Committee
Consult the new user guides
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the new user guides
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 59
View Scott Aitchison Profile
CPC (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Bowers, thank you very much for being here, along with your army of support. We appreciate that.
I just want to set the base here a little. CMHC is the lead agency for the national housing strategy. Is that correct?
View Scott Aitchison Profile
CPC (ON)
I read in the 2021 final evaluation report on the national housing coinvestment fund that this program supports the creation of new affordable housing stock and also the repair of existing housing stock.
Is that also correct? Is that the verdict?
View Scott Aitchison Profile
CPC (ON)
What's troubling, though, is that in the Auditor General's report that we just received, the Auditor General reported that rental housing units considered affordable and approved under this program “were often unaffordable for low-income households across Canada in 2020”.
How do we reconcile the fact that the program is to construct and repair affordable rental units—of which there are a defined number—with the Auditor General's report, which says they were often not affordable?
View Scott Aitchison Profile
CPC (ON)
I'm going to stop you there. I don't want you to describe all six of the programs. I know the national housing strategy is broken up into a lot of different categories. I get that.
Very specifically, this was a report on the national housing coinvestment fund, which is specifically for affordable rentals. The AG has reported that this program, specifically, often produced or delivered units that were not actually affordable.
I'm asking very specifically how we reconcile that. I'm sure there's a reason. I'm curious to know what it is.
View Scott Aitchison Profile
CPC (ON)
I'm going to stop you. I'm sorry. I don't need you to explain to me how the programs work and what affordability is. We get that.
I'm talking very specifically about this program that is supposed to deliver affordable rental units. The Auditor General has reported that, in many cases, they were not affordable. I want to know specifically what caused that, not that there are a dozen different programs. We know that.
What, specifically...?
You're burning up a lot of my time here.
View Scott Aitchison Profile
CPC (ON)
The Auditor General specifically said the national housing coinvestment fund, which is for affordable units, did not always deliver affordable units. There must be a reason for that. That's all I'm asking.
View Scott Aitchison Profile
CPC (ON)
She said that some of them were not actually affordable.
View Scott Aitchison Profile
CPC (ON)
Yes, I know. Okay. There's a mix.
The definition of “affordable rental” is that the household spends less than 30% of their income, before tax, on rent. Is that correct?
View Scott Aitchison Profile
CPC (ON)
Do we have multiple definitions in this country of what “affordable” is?
View Scott Aitchison Profile
CPC (ON)
Is that part of the reason we can't quantify whether these programs are always really, truly helping? I know we have some anecdotal support, but is that one of the reasons the Auditor General couldn't measure whether these programs were working or not?
We have different definitions, depending on who you're talking to, I guess.
View Scott Aitchison Profile
CPC (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Bowers, we know that the CMHC paid out about $48 million in staff bonuses over 2020 and 2021.
Can you tell us what the bonus pool is for 2022?
View Scott Aitchison Profile
CPC (ON)
No. How much will the bonus pool be for 2022 specifically?
View Scott Aitchison Profile
CPC (ON)
I'm sorry. You reported back at public accounts last week that it was $30 million for 2022. Is that a rough estimate?
View Scott Aitchison Profile
CPC (ON)
Okay, so it's a rough estimate of $30 million for 2022.
View Scott Aitchison Profile
CPC (ON)
What I'm struggling with is that when we think about bonuses, we think about a really exceptional job being done, and the Parliamentary Budget Officer's reported that over the first three years of the national housing strategy the CMHC spent less than half of the funding allocated for two key initiatives, one of which, of course, is the national housing coinvestment fund, which spent only about 50% of its allocated dollars over those three years. We know too that the Auditor General has reported that many of those units weren't in fact affordable. We know that inflation actually means now that a lot of the funds that are being invested don't go as far, because of course inflation is a bit out of control.
We know that in general, the housing situation is getting worse. And it's not just the homeless situation, although it's bad; 216 people died in Toronto last year, which is over four people per week, or double what it was in 2017. Home prices are more than double in the last seven years. The National Bank of Canada said in the second quarter of 2022 that the mortgage in a home now takes about 63.9% of income to service. That's the highest it's been since 1982. The PBO has reported that an average of $118 million a year was spent on homelessness programs. It's been bumped up to $357 million a year, yet homelessness continues to be on the rise. Of course, we don't really know exactly where this money's being spent and if it's actually having the impact we want it to have.
What I struggle with and I think what a lot of Canadians struggle with is how we can come up with a bonus pool of $30 million, or whatever it might be. We've made some progress; we've done some good things here, and I have no doubt that everybody at the CMHC means well, but bonuses should be based on results, and the results just aren't really there. I'm wondering if you could speak to that.
Results: 1 - 15 of 59 | Page: 1 of 4

1
2
3
4
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data