:
I will call the meeting to order. I thank everyone for coming on this new system we're working on for the House of Commons at the moment.
Welcome to meeting number 20 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance. Pursuant to the order of reference of Tuesday, March 24, the committee is meeting to examine the government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Today's meeting, as you're well aware, is taking place by video conference, and the proceedings will be made available via the House of Common's website. The website will always show the person speaking rather than the entirety of the committee.
In order to facilitate the work of our interpreters, I'd like to outline a few rules for us to follow. Interpretation in this video conference will work very much as it does in a regular committee meeting. You have the choice at the bottom of your screen of either “Floor”, “English” or “French”.
Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. When you're ready to speak, you can either click on the microphone icon to activate your mike or you can hold down the space bar while you're speaking. When you release the space bar, the mike will shut off, something like a walkie-talkie.
Should members need to request the floor outside of their designated time for questions, they should activate their mike and state they have a point of order and I will pick up on that.
If members wish to intervene on a point of order that has been raised by another member, they should use the “raise hand” function. This will signal your interest to speak. In order to do so, you can click on “participants” at the bottom of the screen. When the list pops up, you'll see, next to your name, that you've clicked on “raise hand”.
Beyond that, speak slowly and clearly. It's a lot better for interpretation. Your mike should be on mute when you're not speaking.
With that, I will welcome all the witnesses. Thank you for coming to this panel. Your input is very important to us.
We'll start with Cécile Arbaud from Dans la rue.
:
Hello. My name is Cécile Arbaud.
[Translation]
I am the executive director of Dans la rue in Montreal. Founded 31 years ago, Dans la rue helps more than 1,000 homeless young people a year. I'm really interested in youth homelessness. Dans la rue actively supports the Jeunes+ coalition, which was created in 2019, to prevent youth homelessness in Quebec. I sit on its steering committee, and I also sit on the boards of directors of two Canadian organizations that work at the national level to fight youth homelessness: the Coalition Vers un chez-soi, also known as A Way Home Canada, and the Changer de direction network of centres of excellence, better known as the Making the Shift Youth Homelessness Social Innovation Lab.
Through youth outreach, research, knowledge mobilization and collective impacts, all these actors and dozens of others across Canada are seeking to prevent and reduce the social aberration of still having dozens of young people a year who are homeless, who are in great psychological distress and who have many barriers to overcome, preventing them from pursuing their development, their studies, their attachment to employment and their ability to lead independent and rewarding lives.
My area of experience is more with homeless youth. That being said, I am also a member of the board of directors of the Réseau d'aide aux personnes seules et itinérantes de Montréal, RAPSIM, which brings together 100 Montreal homelessness organizations, so I am quite familiar with the homelessness scene in Montreal. I won't be speaking on behalf of all these organizations today, but I will try to speak on behalf of people who are homeless and young people who are homeless.
The COVID‑19 crisis highlights the right of all to have a roof over their heads. More than that, it highlights the extent of what will be needed to end homelessness, because it exacerbates the difficulties experienced by young people. I will give a few examples of what is happening right now, particularly among young people. This doesn't apply only to young people, but young people have specific characteristics. Many young people who had jobs have lost them. Many young people have, it has to be said, lost somewhat formal income, such as street begging. I won't go into details, but the inability to beg on the street is a loss of income for some young people. Few young people have previous declared income that would allow them to access the Canada emergency benefit. Access to housing assistance programs is closed. Access to private housing is virtually impossible. The issue of release from prison is unresolved. Some of the young people who come to our emergency shelter have been out of prison for a short period of time.
The majority of programs aimed at getting out of homelessness and empowering youth are closed or discontinued. I'm talking about school and employability programs. Administrative and legal processes are lagging behind. People who are homeless, particularly youth, are getting tickets for gathering together or failing to respect social distancing on the street. This is very counterproductive, and it will add a burden to their shoulders when they have to contest these tickets. Moreover, they won't be able to pay them because, in Montreal in this case, they are getting $1,546, while the Canada emergency response benefit is giving $2,000. It doesn't make any sense. Mental health follow‑ups are much more complicated. In addition, young people feel excluded. They have no place to stay, and they are kicked out of different places. Isolation is very difficult to live with, and the level of anxiety is very high.
Access to and use of drugs is less safe. Drugs are of poorer quality, posing a serious risk in the pre‑existing opioid crisis. In addition, access to therapies is currently very limited. No new patients are being taken. Young people who have children of their own find themselves confined to the home, often in a difficult marital situation, or they have not developed all the necessary parenting skills. We are often a little worried about them. Telephone interventions provide only limited support. Finally, one of the major sources of youth homelessness is leaving child and youth protection centres or youth centres, as we say in Quebec. For the moment, all exits are obviously suspended, which could stop the tap of homelessness, although we still see some young people running away from youth centres. In the meantime, those who are stuck and who do not leave can't prepare their exit. As a result, we are in danger of seeing the rate of homelessness increase.
These examples demonstrate the breadth and complexity of the measures needed to help youth move out of homelessness. The young people we continue to see on the streets—because we have kept emergency services—are the most disadvantaged. They were already living in an emergency situation, and now they are even more so. Emergency solutions are no longer enough for responding to even more difficult situations and to an almost certain increase in precariousness and homelessness. We will have to act very quickly, with a long‑term vision, to help all the people concerned, meaning all the people who are homeless, who are going to be homeless or who are in a very precarious situation.
In my opinion, several things need to be done. First of all, we must facilitate access to housing and staying in housing. That means all sorts of things, but, in short, we must prevent people from being evicted because they can't write a cheque. It's often said that people are one paycheque away from homelessness, and we really have to be careful about that. We must also make it easier to support people when they leave institutions. I am thinking of prisons, in particular. We should also think about providing people with a decent income, even a guaranteed minimum income. Furthermore, we must increase psychological and psychiatric assistance and follow‑up services at home, as well as adapt psychosocial services to the context of the pandemic to ensure their continuity.
For young people in particular, there is a need to increase and strengthen prevention, which must also take place earlier, in families, schools and when leaving a youth protection centre. It is also necessary to increase and strengthen support for self‑reliance so that young people can develop and maintain good mental and physical health, and have access to education and employment programs to lead more independent and rewarding lives.
Thank you.
[Translation]
My name is Véronique Laflamme. Today, I am representing the Front d'action populaire en réaménagement urbain, FRAPRU, which is a Quebec‑wide group of housing committees, tenants' associations and citizens' committees from various regions of Quebec.
We have 140 groups in Quebec, 30 of which are active groups that work daily with tenants, mainly low‑ and modest‑income tenants, and with people who want to start social housing projects. Our groups support these projects, and provide support and services to tenants, particularly vulnerable tenants. In the context of the current pandemic, our groups receive many calls from tenants who are worried about losing their homes or who have reached the threshold of being able to pay.
FRAPRU is a group that promotes the right to housing, a right to which Canada committed itself as a signatory to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, but also by recently adopting, last June, Bill , which included the recognition of the right to housing.
I would point out that the right to housing includes protection against eviction and a criterion relating to the ability to pay, which every home must meet, and that it must be implemented progressively, not regressively, using the maximum available resources.
The current pandemic highlights the interrelation between the right to adequate income, the right to health, the right to food and the right to housing. The particular consequences of the lack of decent housing for the homeless in particular have just been clearly highlighted by the person who spoke before me, but the consequences for seniors are also revealed by the current situation. It is important to remember that there are many seniors who are not in public institutions, but rather in rooming houses or in poor housing situations.
FRAPRU's main concern in the current pandemic is therefore to avoid mass evictions after the end of the health emergency. In most provinces and in Quebec, there is a moratorium on tenant evictions during the health emergency. Unfortunately, in most cases, this will disappear at the end of the pandemic. Since tenants' ability to pay is affected, we fear a wave of mass evictions, particularly because of the lack of employment insurance for many low‑income workers, despite the income assistance provided by the Canada emergency response benefit.
We are concerned that many people will not be able to pay their rent and that they will be even more precarious after the pandemic, not to mention those who will not be able to return to work or low‑income households that do not qualify for these programs. I am thinking in particular of low‑income retirees and people on social assistance who have to pay more for food because of the closure of resources that often allow them to have access to some free food. These people will become more vulnerable and will have a harder time paying their rent because of the pandemic and the end of various services.
So our main concern is to avoid evictions during the pandemic, but we're also thinking about what will happen afterwards. We are well aware that this is a provincial jurisdiction, but it remains a concern that the federal government must have, given its commitments to housing rights.
Our other concern has to do with the ability to pay. The Canadian government has been able to take action on the income side, particularly through the benefit programs that have been announced but, as I was saying, we don't think that will be enough, for a number of reasons. It isn't yet the case in all Quebec cities, but in several Canadian cities, the $2,000 is close to the amount charged for rent—it's important to remember that. In Toronto and Vancouver, but also in Montreal, many tenants are already paying $1,500 or more in rent. Therefore, additional resources are needed. Later on, I will suggest some measures that could be implemented by the federal government.
At the same time, I would point out that tenants are all the more vulnerable to eviction because hundreds of thousands of them were already in core housing need at the time of the last census. In fact, 1.7 million tenant households in Canada were paying more than the standard of 30% of their income for housing, and 800,000 tenant households in Canada, including 195,000 in Quebec, were spending more than half of their income on housing.
This prevents them from meeting their other basic needs.
Food banks were already highlighting the impact of the lack of affordable housing on the increased demand for food assistance. These situations are exacerbated by the current pandemic. There was a pre‑existing housing crisis in Quebec and in several Canadian cities because of the scarcity of affordable rental housing, but especially because of the high cost of housing, which was already leading to the exclusion of many tenants from their neighbourhoods. Finally, there was also a context of real estate speculation, which is still present and will unfortunately not disappear with the pandemic.
The major problem in Canada is the lack of alternatives for all these tenants. At FRAPRU, we have often highlighted the fact that this crisis has been caused by the lack of social housing and the federal government's withdrawal from housing outside the private market, whether it be low‑rent housing, co‑ops or non‑profit organizations. According to the OECD, Canada ranks 16th in terms of its percentage of social housing. Social housing accounts for 4% of Canada's housing stock.
As Ms. Arbaud said, in this case social housing is inaccessible to many, making many tenants even more vulnerable to eviction. They have nowhere else to go, which leads to more homelessness.
In the current context, bearing in mind that Quebec's areas of jurisdiction must be respected, the demands we are making of the federal government are not the same as those we are making of the Quebec government. First of all, we are talking about a contingency fund. Yesterday, the government announced assistance measures of this type, including loans for commercial rents. We believe that this requires a contingency fund and not just interest‑free loans, because we must avoid increasing debt. It takes special grants and then perhaps interest‑free loans for tenants.
In Canada, particularly in Ontario, there is already such a fund to help people who, for one reason or another, can't pay their rent. It could be set up by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, which already manages mortgage loans.
Then there is the funding of emergency rent supplement programs. Rent supplement programs have been federally subsidized in the past. They can be managed by the provinces, which have infrastructure. These programs need to be funded quickly to help people stay in their homes with financial assistance.
At the same time, funds must be made available now to rehabilitate the social housing that Ottawa has funded in the past. This would make it possible to quickly rehouse people who can no longer afford to pay their current rent. Because of underfunding by the federal government, 300 social housing units are shuttered in Montreal alone. Renovating these units would not take as long as building new ones.
Lookout Housing and Health Society has been working to end homelessness and increase the health of vulnerable people in British Columbia since 1971.
We provide housing and a range of support services to adults with little income and who have few, if any, housing and support options. Because the people we serve have challenges meeting their basic needs and goals, we place minimal barriers between them and our services.
We started in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver and we are now one of the largest shelter and housing providers in the province, providing services in 15 communities across Metro Vancouver, Fraser Valley and Vancouver Island, as well as offering provincial services through our Mood Disorders Association of British Columbia arm.
We currently have about 900 staff. They serve more than 2,800 people daily in our shelters, housing, outreach health and support services. We support people who cope with multiple barriers, including mental health problems, substance use, poverty, chronic illness and trauma.
For COVID-19, Lookout has partnered with BC Housing, Vancouver Coastal Health and the City of Vancouver to open the emergency response centre located in the Roundhouse Community Arts & Recreation Centre. It has appropriately spaced cots and bathrooms available for people who need to self-isolate and has social distancing parameters.
In the last couple of weeks in March, we started a phased move-in with a maximum of 79 beds. As of this morning, there are 51 people staying at the Roundhouse Centre.
We're also currently working with two other communities to provide a second and third emergency response centre, partnering with BC Housing, two local municipal governments—New Westminster and Abbotsford—the Fraser Health Authority and a local church. They are scheduled to open in the next two to three weeks. These sites will also be used as shelter expansion and overflow for medical services in emergency rooms. They will allow for social distancing in an effort to try to keep people well and bolster their immune systems before COVID hits the vulnerable population that we serve.
Unfortunately, these centres are necessary due to our housing crisis and the lack of social housing, and they are also temporary. It's due to the pandemic nature that they have been opened.
Lookout serves vulnerable populations, and our goal is to prevent illness. It's always a high priority for us. We follow best practices established by local heath authorities for potential outbreaks of any kind at any time. Our policies include universal precautions and a pandemic plan, and it covers all forms of contagion. We work with our suppliers to have up-to-date cleaning supplies and procedures and we use innovative products to help reduce bacteria at our sites.
Over the last few months, our focus has really been on increasing the immune systems of vulnerable people and creating that trust and connection to local health care when and if people fall ill and become COVID-positive.
For this work, we're following the guidance of the WHO, the CDC and the local health authorities in increasing our cleaning protocols and using PPE effectively but also sparingly, since we're having a very difficult time in accessing a regular supply. Obviously, we are promoting handwashing and educating about its importance, and we are enforcing social distancing and relieving our sites of congestion as much as possible.
We thank Reaching Home and the federal government for the COVID response in dollars. We've been a recipient of a lot of that support financially, and we thank the Province of British Columbia for the emergency funding that has helped us purchase some of the PPE and create some of these new connections for folks.
Right now, our staff team is our number one resource, so finding ways to protect them and keep them safe and to provide relief and celebrate their successes and essential service in our province is really important work that we need to focus in on, I think nationally.
Thank goodness for the community groups and organizations that have been donating homemade masks, cleaning supplies, food and other items, because procurement of these types of things is getting really difficult.
Overall, I think the national housing and poverty strategies, as well as this response, have been very good at a federal level, but through this pandemic and beyond, we need better access to health care that focuses on trauma recovery and concern for the wellness of those who are socially isolating, and more so for the folks that Lookout serves on a day-to-day basis in dealing with previous trauma amidst the pandemic, combined with the opioid crisis, the local housing crisis and really a national housing crisis.
Dental care has also been an area of concern, where people fall into addictions That has a profound impact on their health, and so we need a federal dental program, and easier access and implementation of the CMHC funds for housing. It has been incredibly difficult to build housing even with the national housing strategy. The scope is very limited, and it's tough to access. A lot of further work on drug policy is needed in this country to keep people safe who are mired in addiction.
There was some work on pandemic prescribing, and I applaud the federal government for taking those steps. The issue needs more attention. We need to be focusing to ensure that the most vulnerable people have a level of wellness that allows them the best opportunity to overcome the challenges they face, and we see a myriad of challenges. As long as trauma and physical health are impacting folks, they're not going forward in their journey to wellness.
Thanks for the time today.
:
Thank you very much indeed, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the members of the committee. On behalf of the over 12,000 members of Mortgage Professionals Canada, thank you for providing us with the opportunity to take part in the discussions today.
I am Paul Taylor, president and CEO of Mortgage Professionals Canada, and as Mr. Easter has just stated, with me is Elaine Taylor—no relation—vice-president of sales at MCAP Financial Corporation, but also currently serving as chair of Mortgage Professionals Canada's board.
For an initial context for our remarks today, I'd like to remind the committee of MPC's membership composition. We are a professional association promoting mortgage broker-originated mortgages. By head count, mortgage brokers and agents across Canada make up the largest component of our membership. However, almost all Canadian banks and mortgage lenders that originate mortgages through independent agents and brokers also belong to our association. Additionally, all three mortgage insurers in Canada are also members. Because of the diverse nature of our members' businesses and their respective role in fulfilling broker-originated mortgages, MPC has a thorough understanding of the marketplace impact of any changes to mortgage finance and funding costs, securitization and liquidity, underwriting criteria and lending guidelines, and changing consumer behaviours.
With the context and the stated framework of the discussion today being the impact of COVID-19 on housing and homelessness, we will probably comment primarily on measures implemented to ensure continued liquidity in the marketplace and on the individual income continuation programs, and business continuity and wage subsidy programs created over the course of the last four to six weeks, both of which we consider critical to ensuring the continued security of housing for millions of Canadians.
Real estate purchase and sale transactions have diminished dramatically in some regions of the country. Home purchases and sale transactions are usually about a one-to-eight week process and at the beginning of the calls for social distancing and isolation as a best practice, our industry wrestled with changes in process to complete the transactions that were under way.
At the time, home inspectors couldn't gain access to properties to estimate values and many legal professions were unable to permit electronic signing for title registry changes, both traditionally necessary functions for mortgage funding to be completed.
Fortunately, most of those challenges were dealt with in a collaborative fashion, with lenders, mortgage insurers, realtors and mortgage brokers all working towards the best outcome compromises to ensure no one was stuck between the sale of their previous home and obtaining legal possession of their next, but we are now experiencing a significant reduction of new business activity, like many industry segments in Canada. This is placing significant financial strain on businesses and on individual Canadians' ability to meet their financial obligations. Once the transactions in the current business pipeline are finalized, we anticipate many of our members will have little opportunity to generate income, both through the remainder of the lockdown and for a period of time following the acceptable resumption of business.
I'd now like to pass the mike to Elaine.
The landscape presents many challenges for our lender and insurer members. Their products depend upon the ability of Canadians to manage their debt obligations smoothly. With a government order for businesses to close, many borrowers' ability to meet these obligations had been seriously impacted, due to their loss of income. This generally means that those most affected require more access to credit at a time when investment capital becomes scarce. With the risk of defaults rising, investing in mortgages or any consumer debt product becomes less appealing without additional risk premiums in the form of higher interest rates.
With these challenges in mind, the federal government and related agencies implemented a number of changes to assist the financial landscape at both the macro and micro levels. The reintroduction of the insured mortgage purchase program, with its newly increased limit of $150 billion, provided much needed access to capital for banks and other lenders. Additionally, the reduction of the domestic stability buffer also added $300 billion in liquidity to banks to be able to support struggling businesses through additional extensions of credit. The reductions to the Bank of Canada benchmark rate also occurred during this time. We're supportive of all these changes and the speed with which these mechanisms were brought to bear.
As an industry, we are reassured by the timely and coordinated macroeconomic support brought forward. Ensuring liquidity and capital adequacy is critical in these uncertain times. It provides confidence to lenders that their continuing cost of capital will be reasonable and accessible, allowing them to continue to support Canadian businesses' and consumers' needs for affordable credit access.
One suggestion we make for OSFI to consider, following the same thought process as the already-implemented reduction in the domestic stability buffer, is to reduce the capital requirements for mortgage insurers. This would allow them to reduce their required premiums, making access to the insured mortgage purchase program and other programs easier for lenders and borrowers.
With funding for credit assured, the next consideration is Canadians' ability to manage their credit obligations. For the individual Canadians most affected by job or significant income loss, many of our members included, we also wish to compliment the government for the speed with which the emergency support programs have been introduced. The Canadian emergency response benefit, in particular, should be acknowledged as a tremendous showing of financial support in record time, providing a much-needed cash lifeline for many families.
We are also complimentary of other programs that we can discuss in more detail during the question and answer period.
For the most part, while no program can be tailored to meet the needs of all circumstances, the supports offered as emergency assistance are well considered, given our circumstances and the requirement for swift support. That said, we anticipate many individuals will suffer significant long-term economic loss due to the outbreak and business interruptions caused by COVID-19. We anticipate some of the least fortunate, owners and renters alike, will possibly find themselves unable to afford to stay in their homes. We would recommend examining the possibility of introducing additional insured mortgage products into the marketplace to assist. We also suggest that some federal funding be set aside to provide the additional support that municipalities, NGOs and charitable organizations will need to assist these individuals in the coming months and years.
We thank the committee for the opportunity to share our professional opinions today, and we welcome your questions.
:
Thank you to the committee this afternoon for this opportunity.
I'd like to start by saying that I hope you're all well and healthy during these very trying times. It's a pleasure to meet some of you, even through these methods this afternoon.
I will also speak today about the challenges COVID-19 poses to our sector and those experiencing homelessness. I'm sure you will hear some common threads with what you've already heard from the previous witnesses.
First I'll give you just a brief explanation about Siloam Mission. We're the largest service provider for those experiencing homelessness in Winnipeg. Siloam has been serving the community here for over 32 years. To give you further context, we run an overnight shelter with 110 beds that are full basically every night, with some people redirected to other nearby shelters. We have a daytime drop-in. We serve approximately 500 meals, three times a day, 365 days a year. If you do the math, that's over 500,000 meals per year. We also offer health care, including 10 professional services, clothing, work experience programs, mental health counselling, and one-on-one supports to help people regain and maintain housing and get back into the job market as well.
We recently added a social enterprise laundry, giving full-time work to guests at our shelter who want to re-enter the workforce. That started in October and we're very pleased to see the impact that it's having. Not only are these people being paid, but to see the change in their self-esteem and, I would say, overall dignity is really encouraging. In our next project, we'll be adding recovery-based housing units to our facility, which we were recently awarded based on an RFP submission.
As we all know, poverty and homelessness are complex under normal circumstances. The situation we now face with COVID has created new challenges and, I think it's safe to say, added pressure to day-to-day existing challenges, from fundraising to delivery of the services that I had mentioned a moment ago. We know that food, shelter, physical health and mental health are deeply interlinked and make up the essentials for survival.
The current directives around COVID-19—and we hear this a lot and practise it a lot, and I know you do as well because we follow your lead—are to self-isolate and just stay home. Unfortunately, doing those things is not possible for those who don't have a place to call their own. That's one of the challenges. The onus is therefore put on places like Siloam Mission, and on organizations that I've listened carefully to here this afternoon as well, and others here locally, places already working at full capacity, to alter services to better protect an already vulnerable population.
In many cases, those experiencing homelessness are already among the most vulnerable to illness and health emergencies. Health care among those who live on the streets is vulnerable every day, no question about it. They are more likely to have underlying medical conditions and to have a history of poor nutrition, health care and hygiene. Add to this the inability to isolate, poor access to proper hygiene tools and the environment of a homeless shelter and you have an extremely, extremely vulnerable group.
I would say, as we look forward, that much has already been done among the providers in Manitoba and federally to protect our community. We are extremely fortunate that we have not yet seen an outbreak in our homeless community. Every day we are so grateful here at Siloam. Yes, we hear of positive cases in our city and province and across our nation, but fortunately within our shelter we're not aware of a positive case as of yet, and we're very grateful for that. We also know that each new day is a new risk, and I can't imagine the potential horrors if we were to see an outbreak. These most vulnerable members of our society must be included in public policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, and just as important, included in recovery efforts when the pandemic subsides, and—I know I share this sentiment with all of you—we hope the pandemic subsides sooner than later.
I want to respect everyone's time. In my last minute or two, I will speak about the future impacts of COVID-19. The facts and figures that have already been shown paint a sombre picture of what lies ahead for Canada's business sector and economy. I pay attention to those numbers every day. As a charity, we're certainly not immune, and if anything, may be more vulnerable as we brace ourselves for a long season of reduced charitable giving. We know that as the economics of this go forward, non-profits and charitable organizations are going to be significantly impacted, and we are bracing for that. To give you some scale, at Siloam Mission we rely on about 90% private donations.
Not only do we expect those private donations to drop sharply in an economic fallout from COVID, but we also know to expect an increase in demand for services. I noted the previous speaker mentioned that people aren't going to be able to stay in their own homes because of the challenges, but where are they going to go? Some might end up in shelters such as Siloam and other places across the country. There will be people living on the brink before this crisis who will find themselves at our doors, whether it be for meals, a place to stay or to get back on their feet.
Briefly, to close, while we know the pressures on government are already immense to help people across this economic spectrum, we also see the need in our community growing and it's safe to assume that it's not going to stop. I think I can speak for communities across our wonderful country when I say that. Agencies serving the homeless population are facing a drop in donations, and at the same time, it's the greatest service delivery challenge we know we've ever faced here.
Please take note of this: We know from past studies that our services, from health care to shelter to counselling, translate into government savings, most notably in the form of reduced emergency room visits and police interaction. We have studies that if I had more time I would share with you.
We hope that, as we weather this pandemic and work together toward recovery on the other side, our governments will invest in the work being done amongst our most vulnerable citizens.
My last comment to all of you would be that I believe investment in this work will literally save lives and it will go a tremendous distance as we help people to transition back into health, into homes and into jobs.
Once again, thank you for your time. It's a real privilege to participate with all of you today.
:
Thank you very much. It's a pleasure to be here with you.
To start, I just want to recognize and thank the federal government, all of the MPs and Canada's federal civil servants for the critically important work you are all doing to support Canadians through this pandemic. I want you to know that we very much appreciate all that you are doing.
I also want to recognize and thank the government for the new and important investments of over $200 million in the Reaching Home program, as well as support for women's shelters and sexual assault centres. That's very important.
As you know, I am representing United Way Centraide Canada. We are Canada's largest non-governmental funder of vital community services, focused on eliminating poverty and also providing the supports to vulnerable Canadians that they need to build sustainable livelihoods. Across Canada we support about 3,000 community organizations and about 5,600 different programs. We invest about $40 million annually in housing and homelessness supports, as well as domestic violence issues.
We're also very active in our communities across Canada in supporting a COVID response.
As has already been said this afternoon, we know the pandemic is affecting all Canadians, but I think we also know that it's going to have an even more profound impact on our most vulnerable Canadians, in particular, the homeless and the precariously housed.
I thought what I would do is share a little bit of the experience we're seeing on the ground, from coast to coast, from community organizations and our United Way Centraide partners that are supporting them.
To start, the good right now is the additional funding that was provided, which is extremely important. It's flexible. It's allowing our communities to adapt and respond. I want to recognize the importance of that.
Equally, perhaps, the challenge is that the COVID-19 implications are not really short term. They're not just today; I think this will be in front of us for the next six to 18 months until such time as we get a vaccine. That tells us that the additional funding, however critical, may not be enough for what's in front of us not just in the immediate term but in the months to come.
I think you've heard a little bit of this already, but I'll reiterate a few things regarding the challenges and how communities are responding in particular around homelessness.
Food is a significant issue. As the meal programs have changed, our homeless populations and our community service providers have had to find new ways to provide safe access to food.
The challenges of supporting people dealing with mental illness are significant. They are even more profound in the midst of the COVID-19 crisis we're facing.
We know and we're hearing that domestic violence calls are up. Families are under stress financially and through isolation.
We know that our shelters are full. It's been referenced, but you know our emergency shelter system was not designed for social isolation. Our existing shelters are facing a challenge. That's requiring us to find new spaces, spaces that can accommodate social distancing, and also to create spaces for those who test positive so that they can be isolated. The shelter system wasn't designed for this, but we're having to adapt all across the country.
The issue of personal hygiene is a significant one as homeless individuals don't have the same access to public facilities to take care of their personal hygiene needs. There are United Way Centraide organizations that have had to literally buy porta-potties in order to contribute and support communities in a crisis. I never thought that would be the case, but we are doing that just as part of the response. I think we need to highlight that.
There is also a new demand. People who are leaving incarceration without a plan for housing are showing up in the shelter system.
Another thing I would highlight as an important challenge is we have to protect our front-line workers in the shelters. There is a tremendous need for health and cleaning products and for personal protective equipment. All are in short supply. It's incredibly important that we work hard to support our front-line workers to make sure they have access to what they need to deliver care to the communities.
Those are all things that our amazing community organizations are working hard to address. We should be proud of how hard they are working to support the most vulnerable Canadians.
We also have to think about not just today, but about what could be coming at us. That is the potential problem of the new homeless and new homelessness. We know that social distancing and isolation are pushing the precariously housed into homelessness. We know that eviction prevention programs are really good right now—they're great—but we can foresee a wave of evictions coming due to the economic hardship that people are facing, and the inability to pay rent in the future. This is really important as we think about not just today, but what's in front of us.
What's needed? I'd like to highlight a few things.
First is the recognition that housing is a fundamental human right, and a fundamental right for Canadians. It's something that Canada recognized in legislation last year. The reality is that people cannot build a sustainable livelihood without safe, secure and affordable housing. It has to be part of our conversation.
We had a homelessness and housing affordability crisis before COVID. The COVID crisis is really just showing the significant gaps we have in our safety net.
For us, thinking short term is important. Let's also take the time to think in the longer term. I think you've heard some of that this afternoon.
I'll share with you a couple of ideas as part of my final remarks.
Fundamentally, what we have to do is make sure we keep Canadians housed. This means adequate income support to keep Canadians housed through the immediate crisis, but also into the future. We also know that low-income workers are at greatest risk of losing their jobs due to the economic shock. They are also the most precariously housed and are facing low vacancy rates and, as a result, high rents.
Here are a couple of ideas for all of us to consider.
We have CERB. What about a CERB rental support top-up? We have Canadians who qualify for this benefit. It's not necessarily enough to pay both basic needs and rent, but we could easily implement a top-up. You could think about this as 30% to 50% of the average rental cost in a market, to top up those benefits so that people can significantly reduce the impact of evictions in the future.
For those who don't qualify for CERB, we could think about an emergency rent benefit program, which would essentially help low-income Canadians avoid depleting all of their assets and then ultimately depending on social assistance.
We also have the beginnings of the implementation of the Canada housing benefit. Certainly, something we could look toward would be accelerated implementation.
My final comment would be that we need to really make a commitment to supportive housing. We have a significant need for investment in supportive housing, and for the federal government to be a contributor and to help build the thousands of supportive housing units that we're going to need to support the most challenged in terms of homelessness. I think that is part of our long-term solution. It's something that we advocate and support, and we hope that many others will as well.
With those remarks, I thank you for the opportunity to speak today. Also, thank you for all of your leadership. Finally, thanks to all of the front-line community organizations that are doing great work supporting our communities today.
:
Bonjour and thank you for inviting me to your panel today. In particular, I thank our Davenport MP, Julie Dzerowicz.
I want to share some other thanks and four suggestions for a more pandemic-proof infrastructure for low-income Canadians. One recommendation concerns income tax and three recommendations concern affordable housing.
First, let me explain that West Neighbourhood House, formerly known as St. Christopher House, is a multiservice not-for-profit charitable organization serving diverse communities in downtown Toronto, from preschoolers to homeless adults to seniors. I'll give a shout-out to Dan, because we're also, as he knows, an active member of United Way Greater Toronto, which has been a fantastic leader in this COVID crisis downtown.
To be clear, despite our name as a house, at this time we are not a housing provider.
The federal government has many ways to help in this immediate crisis and to pandemic-proof the future socio-economic infrastructure of our country, especially for low-income people.
First, you have helped enormously already with the bold, swift and generous Canada emergency response benefit. The announcement provided immediate mental relief to millions of newly unemployed, extremely stressed Canadians. The CERB is instrumental in helping people cover the high fixed costs of rent or mortgages, keeping their housing stabilized. The last thing Canada needed in this pandemic was to have thousands more people becoming homeless, and that was a real risk.
Thank you also for your continued responsiveness, iterating the design of the CERB as you take into consideration low-income workers in the gig economy and the informal economy, as well as the now highly valued, but still underpaid, front-line workers in essential services such as personal support workers and staff in homeless services. It's important that there are supports in place for each segment of Canada's diverse labour force.
CERB or “COVID cash” will also help keep the money flowing in local economies. I'm sure many of you share my deep concern about the viability of small businesses, particularly along the main streets and retail strips that contribute so much to the character of our neighbourhoods and towns across Canada. The CERB is really a tremendous and historic public policy achievement. I offer my sincere thanks and congratulations to everyone who contributed to this idea.
Building on the innovative thinking and the responsiveness of the CERB, I have several suggestions for the federal government to pandemic-proof infrastructure for low-income people going forward.
My first recommendation is to implement automatic income tax filing for low-income people. The pandemic has highlighted the value of this, as most volunteer income tax clinics closed because of the pandemic. John Stapleton and others have made a very good case that the government already has the information needed to get low-income people access to important tax-related benefits. Part of an improved infrastructure for low-income people would include more financial problem-solving services, and we are working with Prosper Canada and others on specific proposals for that.
Secondly, Canada needs to rethink the range of housing options available to lower-income people. The housing situation wasn't working before, and now the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted even more how the lack of affordable housing affects us all. One way to put this very crassly is this: It's in everyone's personal interest that homeless and very poor people are not filling our hospitals because of being exposed to COVID-19 in overcrowded shelters, rooming and boarding homes, or tent encampments.
The future well-being of Canada is linked at least in part to a more inclusive housing system for low-income Canadians, and I would recommend that it would have the following three features at a minimum.
First, give public and not-for-profit charitable housing providers the exclusive role of taking care of the housing needs of lower-income Canadians. They have the long view, the mandate and the obligation to hold community assets such as affordable housing for perpetuity. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic has shown that landlords have significant influence over the well-being of their tenants or residents. For vulnerable people, landlords are sometimes their lifeline. Not-for-profit charities are mission-focused and accountable to community governance, so they are well positioned to maximize their resources to keep vulnerable occupants safe.
Second, provide not-for-profit charitable housing providers with the grants—not loans—needed to build or purchase housing. Let's not spend taxpayer or donor dollars on financing costs. Saving on financing costs frees up public and donated money to invest in more affordable housing over time.
Third, preserve existing affordable housing by providing an incentive to private landlords to sell their buildings to not-for-profit charitable organizations. The federal government could forgive capital gains tax and/or capital cost allowance payback if a private sector landlord sold a multi-unit residential building to a non-profit. Yes, this is a cost to government in forgone revenue, but it is cheaper, significantly cheaper, than constructing new affordable housing. Clearly, both are needed.
There are thousands of relatively affordable rental units in small apartment buildings in neighbourhoods and towns across the country. Many are owned by families or small operators, but very vulnerable to being bought up by REITs and multinational operators.
We have done an analysis of this public policy option with our consultant, Jill Black, based on previous work developed by long-time housing experts Steve Pomeroy and Marion Steele. I'd be happy to forward that information to anybody.
To recap, thank you for taking the bold step of providing COVID cash, the CERB. Please pandemic-proof the infrastructure for low-income Canadians with income tax auto-filing and a public or not-for-profit housing system for them.
Thank you for your time.
Before I begin, I would like to thank all our witnesses for taking the time to appear before the finance committee today. Now more than ever, Canadians facing homelessness and precarious living conditions are exceptionally vulnerable due to the spread of COVID-19. Ensuring that these individuals have safe and continued access to essential resources and supports is one of our government's top priorities. We are all incredibly grateful to you for the selfless work you do in this area and for your input and perspectives on how our programs are being delivered and are directly supporting Canadians facing homelessness. Thank you, and I look forward to our discussion this afternoon.
I have two questions. One is for Madam Arbaud and the other is for Mr. Clement. In the interest of time, I will say both.
[Translation]
Ms. Arbaud, the economic action plan contains a number of measures that address the problems of homelessness and, indirectly, housing. For instance, income replacement measures, such as the Canada emergency response benefit, will provide shelter for some recipients. Other measures, such as funding for the A Way Home program, specifically address these issues.
Do you think it's better to address homelessness and housing issues through specialized programs, rather than generalized measures such as the CERB?
[English]
To Mr. Clement, although this is not entirely related to homelessness and housing, while you are here I would like to discuss the $9 million in additional funding for the new horizons program that is being delivered through United Way Centraide.
It is critical to identify vulnerable seniors facing isolation or poverty as particularly vulnerable to COVID-19. Could you provide some details on how that funding is being distributed to meet the needs of vulnerable seniors, especially those facing poverty and precarious living conditions? What priorities or criteria are in mind, and has a plan been put in place to ensure consistent distribution standards?
:
It's a great question. It was around the new horizons for seniors program and the $9 million that the federal government is mobilizing in support of vulnerable seniors.
First of all, thank you for that contribution to Canadians. It's incredibly important today.
We all know that our seniors are the most at risk and vulnerable as a result of COVID-19. We know that means isolating at home and taking significant precautions. We also know that our most vulnerable seniors often are those who were using things such as community support programs and day programs for physical and social activities. That's where they were accessing nutritious food supports. Those programs have had to close because of social isolation, so the very infrastructure that was supporting our seniors isn't there. That means we have to actually bring those supports to them and our most vulnerable. That's really important. Not the least of that are things such as food.
I would name one more issue. If you think about meals on wheels programs, those are also often supported by volunteers who are seniors and at risk. Not only are some of the programs having to close because of social isolation, but some of the volunteers who have been supporting them have had to isolate. Therefore, it's a bit of a double whammy.
To answer your question about the methodology for distribution, we've been asked to make sure that those dollars are supporting all parts of Canada. The first thing we did was make sure there is a minimal viable amount of money that can go to communities across Canada. We also used a population distribution model. Where the seniors are and the distribution of seniors was used to then inform each region of the country in terms of their allotment of those dollars. Those dollars are being deployed through local United Way Centraide organizations, our 79 member organizations that serve all regions and all communities in Canada. They are accountable organizations with expertise on the ground, with community relationships and strong senior support relationships, that are going to be delivering that funding to community support and senior-serving organizations—
The difference between social housing and affordable housing is very important. Social housing is housing that does not belong to the private market. It therefore belongs to society or communities. Public housing often belongs to municipalities or the government, or non‑profit organizations and housing cooperatives. There are three forms of social housing in Canada, which in the past were funded directly by the federal government, before it was withdrawn in 1994.
Under current provincial programs, there are different formulas that are still funded and others that are less so. Since the withdrawal of the federal government, there is no longer any low‑income housing or public housing. This is housing that is very much in line with the needs of low‑income people, particularly tenants who are seniors, many of whom currently live in low‑income housing.
In the national housing strategy, the government talks about affordable housing, which can be anything and everything. It can include housing that can be rented for $2,000 a month, according to the rates set by the various programs.
At the moment, there is no definition of affordable housing. Depending on the various initiatives of the national housing strategy, it may be based on a percentage of income or a percentage of the median rent in the area, which often results in very expensive and unaffordable housing for the average core housing need renter, which includes 1.2 million Canadians. If memory serves me correctly, the median income of these Canadian households is about $18,000, and in Quebec it's even a little less. Therefore, they can't afford most of the private rental housing that has been built under the national housing strategy.
That's why we're calling for investments to be focused on social housing, in order to get out of this wave of real estate speculation, which is excluding people from city centres. We think that the only way to produce housing with guaranteed occupancy and not to encourage real estate speculation is to get out of the private housing market and to build more housing outside the private market in various forms, whether it is co‑operative, non‑profit or public housing.
With regard to your second question, in the economic situation we're facing, we need that kind of infrastructure, among other things, to encourage the local economy. In Quebec, a number of studies have been done on the financial benefits in the local economy, but I'll save those arguments for another discussion, perhaps.
You're probably going to be interested in what we're recommending, Mr. Ste‑Marie. I learned this morning that there are also shuttered housing units in Joliette. That said, it is mainly in Montreal that there are federally funded housing units that are now shuttered because they need to be renovated. Of course, they are everywhere in Canada. They can be renovated quickly. We think that would be a concrete measure to take, and it would not prevent investment in the development of new social housing. Such a measure would, at the very least, make these units available to people who need them. In Quebec, 40,000 people are waiting for public housing or low‑rent housing. We believe that we cannot do without these 300 housing units that are currently shuttered and that are still, for the most part, under federal responsibility.
The second measure we are asking for is a contingency fund. This is what other groups across Canada are asking for as well, and there are all kinds of petitions going around. We think this could easily be implemented on the CMHC side. It could be complementary to income support measures for people whose income is not enough to pay their rent, even with the $2,000. We know that there are people who are suffering further income losses because of the pandemic.
At FRAPRU, we do not recommend a private rent supplement; we prefer social housing. However, in the current circumstances, people need quick support, and rent supplements can be a way to keep tenants in their homes. Because the federal government has funded such programs in the past, this is manageable. In Quebec, there is already a program in place that would send a clear signal to the provinces to help tenants, for example.
The last measure does not pertain to homelessness, but has more to do with the medium term. Plans for the recovery phase should include investments in social housing. That way, we won't find ourselves in a worse situation after the pandemic than we were in before the pandemic, in terms of the housing and homelessness crisis facing cities big and small across Canada and Quebec.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thanks to our witnesses for being here today. This is a very important panel, and we shout out to all of the shelter and supportive housing workers across the country who are putting their lives at risk in providing vital supports at shelters and in supportive housing. These people are Canadian heroes. That's why the NDP caucus has been calling for a courage bonus. It's to ensure that those front-line workers receive appropriate levels of financial support at this critical time.
I'd like to address my first questions to Mr. Williams.
Shayne, thank you for being here. I really appreciate your being available for this panel. I want to ask you a couple of questions.
First, what would Lookout need right away to deal with COVID-19?
Second, to what extend does opening the CERB to make it a universal benefit to people who are left out.... Seniors, students and people who are unemployed are all left out of the CERB. If we made it universal, as has proposed and as it is already structured to be, what kind of difference would that make for the people you are working with?
Third, coming out of this crisis, a number of our witnesses have talked about the importance of not going back to the way we were before. You flagged in your presentation a national dental program—and national pharmacare is something that many people have stressed—and starting to build housing again, social, co-operative and affordable housing. How important is it to have a game plan coming out of this crisis so that we don't go back to a normal that had so much inequality?
:
Thank you, Mr. Julian. I appreciate the questions.
As to your first question on the immediate need, Lookout and other service providers across the country, like my peers on the call today, are looking for a myriad of ways to help people socially isolate, whether they're symptomatic or COVID-positive, in places that get them off the streets. There is co-operation with municipal governments and provincial governments to identify places, and then COVID Reaching Home dollars help operate places like the Roundhouse, the local gymnasium here in New Westminster and the church in Abbotsford. These are places where folks can come, and as we're going to inevitably see folks get diagnosed, they will have a spectrum of places where they can self-isolate and have their own bathrooms.
We've escalated a few different ideas to the province, and we're hopeful that we'll get some federal support for RVs, hotels and university dorms to have an inventory of places that would be suitable for that spectrum and relieve our health friends in their emergency response in emergency rooms so they can reserve their hospital interventions for folks who are COVID-positive and require ventilation and hospital expertise. The ones who can socially isolate and get well on their own could move into other places, and we can be kind of creative around that. That's an immediate need outside of the stuff in my presentation, such as PPE, best practices and cleaning, those types of things.
As for the CERB, we're seeing different folks accessing our shelter continually, and now there seems to be more seniors and students—folks who won't be able to access the CERB. Opening that up could be a massive prevention tool for individuals. It's a huge cost to government, I realize, but I think that it's putting the shingles on the roof rather than trying to mop the rainwater off the floor. This prevention tool would have an incredible long-term impact and would keep people out of the cycle of homelessness. We know that every additional day that somebody is homeless, it's more and more difficult to make the journey back to wellness. We want to prevent folks from becoming homeless or facing barriers, and I think that's a really smart approach to this crisis.
As for not going back, we're putting investments in and we're going to see a healthier community as a result of this pandemic. Hopefully the virus is not going to go through the shelters like wildfire and we're not going to see a huge loss of folks. That's the risk at this point. For the ones who are not in that situation, I think the nutritional value, the connection to health care, the relationship with non-profits and the fact that they're not being exposed on the streets right now are going to have a profound impact on their access to health care in the future and their ability to be well.
We absolutely have to put mechanisms in place like pharmacare and a national dental program, make a true investment in social and affordable housing, as our peers have said, and invest in getting current housing out of the hands of for-profit entities and into the hands of non-profits. The speakers today have articulated a lot of that stuff, and I think it's very necessary to have a plan coming out of this.
:
We have about 100 different programs across three different health authorities, as well as B.C. Housing, which is our housing entity here in the province of British Columbia. They're all great supports, trying to do the best thing and asking for inventory and what we need for PPE.
We're not an organization that's going to require N95 masks or that type of thing, but having just your regular disposable masks or cloth masks, goggles, hand sanitizer, gloves, those kinds of things, are all super important in what we do in sheltering and providing food for folks.
With the sheer volume of people and sites we have, our PPE requests are quite great, so we put those requests to our funders and we get a response saying, “We can't get as much as you need. We can only give you pieces of that.” We're then put into the situation of working with suppliers and volunteers. We have a great immigrant program here locally that's made cloth masks for us for a small donation towards materials, so we're cobbling it together. I'm telling you that's a full-time job plus at this point, for the one person trying to pull it together.
Recently, B.C. Housing announced here in the Downtown Eastside that there would be a distribution centre to procure community donations and then spread that out to non-profits. I think it has started. We're starting to see a little more support, but our PPE asks have largely gone unaddressed. If it weren't for that full-time worker, our local connections and great champions in the community, we would probably be in a much worse situation.
:
I'm anal about numbers. I have a finance background, so I pay attention to the numbers.
To give you some scope very quickly, our plan here at Siloam before COVID hit, and even while it exists, is that we're opening.... Right outside my building right now, I could show you a new building expansion. It's a paradox, where it's sited, because we're going to have space available for all the services I've described to you in the coming months. We'd be opening at the end of May, had COVID not come upon us. I say that it's a paradox. We're grateful for the space, but it also tells you the need. We need the room because the needs continue to expand, and COVID is going to put more pressure on that. We're going to have more beds in addition to the 110 we have right now.
We responded to an RFP recently. We've been awarded, based on the need, an increased number of supportive recovery beds for people coming out of addiction recovery. We have room in our current building after we make the move, so we're paying attention to that and we're expanding on our social enterprise. With all those things, given that we expect donor fallout, we're going to need resources, and I would love to work with government to show a business case to say, “Look, here is what we need. Hold us accountable and here are the outputs you can expect.”
You made a comment about the dignity and self-esteem of people. By investing in people who have been down and out, with hardship leading to homelessness, I can tell you first-hand that people want to work. They want to be trained or retrained so that they can get back into their own place and back into the job market. We have stories and experiences. When people come through the front door of Siloam, they will come back and share their experience because they came out ahead when they came out the other door. I trust it's the same for some of the organizations that are on the phone today.
The last comment I would make is that as we pay attention to the post-COVID future, the need is going to go up. We anticipate that our donor contributions and other revenue contributions are going to go down, and therein lies the rub. We know that we can work together with the community to expand upon the services, but we're going to need your help. We're going to need the help of government, and in return for that, I know we can provide you with some comfort in terms of the metrics to say, “Here is how many people are going back into housing; here is how many people are going back to work as a result of job training; here is how many people have participated in health care and are being taken care of for whatever illness they might have.”
We don't want to be irresponsible when we say this, because we're dealing with it with all hands on deck today, but with my leadership team, we're saying, “Okay, when we come out of this—and we are going to come out of this collectively, as a nation—here are going to be some of the challenges.” I hope we can have another opportunity to talk about things like that, and I hope it's in the short term rather than the long term.
I trust that answers your question. I could really go on, but thank you for the opportunity.
:
Perfect. Could you do me a favour and formally submit that to the committee, please, just so that it can be part of our formal deliberations?
You've also made a number of recommendations around housing, which were very helpful. This question may be for Mr. Bell, as well, who talked a bit about the ongoing discussions we're going to need to have.
I like to say that in every crisis there's an opportunity before us. We have introduced the national housing strategy. We have introduced the poverty reduction strategy. We've taken a number of huge steps to try to address the housing issue, the homelessness issue and the poverty issue in our country. The opportunity that is before us.... We have a better understanding of what's happening right now and some of our vulnerabilities.
You've presented a number of ideas, Maureen, around things that we could be incorporating or adding to the efforts we are already making right now, so I want to ask this. You mentioned an analysis that was done around your CERB recommendation to provide an incentive to private landlords. Please submit that to us.
I only have 30 seconds left, but maybe you could talk a little more to us. Do you see the recommendations that you've made as fitting in well with the national housing strategy, or is it in addition to what we have already proposed?
:
I have not given it that much thought, but on the surface I like your idea, even if that is a temporary measure, because certainly it would create some incentive for people. We know there will be challenges within households with what I would call “disposable income”, but if that were a consideration, I believe that would be worthy, even in the short term. I would see that as part of a partnership between the federal government and the agencies, like Siloam and others participating on the phone here and across the country, whereby we could continue.
At Siloam, given the fact that 90% of our dollars are from donors, we think we need to be good stewards with every dollar so that we can stretch them to the best of our ability. I think a partnership that would include a measure like that with the federal government would perhaps get donor communities to continue giving. I also think that in addition to being able to adopt measures like that, we need to be in a position as organizations to show the impact they are having. That's why I said in my earlier comments that whatever measures could be done or put into place, including the one you just suggested, should show the impact they are having.
We talked a lot about housing today. It starts with housing, but you need the supports. That's where those operational dollars come into play so much. They say, “Okay, John Doe, you have a place now, but you must have the supports.” He must have the ability to attend job training to rehone his skills or learn a new skill.
Our biggest fear, quite frankly, is that if the 90% should plummet significantly, we have no choice but to cut back services. That would be a sad day, not only for non-profit organizations but for the hospitals and the places that serve our communities that will continue to be overloaded by people showing up at emergency rooms and elsewhere who are battling addictions and mental health issues.
It's complicated, but the simplest way I can explain it to you is if that method and other methods.... I think the Reaching Home initiative is tremendous, but I'd like to see it get more legs. Siloam has participated in the national housing co-investment fund. It's great, but it needs to gain more momentum. We should see what's working and what's not, and redirect the dollars into areas where they are needed for those who are working on the ground.
We would be a very worthy participant in trying to trade ideas. I don't want to get ahead of myself, because I think all of us on this conference call today are speaking the same language, but accountability needs to be put in place by all of us. If you were to increase the non-refundable tax credits around charitable donations and if the national housing strategy were to expand, get more aggressive or redirect, I would expect that in return you would need to see results.
Thank you.
Thank you to the presenters. It is a very interesting discussion today. Housing is a very important issue in my riding. It's probably one of the biggest issues we are challenged with.
I'm the MP for the Northwest Territories. In the north so far we've been very fortunate that COVID-19 has had very little presence in our communities, especially our smaller communities, because not only do these communities have limited health resources, but with our overcrowding problem, it can be almost impossible for many to practice physical distancing within their own homes.
I have two questions.
First, would you agree that this pandemic has proven the need for greater support in addressing the social determinants of health, like housing? I know that nobody here has talked about the north or remote or indigenous communities, but I want your opinion on that.
Second, I'm hearing a lot of suggestions about building houses as part of economic recovery, because it's going to create jobs in every community we build houses in. Can you talk about those two things?
I'm just going to throw it out to whoever is interested in responding. Maybe all of you can respond, if we have the time.
:
Thank you for the questions.
The first question was about whether the pandemic has increased awareness of the need for housing in communities. I can tell you that here in Winnipeg, the simple answer is yes. It already existed. There was already work being done by our organization and others, in consultation with End Homelessness Winnipeg, to try to determine where the costs are and who's going to operate these houses in working with landlords and all those things, but this pandemic has just increased the need.
Further to the question, I will tell you that I know there's a significant piece about the indigenous community that was just mentioned. It should be known that 50% or 60% of the people who are having meals at Siloam on a daily basis are of indigenous backgrounds and come from the north. They are seeking housing. We're working with End Homelessness Winnipeg. I know I keep mentioning End Homelessness Winnipeg, and they're going to love the promotion I'm giving them here today. They are officially an indigenous organization, so they're working very closely with that issue, but they're also feeling the pressures of the need for housing within the indigenous community.
Simply put, this pandemic has just put us all on alert in terms of how much more critical the housing situation is. I have to say again that it's more than just the bricks and mortar of the houses. We have to have the supports in place. That is where I hope the federal government, in the next two or three or four months, or whatever your guess is for when this is going to end, will show a willingness to listen from an operating perspective and say, “Yes, there's a need for housing, but how about the operations to help people as they train for jobs and deal with mental illness and deal with addiction and those types of things?” Those things are escalating.
:
Mr. Chairman and committee members, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you and speak to the difficult realities that farmers and food supply chains across Canada are facing due to the COVID-19 pandemic. These next days and weeks are essential if we are to ensure Canada's domestic food supply is secure both now and into the future.
My name is Mary Robinson and I farm on a sixth-generation family farm in P.E.I. I'm also president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture. Today I'm joined by CFA's assistant executive director, Scott Ross.
The CFA is Canada's largest general farm organization, providing a unified national voice for the 200,000 farm families across Canada. Whether through travel restrictions, social distancing or closure of critical businesses, food systems around the world are being challenged by these new operating conditions. This global uncertainty highlights the importance of a well-functioning supply of affordable and nutritious Canadian food, a critical factor in good public health. This must be the leading priority behind the direct public health impacts of COVID-19.
Canadians have always been able to depend on farmers to grow food. Today, Canadian farmers need immediate help from our federal government to continue fulfilling that responsibility. Without it, Canadian consumers could see a decrease in the amount and variety of food at their local grocery stores, as well as higher prices in the months ahead. I applaud the collaborative efforts of all levels of government in mobilizing their resources to protect Canadians' health, demonstrating what can be accomplished in the face of urgent challenges when we work together.
There is no shortage of issues Canadian farms and supply chain partners are facing. Our first concern is the labour shortage impacting farms and food processing. We welcome many of the measures taken to date. However, continued logistical challenges will likely see many Canadian farmers still short on critical labour needs. This extends to processors and other key buyers of agricultural products, who continue to experience disruptions and reduced capacity.
The second concern is the increasing unexpected costs COVID-19 is placing on Canadian farmers. Supply chain disruptions, like plant closures in livestock, already see farmers having to hold on to livestock where they can or face immediate animal welfare challenges and the prospect of depopulation where they cannot. Regardless, this equates to additional expenses and reduced production. Meanwhile, shifts in the retail and food service landscape have seen markets evaporate overnight, leaving farmers with few options, if any. These challenges are eroding the confidence they need to invest in planting a crop and maintaining livestock herds, decisions that must be made now and directly affect the availability and affordability of foods later this year.
A domestic supply is the one source of food we truly can depend on. This year, more than ever in my lifetime, we will need Canadian farmers to produce food and set our country up to best weather this storm.
The CFA is calling for an emergency preparedness plan that gives farmers confidence to overcome these challenges, targeting investments in a number of key areas.
The first is a flexible and responsive emergency fund giving farmers and food businesses confidence that there will be expedient financial support to help them address unforeseen challenges.
The second is enhancement to Canada's BRM suite to address immediate financial constraints through AgriInvest and provide confidence that farmers will receive adequate support from AgriStability if they do see significant losses this year.
The third is prioritizing access to PPE, second only to health, to ensure all agri-food workers feel safe coming to work.
Finally, further measures are needed to encourage Canadians to work on farms and in Canada's food-processing plants.
Canadian farmers are resilient, hard-working people who take pride in the fact that every day they feed Canadians. If government invests now in mitigation and preparedness, it will ensure our food system is secure and our grocery stores continue to be well stocked with safe and affordable food, while preventing far more costly issues down the road and positioning the agri-food sector to help drive Canada's economic recovery and prevent long-term reductions in Canada's capacity to produce food.
I thank you all for your time and welcome any questions you may have.
:
Thank you very much for the opportunity to address the members of the House of Commons finance committee.
My name is Barry Friesen and I'm the general manager of Cleanfarms. I've had the fortune of living in four provinces from coast to coast, from B.C. to Prince Edward Island to Nova Scotia, and now Ontario. My first job was on a farm, so I'm very proud to be talking about this.
I'll start by mentioning that I've worked in agriculture now permanently for 10 years. I've never been prouder to work in the industry and with farmers, and with people like Mary and Martin, who are in this for the long haul.
Cleanfarms is a Canadian non-profit steward organization created and funded by the Canadian crop protection industry, comprising agriculture manufacturers, retailers and growers. We work across the agricultural value chain to recover waste from Canadian farms: plastic packaging such as jugs, barrels and totes; large plastic grain storage bags and silage wrap; seed, pesticide and fertilizer bags; and twine. We are one of the many industries that support Canadian farmers. Our work also contributes to a growing circular economy for plastics and helps maintain the health and well-being of the rural environment.
I've been asked to speak about how Cleanfarms is managing operations within the challenges of the government's response to the COVID-19 restrictions. For context, the ag and agri-food industry contributes over $100 billion annually to Canada's GDP. At the same time, it promotes food security here and worldwide and employs 2.3 million people. Managing issues beyond industry's control, whether in weather or politics, is the norm, but as you've already heard, COVID is pushing way past business as usual and many farmers are being forced to make unthinkable decisions.
Over many years, ag has proven itself as a leader in innovation, and growers place huge investments in their businesses. At the same time, this industry is focused on sustainability and protecting land, air and water, because if it isn't, Canadian ag won't exist. This is a lifelong commitment, and it's where plastics and Cleanfarms come in.
Plastics are vital tools for farmers. From plastic packaging crates to plastic jugs and totes to plastic film wraps that safeguard crops after harvest, plastics protect Canadian agriculture. Cleanfarms helps farmers recycle this packaging and promotes a circular economy in ag. Effective packaging is especially valuable when the supply chain is under pressure, as with the recent rail disruptions and now with COVID.
For example, while we're discussing the impact of COVID today, thousands of tonnes of grains worth millions of dollars remain securely stored on farmers' fields in grain bags. Grain bags are those long plastic tubes you see across the Prairies. For some growers, grain bags can be the difference between survival and disaster, and when they can't be used anymore, Cleanfarms collects them for recycling back into new products. This is just one example of the sustainable systems that are in place now to mitigate disruptions and promote food security during and after COVID.
Right now ag retailers across the country are working to make sure farmers have what they need to begin planting. In these challenging times, this may mean delivering products like crop inputs to farms ahead of schedule to avoid the impacts of transportation disruption. This is possible because these materials, pesticides and fertilizers are safely stored in plastic packaging.
We need to think of the recycling phase as well, where COVID is also having an impact. We're working closely with staff at over 1,600 collection sites across Canada, helping them put in place physical distancing precautions that are so important to ensuring growers can safely return their empty containers for recycling. COVID is adding cost and new pressures to these operations.
At the same time, domestic and international recycling supply chains are slowing down and entering crisis mode. Recycling plants were facing pressure before COVID and are closing for the health and safety of their workers, creating stockpiles of plastics that can't currently be recycled into the economy and turned into new products. There's a huge investment in this industry, and we don't want to turn the clock back to 2008, when investments were lost and we had to rebuild essentially from the ground up.
Despite COVID-19, Cleanfarms teams are still at work with our ag partners trying to figure out how to recover more plastics and other materials so they remain a valuable part of our economy. We need to support the ag supply chain so we can manage these plastics to protect the environment. To do this, we need to support the industries that enable Canada to be self-sufficient, competitive and sustainable. We must protect jobs and the environment, reduce food waste and promote food security. Our partners are doing all of this in the face of COVID, and we will do our part, recycling the plastic products and packaging that are so vital to ag productivity.
In closing, I'd like to thank the government for the support that is being directed to agriculture communities to enable them to continue with the essential work they do, and I'd like to thank the committee for the opportunity to share these additional concerns and comments with you today.
:
Thank you for the opportunity to share perspectives from Canada's forest sector and its workers.
FPAC represents Canada's wood, pulp, paper and wood bio-products manufacturers. We're a $73-billion annual industry, directly employing some 230,000 Canadians across over 600 communities.
FPAC is grateful for the Government of Canada's and provincial governments' recognition of the essential nature of our sector, our products, our supply chain and our workforce.
Rarely have Canada's forest products been of such high profile. From a 241% increase in the demand for toilet paper to the need for sanitary wipes and paper towels and pulp that goes into protective masks and hospital gowns, wood pellets, biofuels to green energy that feeds heating systems in provincial power grids, we've embraced our role as an essential provider. Our workers and partners along the supply chain have been incredible. Mary talked a bit about that. We can't say thank you enough to our mill workers, our further manufacturers, truck drivers, railroaders, retailers...I could go on.
Given the moments of protectionism we've seen in recent weeks, I'm also proud that we have this sustainable and valuable natural resource right here at home so we can provide for Canadians.
Despite the current headwinds, I must say that our sector is quite optimistic about the future, but there's no doubt that the next two to three quarters are going to be brutal.
That said, we are looking to 2021 and beyond, and we view our sector as having an opportunity to be one of the bright lights in Canada's economic recovery, especially in our rural and northern communities. Wood products are increasingly becoming the building material of choice. They come from a renewable source and from among the best-managed forests in the world. Our wood waste isn't wood waste at all. Wood chips from our sawmills are being turned into everything from toilet paper to bioplastics. Paper towels are being turned into biofuels. It's our contribution to a more circular and lower-carbon economy.
Our industry is not looking for a bailout. What we're looking for is bolstered cash flow supports to keep our businesses operating through these difficult next two to three quarters. Remember, we're an industry that hit our low point in the market in 2018, and 2019 was difficult. About $3.6 billion of Canadian industry softwood lumber duties are sitting in a U.S. bank account now, and we can't wait to get that.
Across the country, over the next 36 months, we have hundreds of millions of dollars in shovel-ready projects, ready to go, that will further improve environmental performance, drive economic growth, and sustain jobs in northern and rural communities, where there are often few options, or in some cases where we're the biggest game in town.
The rest of 2020 is going to be about survival.
Thus far, well-intended federal programs like the wage subsidy program are leaving a large majority of players in our sector and our workers behind, and the effectiveness and speed at which we need liquidity supports remains a big question mark.
This is what we're facing. Lumber markets have collapsed, with a nearly 40% decline in prices in recent weeks, leading to the temporary closures of dozens of sawmills. At last count, we were at 39 sawmill closures across the country, and this has put thousands out of work.
As well, some of those essential products that I talked about earlier are made possible because of Canada's pulp mills, but with sawmills going down, our pulp mills are starting to suffer. They can't get the chips they need to make their in-demand products, so some of them are starting to announce downtime as well.
In addition, with offices closed, stores closed, advertising revenues down and schools out, our newsprint and paper markets are collapsing around us as well.
Despite falling markets, with increased supports there is an opportunity to keep more of our mills operating and more of our people working. Right now, most sawmills in Canada have come out of their winter harvests and our log yards are pretty full, so it would be great to process more of our log inventories. This is where an improved wage subsidy program would be of interest.
We're a highly integrated sector. Our sawmills are our industry's heartbeat. We need to find a way now to keep our sawmills operating so chips can continue to feed our pulp and paper mills. If we don't have chips flowing, our industry's biggest artery is cut off, and thousands more will be out of work.
Here are a couple of proposed fixes on the wage subsidy side.
Many of our companies have multiple segments and mills, and they just don't meet the criterion of a business with a 30% revenue decline. If there were a measure to consider a mill-by-mill approach or a more segmented approach, thousands more people could continue to work.
We're also a proponent of a sliding-scale approach. We found the 75% threshold to be very generous and of great interest, but we'd be equally interested for our companies facing a 10% or 15% decline to maybe qualify for a 40% or 50% subsidy. That creativity would be a big help to us as well.
Wage subsidies aren't a magic bullet. Our biggest issue—and I think it's similar for our friends in agriculture—is about liquidity: managing increased operating costs, working through falling prices and markets, and making our credit payments. We've just not seen the evidence yet that the BCAP out of EDC is going to deliver what we need.
We need supports now that move with speed and ease in the face of markets that are falling off a cliff, measures that are not going to force companies to provide more security. Many just don't have the flexibility to do that. We need measures that are responsive to the reality of the crisis, and we need our lenders to be prepared to take more risks than our main street banks.
We have a few other ideas. I'll defer those, maybe, to the Q and A portion. I have a couple of suggestions around worker supports that we're working on with our friends at USW and Unifor. I'll defer those to the Q and A as well.
I look forward to your questions. Thank you.
:
Thank you so much for the opportunity to present to all of you regarding the government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
I'm Lynn Napier, the mayor of Fort Smith and president of the Northwest Territories Association of Communities. We proudly represent 33 communities of the Northwest Territories that vary in size from 52 to 21,000. Our members are both indigenous communities and traditional municipalities, but all are northern and remote to varying degrees.
We have been fortunate enough to present to this committee in the past and have highlighted our four main federal priorities as infrastructure, climate change, housing and broadband. The current pandemic has really highlighted the importance of these priorities and how much they impact on the resilience of northern communities.
We've been very pleased to hear of the programs announced to date to mitigate the economic impacts on both individuals and businesses. Further, the more recently announced health and social services support for northern communities was very welcome. When our territorial government, residents and businesses are doing better economically, so are our communities. Despite the support program's name, little or none is actually going to local communities. We are, however, going to need additional programs to support local governments.
As you know, local governments are relied upon to keep essential services running. We have 33 communities that deliver water, sewer and landfill services; provide fire protection, planning and building services, as well as transit and recreation services; and protect our most vulnerable populations.
We're working tirelessly to ensure that we maintain these services, but we are also very concerned. COVID-19 has led to not only many additional tasks for communities; it is also compromising their ability to raise revenues, whether they are taxes or user fees. This poses a particular challenge because of the small size of our communities, especially when they cannot legally carry a deficit budget. We're going to require particular support from the territorial and federal governments.
I would like to highlight some unique areas of challenge in the north that make us particularly vulnerable to the virus and to its impacts.
We have a large cohort of vulnerable populations, including those on income support, the homeless and those with mental health and addiction challenges. Well in excess of 50% of our housing is overcrowded and insufficient.
The last month of self-isolation has really highlighted the inadequate broadband connectivity in our communities and proven a barrier to education, working from home, telehealth and participation in the digital economy on an unprecedented level.
The lack of proximity to health care services as a result of our communities' remoteness is making community leadership very anxious. This is further compounded by the fact that we are over 50% indigenous, which is a particular risk factor with respect to COVID-19.
We are already seeing significant impacts on our two main industries: the mining and oil and gas industry, and tourism. Last but not least, our existing supply chain issues are only likely to become worse.
Our communities will require support for the immediate response to COVID-19. The funding should be provided as quickly as possible. Community governments are already experiencing significant impacts. To get this funding out the door as quickly as possible, it should be allocated-based and distributed on a base-plus basis.
Direct municipal financial impacts will also need to be addressed as well, whether they relate to reduction in tax revenues, user fees or additional costs. We hear estimates that one in four businesses may not survive the pandemic. That would mean a significant loss of tax revenue. Closed recreational facilities cannot generate user fees. Without these financial supports, communities will be forced to reduce services even more, or those that can will have to raise taxes at a time of economic instability. With northerners already subject to a very high cost of living even before COVID-19, this will have a significant impact and may put some residents into insolvency or force them to leave.
With respect to planning for the critical economic stimulus recovery phase, I am pleased to let you know that local governments are agile enough to be important partners. We commissioned a report by The Conference Board of Canada's centre for the north, which clearly demonstrated that community governments' expenditures have the largest impact on the NWT economy. For example, local government expenditures generate 13 jobs per $1 million expended, while territorial and federal projects generate seven and six jobs per $1 million respectively. Local governments are absolutely the best bang for the buck.
The expansion of the gas tax fund with a continued allocation-based distribution across Canada on a base-plus basis is the best way to get stimulus dollars to our communities.
Also, although housing funding is not funded to communities, it is incumbent upon us to highlight the critical importance of increasing the funding for housing in the Northwest Territories. This not only will serve as an economic stimulus, but will also address many of the social determinants of health in the communities and, in the long run, make communities more resilient.
We would be very pleased to provide advice on how best to design the various funding programs for the greatest effectiveness in the north. We're best positioned to help various programs navigate the challenges in the north. We ask that you not wait to contact us until there's little or no uptake on a program. We do it so much that we even have a brochure on it.
We wish to thank you for the invitation to present to you this afternoon. We hope that you continue to consult with us, with the Government of the Northwest Territories, our sister organizations across Canada and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities.
Thank you.
Ladies and gentlemen of the committee, thank you for inviting the Union des producteurs agricoles to comment on the COVID‑19 pandemic and the agricultural challenges it has created, specifically in rural and remote communities.
Agriculture is the main economic activity in rural areas. Together with the agri-food sector, agriculture contributes more than $112 billion to Canada's economy every year and is responsible for one in eight jobs. Agricultural production alone generates annual revenues of more than $60 billion. What's more, Canadian farmers invest nearly $8 billion in their businesses every year.
Hundreds of communities all over the country depend on agriculture to promote land use, sustain local services and support the operation of schools and other public services. Without agriculture, Canada would be uninhabitable.
Canadian farmers now have to compete with countries whose social, environmental and health standards are significantly lower than ours. We also have to compete with farmers who receive greater government assistance than we do, in the United States, in particular, and it's becoming harder and harder for us to remain competitive in that context.
The COVID‑19 pandemic is a major crisis on an unprecedented scale, and the agricultural sector is not unscathed. Plant and animal production have been hit hard. The market upheaval has forced each and every farmer to take on enormous risks just to keep production going. We are pressing ahead into the unknown.
AgriStability, AgriInvest and AgriRecovery, the government's risk management programs for farming businesses, are not designed for a situation like this. We need to know now whether the government is going to be there, as we take huge financial risks to keep production going.
The Canadian Federation of Agriculture, or CFA, made a series of recommendations, which Ms. Robinson talked about earlier. The CFA is calling on the government to create an emergency fund for the agri-food sector and to restore the AgriStability program to 2013 levels prior to the funding cuts. The CFA is also recommending an enhancement of the AgriInvest program in 2020. The Canadian government has to make it clear to farmers that it will be there if the situation gets even worse in the coming months.
To support the future of rural communities, land use and food chain continuity, the Canadian government has to restore business risk management program funding to what it was before the 2013 budget cuts. The COVID‑19 pandemic is shining a light on an urgent problem in the agri-food sector, which is the result of years of withdrawal by the federal government.
In times of crisis, Canada's food security hinges on the ability of the country's farmers to feed the population. The prevailing health crisis is putting a strain on farmers around the world. It's tough to predict where inventory levels and food prices will be in the months ahead. Which vegetables will we be able to import, and how much will they cost?
Not sending a clear message to Canada's agri-food sector now is akin to putting the population at great risk.
Good afternoon everyone, and thank you for the opportunity to address the committee on behalf of Quebec's municipalities.
To start, I'd like to point out that I had trouble getting connected for the meeting. In a pandemic, when everyone is in isolation, the importance of a strong Internet network in every region and municipality across the country becomes very apparent.
Senneterre is located in northeastern Quebec, in the Abitibi‑Témiscamingue region. With a population of 1,300, it spans a vast area of 16,512 km², making it one of Canada's biggest municipalities. Forestry is the main economic activity. As a central town, it's a major urban hub in rural Quebec. Offering government, business and industry-related services, the municipality serves a number of small surrounding communities, or buttress communities, as we call them.
The town is also located in a major indigenous region, where 8% of the population is indigenous. The region is home to three indigenous communities: Cree, Atikamekw and Algonquin. With the current crisis, everyone seems to have forgotten the crisis we were dealing with in January and February, the rail crisis stemming from unresolved indigenous issues. We must not close our minds to that reality.
The Abitibi‑Témiscamingue region depends on mining, forestry, agriculture and tourism. As you can imagine, these four economic drivers have been hit hard by the current situation. The crisis's impact on Quebec's municipal community and on small communities has been severe, especially for remote rural communities, which very often revolve around a single industry. In our municipality, it's forestry, so we feel it's important that any economic recovery plans include opening the border to support forestry. Our plants are still operating today because we need chips, but tomorrow, we'll need to ship lumber to various markets, especially the U.S., which buys the bulk of what we produce. The border must be opened without restriction to the lumber trade.
Senneterre is home to 21 outfitters, most of which serve European and American customers. I can tell you that we don't expect any Americans to come up for bear hunting or fishing this year. Outfitters will probably have a tougher time. Clearly, we need to support our tourism industry with significant and targeted assistance, especially for outfitters.
As far as the role of municipalities is concerned, thus far, their primary focus has been emergency management and they've taken steps to provide some relief for property tax payments. When it comes to supporting individuals and businesses, municipalities will be there to help them get back on their feet. Nevertheless, much is expected of the higher levels of government, namely, provincial and federal authorities. That means there are certain expectations as regards support for individuals and businesses, expectations that the programs put in place have in part satisfied.
The Union des municipalités du Québec is currently working on a municipal economic recovery plan, which it will submit to the provincial government. Some of the measures will also be submitted to the federal government, including the municipal water infrastructure fund, or FIMEAU in French for short. Roughly 50 of the projects that the provincial government has approved are being looked at by federal public servants. In many cases, it's just a matter of rubber-stamping the proposals. It's important that these projects get under way quickly or at least that they be ready to go for the recovery phase.
The gas tax fund is another priority for the Union des municipalités du Québec. Not only does the fund need to be enhanced, but it also needs to be adjusted for broader use. It should allow for community-level projects, not just major infrastructure projects such as water and sewer work. It's also necessary to repair municipal garages and fire stations. The fund needs to be adjusted and enhanced.
Furthermore, we need to put our young people to work. In April, it's no longer realistic to stick to the work placement and summer job programs put forth in January. We need to allow for a broader use of youth summer job funding. In Quebec City, a major shift towards a decentralized public service is happening, something the federal government should seriously consider.
[English]
Small is beautiful.
[Translation]
The government should consider delivering local and economic development services in Quebec's regions. Doing that would put more people to work in offices and require more employment services in Quebec's regions. The government needs to explore ways to decentralize the public service to bring it closer to the people it serves.
I had a few other points to make, but I'll probably get a chance to come back to them during the question and answer period. I think my five minutes are already up.
:
Thank you. It's great to hear from you as well.
The funding measures that have come out already have been very well received. All of the supports that are going towards the territorial government and to the On the Land program—which is an amazing measure that's been put out to allow people not only to self-isolate but also to go back to traditional practices for food security—are very well received across the territory.
What we're looking at now is that while money has gone out to airlines, we know that it's not enough, and airlines are critical to our entire territory. The impact of COVID-19 on airlines has been devastating, and there are communities across the north that we can get to only by air. We rely on airlines for medical travel, for food security, really for everything, and right now that's the only way we can even get testing for COVID into the smaller communities. We know that's a really urgent issue facing the north and probably rural communities all across Canada, especially for territories like Nunavut, where there are no roads that lead there at all.
We know that is a major impact. As well, we are coming now into breakup season, so we're losing the ice road access to many communities, and that's already affecting our supply chains. The impact we have seen on the supply chain in the past two months is only going to become worse.
We know that any money that's going to come into the area for construction or for supplies, for this season especially, will need to come soon, so that we can use those funds across the territory. There is a very limited window for getting to the different communities, so if there are any programs to help with economic stimulus, such as construction or housing, which is one of our federal platforms in the territory, we're going to need the money quickly so that we can get those projects going.
I'd like to build on what Martin has shared with us. The AgriInvest stimulus we've asked for would be 5%, based on allowable net sales from 2018. The reason for our suggestion is that it's a very simple mechanism that would give a quick injection of cash to producers straight across all commodities in the country. We thought that would be the cleanest way to get a stimulus to farmers to help them address some of these extraordinary costs.
The second part of our ask was that we would increase AgriStability coverage, and that would mean returning the coverage rate to 85% and removing the reference margin limit. Now, AgriStability is typically used to address large declines in margins. What we've seen is subscription to this program drop off because it's become very ineffective. I believe it was the Conservative government that cut it back 15%, so now if you're going to trigger an AgriStability payment, you're in very rough shape financially. It comes much later, 16 months after the fact, and it's really not that effective as a safety net program. That's why we've asked for AgriInvest to be reinstated to what it was before.
We've also asked for improved access to capital. We know all of these offers to Farm Credit Canada have been made. They represent only about 30% of the lending within our sector, so we'd like to see CALA expanded to other lending agencies in Canada.
The emergency fund that we mentioned is really a statement of confidence by government to Canadian producers. We've heard from other presenters that we're competing against American producers who definitely know they have the confidence of their president. They've seen over $30 billion given to them. What we need is for our government to step up, much as they have with health, and say that we need to ensure that our domestic food supply is secure this year. We need to make sure that the producers who are investing hundreds of million of dollars right now have the confidence to do that. If we don't have that kind of financial backstop from the federal government, we are going to see a reduction in the amount of food planted and the number of animals raised this year. We will see it hit all of us, and it will definitely result in food shortages, a decrease in the variety of food and an increase in the cost of food.
We've been careful to not raise panic and alarm about this in the press, but I can tell you that in Prince Edward Island and straight across the country, I'm hearing about upwards of a 25% reduction in potato planting. I'm understanding that in the Holland Marsh and that entire area, which is really the vegetable basket of Toronto where 90% of the produce comes from in the middle of summer, they're looking at a 10% to 40% reduction in their planting.
This is going to have a direct impact, because producers right now do not feel that the government has put anything meaningful in place that they can take to the bank so that if something happens on their farm due to COVID-19 and they're unable to harvest, they're going to be covered. It makes more sense for them not to make the investment.
:
Thanks for the opportunity.
The wage subsidy piece has been top of the list with Unifor and USW in our conversations, just in terms of getting more of our companies in. As to the reasons that we're not fitting, there are a couple of things. The March 2019 comparison was when we were at our low point in lumber commodity markets. We came off a real high in 2017, got hit with softwood lumber, and things started to slide late in 2018. That was not a great benchmark for us. The January-February 2020 adjustment as an average didn't work either, because we were still not quite out of that point yet. Our margins are very thin and we're also selling in U.S. dollars. Our revenues get a bit of an artificial bump with the U.S. dollar, with the Canadian dollar going down, so we just couldn't fit into this model.
To be fair to the finance minister, we've shared these new approaches just in the last couple of days. We were looking forward to last Saturday's legislation and we took a few days to try to find our way. We do think there's an opportunity in the regulatory framework, so we'll do our best to push there. It's only been a couple of days, to be fair to and his team.
As I said, that's not a magic bullet. We have massive cash flow issues that we have to deal with. Really, the wage subsidy will help us get a number of mills up and running, get some more people working and get that chip flow going to the pulp mills. We have three pulp mills that are either.... One is down and two are going down, but their order sheets are pretty full, so there's a demand for their products and we'd like to keep those pulp mills moving.
On the worker side, I learned two things in this process. The first is around what's called a SUB, or a supplementary unemployment benefit. Because we're a commodity sector, prior to March 15 a lot of companies in our sector that were in temporary shutdowns would try to keep a lot of our employees whole. They might go on EI, and then we'd top them up with SUB. It could be $200 to $300 a week on top of the $573 under EI.
On March 15, we kicked into the CERB, and I think I get why this happened: It was the ease of getting this thing up and running and cash out the door. Then the maximum benefit moved from $573 to $500. As well, our ability to do that $200 to $300 top-up was taken away from us. Right now it's still not fixed. It's been in office for about a week. We've had a couple of tries. I know they're busy, but we still haven't had word back.
That measure to top up and help our workers during this transition is on industry's dime, and we'd like the flexibility to use it again.
:
I don't need to go very far to find examples and I will talk about my home specifically. My son has received the CERB.
We looked forward to a measure being announced, and once that measure was implemented, things went quickly. Regarding the CERB, I have a concrete example because the beneficiary lives in my home. That is good news.
For businesses, as soon as measures are announced, we relay them to our economic development services. Currently, none of our businesses have been able to use the federal measures, but their file is under review. So I cannot speak to the effectiveness of those measures. We have teams taking care of those files. They are not really at the municipal level because those are rather territorial economic development services. We can measure the effectiveness of measures over the next few days and weeks.
However, I can tell you that needs on the ground are huge.
The CERB is good news and it seems to be effective. The financial assistance for businesses will be measured in due course. All that is combined with financial assistance from the Government of Quebec. They should not be taken cumulatively, and we must make sure that measures will truly help the recovery of businesses, but not necessarily of those that were already struggling. We have teams that are currently analyzing all that.
What we have heard on the Canada summer jobs program is that agricultural employers, as essential industries, can still access and apply, at this date, for the Canada summer jobs program.
One of the challenges we've heard identified, however, is that no new funding or spaces have been made available in the program, so for agricultural employers to get applicants, it would require another business or industry to be bumped off the list. Certainly we're very pleased to see that this recognition has been given, and we hope to see youth coming out to farms.
I think there is a broader set of challenges, though, around agricultural employment and bringing youth in, and it extends beyond that program. Much of it speaks to the challenges at this point in time in attracting Canadians, writ large, to farms; and that speaks to remote locations. We all understand the consistent message and recognize the importance of staying home, but it certainly creates a challenging set of decisions for Canadians when they are looking to leave their homes and go to work on a farm. More than anything, I think, when we look at the CERB and the incentives that are provided, there is a real, challenging case to be made to see someone forgo those benefits to work on farms at this time.
One of the key issues we've been highlighting is the need to look at creating an incentive that would allow Canadians to access those benefits while working on-farm out of recognition of the essential nature of our food supply and the fact that we need all hands on deck when it comes to working on-farm at this moment.
Ms. Robinson, I want to ask you about the carbon tax.
I recently had a call with the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities. They expressed concerns about the carbon tax. They also noted that it was increased, as was the initial plan, on April 1, in the middle of this crisis. They tell us that they estimate that the carbon tax will add roughly $2.38 per acre on an average Saskatchewan grain farm, and there are probably similar numbers in my home province of Manitoba.
I'm a city boy, so I'm just learning about agriculture. I had never heard of grain drying before I got elected for the first time to Parliament in October. It's a new thing for me, but I understand that agriculture is a very energy-intensive business, and it's a critical business for the reasons you've outlined.
We don't want to see panic. We don't want to see our grocery store shelves empty. You've outlined a plan, but I'm wondering whether you would consider including in your plan a call for the federal government.... By the way, there are also the downstream costs of the carbon tax. It's not just the tax itself. It's the cost of transporting and trucking and the input costs on fertilizer. It permeates the entire industry in a substantive way.
I'm just wondering, given that you represent this sector, which I think you said has something like 20,000 members....
:
Thank you so much for this question, Mr. Fraser.
You will have received from the clerk our emergency preparedness document. I think on page 3 of that document we outline some measures that we suggest be taken in regard to the recruitment of agri-food workers to address this labour shortage.
In terms of the work we've seen done on the temporary foreign worker side, it's fantastic that we get access to those people. We're still going through some of the rigmarole to get Guatemala to send people to us. That causes a lot of concern, particularly in Quebec, because they see a lot of workers from Guatemala. The $1,500 will certainly be used up as we try to finance the isolation requirements for those foreign workers.
Beyond that, we do need to see access to PPE. That's vital so that we can all keep healthy on the farm and keep doing what we need to do. We need to have the sense that those workers are essential. It would really be fantastic if we could have.... We've heard stories of xenophobia, of comments like “Go home” and “Why are you taking jobs from Canadians?” That's just so far from the truth. These people are heroes. We should be celebrating them and thanking them for coming here and for having confidence in us to keep them safe.
Specifically in regard to attracting displaced Canadian workers, you've heard of the “working while on claim” set-up. We have proposed that there be 0% clawback on working while on claim. Government is going to pay people to be on EI or have CERB. If they could have those payments as well as the wage they would earn on-farm or at an agriculture processing facility, then that, we think, would go in the category of hero pay, because ultimately we do need to incentivize people to have the confidence to go and work on farms.
We would also like to see rapid testing available. We think that this would go a long way to ensuring that people on farms are kept safe. When the first tests become available, maybe if the first 20,000 are made available to our health care system, the next 20,000 could be made available to our agri-food system. What's happening in High River, for example, with Cargill, is catastrophic. We're going to get into animals being culled. I don't want to mince words here. There's an animal welfare issue, and it's highly expensive. We just can't turn the tap on and off in animal production.
These are some of the things we're seeing. You'll find more details in our document when you have a look at it.
:
On the SUB, I'll get back to you next week. The auto piece I hadn't thought about, so I'll check first with our members in Unifor and the steelworkers, and then I can maybe check in with Flavio or somebody in auto and get a better read. I'll be back to you next week and I'll be happy to share that with the clerk as well.
We have a lot of projects. Our focus in working with our members is on things that are going to drive environmental performance and economic growth, so we're looking at air, water, effluent and then a lot of other innovations. If we can convert some of our paper mills, as that category declines, into other products, that might be more in the bioeconomy space.
There is a lot of transformation that continues to happen. In the last significant downturn, there was a massive billion-dollar black liquor program—some of you might remember—that provided a lot of stimulus to a lot of our pulp mills. We'd like to see a broader stimulus package that's going to support our sector and allow more people to participate.
In the case of that stimulus, it was very narrow. I think if we broadened it to innovation, environmental benefit and economic opportunity, that's going to allow us to not only modernize and build for the future of our sector, but also to create those spinoff jobs through construction and to support local communities.
Based on where we operate, we're mainly in northern and rural communities, so we're already thinking about what our role and responsibility is, as a sector, to be part of Canada's recovery coming out of COVID. We hope to be a big player in the north and in rural communities.