Mary Van Buren is the president of the Canadian Construction Association, which represents more than 20,000 member firms drawn from 63 local and provincial associations.
It sometimes seems to me that Canada’s leaders may be suffering from nostalgia when it comes to addressing the housing crisis in Canada.
There was a time from our history when housing consisted of a modest cabin, built by hand, using logs hewn from a nearby stand of trees; lantern-lit and warmed by a crackling fire in the hearth; sitting in its wide expanse of grassland, its only connection to the outer world a rutted dirt road. A cozy, nostalgic image perhaps, but far from our current reality.
The politicians who are promising action to build the 5.8 million new homes Canada needs by 2030 seem to be forgetting that, unlike that log cabin, the millions of homes that are needed can’t even begin to be built without connection to the world around them, to roads, bridges, clean water, electricity and waste management. They don’t seem to be factoring in that those houses will have people in them, millions of people, who need access to hospitals and schools, to civic and recreational facilities, to public transit, to emergency services. In other words, it is not possible to build so many new homes across Canada without considering essential housing-enabling infrastructure. Yet no one is even talking about that part of the equation, let alone announcing funding for it.
It is a significant oversight. A report by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities estimates that each new housing unit will require $107,000 in public infrastructure investment. This amounts to a total of $620-billion in new public funding needed to produce workable housing, which far outstrips currently projected investments of $245-billion.
The oversight is even more astonishing when you consider that the same federal Minister, Sean Fraser, is responsible for both Housing and Infrastructure.
But perhaps it is more than an oversight? A more cynical take is that current announcements of investments in housing are motivated by political gamesmanship, taking into account electoral cycles rather than the actual long-term needs of Canadians.
Or perhaps it is willful ignorance? Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault recently said his government “has made the decision to stop investing at the federal level in new road infrastructure” because “the analysis we have done is that the network is perfectly adequate to respond to the needs we have.” In the face of outrage, he moderated his statement the following day, saying, “We still have funds, obviously, to maintain and enhance our road network across the country.” I think most Canadians would say that there is nothing in the state of our highway infrastructure that makes it obvious that funds exist to improve the existing road network. Moreover, how does suggesting the existing network is adequate square with a rapidly growing population and the need for 5.8 million new homes in the next six years?
In our real, modern world, we expect our politicians to understand that issues like housing exist within a bigger picture – that when new homes are promised, not only does house-enabling infrastructure need to be factored in, but so, too, does the labour needed to build them. (Spoiler: there simply aren’t enough construction workers available to build what is needed on that timeline, so we will need more immigration, which means … we’ll need even more housing.)
We need an accurate and realistic evaluation of the necessary funding, and a plan for where that money will come from. We need investments in infrastructure that are made based on the real needs of Canadians – projects that are shovel-worthy rather than just shovel-ready. We need a plan that provides certainty, so that private investments can be made, workers recruited and retained, and projects planned and delivered. It’s time for some big-picture, long-term thinking.
To those of us in the construction industry, that sounds a lot like the long-promised National Infrastructure Assessment, and a comprehensive, long-term (25-year) plan for infrastructure investment – including housing, trade-enabling infrastructure, maintenance infrastructure and other essential infrastructure – developed in collaboration with industry and aligned with municipal, provincial, and federal priorities. Surely, rather than nostalgia or political gamesmanship, a solid, fact-based approach is what makes sense for Canada.
Perhaps, with a federal budget coming on April 16, an appropriately funded, big-picture approach will soon be announced. If so, the Canadian construction industry is ready to play its part and partner with the government to build a strong foundation for a stronger Canada. What’s certain is that the housing that Canada needs can’t be built in isolation, disconnected from the surrounding world, and it sure won’t build itself.