Build Canada Homes Act

Bill C-20, Build Canada Homes Act · Time allocation motion · now law Where it stands

The House debated Bill C-20, which creates Build Canada Homes, a new Crown corporation to promote affordable housing and faster, factory-based construction methods, and moved a time-allocation motion limiting third reading to five more hours. The minister said Canada is in a housing crisis and the new agency is needed to build affordable, non-market homes faster, citing partnerships with Quebec, Nunavut, B.C. and New Brunswick. Conservatives opposed the bill, saying the government already has several federal housing agencies, that red tape and federal spending caused the housing crisis, and that housing belongs with provinces and municipalities; they also asked why the bill was being rushed and whether building codes could be simplified instead. A Bloc member raised higher construction and shipping costs in remote regions like Gaspé and asked whether funding would reflect those costs, which the minister said Build Canada Homes would have to account for. Some time also went to a dispute over unanswered emails between a Conservative member and the minister, and to a Liberal member’s point about Conservative requests for housing fund letters of support.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

3 statements

Alexis Deschênes, Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj

Bloc Québécois
“Building homes costs much more in remote areas like my riding. Will this new housing agency adjust its funding to match these higher costs? Right now, local projects are stopped because the budgets are based on cheaper city costs.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I want to take advantage of the minister’s presence here to tell him about what is happening in my riding, in the Gaspé region and in the Magdalen Islands. The cost to build housing is not the same across the board. In the Gaspé region, in particular, it often costs about 25% more because of the remote location and the fact that there is less competition. It is even worse in the Magdalen Islands because all the materials have to be brought in by ship. Here is my concern and my question for the minister. First, is he aware that the regions may have different construction costs? Second, will Build Canada Homes have the flexibility it needs in its support for housing projects in order to adapt to regional realities? Otherwise, what is happening right now is that projects in my riding are stalled because they cannot be completed within the budget, given that construction costs were based on cost estimates in urban areas.

Alexis Deschênes, Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj

Bloc Québécois
“The government wants to use factory-built homes to lower costs. But shipping the parts to rural areas like the Gaspé Peninsula is expensive, so it does not actually save money. I want to know if the government will account for these shipping costs in its housing plans.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I would like to continue the discussion with the minister. He mentioned prefabricated houses, and I am aware that both the Quebec and Canadian governments prefer them as a means of reducing costs. However, what we are seeing in the Gaspé Peninsula is that prefabricated components have to be shipped, and that poses a problem. I therefore ask that, when planning future programs, the government consider that prefabricated houses, if built in the city, will have to be shipped to the regions, which adds to the cost. So far, in the Gaspé Peninsula, we have determined that it does not actually work out to be any cheaper in the end. I would also like to mention the company Les Habitations Mont-Carleton, which is based in Matane and aims to become a Canadian leader. I think they have a bright future. Can the minister assure us that, even if the government makes a shift towards prefabricated housing, the cost of shipping the components will be taken into account?

Mario Beaulieu, La Pointe-de-l'Île

Bloc Québécois
“We will not vote against this bill because Quebec agreed to it. Still, the government should just send housing money directly to Quebec instead of creating a new agency to do work that existing agencies can already do.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I have a question that has already been asked, but I do not think the answer was adequate: Why replace existing bodies, such as the CMHC, that could very well have fulfilled the same role? Essentially, we are not going to oppose the bill since an agreement has been reached with the Government of Quebec, but it would have been much easier to simply transfer the money to Quebec.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 132

  1. Government Orders Build Canada Homes Act 34 statements
  2. Government Orders Government Orders 39 statements
  3. Oral Questions Rail Transportation 4 statements
  4. Oral Questions The Economy 7 statements
  5. Oral Questions Canadian Identity and Culture 6 statements
  6. Oral Questions The Economy 15 statements
  7. Oral Questions Oil and Gas Industry 4 statements
  8. Oral Questions The Economy 4 statements
  9. Oral Questions Steel and Aluminum Industry 4 statements
  10. Oral Questions International Trade 2 statements
  11. Oral Questions The Economy 10 statements
  12. Oral Questions Diversity and Inclusion 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions Public Safety 9 statements
  14. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  15. Oral Questions Agriculture and Agri-Food 2 statements
  16. Oral Questions International Trade 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions Health 2 statements
  18. Oral Questions Employment 8 statements
  19. Government Orders Build Canada Homes Act 45 statements
  20. Private Members' Business Corrections and Conditional Release Act 7 statements
  21. Government Orders Build Canada Homes Act 59 statements
  22. Government Orders Protecting Victims Act 106 statements
  23. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements