Build Canada Homes Act

Bill C-20, Build Canada Homes Act · Report stage · now law Where it stands

What the law does

The law establishes Build Canada Homes as a Crown corporation to develop affordable housing and promote efficient construction techniques. It sets out the corporation's powers and governance, and authorizes federal money to fund its operations. The federal cabinet can also transfer property and obligations from other Crown corporations to Build Canada Homes, and issue directives related to reorganizing Canada Lands Company Limited.

Official text (opens in a new tab)

34 statements

Connie Cody, Cambridge

Conservative
“The housing crisis has gotten much worse over the last 10 years under this government. Costs are up, shelters are full, and people have nowhere to go. The government is making announcements and creating more bureaucracy instead of actually building homes.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 44 of 100

    None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, Canadians are not living in the past. They are living through a housing crisis that has worsened dramatically over the past 10 years. Under the government, Canada has experienced rising costs, declining affordability and the most severe housing pressures we have seen in a generation. What once was a challenge has now become a full-blown housing catastrophe. The consequences are very real. Women are staying in dangerous situations because they have nowhere to go. Shelters are full. Providers in communities like mine are turning people away because there are simply no beds available. Those frontline organizations are not asking for more announcements or more studies or more excuses. They are asking for action. The reality is this. The government promised homes but delivered bureaucracy. Rebranding programs and making announcements does not build homes, and Canadians are paying the price.

Mario Simard, Jonquière

Bloc Québécois

Linked statement

“My party supports this bill, but I worry it makes housing funding too complicated. Housing projects in my riding were supposed to get money years ago, but they are still waiting because of this new agency. Creating this agency has caused more delays.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, the Bloc Québécois supports the bill, but I agree with my colleague that it adds another layer of complexity. My riding is home to some social housing projects that were supposed to be funded by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Now we are waiting for the funding, because the program has been deprioritized or sidelined by Build Canada Homes. As of today, we are still waiting for a response from Build Canada Homes regarding funding that was due years ago. There has already been a delay, and now a new structure is being added. The government appears to have rushed this process. I am wondering whether my colleague has any similar examples in her riding.

Connie Cody, Cambridge

Conservative
“We need to build twice as many homes to make housing affordable in Canada. This new agency will not build enough homes to fix the problem, and more families need shelter now than before.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 46 of 100

    None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, to restore housing affordability in Canada, we will have to double housing construction across the country, adding more than 200,000 units each year for the next decade. Build Canada Homes will hardly scratch the surface, building only a few thousand units a year at best. Since the inception of Build Canada Homes last September, demand for shelter space has risen dramatically, and the perceived accomplishments from Build Canada Homes have not offset any of the high rates of families seeking—

Elizabeth May, Saanich—Gulf Islands

Green
“I agree that homes should be places to live, not investments. We need to build homes and communities that give people a good life, not just homes to sell for profit. I want to know what the member thinks a government corporation can do to make people's lives better.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, there was so much I agreed with in the speech the member gave. She referred to the fact that we should look at homes as homes and not as investments. If I am not quoting her accurately, I am sure she can correct me. The concept that Greens also bring to this is that we are building homes and communities. We are not just building homes for market purposes. We need to meet the needs of communities and help people actually have a life with dignity. I wonder if the member has any comments on the approach between a Crown corporation, bricks and mortar, and what we can do to make people’s lives better.

Connie Cody, Cambridge

Conservative
“Housing has become much less affordable under this government. Shelters are full, and families and seniors cannot find places to live. We need to build more homes so people can live with dignity.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 46 of 100

    None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
  • A repeated line

    “After 11 years of the Liberal government.”

    Said 25 times by 19 members since April 30.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I do not disagree with the member. Seniors should be able to live out the rest of their life with dignity. After 10 years of the Liberal government, housing has become less, not more, affordable. What once was a crisis is now a catastrophe. We see the consequences every day. Shelters are at capacity. There are long wait-lists. Shelters are no place for anyone, families, children or seniors, to live. They cannot accommodate the overwhelming number of people seeking shelter. If we are looking for dignity, we have to build the homes for people to build their family and their life.

Michael Barrett, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes

Conservative
“Housing has gotten worse over the last 11 years under this government. Creating another government agency will not fix the problem or build more homes.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I wonder if my colleague could share her thoughts on what it tells us that, for the last 11 years, we have had the same Liberal government but the housing situation has not improved. In fact it has worsened, and the evidence of that is clear in my community and the communities of all members of this place. Why is another housing bureaucracy not the answer to getting homes built and getting dignity for Canadians?

Connie Cody, Cambridge

Conservative
“Our housing system is under serious strain. When there are not enough homes, vulnerable people like seniors and women leaving dangerous situations suffer first.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 47 of 100

    None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, it is true that we need to have greater dignity expectations. The examples I raised of seniors and women who tried to leave dangerous situations are not isolated cases. They are clear indicators of a system that is under serious strain. When housing supply is this tight, the people who feel it first are often the most vulnerable, and—

Marc Dalton, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge

Conservative
“I do not support this bill. It will not build homes. It just creates another expensive government agency. Under the Liberals, our economy is shrinking and home building has crashed. We should cut taxes and red tape for builders instead of adding more bureaucracy.”
  • A repeated line

    “Cut the GST on all new homes under $1.3 million.”

    Said 3 times by 3 members since June 5.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I was an MLA in British Columbia in the years coinciding with when the Conservatives were in power under former prime minister Stephen Harper. Those were the years when Canada, and more specifically B.C., was moving forward. Projects were getting built under a free enterprise provincial and federal government. In my riding, there is the Golden Ears Bridge, the Pitt River Bridge, the Port Mann Bridge and the expansion of the Trans-Canada Highway. The highway that used to go between Vancouver and Squamish was called the highway of death because of all the fatalities there. That was expanded. There is Kicking Horse Pass. The Olympics happened. There is the Canada Line, the convention centre and a new stadium, new hospitals and new schools. All throughout British Columbia there was tremendous progress, and I know that this was the same throughout the country. The New York Times, during that period, said that Canada had the richest middle class in the world. We had a dollar at par with the American dollar. I would talk to Americans and others visiting Canada and visiting Victoria, where I often was for my government work. They were amazed by the prosperity they saw in British Columbia and in Canada. Let us keep in mind that between 2007 and mid-2009, the world underwent the great global recession. It was the most severe economic and financial meltdown since the Great Depression in the late twenties and the thirties, impacting housing significantly. Canada weathered this storm very well, and we were number one in growth. Between 2006 and 2015, under Stephen Harper, there were two million housing starts in Canada, while the population growth was about 3.2 million. Using household sizes, those starts were enough to accommodate more people than the population during that period. Canada fared the best in the G7. We were a prosperous nation going from strength to strength. Fast-forward to 2026. After 11 long years under the Liberal government and under two Liberal prime ministers, we have gone from boom to gloom and from first to worst. There has been economic stagnation and decline under the Liberals. In three of the last four quarters, we have shrunk. We are in a recession. We are the only country in the G20 with an economy that is shrinking. The G20 includes nations such as Argentina, which was an economic basket case not so long ago; Australia; Brazil; China; France; Germany; India; Indonesia; Italy; Japan; Mexico, whose number one trading partner is the U.S., as it is for Canada; Russia; Saudi Arabia; South Africa; South Korea; Turkey; the United Kingdom and the United States. I know that the Liberals would like to blame the U.S. for all the problems Canada faces, but all these countries are impacted by U.S. tariffs, and some are in war zones. However, credit must be given where credit is deserved. The Liberals excel, get an A, for building bureaucracy, increasing red tape and doling out money to friends, family and themselves. Since I was elected to the House of Commons in 2019, it has been one scandal after another. We get numb after a while. The Conservatives had their scandals also. One lady, a cabinet minister, resigned for having a $16 glass of orange juice. The Prime Minister promised to double housing construction to half a million homes a year and to move at speeds we have not seen in generations. How has that turned out? More than one year in, the result is the exact opposite: fewer permits, fewer starts, and a housing crisis that keeps getting worse. For example, Toronto has experienced a major housing construction downturn, a crash. Starts are down more than 50% in the last three years. New condo sales in the GTA collapsed to 1,599 units in 2025, the lowest annual total in 35 years and 91% less than the 10-year average. However, this must be kept in context. Canada’s population has increased by 2.5 million people in the last three years alone, under the Liberals’ chaotic handling of immigration. Construction should be skyrocketing, not plummeting. The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation says that we need to build 480,000 homes a year for the next decade. We are expected to build only half of that this year and only 212,000 units by 2028. Meanwhile, 131,000 Canadians who used to work in construction are unemployed as of April, and half of home builders and contractors are reporting layoffs in the first quarter of this year. Maybe there is a strategy under this political madness. Maybe the intention is to make things so bad that when there is a change, and I think there was some positive news with the numbers today, the Liberals will blow the trumpets, bang on the drums and say how they have turned things around, how marvellous things have become. However, this is a fail. It is not a new day. It is not a new government. It is the same old, same old. Instead of a plan to build homes, the Liberals would deliver a fourth housing bureaucracy. Far from building at generational speeds, they have taken a year to introduce legislation that still builds no homes. Even when homes start getting built, the Parliamentary Budget Officer found, Build Canada Homes would add just 5,000 homes per year, 1% of what the Liberals promised. We can do the math on how much is being invested right there and what that equates to as far as cost per unit. It is more bureaucracy, more red tape and more cost. I recently held a round table with builders and developers. They are asking for less government in the homebuilding process, not more. Ever-increasing regulations are killing the market and driving up construction costs. Federal, provincial and municipal regulations and taxes are all adding costs, not just for the builder but also for the home purchaser. If we are to make housing affordable for Canadians, we need to cut the cost of building and to build more, faster. Bill C‑20 would not build, and it would not cut costs for builders. What would it do? It would build a fourth government bureaucracy. That is an F, for “fail”. I was a teacher. We can see the stats here very clearly. Canadians used to be able to buy their first home in their twenties or early thirties. Realtors in Vancouver tell me that it is now an anomaly for new homebuyers to purchase a place without getting significant financial help from their family. This is building a sharp divide in Canadian society between the haves and the have-nots. This is not good. It is becoming dependent upon generational wealth rather than on someone’s being able to make it on their own, even with a supposedly great salary. Conservatives have a plan: Cut the GST on all new homes under $1.3 million, saving families up to $65,000 and unleashing new building; tie federal infrastructure dollars to homebuilding, with municipalities having to permit at least 15% more homebuilding each year to get things done; cut development charges by 50%, because the number one cost of construction is all the regulations and permitting; and end the capital gains tax on reinvestments in new housing in Canada and unlock billions of dollars of investment in the country’s homebuilding sector. Canadians should be able to earn a strong paycheque in a thriving economy to buy an affordable home. It used to be this way, and it can be this way again.

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

Liberal
“The member is sharing false information about immigration. Immigration numbers actually went down in the last year. I want the member to apologize for giving wrong information.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, it is truly amazing how the Conservatives love to give misinformation, not only inside the chamber but outside the chamber also. I look at what the member just finished saying of the government in the last year. He was being critical of how we are doing the opposite, and then he used the example of immigration. He said the immigration numbers have gone up by 2.5 million in the last three years, and then he went on to blame the Prime Minister. In the last year, we have actually seen a decrease in immigration, yet the member tries to give the impression that the Prime Minister and this government have not stabilized the immigration issue. That is a sample of the misinformation that Conservatives pump out, day in and day out, inside and outside the chamber. Will the member apologize for providing misinformation once again?

Marc Dalton, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge

Conservative
“The Liberals brag about small changes, but their housing and immigration records are failures. The Conservatives built 2.5 million homes when the population was growing much slower.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 20 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 98 of 100

    Of this reply, 97% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I want to apologize for the fact that I will probably be too nice in my remarks to the Liberal member. This is madness, and it actually proves the point that the Liberals might see a slight change and then blow the horn about how wonderful they are. It has been a disaster, and now they are saying that immigration is down, but it is down from historic highs. The Liberals tweak it down just a little and say how great they are doing. They have made a total mess of things. Under the Conservatives, we built two and a half million homes during a time of population increase that was less than the increase over the past few years. I hold onto that F for failure for the Liberals.

Elizabeth May, Saanich—Gulf Islands

Green
“I want to make sure this bill actually gets homes built instead of just adding more government bureaucracy. I do not think the bill is a bad idea, but we need to deliver housing more efficiently.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Signal 15 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I find it discouraging, as I am sure many members do, when the debates get overly partisan. I did not find the hon. member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge to be particularly partisan in his comments. Also, in a weird show of solidarity with a former member, I would like to point out that poor Bev Oda has been vilified for years for something that was not her fault. It is her fault that she is addicted to smoking, and her staff put her in a non-smoking hotel. She asked to be moved, and she never bothered to check that, where she was moving to, it was impossible to order breakfast without getting a $16 glass of orange juice. There are many things about which Bev Oda and I disagreed, but I served at the same time as her, and we did share a love of dogs, so I will just put that out there. My concern with this bill, and I will agree with my hon. friend from Pitt Meadows, is the proposed creation of new bureaucracies on bureaucracies. I will address this when I get a chance in my speech, but it does not mean that the Build Canada Homes idea is a bad idea. How do we get more efficient delivery, from a speech and money and a commitment to actually getting Canadians homes?

Marc Dalton, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge

Conservative
“Private companies should build more homes instead of the government. The government creates bureaucracy and gives jobs to insiders instead of getting things done.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, how we do it is we move building more into the private sector, as opposed to keeping it in government hands and government bureaucracies, where it gives jobs to friendly insiders and goes nowhere. That is the problem. The government has just been building bureaucracy. It has become a disaster for Canada.

Yves Perron, Berthier—Maskinongé

Bloc Québécois
“This bill lets the new housing agency buy shares in housing companies. I worry that mixes up government and private roles. I want to know what my colleague thinks about that.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I would like my colleague to comment on something. We know that Build Canada Homes will be entitled to acquire shares in companies involved in public housing. It seems to me that the roles are getting mixed up. We have some reservations about this. I would like to know what my colleague thinks about this.

Marc Dalton, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge

Conservative
“Private companies have an important role to play. The government needs to remove regulations that hold Canadians and businesses back.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 48 of 100

    None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I did not hear my colleague’s question. If he is wondering if there is a role for private companies, the answer is yes. It is important. Canada needs to be unleashed. This is what is happening. Companies, individuals, Canadians are being held back, and they need to be unleashed from all these regulations.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 130

  1. Government Orders Build Canada Homes Act 34 statements
  2. Oral Questions The Economy 12 statements
  3. Oral Questions Canadian Identity and Culture 6 statements
  4. Oral Questions The Economy 14 statements
  5. Oral Questions The Economy 30 statements
  6. Oral Questions Artificial Intelligence 2 statements
  7. Oral Questions The Economy 4 statements
  8. Oral Questions Transportation 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  10. Oral Questions Agriculture and Agri-Food 2 statements
  11. Oral Questions Health 4 statements
  12. Oral Questions Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship 4 statements
  13. Government Orders Build Canada Homes Act 28 statements
  14. Private Members' Business Silver Alert National Framework Act 4 statements