Parliamentary Speeches

With regard to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation's (CMHC) mortgage insurance loans for non-profit housing providers, to date: (a) how many non-profit housing projects with mortgage guarantees from CMHC defaulted, broken down by year and by province or territory; (b) for each project that defaulted in (a), what was the reason for the default; (c) how many and what percentage of non-profit projects that defaulted were eventually foreclosed; (d) how many and what percentage of projects in default were also guaranteed by provincial or territorial governments; (e) what is the amount of administrative fees the CMHC charges to non-profits seeking to have CMHC mortgage insurance for their housing project, on average; and (f) what is the total amount of administrative fees the CMHC has collected from non-profits broken down by year and by province or territory?

With regard to the government's Rapid Housing Initiative (RHI), to date: (a) how many applications through the Projects Stream has the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) (i) received, broken down by municipality and by year, (ii) rejected, broken down by municipality, by year, and by number of units per application, (iii) approved, broken down by municipality and by year, (iv) accepted and delivered all funding for, broken down by municipality, by year, and by number of units; (b) how many applications through the Cities Stream has the CMHC (i) received, broken down by municipality and by year, (ii) rejected, broken down by municipality, by year, and by number of units per application, (iii) approved, broken down by municipality and by year, (iv) accepted and delivered all funding for, broken down by municipality, by year, and by number of units; (c) of the projects rejected, how many had either municipal, provincial, or territorial resources attached to the project (i) for the Projects Stream, (ii) for the Cities stream; (d) how much federal funding has been paid out by the program; (e) what are the median processing times for RHI applications, broken down by municipality and by year; and (f) what are the median rents for completed RHI-funded units, broken down by municipality and by year?

With regard to compliance inspections undertaken by Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) related to the Temporary Foreign Worker program and the findings of those inspections: (a) of the more than 2,100 inspections undertaken by ESDC in the last fiscal year, how many and what percentage were conducted (i) in-person, (ii) remotely, broken down by year and by province; (b) of those inspections conducted in-person in (a), (i) how many provided formal or informal notice to employers prior to the date of inspection, (ii) how many and what percentage were found to be in violation of compliance standards, (iii) what were the reasons cited for the violation of compliance (ranked in order of the most frequent) and the percentage for each distinct reason in relation to all found violations, (iv) within what timeframe did the employer address the violations; (c) of those inspections conducted remotely in (a), (i) how many and what percentage were found to be in violation of compliance standards, (ii) what were the reasons cited for the violation of compliance (ranked in order of the most frequent) and the percentage for each distinct reason in relation to all found violations; (d) were any of the employers found to be repeat offenders and, if so, how many employers were found to be in violation of compliance standards more than once and how often did these employers violate compliance standards; (e) how many and what percentage of employers found to be in violation of compliance standards received a follow-up inspection following the original finding of violations, and how many and what percentage of follow-up inspections found the employer to be in (i) compliance, (ii) violation; (f) among employers who were found to be in violation of compliance standards of the Temporary Foreign Workers Program, how many and what percentage (i) were required to provide adequate living accommodations for migrant workers, (ii) failed to meet the requirements to provide adequate living accommodations, (iii) employed foreign nationals holding closed work permits and (g) in those cases whereby it was decided that employers failed to provide foreign nationals with appropriate and agreed-upon wages, failed to provide foreign nationals with health insurance, charged foreign nationals excessive fees, failed to provide adequate living accommodations, failed to maintain a workplace free of abuse or reprisal, failed to meet expectations listed in the offer of employment, or failed to provide information on the foreign national’s rights in Canada, what measures, if any, were taken to compensate affected foreign nationals?

Mr. Speaker, the out-of-touch Liberals have let the housing crisis get so bad that in Halifax this winter, a man died alone in a tent. The average rent in Halifax is now over $2,000 a month. Leaving this up to big developers will not bring down rents. People are being renovicted. We need real action, not just words. The Liberals are running around announcing and reannouncing existing funding that will not deliver homes for another four to seven years. Will the Prime Minister take immediate action to secure existing empty buildings to get people off the streets this winter?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians with loved ones in Gaza have spent many sleepless nights worrying about their families as the humanitarian crisis worsens. UNICEF now calls Gaza the most dangerous place for children in the world. Today, the NDP joined with the coalition of Palestinian families and community groups to call for special immigration measures so people in Canada can reunite with their loved ones. The Australian government is already doing it. Canada must do the same. Will the Liberals immediately enact special immigration measures to include extended family members of Canadian citizens and permanent residents from Gaza?

Mr. Speaker, more than two million innocent lives remain trapped in Israel's siege of Gaza, trying to survive amid the most horrific and inhumane conditions. Thousands of children have been killed. As a mother, my heart aches for those families. Survivors are being deprived of clean drinking water, food, medicine, sanitation, fuel and electricity. More than 1.7 million Palestinians are displaced from their homes in their ancestral homeland. Among them are people with disabilities, women, children, seniors and beloved family members of hundreds of people in Canada. The Australian government has enacted special immigration measures, including a special visa program to prioritize visa assessment for those seeking to depart Gaza. Canada must do the same. I am calling on the Liberals to immediately enact special immigration measures to facilitate the evacuation of extended family members of Canadians and permanent residents of Gaza, and I renew my call for a permanent ceasefire.

Mr. Speaker, this summer, Canadians saw refugees rendered homeless in the city of Toronto. With pressure, the federal government finally agreed to provide some support, but it is not enough. Tonight, another refugee family will be turned away from a shelter because it is full. As the nights get colder, things will only get worse. Mayor Olivia Chow negotiated a historic new deal with the Province of Ontario that calls on the federal government to deliver for refugees. Will the Prime Minister do his part so that refugees do not have to sleep on the streets and be rendered homeless this winter?

Mr. Speaker, people with full-time jobs are sleeping in their cars, yet the Liberals are delaying funding for public housing until 2025. Experts are saying that investing in community housing is not only socially responsible but economically sound. Deloitte just released a report that says increasing the community housing stock could boost GDP by up to $136 billion. While the corporate-controlled Conservative leader is off demonizing community housing, the Bank of Canada says it is anti-inflationary. Will the Liberals stop delaying housing investments in the fall economic statement to get affordable housing built now?

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to enter into debate on this anti-scab legislation. This legislation is so important because we know that workers are struggling out there. We know that, when we have the union supporting us and fighting for us for better working conditions, better treatment and better wages, we are elevating the workforce not only for union members but also for all workers across the country. I have been working ever since I was in grade 4, but years ago, I was a student trying to make ends meet through the course of the summer and to pay for my university tuition. I started working as a dishwasher, and later on that summer, I landed a job as the mail girl, which was the actual title at that company. Unfortunately, there was a strike, and for that entire summer, I did not make any money. I walked the pickets though, and I learned a lot about the labour movement and the importance and history of it. I learned what the labour movement was fighting for and what it meant for the family members of those in that fight. I had a choice as a student to just say, “Hey, I don't have time for this” and find myself another summer job, but I did not do that. I stayed on the picket line to support those families and learn about that history. For me, it was such an important lesson. In fact, I learned so much, it was much more than I could have learned otherwise in any other scenario. Since then, I have been converted to believe in the labour movement, its history and what it means for current day workers. We are talking about anti-scab legislation today. What does it really mean when we refer to “anti-scab” legislation? It is the importance of respecting and protecting the value of the workers in a particular union in a particular workforce. It means bringing balance to the whole equation of the imbalance of power for employers. All too often, employers will leverage different powers against the workers, and an example of that would be to bring in workers from outside to cross the picket line and undermine the position of existing workers. There are times when workers are even locked out while the employer brings in outside workers to do the work of the existing workers. This is to undermine them, drive them out and, really, dismantle labour and the voices of the workers. The NDP, as members know, was founded by the CCF, by the labour movement. We strongly believe in the rights of workers. However, this is not the first time that the NDP has brought forward anti-scab legislation. We have done this at least eight times over the last number of years, most recently in 2016. However, both Liberals and Conservatives voted against the NDP's legislation on anti-scab workers. Fast-forward to today, and 25 New Democrats were able to force the Liberal government to take action in a minority government. We are now seeing anti-scab legislation tabled and debated in the House. Our leader had a press event on the morning before the legislation was moved, which was held just outside of this chamber, with labour leaders. The media asked: “How is this relevant today? Are there any examples of where this is happening today?” Well, as it happens, in my own riding of Vancouver East, at the Rogers site, workers were being locked out and Rogers was bringing in scab workers, and not from just within the local community. When I visited the picket line, the workers were telling me that the company was bringing in workers from outside of the country. It was bringing in workers from Toronto, and paying for them to come to Vancouver to do the work of the members there. I was at the picket line late afternoon on a Friday and then again on the Saturday. On the Friday afternoon, scab workers were driving in and out of the site, and the workers who were picketing there were being undermined by those scab workers. That means the workers will not be able to get the wages they need to support their own families, especially at a time when the cost of living and housing costs are so high. People need to be respected. However, they were not necessarily fighting about wages. They were fighting for job protection. I met workers at that picket line who have been there for 30 plus years. They told me that they are not in this fight for themselves but are in this fight for future generations. They are close to retirement and want to make sure future workers coming in will not be undermined by the employer and that they will have the ability to fight for their working conditions and their rights. They were there to bring balance to the equation of the power imbalance between the worker and the employer. They want to make this mark, not just for themselves, but for future generations. They also know, when they make this mark in this fight, they will impact other workers outside of Rogers. They want to move the entire labour force forward for workers. This is what the labour union movement has been about. That is what this anti-scab legislation is also about for these workers at Rogers. I understand they have come to a tentative agreement, so fingers crossed that things will go through smoothly. However, it did not have to be this way. If this legislation had been in place, this would not have happened to those workers. This is what we are talking about, which is the need to protect workers. The Conservatives claim they support workers. Talk is cheap. They need to show it in action. The Conservatives and their leader have a choice right now on what they are going to do with this bill. Are they going to support this bill, or are they going to play silly buggers, with games, in delaying the passage of this bill?

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are sensitive. I will retract the words “silly buggers”, but will they stop playing games with this bill and stop undermining the rights of workers? Will they end the debates in the House for what has already being studied, for example at committee, to delay the passage of bills, as they have done on the GST exemption bill for housing? We have seen them play this game over and over again, so will they do what is right by the workers? Will they show their support in voting for this bill, or will they continue to distract from the work that is so necessary for the rights of workers? Time will tell, and the votes will come up. I urge the Conservatives to move forward in doing what is right. In addition, I urge the government to move the timeline. Instead of 18 months for this bill to come into effect, I urge the government to bring it forward now to protect the workers.

Mr. Speaker, indeed, the Conservatives have relied heavily on temporary foreign workers for the oil and gas sector and for many sectors. In that process, what are they doing? They are allowing for the exploitation of workers because they do not have permanent resident status. They are absolutely relying on the employer, and they face abuses and exploitation that are out of the ordinary. That needs to stop. The Liberals, though, also continue to rely on temporary foreign workers. That needs to stop, too. That is why New Democrats have called for landed status on arrival now. We have also called on the government to regularize existing workers who are here in Canada, so they can have their rights protected. Will the Conservatives show up for workers, and for the immigrant community, particularly?

Mr. Speaker, absolutely, the government could move this forward. It is the NDP's intention to amend the 18-month timeline. There is no reason to wait that long for it to come into force and effect. In fact, when I was on the picket line with Rogers workers, one of the first questions to me was: Why 18 months? Why so long? It is not reasonable. Workers said that six to 12 months could be accepted, but 18 months is out of touch with reality. We want to see that amendment go through. We want the government to do what is right and to actually follow up with real action to move that timeline up from 18 months.

Mr. Speaker, if the Conservatives were really concerned about workers and getting anti-scab legislation, first, they would actually vote for this and not play games with it. Second, I would like to hear them say they are against scabs and that they are against scab workers crossing picket lines. I have not heard them say that in this entire debate. The other thing I would like to see them do would be to call on the provincial governments, call on their buddy from Alberta, Danielle Smith, to bring in anti-scab legislation for Albertans. That would go a long way. Next, they should go to Ontario and call on Doug Ford to do exactly that as well.

Mr. Speaker, the housing crisis is escalating across the country. In Halifax, homelessness is on the rise. As winter approaches, urgent calls to repurpose empty buildings as affordable homes are mounting, yet the Liberals are so out of touch with reality that they are delaying much-needed resources to get homes built until 2025. Under the corporate-controlled Conservatives, 800,000 affordable low-cost rental apartments were lost to housing profiteers to turn a bigger profit. As it turns to winter, snow and freezing rain mean people will die of exposure. Will the Liberals roll out the housing funds now to save lives?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians from coast to coast need affordable homes today. People are living in tent encampments, being evicted from their homes or trapped paying sky-high rents. The Liberals continue to delay and disappoint. In their fall economic statement, by delaying funding until 2025 means that affordable homes will not be built for at least another seven years. This is absurd and completely out of touch. Will the Prime Minister commit to roll out the money now so that shovels can get into the ground to build the homes that Canadians desperately need?

Mr. Speaker, the member for Ottawa—Vanier talked a lot about housing and affordable housing. No doubt here in Ottawa there is a desperate need for housing. If the member really supports her community and her constituents in getting access to safe, secure and affordable housing, why then would she not raise the issue with her own government slow-walking the delivery of housing in the fall economic statement? There are two major initiatives the government is going to delay the funding for until 2025. Just as an FYI, the average time to get a project off the ground is five years. Add another two years to wait for the funding to come in and that is seven years. It will not be until at least 2030 before real housing gets built for people to access. How is that supporting her constituents? Will she actually do what is right and tell her own government to fix that problem and roll out the money now?

Mr. Speaker, the member talked a lot about housing. The government, of course, purports that it wants to see more housing built faster, yet in the fall economic statement, it has slow-walked the rollout of money that would actually build housing Canadians could afford. That does not make any sense. Now, on this particular bill, another thing that does not make sense is that the government is not making the GST exemption available to existing co-op and social housing projects. If they do not get access to that funding, some of these projects may actually become unviable. If the member truly supports housing and seeing social and co-op housing being developed in this country, will he call on his own government to allow the exemption for existing projects?

Mr. Speaker, today is National Housing Day. The NDP demanded immediate action to stop housing profiteering, a non-profit acquisition fund and major funding and below-market financing for social and community housing in the fall economic statement. However, the Minister of Finance failed to deliver. Delaying the funds to the NDP's key housing measures for another two years makes the Liberals' claim that they want to see more homes built faster a joke. It undermines the Bank of Canada's view that housing investment is not inflationary spending and can even drive down the high cost of living. The fall economic statement also offered nothing new to support women, seniors or veterans, nor to support indigenous, Inuit and Métis peoples. Canadians do not have to choose between the Liberals, who just disappoint, and the Conservatives, who think building social housing and co-ops is a Soviet-style takeover of housing. New Democrats will at least double Canada's community housing stock and put a stop to housing profiteering. It is time for Ottawa to work for everyday people and not just wealthy CEOs.

Madam Speaker, I am tabling a petition that was initiated by multiple pro-democracy and human rights groups across the country. In total, the petition garnered 5,799 signatures. The petition notes that in view of the recent CSIS revelation on China's interference and influences in Canada, the petitioners are deeply concerned that some members of the community are using the centenary anniversary of the Chinese Immigration Act of 1923, also known as the Chinese Exclusion Act, to undermine the government's commitment to proceed with the foreign influence transparency registry. It also notes it is imperative not to conflate the racist act, which discriminates against all Chinese, with the registry. It is applicable only to those, Canadians or not, who lobby on behalf of foreign governments. Anti-Chinese racism cannot be used as a shield to distract from and minimize the urgent actions required to preserve our Canadian democracy. Setting up a comprehensive system of our own foreign influence transparency registry is one of the most effective ways to safeguard our Canadian democratic system and uphold the universal core values of freedom, democracy and justice. Canada must be in step with our allies, including Australia, the U.K. and the U.S., each of which has established its own registry. Canada simply cannot afford to play politics with our national security or democratic process. As such, the petitioners are calling for the government to, one, move expeditiously with the passage of the foreign influence and transparency registry legislation in the coming fall session of the House; two, develop a proactive and comprehensive strategy in eradicating systemic racism in all its manifestations within Canada; and finally, develop a proactive public education strategy on promoting civil engagement and democratic participation.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague, the member for Elmwood—Transcona, for his excellent analysis of the fall economic statement. I want to be very clear in saying to the Liberals that I want them to turn their minds to page 31 of the fall economic statement. In terms of more financing for apartment construction, for 2023-24 and 2024-25, there is zero in both of those columns. In terms of building more affordable housing, there is zero in both columns. Then we turn to the co-op housing piece: For strengthening the co-operative housing development program, there is zero in both columns. The big joke is that the Liberals actually announced $309 million for co-ops. That was a promise back in 2022, which they have slow-walked and not delivered on. They are now announcing it as though it were new money, and it will not even roll out until 2024. The other thing that is missing here is this: Why is the government not stopping corporate landlords from renovicting people, buying up low-cost housing and displacing people, by saying no to them?

Madam Speaker, in the petition I am tabling today, the petitioners note that in 2009, the immigration committee report on temporary foreign workers and non-status workers recommended that the government discontinue employer-specific work permits. They also note that in 2016, the HUMA committee report on the temporary foreign workers program found that “employer-specific work permits can place migrant workers in a vulnerable position with negative implications for their physical and mental well-being.” It recommended that immediate steps be taken to eliminate employer-specific work permits. In 2019, Canada acknowledged that employer-specific work permits create a power imbalance that “favours the employer and can result in a migrant worker enduring situations of misconduct, abuse or other forms of employer retribution” when it implemented the open work permit for vulnerable workers, OWP-V, policy. Since then, numerous regulatory reforms attempting to improve the protection of temporary foreign workers, including the OWP-V policy, have failed to meaningfully counteract the high risk of abuse imposed on workers by employer-specific work permits. The petitioners are calling for a just and equitable immigration system that provides full and permanent status to all workers coming to Canada, and regularization programs for those currently without status. In the interim, the petitioners are calling on the government to eliminate, without delay, the employer-specific work permit and adopt a work authorization regime that permits temporary foreign workers to freely change employers while in the country regardless of their occupation or national origin.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are out of touch with Canadians struggling to find a home they can afford. They just handed over six parcels of federal land to wealthy developers, and only a small fraction of the homes built will be affordable. We are in a housing crisis. Rent is through the roof. Canadians are having to make impossible choices. Some end up living in cars or on the street. Canada needs at least two million non-profit homes, so why are the Liberals, yet again, putting profits over people having an affordable home?

Mr. Speaker, I am entering this debate because I have seen the Conservatives over and over again think of different tactics to delay progress on virtually anything in this House. They will bring forward successive concurrence debates to delay progress of other matters in this House, even though those debates are being actively dealt with at committee. Therefore, here we are. What I am hearing from the minister is that on this issue, the very questions the Conservatives are raising have been discussed extensively at committee, yet they are still in this House trying to block passage of the bill. Under what circumstance is it justifiable for all of us as parliamentarians to be in this House to obstruct the work that needs to be done on behalf of Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, for three decades, Liberals and Conservatives relied on the private market, and now the average rent for a one-bedroom is $2,500 a month. The government's own housing advocate is calling for more community housing that fits people's budgets, and the Bank of Canada says that investing in social housing would not be inflationary. The Conservative leader is calling investment in social housing a “Soviet-style takeover”. He is in it for wealthy investors. The Liberals are failing Canadians. Will the Prime Minister stop siding with Conservatives and commit to doubling Canada's social housing stock?

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions to present today. In the first petition, the petitioners note that Canada proudly proclaims that we welcome all refugees in need of safety, in keeping with a mostly justified presentation of ourselves as caring, responsible people. The safe third country agreement with the U.S. has made it very dangerous for refugees to enter Canada in order to escape persecution, violence and discrimination. The petitioners note further that the recent expansion of the safe third country agreement to 9,000 kilometres of the U.S.-Canada land border is forcing asylum seekers desperate for safety to look to even more dangerous pathways, and people will die. Therefore, they are calling on the government to reverse the recent amendment to the safe third country agreement and suspend the agreement altogether so that refugees can enter Canada safely without risking their lives and be safe while their claims are being processed by the Immigration and Refugee Board to determine whether they have a valid refugee claim.

Mr. Speaker, in the second petition that I will present, the petitioners note that Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the rule of law and respect for human rights and democracy. They note that the former minister of immigration said, “Family reunification is an essential part of Canada's immigration system”. The petitioners note that some members of Parliament have acknowledged that reuniting parents and grandparents with their families in Canada provides immense contributions to our communities. Nonetheless, the family sponsorship program is a lottery system that has many flaws and has essentially been closed since 2020. For 2021, 2022 and 2023, the applications that won were chosen from the 2020 pool of interested sponsors. The lottery system is unfair to permanent residents and citizens who are contributing to Canada's economy throughout their stay and would love to reunite with their loved ones. The super visa, which is another option to relocate parents and grandparents to Canada, allows them to have multiple entries to Canada for 10 years. However, they cannot get an open work permit and in general have no rights. The petitioners are therefore calling for the government to open the submissions for interested sponsorship forms in 2023, lift the arbitrary caps on invitations to apply and accept applications, increase the annual levels plan allocation for this stream, implement processing standards to ensure that families are reunited in a reasonable period of time and develop a better system for the family sponsorship program where eligible applicants can apply to sponsor their family.

Mr. Speaker, earlier the former minister of immigration pointed his finger at international students struggling with Canada's housing crisis. I am glad to hear the current Minister of Immigration say that newcomers are not to be blamed for the housing crisis. Canada needs to ensure that a proper housing plan to address the housing crisis includes international students. Will the minister take it up, ensure that his government provides leadership in this regard and partner with institutions, provinces and territories, with a one-third, one-third, one-third cost-sharing plan, to ensure international students, and students, for that matter, will have access to proper housing?

Mr. Speaker, one of the things people often do is point fingers at newcomers when there are challenges in our communities. We know that there is a housing crisis, but I want to say very clearly that newcomers are not to be blamed for the housing crisis. The people who should be blamed for it are government members. Both Conservative and Liberal governments have failed to ensure that there is a proper housing plan to address the housing crisis. My question for the member is this: From Quebec's perspective, what does Quebec need the government to do to ensure that the housing needs of Quebeckers are met?

Mr. Speaker, on the issue around providing supports to the provinces and territories to support newcomers, it is absolutely critical; there is no question. Even, during the time with the Liberals, there was much fanfare with the Syrian refugee initiative. I met families who were not able to get language training. We can take, for example, a husband and wife team; they had to choose which of the family members would be able to enrol in language training, because there were not enough spots. The issue around the lack of resettlement services is not from this moment in time; it has existed for a very long time, and that is wrong. The NDP has called on the government to properly support newcomers when they come to Canada. Therefore, from Quebec's perspective, I would be very interested to know this: What kinds of resources are necessary for Quebec to be successful in supporting newcomers, especially on language training?

Mr. Speaker, we have been hearing a lot of comments in the public realm, even from the former minister of immigration, who is throwing newcomers under the bus and blaming them for the housing crisis, particularly as it relates to international students. Is it not the case that Canada has a housing crisis because successive Liberal and Conservative governments have failed Canadians? Successive Liberal and Conservative governments have cancelled programs: the co-op housing program, in the case of Conservatives, and the national affordable housing program, in the case of the Liberals. This has contributed to the housing crisis we face today.

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to enter into this debate. First, let me thank my Bloc colleagues for bringing this motion forward. They are absolutely correct in saying that the federal government needs to consult with provinces and territories with respect to Canada's immigration plan. There is no question about that. I do believe that the Canadian government is doing that. That said, what needs to be done, of course, is for the federal government to show the necessary leadership to support provinces and territories so they have the necessary resources to support newcomers, and not just to support newcomers but also to support all communities so they are healthy communities. I am an immigrant. I am one of those people who came to Canada. Back in the day, my family struggled to survive, but we did survive. We also had a housing crisis at that time. Our family of eight people lived in a 700-square-foot basement suite. That is all we could afford. Fast-forward to today. Where are we with respect to the housing crisis? We now have a situation where, in Toronto, newcomers are sleeping on the street. The weather is getting colder all the time, and where are they? They do not and cannot even access a shelter. The City of Toronto is left holding the bag on its own. The Liberal government promised to transfer money to it, but that money has yet to materialize. It is all talk and no action, continuously. What does it do? It disappoints. It does not actually deliver on what it says. It is not just newcomers who are struggling with the housing crisis; all Canadians are struggling with it. What does the government want to do? The former minister of immigration has pointed to newcomers and international students as though somehow they are responsible for Canada's housing crisis. Let me be clear about who is responsible for Canada's housing crisis. Successive Liberal and Conservative governments have failed Canada and Canadians. Whether someone wanted to rent or to buy a home, what has happened over the last 30 years with Liberal and Conservative governments is that Canada has lost more than a million units of housing. That housing was being rented at $750 or below a month under both the Liberals and the Conservatives. What else happened? The Conservatives cancelled the co-op housing program, and the Liberals cancelled the national affordable housing program. They gutted funding for housing. They downloaded it to the provinces, territories and cities, saying, “Good luck to you.” Now, we have a housing crisis after they walked away from their responsibilities. Now, whom do they point their guns at? The leader of the Conservatives and the Conservatives are pointing their guns at municipalities as though it were all their fault that there is a housing crisis. The municipalities are not to be blamed. The federal Liberals and the Conservatives are to be blamed. They are responsible for the housing crisis. If blaming people when they walked away from their own responsibility were not enough, they actually emboldened wealthy investors to get into the market to buy up affordable rental apartments and then displace people, to renovict people, to demovict people, to throw them onto the streets and then jack up the rent. Rent has gone up from $750 a month to now, in Vancouver, $3,000 a month. When asked whether they will take responsibility for this, take action and say “no more” to the wealthy investors getting in there to displace people, neither the Liberals nor the Conservatives will take up that fight. They will not even speak about it. My goodness, who is to blame? Let us be clear that it is not newcomers. Conservatives and Liberals should look at themselves in the mirror and realize they are the ones who are responsible. Before I go on, let me just say that I will be dividing my time with my colleague from Elmwood—Transcona. This is a serious question. We are seeing the rise of hate and division in our community. I am experiencing it directly, as someone who is an immigrant, who came to Canada many decades ago as a young child. It has never been worse. I understand that when people are faced with tough times, and they are faced with tough times with high inflationary costs, with food insecurity and being actually thrown out of their homes, they are unable to move forward. People who grew up in communities are being displaced because they cannot afford to live in the neighbourhood they grew up in. Professionals in a family, who are making a decent income, still cannot make enough to afford rent, let alone to hope to buy. Families are having to move back home with their parents in order to survive. They are people. I was just at a community event for Thanksgiving, where I was serving Thanksgiving meals to people, and I met construction workers who are working but cannot afford rent. They are living in shelters and in cars. That is the reality, so when we see the situation and its seriousness, the government needs to understand that it is its job and it is parliamentarians' job to stop trying to divide communities, stop trying to prey on people's fears, come up with real solutions and take responsibility for their own actions. Their words matter. Equally importantly, their actions matter. What is the NDP calling for to address the housing crisis? We absolutely want to say “no more” to the wealthy investors who are coming in to buy up affordable housing and affordable rental apartments and then displacing people. We are saying “no more”. It has to stop. We need to put a ban on that. In addition, we need to ensure that the government puts forward investments to support the non-profit sector so it can go in, buy up the units that come onto the market and create a non-profit acquisition fund. This is something the NDP has been calling for for a very long time. It is time for the government to act. We also want the government to take action and speak to those who want to access government supports, such as CMHC's insurance guarantee or low-interest mortgage supports. If the private sector wants to access government programs, there has to be a return to the community. It has to reduce the rent for the community in perpetuity for those units, not just for a year or two, or for five years, but for the life of that project. Those are taxpayers' resources, and we need to ensure that taxpayers' resources benefit the community and not line the pockets of wealthy investors. We need to make sure that the government takes real action and builds social housing and co-op housing like we used to. Contrary to what the leader of the Conservatives says, which is that building social housing and co-op housing is some sort of weird “Soviet-style” model of housing, the NDP believes in supporting people. I invite the leader of the Conservative opposition to visit a co-op, to visit a social housing project and to talk to the people there who are accessing that housing about how it has made a difference in their lives. I invite the leader of the Conservatives to not just do videos and selfies in the back lane to make fun of people and to call people's house a shack, saying a proper house that people live in is some sort of shack, but rather to look deeply into people's lives and the struggles they have and to understand, when stable housing is provided to them, the difference it makes in their lives. It is time for action, not this nonsense that the Conservatives are talking about. The NDP supports the Bloc's motion absolutely. The federal government should provide leadership and should support provinces and territories, including Quebec, with the necessary resources to support newcomers.

Mr. Speaker, first, I would invite the member to actually look into his own government's national housing strategy. The vast majority of the money is actually not real money for people. The government actually counts money from the provinces, territories and other partners towards that amount of money. The other thing is that the government slow-walks the money, so projects do not get built. We have been talking about this since 2017. What is there to show for it? There is not that much. There is another thing I actually want to point out. I invite the member to read the Auditor General's report, which says that the government itself, CMHC itself, does not even know what it is doing and whether or not the housing program is meeting the needs of the most vulnerable. Let me get into the other question the member asked on the issue around supports for people. The government needs to understand that the private sector is in it to make a greater profit. We do have to partner with the private sector, but we have to make sure we put measures in place so there is a return to the people. We have to say, “no more displacement of people and sending them out onto the streets”. That is contributing to the housing crisis, and the government, with its policies, is aiding and abetting the private sector in that regard.

Mr. Speaker, that is a question I asked the minister in question period last week. I would ask the member to check the NDP website, and my website especially, for all the comments I have made with respect to the processing backlogs and the government's violation of its own policies. It is shameful, and it is time for the government to take the necessary action to respect newcomers, to process the applications in the way in which they deserve, to establish processing standards and to abide by the standard of no more than 12 months for processing.

Mr. Speaker, Quebec and British Columbia are the two provinces that are doing a lot of the heavy lifting, even without the federal government at the table. He is absolutely correct. What we need the federal government to do is to invest and to partner in a true partnership with provinces and territories in the development of housing. The way the government is doing it is shameful. It will often go to a project that is already under development, all for a couple of million dollars, so it can be part of the announcement. That is wrong. Provinces are leading the way. It needs to actually ensure that it provides the necessary resources to match the resources of provinces and territories, so the provinces and territories can address the housing crisis and can get housing built expeditiously.

Madam Speaker, just to build on the issue around international students, one thing the federal government has not done is to show leadership in partnering with provinces, territories and institutions to create a housing plan for students. A viable option would be to ensure there is a cost-sharing plan between those three entities to ensure that housing is in place, not only for international students but also for domestic students. Can the member comment on the concept of the federal government showing leadership?

Mr. Speaker, New Democrats condemn the Hamas terrorist attack on innocent children, women and the elderly. Now, people who have nothing to do with Hamas are getting killed. Right at the outset, New Democrats called for a ceasefire, the release of all hostages, the protection of all civilians, an end to the siege and bombardment of Gaza, and for humanitarian aid to reach civilians urgently and without restriction. We condemn all acts of anti-Semitism, anti-Palestinian racism and Islamophobia, including any glorification or calls for the killing of innocent people, Israeli or Palestinian. As the siege and bombardment continue, a whole population could be wiped out. Humanity must be at the forefront of this war and any war. We must support ICC investigations into all war crimes. Canada must end arms sales to Israel and condemn settler attacks in the West Bank. We must invest in building a just peace for Palestinians and Israelis and put an end to the occupation.

Mr. Speaker, last week, I asked the Minister of Immigration if he would expedite existing immigration applications to help get families out of Gaza. He said he had instructed his officials to be as flexible as possible, yet Global Affairs is telling people outright that only immediate family members are eligible and that parents and siblings are excluded. Clearly, the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing. Will the Minister of Immigration officially commit to expediting existing immigration applications and including extended family members?

Mr. Speaker, then let me close with this. That is enough with the gamesmanship. Let us put people before partisan politics. Let us invest in people. Let us build the social housing. Let us stop the profiteering from housing and say no to investors who are renovicting people and then jacking up the rent. Let us have the government take responsibility. Housing is not an issue that can be passed off to others. We need to take responsibility. The federal government needs to show leadership, particularly in ensuring that there is a housing plan for international students and for migrants who are here. It is the responsibility of the government to work in partnership with provinces, territories and different entities and agencies. It must not blame newcomers for the housing crisis. There is no one else to blame except the government. It must take responsibility.

Mr. Speaker, I will tell the leader of the Conservatives exactly what happened to those 800,000 units: The rent went up from $750 a month to over $2,000. That is what happened. That is where those 800,000 units went. That is how the Conservatives lost affordable rental apartments for people who needed them. In the bill the member put forward, there is zero mention of social housing or the need. The Conservative leader talked about Singapore. It has 80% social housing. What does Canada have? It has 3.5%. The Conservatives cut the co-op program and gutted social housing. That is why we have this crisis. Why are the Conservatives not supporting communities in building social housing and co-op housing?

Mr. Speaker, Canada is faced with a housing crisis. The crisis did not happen overnight. In fact, it began 30 years ago. People cannot afford to buy or rent a home. Canadians are living in cars, and homeless encampments are popping up in communities big and small throughout the country. In Vancouver East, we have a permanent encampment. Earlier this month, the metro Vancouver homelessness count showed a 32% increase in the number of people experiencing homelessness since 2020, with 33% of those people being indigenous. Rent has skyrocketed. Young people have no hope of ever owning their home. Predictably, the Conservatives are suggesting that helping wealthy investors and developers would solve the housing crisis for Canadians who cannot afford to buy or rent the very homes that these wealthy investors are putting on the market. It is no joke: The Leader of the Opposition talks about the elite and the gatekeepers; he should look in the mirror and at those around him. Half of those on the Conservatives' national council are lobbyists for big pharma, big tech, oil, anti-union corporations and, we can guess what else, real estate companies. The Conservative leader is the ultimate lackey for wealthy CEOs, whose main job is to help perpetuate corporate greed. The Conservative leader is not who he says he is. He wants people to believe that he cares about the housing crisis, people and their families and what they are faced with. If that is the case, why is he completely silent about the wealthy investors who are displacing renters by renovicting them so that they can jack up rent? The Conservative leader's housing bill does not even mention the very people who are in desperate need of a home that they can afford. The bill offers no solutions to those who are being renovicted so that wealthy investors can jack up rent and increase their profits. As part of the Harper government, the Conservative leader had an influential role in the administration. He sat at the cabinet table. He was even the minister of housing. What happened during that time? Not only did the Conservatives gut housing programs, but they also cancelled the national co-op housing program; in addition, right under his nose, Canada lost 800,000 units of rental apartments that cost $750 a month. While tenants were displaced, wealthy investors and corporate landlords stuffed their pockets. What did the Conservative leader do? He cheered on the private sector: the people who are benefiting from Canada's housing crisis. He celebrated the fact that the Liberals gave special tax treatments to real estate investment trusts, whose business model is just to maximize profit. Even now, there is mounting evidence that wealthy investors are displacing tenants and jacking up rent. The Conservatives are still on the side of wealthy investors. We can talk about gatekeepers; it is gatekeeping for wealthy investors. As Maya Angelou said, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.” This is just another Conservative plan to line the pockets of their friends and insiders. While they do it, they also plan to kick municipalities in the shins by slashing funding that communities need. This is just what the Conservatives did before: They cut funding to housing programs, downloaded housing to local governments and then blamed them for not delivering the homes that people need. We should make no mistake: It was the Conservatives who cancelled the national co-op housing program and cut funding for social housing in 1993. The Liberals, of course, are no better. After promising during the election that they would restore the cut funding, they then went and cancelled the national affordable housing program. Much to the glee of the wealthy investors and corporate landlords, both Liberal and Conservative governments let the private sector run the show for 30 years. Both parties relied on the private market to deliver the housing Canadians need, and we can see where it got us. Rents are up to $2,600 a month in Toronto and to almost $3,000 in Vancouver. Hundreds and thousands of people experience homelessness annually. Shelters are underfunded and over capacity. I have met schoolchildren who are worried about their housing situation and women fleeing domestic violence who have to return to abusers because they are locked out of the market and the housing supports are not there for them. I have worked with families whose children were apprehended, just because they could not meet their housing needs; they could not afford the rent. The wealthy investors and developers that the Conservatives want to give a blank cheque to are the same people who created a housing market that not even the middle class can afford to compete in. When the Leader of the Opposition said people were living in a shack, it was actually regular housing that people live in. Across the country, financialized landlords are pursuing aggressive rent increases and displacing long-time tenants, including seniors on fixed incomes, as a business tactic. Enough is enough. More for-profit solutions are not going to change the course. There is a glaring absence of any measures to ensure that homes built are actually affordable to everyday people in the Conservative leader's bill. There is zero mention of the need to build up Canada's social and co-op housing stock in the Conservative leader's blueprint to fix Canada's housing crisis. He wants us to believe that the wealthy investors will suddenly wake up and decide that they are not driven by profit anymore. It is a delusional fantasy. It will not happen in a million years. There is zero common sense in that belief. We have seen the results of the trickle-down theory of boosting for-profit housing over the last 30 years. The 30 years of underinvestment from Liberal and Conservative governments has resulted in the loss of over 500,000 units of affordable housing that would otherwise have been built today. Conservatives and Liberals slashed programs that built and protected affordable housing in 1993, and the next Conservative government lost 800,000 units of low-cost rental apartments priced at $750 a month. They allowed wealthy investors to buy up the low-cost rental apartments and jack up the rent to maximize profit. The result is that Canadians are locked out of neighbourhoods they love, where their family, friends and jobs are. To be clear, housing prices also went up, not down, under the Conservative government. There is no question: The Liberals are no better. Canadians have lost another 250,000 homes under the Liberals. That is over one million homes lost while both the Liberals and Conservatives were at the helm. Neither party will even acknowledge the need to stop the loss of existing low-cost rental apartments to wealthy investors and corporate landlords. Steve Pomeroy found that, on average, we have been losing 15 affordable homes to rent erosion for every one unit built. Hamilton is losing 26 affordable homes for every new one created. The NDP takes a different view. We believe in investing in people. We believe in putting people before profits. We are saying that we should keep the private sector's hands off public lands. Doug Ford promised to deliver housing. He made backroom deals to carve up the Greenbelt, to make his developer friends even richer. He bulldozed local planning, only to backtrack months later. What does he have to show for it? He has three cabinet resignations, a criminal investigation by the RCMP and no affordable housing. Unused federal buildings should be leased to non-profits to provide housing for people in perpetuity. It needs to stay in public hands. Instead of privatizing Canada's federal lands for wealthy investors and corporate landlords, they should be returned to the first nations, Inuit and Métis people that they were taken from. The legacy of colonialism has led to drastic overrepresentation of first nations, Inuit and Métis people experiencing chronic homelessness and living in tent encampments. This has to stop. Lands should either be returned to indigenous peoples, the first peoples, or they should be kept in public hands through non-profits so that we can get that housing built for people. In terms of suggesting that we could rely on the market to address the housing crisis, we have already seen that play before. This is what the Conservative leader is advocating. Just now, he suggested that, oh my goodness, building social housing and co-op housing is a Soviet-style model. He should give his head a shake. He should actually go into the communities and check out the social housing and the co-op housing. They are models that are to be envied. That is what we have to do address the housing crisis, not just strictly rely on the market. It is time for action, not more of the same.

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting. The Conservatives act as though they are the saviours of the housing crisis, but of course they are and were part of the problem that created the housing crisis. They cancelled the co-op housing program in 1992 and severely cut social housing funding. In fact, we just heard the leader of the Conservatives today talk about social housing and co-op housing as though it was a Soviet-style model of delivery of housing. My question to the member is this. If they really want to actually address the housing crisis like they claim to, why are they not taking on wealthy investors who are jacking up rent, renovicting people, displacing people and rendering them to the streets?

Mr. Speaker, the member is not incorrect to say that the Conservatives' play is to disrupt this House. They do that all the time. I have been here for eight years, and I have seen them do this consistently. Nothing changes. This is the game they want to play. I want to ask the member about the housing crisis. The truth, of course, is that part of the problem with the housing crisis is that both Liberal and Conservative governments relied on the market to deliver the kinds of housing people needed. What we know after 30 years is that it does not work. People need the government to invest in social and co-op housing. The Liberals walked away from that in 1993. The Conservatives walked away from the co-op program in 1992. Will the member call on the government to invest in social and co-op housing like we used to, not what is happening right now under the national housing strategy, which is minuscule in terms of the amount of housing that needs to be developed to address the housing crisis? Will the member commit to that?

Mr. Speaker, I, too, was at that committee and listened to both the representatives from CMHC, as well as various experts on the issue. One of the issues that shocked me was to hear the now former CEO of CMHC saying that the government's goal of ensuring that housing is a basic human right is aspirational. Of course, we also know that the government's own track record has been missing the mark in addressing the homelessness crisis, as well the overall affordability crisis in housing for people in Canada. One of the things that both the Liberals and Conservatives refuse to acknowledge is the financialization of housing. Would the member support the call for the government to say that we have to stop the loss of affordable housing units to the private market, where they come in and buy up low-cost rental apartments, then jack up the rent and renovict people, displacing people and escalating the housing crisis?

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to enter into this debate around the issue of housing, housing affordability and, more to the point, the housing crisis that exists in Canada. From coast to coast to coast it does not matter what community someone is from, whether big or small, there is a housing crisis. Encampments are popping up pretty well everywhere. In my own riding we have the largest encampment in the country. It is effectively a permanent encampment. We have to think about the issue at hand and see how we can solve the issue. The Conservatives, of course, are peddling the idea that we should continue on with business as usual, that is to say, rely on the market to address the housing crisis. The Conservatives have been turning a blind eye to the fact that the housing crisis, in large part, was caused by their own party when they were in government, when they walked away from supporting communities in building co-op housing and social housing programs. They cut funding severely when they were in government. As a result, we lost a lot of housing units that would otherwise have been built. On top of that we also lost a significant number of units when the private sector came in to purchase existing low-cost apartments. Colleagues should know that under the Harper administration, with the Conservative leader at the helm and as a part of that cabinet, Canada lost 800,000 units of affordable housing. The Leader of the Opposition earlier had responded to that by asking where the units went and if aliens came and got them. He should know what happened. The rents went up. The rents used to be under $750 per month for those 800,000 units. They were lost because the private sector came in, swooped up those units, jacked up the rents and displaced people. That is what happened and that is, in large part, a cause of the crisis we face with the housing situation. One would think that the Conservatives, if they were thoughtful and truly cared about people, would actually say that is enough and that they will not allow that to happen any more because housing is a basic human right. We want housing to provide homes for people, not to be used as an investment tool for people to make more and more, bigger and bigger profits at the expense of people who need housing. However, we are not seeing that at all. I think that is because the Conservatives themselves are the biggest gatekeepers of all, gatekeepers for wealthy investors. They want to keep the status quo. I think about 50% of the Conservative caucus, if not more, have real estate interests. That is what they are interested in. They are protecting those very people who can make a profit and helping them to make a greater profit at the expense of the people who need safe, secure, affordable homes. Now I want to say this about the Liberals as well. They sure as heck are not any better. The Chrétien government actually campaigned in 1993 to end funding cuts in housing, but did they do that after the election? True to form on the part of the Liberals, they campaigned on one thing and then they did another. In 1993, after they formed government what did they do? They actually cancelled the entire national housing strategy. As a result, we lost more housing. In total, I have to say that we lost some 500,000 units of social housing and co-op housing that might otherwise have been built had the programs not been scrapped. In addition, under the Liberals that we lost another 250,000 units of housing. It was the same situation as when we lost 800,000 units under the Conservatives. Those units, where the rents were $750 or less per month, disappeared and then rents got jacked up. People have been suffering. It was also the Liberals, by the way, who brought in special tax treatments for real estate investment trusts so that they could actually displace people and jack up rents. That has helped to contribute to this housing crisis. The Liberals know that, and they continue to allow that to take place. Neither the Liberals nor the Conservatives want to take on the profiteering of housing or say to these wealthy investors, “no more”. Neither of them want to say that the investors have to stop displacing people and that they will not allow for that to happen anymore. The NDP is the only party that is calling for that, and we have been for some time, so that we can preserve and hold on to the affordable housing units for the community. In fact, what the NDP wants to do and has called on the government to do is ensure that there is an acquisition fund for the non-profit sector and for community trusts, so they can get into the market, buy the housing that comes onto the market and hold it in perpetuity for the community. That is one critical piece of addressing the housing crisis, but the Liberals are not calling for it and not doing it, and neither are the Conservatives. They are beholden to wealthy investors. They are blind to this crisis, where this action is so desperately needed, and they will not take action. Just for the record, for every one unit that is being built, we lose 15 affordable housing units in this way. We cannot build fast enough to supplement the units. Now, to be sure, what we have to do is build more subsidized social housing and co-op housing. Canada's total social housing stock and co-op housing stock is sitting at 3.5%. Compared to other G7 countries, we are at less than half, and we wonder why we have a housing crisis. The Conservative leader got up here and called building social housing and co-op housing the “Soviet-style takeover of housing”. Oh my goodness. Should governments build social housing for people who need housing? What a horrible thing. Quebec is a province that has done very well in ensuring that there is community housing for Quebeckers. Is that a Soviet-style government? I think not. In British Columbia, we had 16 years of Liberals, but really Conservatives, who took government provincially and caused a huge erosion in social housing and co-op housing development in British Columbia, but the NDP pressed on. We are now back in government, and the NDP government is doing everything it can to build social and co-op housing. Even at that, it is only sitting at 6%. More needs to be done. There is no question about it. The NDP is calling on the Liberal government to invest in social housing and co-op housing like it means to, like it actually wants to address the housing crisis. Right now, we are building about 5,000 or so units of social housing and co-op housing. That is not nearly enough, and we need to increase that number substantially to get housing needs met. In fact, Scotiabank Canada is saying that at the very minimum, to just get into this situation, we need to see 1.3 million units of social housing and co-op housing in Canada. Others housing experts are calling for 20% of the total stock. This is what the NDP is calling for: We need to see the government increase the numbers to at least meet the Scotiabank number, but I would argue that we need to do much more than that if we want to address the housing crisis. That must be coupled with the need to address the financialization of housing and say “no” to the private sector, whose goal and objective is to make greater profits at the expense of the people who are in greatest need. I heard the government members talk about the co-op program. They talk as though they love co-ops. They talk as though they are investing in co-ops. Let us just be clear: The NDP did push the government to come back with co-op housing. It did announce in budget 2022 a co-op housing program of 6,000 units. Of course, the government actually took money from another housing initiative to do that. I am just going to set that aside for a minute. Even with that promise, where are we at? The government has not even signed the agreement with the co-op sector to get the co-ops delivered. That is just still sitting there. It is all talk and no action. Speaking of co-ops, the Liberals say they support co-ops, but guess what? With the GST exemption bill, the government explicitly says co-ops should be excluded from getting the GST exemption. We need to shake our heads and ask what the government has against co-ops. The NDP absolutely intends to put forward an amendment to change the bill so co-ops would be incorporated and included so they could be part of the partnership in addressing the housing crisis. I want to touch for a minute on the fiasco of what is going on within CMHC. Maybe things will change now; I do not know. Let us hope so. Let me put this on the record. There are so many non-profits that have come to me, as the housing critic, asking for help and for urgent intervention. What has happened is that so many of them made the application under different streams, and the bureaucracy within CMHC is unbelievable. The processing of applications is unbelievable. People need to hire consultants to put in an application. Even if they do, CMHC does not even have the wherewithal to process those applications expeditiously. In the meantime, what is happening? We are seeing interest rates go up, and they are going up exponentially. By the time the community group actually gets the equity all in place and goes back to CMHC, the interest rates have gone up. CMHC tells the group that interest rates have gone up and then sends the non-profit back to raise more money. This is like an endless treadmill that these groups are on. Is it any wonder projects are dying and cannot get done? They become unviable. One thing the NDP has said to the government is that it needs to be able to provide stability to the non-profit sector. Interest rates need to be held and to not keep jumping up such that the sector can never meet the equity gap. What the government should and must do to address the housing crisis and work in collaboration with the non-profits is to hold the line. It needs to hold interest rates so people know what they are, and they should be below market. The government should not be trying to make money from non-profits. We are partners. In part, yes, the government should provide grants, but it does not all need to be grants and cash up front. It can be done as a combination of both money and a stable but low interest rate for the non-profits so they can get housing developed. This is what we can do. That is how we can get housing done. I know CMHC will provide loans to non-profits, but it bothers me that it would actually provide mortgage insurance and low-interest rate loans for the private sector with pretty well no return to the community. How is that possible? It is getting a government benefit. It should be made to provide a return back to the community. It does not get a free ride. This needs to end. Yes, we will partner with the private sector, but as long as there is a return back to the community. This is what needs to be done as well. The Liberals will not entertain that, and the Conservatives absolutely would not even consider that, because really they are just a bunch of lackeys for the wealthy investors. That is not how we solve the housing crisis. I also want to raise the following issue with respect to the housing situation. Right now, indigenous people are at least 11 times more likely to be unhoused. In my own community, the most recent homelessness count done in Metro Vancouver shows that 33% of the people who are unhoused identify as indigenous, even though only fewer than 5% of the overall population are indigenous people in the community. That said, what is wrong with this picture? Generations of colonization have caused this problem. The NDP has called on the government to invest in indigenous housing for Inuit and Métis people as well. We were able, in budget 2022, to get the government to invest $4 billion over seven years for distinction-based housing, and then it put a minuscule amount of $300 million for urban, rural and northern for indigenous, by indigenous housing, but $300 million is not going to do it. We have called for, and continue to call for, the government to make significant investment in a for indigenous, by indigenous urban, rural and northern housing strategy for Inuit, Métis and indigenous people away from home communities. We did get that in budget 2023. In total, the NDP fought for and received 4.3 billion dollars' worth of investments in a for indigenous, by indigenous urban, rural and northern housing strategy. That sounds like a lot of money, and we are happy we did kick open the door to have that investment made, but is that enough? It is not going to be enough. I hope the government will not rob Peter to pay Paul, because what the government also has to do is partner with provincial and territorial governments in a separate agreement, especially through bilateral agreements, and add dollars to the pot so we can address the housing crisis effectively. We also need to make sure the Métis nations are supported. I just met with some of their members last week, and they presented a plan that talks about building the infrastructure and housing for Métis people. The government needs to invest in that as well. The housing crisis has been made by government policies over all these years. There has been underinvestment, walking away from investing in housing, and just passing the buck to local governments, provincial governments and territorial governments. It is not good enough. The government needs to step up and take responsibility. I know that the Prime Minister has said housing is not his responsibility. Let me just say that housing is everybody's responsibility. It is the federal government's responsibility, the provincial and territorial governments' responsibility, and the municipal governments' responsibility, and we need to work in partnership with the private sector, as long as there is a return back to the community, and with the non-profit sector, the faith community and so on. I also want to raise another issue with respect to housing. It is so important for everyone to understand that the business-as-usual approach is not going to address the housing crisis. The wealthy investors and developers are not going to wake up and decide they are not really interested in maximizing profit. They are not going to do that. That is what happened over 30 years when successive Liberal and Conservative governments relied on that as an approach to addressing the housing crisis. Look at where it got us. The Conservatives want to just blame the Liberals. Do members know what? They are both to blame. Their solutions today are deficient. We need to invest in people and put people before profits. That is how we can address the housing crisis. Finally, I want to say this: The Conservatives just want to kick municipalities and blame them, when it was the Conservatives who offloaded housing responsibility to local governments without resources and supports in place. They do not get to kick their partners. Yes, they can engage in negotiations with them and talk about the different things they want to achieve. However, blaming local governments is also not the solution. I get it; there are councils that will just say “not in my backyard”. That is not acceptable, and we do need to call that out, but we cannot just say, “Hey, local government, fix this or else.” We are in this together; we need to understand that. It is everyone's responsibility to get the job done. I know I am running out of time, but I have a few more things I want to add to this debate. Can I get unanimous consent to finish my speech?