Kevin Lamoureux

In response to a question from Bardish Chagger

“I want this bill to pass. It will help us build more homes in new ways, like modular housing. The Conservatives are wrong to try to stop it.”

“Mr. Speaker, when I think of the residents of London—Fanshawe, much as I do for many different constituencies, I think about how Bill C-20 would make a positive difference. It is not an issue of just blindly following the Conservative leadership, even because they are so wrong on this issue. Build Canada Homes is about looking at different ways we can build, such as modular homes. There are ways we can look at how, by working with the stakeholders, we are going to have more homes being built. There are the constituents for whom the member wants more homes to be built. The national government is showing compassion and moving in that direction. His very leader is saying to stop. In fact, the member for Waterloo might have gotten him in trouble by signalling that the member is someone who might be somewhat sympathetic to his constituents’ needs.”

In response to a question from Kurt Holman

“Our government is making housing more affordable. In our first year, home prices and rents have gone down, and more homes are being built.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member can indicate the following very clearly, because the numbers and the facts clearly demonstrate it. Just over a year ago, Canadians elected a new Prime Minister with incredible credentials on the economy and how it works. There have been positive results on the housing file. Houses have become more affordable; they have dropped in price. Rents overall have dropped in price. The government has been working collaboratively with the different jurisdictions, and the housing stock is in fact increasing. The affordability issue is also being addressed in different ways. Within a year, our new government and the new Prime Minister have already made a positive difference, and I am optimistic about the future and being able to hit the targets that have been established.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

In response to a question from Bardish Chagger

“Conservative leaders told their own members to stop writing letters supporting local housing projects because they think the federal government should not help with housing. We believe the federal government should work with communities to build more affordable homes.”

“Mr. Speaker, I guess I would break it down into a couple of things. One is the House leadership of the Conservative Party today, which, I would suggest, very much has that get-out-of-the-way, far-right attitude. That is the group that was very critical of the more progressive Conservatives within the caucus. They are much smaller in number but are the ones who really see the value and are the ones who were actually writing letters to the government saying that they supported the project and wanted it. They were reprimanded. They were told to stop writing support letters for their community. This came from the Conservative House leadership team, or the leadership team as a whole, and many of the members who, I would suggest, are on the far-right scale of thinking that the federal government has absolutely no role to play in regard to housing. Contrast that with the beginning of the question that my friend from Waterloo posed. She highlighted how important housing is to the city of Waterloo, and she is a consistent advocate for Waterloo, not only on housing but on a wide spectrum of issues. She is advocating for Waterloo and sees the value of working collaboratively, and that is exactly what the federal government is doing, because we understand that the end goal is to increase Canada’s housing stock, especially on the affordability front.”

• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 44 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 →

In response to a question from Dan Muys

“That question is off-topic. We are working with Quebec on this major project. Conservatives supported it in the past, even under Stephen Harper, but today's Conservatives are not telling the truth about it.”

“Mr. Speaker, I can appreciate the question, I guess, to a certain degree. It is completely off‑topic. However, when we take a look at what is being proposed and what the government is pushing as a major project, working with the Province of Quebec in a collaborative fashion, this is a project that has received support from Progressive Conservatives. It has also received support from Conservatives. The member will find that, in previous governments, under the Harper regime, there were members of Parliament in the Conservative caucus who actually supported the project and who were in opposition to what today’s far-right Conservative Party is saying. The Conservatives are trying to portray something that is not the case. Hopefully, we will hear a lot more on this project in the days to come.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 45 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“I support this bill because the federal government needs to help build affordable housing. Past governments stopped helping, and that made the housing problem worse. This bill creates a new corporation to build more homes and help co-ops and non-profits.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise and share some thoughts on important issues that Canadians have to face, and hopefully give an explanation as to where I am coming from and why it is very important that the Government of Canada continues to push forward on building opportunities to see more people being able to afford homes and ultimately more homes being built here in Canada. A number of years ago, when I was first elected to the Manitoba legislature, my first responsibility was tied to being the critic for housing and the deputy party whip at the time. It was something that I appreciated being a part of, because it gave me a very good understanding of the housing industry back then. I have never lost interest, and in fact I have had many debates over the years on the issue of housing. When I came to Ottawa, I continued to have discussions and debates on the important issue of housing. From the very beginning, I have always recognized that the national government does, and should, have a role to play in housing in Canada. This has been an issue for a period of time. The minister made reference earlier, in response to a heckle and comments that were coming from the opposition benches, to the fact that the issue we have before us today is not something that just came out of the blue. What we have is an issue that has been there and has taken more than a generation to get to this point. There was a time, in the early 1990s, even going into the 1980s, when governments of different political persuasions and levels were talking about the national government withdrawing from housing responsibility. In part, we are realizing why the national government needs to not only be engaged but demonstrate leadership on this critically important file. When we think of housing, it affects all of our communities. Not only does it impact homeowners and future homeowners, but it affects the community. Whether it is about growth or, in some cases, infill housing projects, it could have a very negative impact if the national government is not directly involved. I have seen that involvement in a very real and tangible way. Let us take a look, for example, at what Habitat for Humanity Canada does in our communities. I represent a riding that has likely benefited the most, or is one of the top five or 10 ridings that have benefited the most, through Habitat for Humanity making housing affordable. In Winnipeg North, I would estimate that well over 100 homes, which is 100 families, have benefited from one incredible non-profit organization, just focused in one federal riding. Everywhere, from the Point Douglas area to Shaughnessy Park, The Maples and into the suburbs, Habitat for Humanity has helped build homes that individuals living in them otherwise would not be able to afford. It has made homes affordable. Today we have a government that recognizes that and supports Habitat for Humanity. I would hope that this support continues into the future. I think of revitalization programs from the past where governments were working together to establish a pool of money so they could refurbish housing stock, and in some situations, such as the promotion of housing co-ops, see co-ops being built. Before I was a parliamentarian, I used to be involved in the Weston Residents Housing Cooperative, and we were able to build affordable housing. We very much needed the support of government. At that time, it was the provincial government that provided the support, but today we have not seen much in terms of the expansion of housing co-ops. However, under this Prime Minister and this administration, the Build Canada Homes act would, once again, provide support for housing co-ops. Housing co-ops play a very important role. Again, looking at Winnipeg North, I think of Willow Park, arguably the oldest and most established housing co-op in Canada, possibly even in North America. That community has benefited because of direct government involvement. Direct government involvement takes many different forms. I referred to housing co-ops. I can talk about infill housing, directly or indirectly, but I would also suggest non-profit housing built by government. Back in the day, maybe 25 years ago, I would see affordable government-built homes, and tenants living in those homes were paying less than 30% of their annual income, no matter what their annual income was. Affordable homes are built because there are many generational issues at times. Individuals find it difficult for a wide spectrum of reasons and are very dependent on government-built homes. Many organizations in Winnipeg North, from the Ukrainian community, the German community or the Polish community, have built homes. When I say “homes”, I am referring to apartment blocks. The Canadian Polish Manor has a dozen-plus floors. It is the same with the Canadian German Society Manor that was established. The Ukrainian community has built a few of them. Even though they might not necessarily have the management of them today, or not in all cases, these homes were built, in part, with federal dollars. They provide homes for seniors. Seniors who live in the community and maybe have children who are grown up or a spouse who passed away often want to stay in the community. Often, these buildings that are built by communities and non-profits are there to support and provide that home so seniors can get out of a single detached home and into a different home environment. There have been all sorts of programs over the years to support affordable housing. There were a number of years when that virtually came to an end because governments at different levels made the decision to withdraw. We saw it, I would argue, during the peak of the Harper era. That is why I referred to the leader of the Conservative Party, when he was minister of housing, and I reflected on the number of non-profit housing units that were actually built when he was responsible for housing. It was fewer than 10. Then we wonder why we have this issue today. It is not something that occurred overnight. I like that the issue was elevated to the degree that, during the last national election, just over a year ago, Canada’s Prime Minister made the decision to be more aggressive in supporting our communities and Canadians by making housing more affordable. That has taken different forms. We know that the price of housing has actually gone down since the last election. We know that the cost of rentals has actually gone down. We also know that the Prime Minister and the government today have put in place specific actions to look at ways to increase housing, both the stock and, where we can, the housing conditions overall, through different types of programs. When we take a look at Build Canada Homes, we think of it in the form of an arms-length corporation that is being funded to the tune of $13 billion, which has already been allocated in the 2025 budget. It is going to ensure that there is more affordable housing across our nation from coast to coast to coast. It is showing that the Government of Canada is working collaboratively with the different stakeholders and our provinces to ensure that we can maximize the benefit of housing. I would be interested in hearing from the Conservative Party today. Is there anyone in the Conservative Party today who believes there is a role for the national government to play on housing? To date, I have heard that, no, there is no role. I would very much appreciate hearing from any Conservative who can stand up and say that, yes, there is a role for the national government.”

“I want the House to pass this bill to create a new agency that builds affordable homes. The federal government has a role to play in housing, and cities need our help to build more homes. The Conservatives are wrong to say Ottawa should do nothing.”

“Mr. Speaker, I want to give my very best to my friend and colleague in his future endeavours, whatever they might be, and I want to acknowledge his family, staff and friends, who I am sure are very sorry to see him go. Others will get a bit more time with a loved one. Having said that, I want to get right into the discussions and talk about some of the things I heard coming from the Conservative Party today. I often talk about how the Conservatives like to mislead Canadians. Today, again, we are getting a good sample of that. I believe the Conservative critic for housing is a former mayor. He can correct me if I am wrong. He stood in his place and said, in essence, that municipalities do not require, need or want any sort of assistance in dealing with bureaucracy and reducing the cost of planning. The individual should go and visit some municipalities, and I would really encourage members opposite to do likewise. Some of them have. I can recall a letter campaign that went around among a number of the Conservative MPs, in which they were asking for financial support. If we take a look at it, the city of Winnipeg has benefited immensely from national policies dealing with housing. I am thinking about the accelerator fund. If we talk to the mayor and the city councillors, we will find that there was wide support for that program, and as a direct result, hundreds of homes have been built. To say, as the Conservative Party consistently does, that the national government should just get out of the way and it does not have a role to play in housing, is misguided at best. Ultimately, it is potentially threatening, if we think about how the Conservatives might ever again take the reins of power, especially the far-right Conservatives we see day in and day out here on the floor of the House of Commons. Today’s Conservative Party would never have supported things like the CMHC, which has been around for generations, provided stability within our mortgage regime and enabled millions of Canadians to acquire the finances that are necessary in order to be a homeowner. I question where the Conservative right and its policies are today. Its members have made it very clear that they do not support Bill C‑20. Imagine my shock. I am not shocked. I can tell the House that, at the end of the day, the Conservative Party is once again making a mistake by not realizing the difference between, let us say, the CMHC and Canada Lands and what we are proposing within the Build Canada Homes legislation. Arnold Viersen: We know the difference. Hon. Kevin Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, no, they do not really know the difference. At least, they have not demonstrated that they do, because they constantly stand up and ask what the difference is. They do not understand it. Mr. Speaker, I am sure you understand it, but the Conservative Party does not understand it. At least, the candidates who have stood up obviously do not understand it, because if they did, they would see the value in having this legislation passed. Build Canada Homes has the potential to do a wide variety of things, which the Conservative Party should recognize, given the time. The fundamental difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives on this issue is that we, the vast majority of Canadians and all provinces and territories, because they participate in the federal programs, recognize that the national government has a role to play in housing. This should be indisputable. We would think the Conservatives would understand and appreciate it. I am not surprised, because if we take a look at it, when the Leader of the Conservative Party was the minister responsible for housing in Canada, he built six houses. I do not know where they are, but apparently he built six homes; not him personally, but apparently, his department. Is that any shock? I do not think so, given what the Conservatives are saying today. If they were to listen to what their communities are saying and wanted to add value to the housing stock, or if they were to take a look at what this government, and particularly the Prime Minister, said as a part of our election platform to deal with the issues of affordability, which includes housing, they would see results. One year later, housing and rental prices have gone down. We have a government that is aggressively pushing the expansion of our housing market. Meanwhile, we see the Conservatives saying, “Get out of the way.” I do not understand how they believe that affordable housing is going to appear out of nowhere. An hon. member: That is a solution. Hon. Kevin Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, no, that is not a solution; it is a dumb idea being promoted by Conservative members. At the end of the day, a vast majority of Canadians recognize—”

“We want to work together with cities, provinces, and Indigenous peoples. Does the member agree that working together is the best way to solve this problem?”

“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?”

“I agree that this bill will help people build more homes faster. I want the member to say more about how it does that.”

“Mr. Speaker, I was encouraged to hear the member opposite say something to the effect of Bill C-20 inspiring Canadians and helping them build more homes faster. I agree that there is that inspiration within Bill C-20. Could the member expand on that particular point? Through Bill C-20, we want to be able to encourage and see that support realized.”

In response to a question from John Brassard

“Conservatives use the word corruption in almost every speech. I want to know if the member thinks the Conservative premier of Nova Scotia is also wrong for backing this project.”

“Mr. Speaker, I often wonder if there is someone in the Conservative backroom who gives out a gold star every time someone on the other side mentions the word “corruption”. The Conservatives consistently try to incorporate that word into every speech they give. My question for the member opposite is this: Does he believe that the Premier of Nova Scotia, who is, as I pointed out, a Progressive Conservative, is wrong in supporting this project too?”

In response to a question from Iqra Khalid

“Canada should control its own space program instead of relying on Elon Musk. Building our own space industry creates hundreds of thousands of jobs and lets us set our own goals.”

“Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate the question, because it is a great way to, hopefully, end the discussion on this particular issue. We have a choice. That is, do we rely on Elon Musk to establish Canadian priorities in sending satellites into orbit, or should Canada have its own space sovereignty, where the Government of Canada can establish the priorities and, at the same time, build on industries, whether it is our aerospace or space industry, which generates hundreds of thousands of direct and indirect jobs? I choose the latter.”

In response to a question from Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe

“The Prime Minister stands up for human rights almost every day.”

“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister supports and advocates for human rights on virtually a daily basis.”

In response to a question from John Brassard

“The member should ask the premier of Nova Scotia about this. Working with Maritime Launch Services will help Canada control its own space industry. We are working with Manitoba and other partners on this project, and it is good for the country.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would encourage the member opposite to, maybe, write that question and see how the Premier of Nova Scotia would respond to it. Here is an opportunity. Maritime Launch Services can provide, through a contract, a service that would provide Canada the opportunity to have space sovereignty. It is a viable opportunity that we are working on with the province of Manitoba and other stakeholders that is going to enhance our industry here in Canada to the benefit of all Canadians. I see that as a positive thing. The member should write the premier.”

In response to a question from Marilyn Gladu

“I want the Conservatives to support the $200 million launch pad project in Nova Scotia. The ocean makes it a great location, and the province's Conservative premier supports it.”

“Mr. Speaker, if only the Conservatives had a member of Parliament from Nova Scotia, I suspect it might actually change their opinions on this issue. The hon. member is right in her overall assessment. My plea to members of the Conservative Party of Canada is that they look at it as an Atlantic Canada initiative. It is the best place to have a launch pad because the Atlantic Ocean is right there, which would be great to have for re-entry and so forth. This $200 million is not just for raw land. As I indicated earlier, one of the biggest supporters, alongside my colleague, is the Premier of Nova Scotia, who happens to be a Progressive Conservative.”

In response to a question from Rhéal Éloi Fortin

“Our government promised to increase old age pensions for people 75 and older, and we kept that promise. Older seniors run out of savings and have higher medical costs. We should keep the promises we make during elections.”

“Mr. Speaker, Canada’s former prime minister Justin Trudeau made a commitment, an election platform commitment, that we were going to increase OAS for those individuals aged 75 and over. We fulfilled that commitment. The argument that was used was that as people age, generally speaking, they use up their retirement funds and their medical costs continue to go up. There are other issues there. The idea of having a significant increase for those who are 75 and above was justified to the degree that Justin Trudeau made the commitment during an election, in an election platform. The member is criticizing Justin Trudeau and the government at the time for fulfilling an election platform issue. Whenever possible, we should try to live up to election platform commitments.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this statement addressed the specific topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

In response to a question from Gérard Deltell

“We should support this project because it protects our sovereignty and could create 225,000 jobs. The $200 million will build infrastructure so Canada can launch its own satellites into space.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is a part of the future for Canada and our economy. As I said, it is estimated that in terms of direct jobs, we could be looking at somewhere in the neighbourhood of 225,000, if we can do this right. I believe we will get it right. As for the $200 million that keeps on being brought up, it is not for the raw land. The company has to build the infrastructure that enables us to ultimately see satellites put into orbit. That is what it is when we talk about the $200 million. It enables Canada to be able to say, “This is an important satellite, and we want it launched as a priority.” Right now, we do not have that capability. Many would argue that that is not right. That is why we have to continue to push this thing forward. It is about sovereignty.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“Our government is investing in major projects across the country, like ports, mines, energy, northern defence, and a space launch pad. These projects create jobs and grow our economy. Conservatives claim Canada is broken, but we are working with the provinces to build a stronger country.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member has not hurt my feelings. It is fine. If he is not following the debate this evening, that is fine, but I hope time was not deducted for the point of order, because I have a lot more to say. Building big and building projects is important to Canada, and the space project is equally important to Canada. If the member was listening earlier, he would know that some speeches did not even mention the word “space”, but I appreciate that he is giving some attention to what I am saying. I ask him to follow along. I will continue with major projects. Manitoba at one time did launch rockets. There are opportunities in the future to have something of that nature once again. However, Canada does not today have a space pad that has the capability of launching things like satellites into orbit, which is why we need to work toward it. This is, as I said, about building projects. In the province of Manitoba, the premier and many community leaders are working with the Government of Canada on ways in which we can expand the opportunity for Canada to have yet another port, a viable and strong port. I am hoping the Conservatives will not adopt for the province of Manitoba the same attitude that they have for Nova Scotia . At the end of the day, if they had representation in Nova Scotia, they might actually be a little more sympathetic to what the Progressive Conservative premier is saying about Nova Scotia, as well as my colleagues within the Liberal caucus. I will move on to the province of Saskatchewan and major projects. Think about what is being proposed to deal with things such as copper mines. Look at what is happening with canola, potash and some of the other projects being considered in the city of Calgary, where the Major Projects Office is actually located. I move on to the province of Alberta and thinking in terms of an energy superpower and being more sovereign. Sovereignty matters to our government. I will get on to that right away as one of the other things we are doing. Not only do we have a memorandum of understanding with the progressive Conservative Premier of Alberta, but we now have an implementation strategy, an implementation plan, actually in progress that is expanding opportunities to become that energy superpower. Take a look at British Columbia. Whether it is the mining of copper, or it is, again, LNG, we will find that these things are part of the major projects. I will talk about the north. The Prime Minister was in Yellowknife not that long ago and talked about the importance of northern sovereignty. As a government, we are looking at over $30 billion in order to build and strengthen Canadian sovereignty up north. These are substantial commitments, because we have a government that sees the value of investing in Canadians and in the projects that are going to help ensure that Canada becomes the strongest country in the G7 and the fastest-growing on a per capita basis. The results are already starting to be realized in different ways, whether it is in constructions or in jobs, with 88,000 jobs announced just last week for the month of May. In the last year, there has been a net increase of well over 100,000 jobs. I believe it is just over 150,000. There are many indicators of this, such as with investments. Foreign investment in Canada, on a per capita basis, is greater than in any of the G20 countries. Arguably, it might even be the best in the world. These are the types of things that the Conservatives consistently overlook. They have adopted this attitude that Canada is broken, and they have to pump that message out, inside and outside the chamber, whether it is accurate or not, and it is not. That is the message they want to get out. I think they need to turn the page and recognize what the Government of Canada is doing, and that is working collaboratively with the stakeholders, the provinces, indigenous people and a wide spectrum of individuals who are providing us with the opportunity to build a stronger and healthier economy, and a healthier society, an economy that works for all Canadians. That is our objective. That is why we brought forward legislation to establish a space opportunity and space sovereignty. We understand and appreciate the valuable contributions that, in particular, the province of Nova Scotia can make in being able to establish that industry here in Canada. It is something that we should be proud of and be promoting. At the end of the day, it means improving the quality of life for all Canadians.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Speech on a motion

  Relevance 22 of 100

  Only 9% of this speech directly addressed the motion under debate.

  See full analysis →