create better homes and stronger communities. Investing more in housing now means not just fairer outcomes but faster growth.