Reflections from Canada's Federal Housing Advocate Marie Josee Houle

seminar today. So, good afternoon and welcome to today's Health Justice Institute seminar lecture. I'm Sheila Wildman, director of Delhausy's Health Justice Institute. We meet in the unseated territories of the Migma Bustway and Pasimuadi peoples. Sovereign nations holding inherent rights as the original peoples of these lands. We convene this series with respect for those inherent rights, mindful of our collective obligations under the Peace and Friendship Treaties, section 35 of the Constitution Act 1982, which recognizes and affirms Aboriginal and treaty rights in Canada. We further recognize and reflect on the fact that African Nova Scotians are a distinct people whose histories, legacies, and contributions have enriched this part of Migmagi, known as Nova Scotia for over 400 years. It's my pleasure to introduce today and to say on behalf of myself and the institute's associate director, Matthew Kerner, what an honor it is to welcome Marie Jose, Canada's federal housing advocate. The role of the federal housing advocate is to hold governments accountable for their human rights obligations to address housing need and homelessness across Canada and drive systemic change to promote and protect the human right to adequate, affordable, accessible, and safe housing. Marie Jose was appointed as Canada's first federal housing advocate in February 2022 and is now into her second three-year mandate. Prior to her appointment, she held a number of roles in the affordable housing and homelessness sector, including frontline work in housing co-ops, consulting and project management for afford affordable housing development, bylaw review, housing related research projects, developing educational programs for housing co-ops and nonprofits, and senior leadership roles. She was executive director for action on laon, an Ottawa housing loss prevention organization, executive director of OCISO nonprofit housing corporation, which is now Unity Housing Ottawa, and a development consultant and project manager on seven new and existing housing cooperatives and nonprofit housing corporations. She's been a member of various right to housing advocacy organizations and co-chared both the city of Ottawa's housing loss prevention committee and the refugee 613 housing task force. Born in Valdor, Quebec and raised in Edmonton, Alberta, Miss also has a connection to Halifax as she holds a master of arts in sociology and social anthropology from Delhauszy. And we're so glad to welcome you back. Um, I've had the pleasure of sitting in on an intense couple days of meetings between MJ uh and her associate Kyle Lambier and local experts engaged with housing justice in Nova Scotia from indigenousled housing and disability supports to African Nova Scotian community land trusts to barriers to housing security faced by incarcerated people and youth in and aging out of care to the procarity of residential tenency. ies in this province. And it was clear during that time, which was an intense time and only just ended minutes ago, uh that the many insights provided in these meetings were heard and appreciated and will help inform the intense activity of her office and for that we are grateful as well as hopeful for a continued relationship. So with all of that, please join me in welcoming Marie Jose. Thank you. Well, I have to say that it's very emotional for me to be back here. First of all, because you are my alma matter and also because the things that we've spent a few days discussing are just incredibly important. So, thank you. Really, Sheila, this was it was intense, but it was really great and I learned so much. So, you know, even though you're out of school, you continue to learn and I and I wish that journey for each and every one of you as well. So, again, thank you so much for the kind introduction and thanks to Delhauszy's Health Justice Institute for inviting me to be part of the health law and policy seminar series. You have to forgive me. I'm at the age of the, you know, so I yeah, you're going to be seeing me shuffle my papers a little bit and that's just life. But I do want to acknowledge the sovereign nations of the Mikmma, the Wallace uh oh shoot Wallace the Quay and the uh the Pamcatti peoples that with with earnest and humble gratitude uh you know we are on their unseated territories and when we talk about unseated it's a really kind word for stolen and many of us have benefited from that theft and so when we're talking about housing and homelessness I think It's really important to pause for a second and think about what that means and the compounded impacts on the people who who had land and had it stolen from them or who were promised land and never got it because land home is everything. Um and uh you know on that note I do want to also acknowledge with great respect the diversity of participants represented here today. So from community advocates to academics to students to people in nonprofit sector to people with lived experience of the very issues we'll be discussing today. Each and every one of you you you bring an integral voice to the discussion that must be heard. So this seminar series has explored intersections between health and law with previous speakers covering a range of topics from Canada's role in developing the international pandemic agreement and our worldleading model for access to medicine to the litigation related to Jordan's principle to health and justice partnerships in mental health settings abortion access and culturally safe health care. So these topics they they point to how law shapes health both as individual experience and as a societal one. So our discussion well you know I have to say it's happening at a critical moment. Canada is facing one of the most challenging periods in our country's history and um we know that it's in times of crisis that there's uh you know where there's a risk that human rights regress where they they're seen as a nice to have as a luxury or maybe even an afterthought or sometimes that we can just focus on you know getting on with the good times right so Canada's homelessness crisis is hurting ing more and more people every day. That's the reality we're facing. For example, in the 2024 Everyone Counts Homelessness survey, it found that homelessness is in sheltered locations rose by 71% in the 74 participant um participating communities compared to the previous count that was done between 2020 and 2022. And additionally, the number of people experiencing unsheltered homelessness rose by 107%. Think about that. So yet our response to the crisis, well, it's it's falling short. So as a country, we're not meeting the moment. We're not doing enough to help people in vulnerable situations, and we're not doing enough to uphold people's human rights. So there's no doubt that that Canada is facing some of the most significant and complex challenges in our history and a commitment to human right must be at the heart of our way forward. So a stronger Canada is one that stays true to its value. You know have long defined and strengthen who we are as a nation. So with that in mind, today I do want to dwell into how housing intersects with and impacts individual health and how all of this could and shape uh and should shape the law. And another way to put it is how um is is that now that uh the human right to adequate housing is grounded in Canadian law, we also need it to be formally recognized as a social determinant of health. Meaning that housing stability is treated as a foundation in health planning, discharge decisions, prevention strategies, and funding priorities. So unpacking and understanding this interplay between housing and health is really important. Right now we're seeing an alarming rise in the number of encampments across the country and growing tendency. We want to dismantle them. You know we're and we we want to relocate people but the reality is people don't just disappear. So this is all done with shifting and fragile supports and sometimes well no supports at all. So in one of my recent reports I noted that that encampments we we should call them survival spaces. So to a certain extent they're health spaces of of you know that provide mutual care and they allow people to stay in one place in order to access regular health care and support services. So when people are forcibly evicted from encampments, it puts them at greater risk. It causes deeper harm. Evictions scatter people. They destroy survival tools. They remove them from the services they need and they deepen the trauma. So from a systems perspective, this demonstrates that Canada falls short of its obligations to respect, protect and fulfill the human right to adequate housing and as a result health outcomes also suffer. So the problem is our current Canadian system does not recognize that housing and health are inseparable. And the problem is um well you know in trying to understand how our system got to this point can be can be overwhelming and it's easy to just want to you know shut everything out and just look away but but we can't. So the state of the human rights is always fragile and the right to adequate housing well it it's no different. So discussions like this one today they're critical for bringing about change and finding ways to make this change possible. So with all this in mind today, I want to touch on four main things. First, the human right to housing and what we mean when we say the right to adequate housing. Second, the current state of how Canada is fulfilling housing rights. Third, the fundamental link between housing and health and why I believe that housing is medicine. And finally, how these fundamentals need to be reflected in a strong housing framework that supports implementation of legislative commitments. So, first, in order to better understand the human right to adequate housing um today, we need to go back to where it all began. So, the it's funny that we're talking about the atrocities of the Second World War. uh today's climate, it's a bit sobering and we have to remember way back what happened back there. But you know that that event that those years of events really revealed how how people's differences could be weaponized and how governments could create and enforce systems to divide and marginalize the most vulnerable people. And in the midst of that dark aftermath, you know, democratic nations, they lit the way forward by making a universal promise to never look away again and to never leave anyone behind. And the result was the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. And uh you know the declaration it's a set of fundamental inalienable rights that every person on earth is born with and that we all share as human beings. And not only are we as individuals entitled to these rights but all states are also accountable for ensuring that these rights are recognized, respected and upheld. So included in the declaration's 30 universal human rights is the right to housing. And it's included under article 25, the right to an adequate standard of living. But the right to adequate housing is is just more than just four walls and a roof. It's about the right to live in peace, in security, and in dignity. And it's about the fact that everyone deserves equal access to housing free from discrimination and harassment. So while Canada played a key role in the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, it later took on a binding obligations when it ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and which recognizes housing as a legal right. But it took another 70 odd years for Canada to give domestic legal expression to those obligations with the passage of the National Housing Strategy of 2019. and this new law created the role of Canada's federal housing advocate. So, it's my honor to be the first to serve in that role since my appointment of February of 22. So, recognizing the right to adequate housing is an important one and when we need a common understanding of what adequate housing looks like. So, that's where we turn to the United Nations. They have provided guidance on making housesable suit uh suitable for human dignity in the form of seven fundamental pillars. So according to the UN adequate housing must be secure meaning that we people have security of tenure that provides protection from arbitrary evictions, forced relocation or harassment. It has to provide um affordability. Um it it the housing cost should not be a barrier to meeting other basic needs such as foods and costs should be prohibited or protected from unreasonable increases. It must be um it must provide availability to basic services including safe drinking water, sanitation, heating, lighting and emergency services. It must be habitable and the dwellings must have adequate space for the inhabitants, be properly maintained and provide protection from the elements and other threats to health and well-being. It must be accessible for people of all abilities, particularly those experiencing discrimination or living in vulnerable circumstances. It must be in a location that's close to employment and basic social services such as child care, education, health care, and is not located in a polluted or dangerous area. And it must be culturally appropriate, meaning that it respects and is appropriate for the expression of the inhabitants cultural identity and ways of life. So, now that we have um each of these seven pillars in mind, I'm sure you're probably looking at your own housing situation going, "hm, how does it fit for me? How does it fit for my loved ones? How does it fit for the people that I know?" Um, but uh you're probably also thinking that when it comes to adequate housing, you know, one size does not fit all. So, adequacy really means meeting people where they're at. So for instance, accessible housing is is crucial for people with disabilities and housing equipped for aging in place is crucial for seniors and cultural supports are they're critical for diverse communities like First Nations, Matei and Inuit. And ultimately the right to adequate housing means more than four walls in a roof like I just said, but housing is also a basic need. And beyond providing shelter for survival, it is central to the physical and mental health, community and sustainability. And as I said, the housing housing is the beginning. And having affordable, suitable, and safe place to live gives us security, peace, and dignity. And from there, it helps us and our families succeed and thrive. Sorry about this. I'm trying to figure out this eyesight thing. Um anyway, so this brings me to the second part of the discussion today. How is Canada doing today? Uh I'm really looking forward to to discussing this with our class um after after this lecture. But but really, you know, how is Canada doing today? Are we succeeding? Are we thriving? So so my job is to keep the national uh conversation focused on that very question, really focused on human rights. And my goal is to drive change on key systemic housing issues and to hold government decision makers accountable for their human rights obligations related to housing and homelessness. And in doing so, I offer evidence-based recommendations to support governments in meeting those obligations. And uh with a small and mighty team, including my dear colleague Kyle, who's here today, I do this work by hearing the voices of people in Canada who are experiencing homelessness and inadequate housing. and then amplifying these voices so that they do reach decision makers. And we work constructively with all levels of government to help bridge the gap between legislative intention and the implementation. And we offer decision makers evidence-based research and recommendations they need to understand their obligations and guide their policym. So as an independent voice, my role as advocate, I continue to push governments to do better and my experiences are documented in the many reports and recommendations I've made over the course of the last four years. Mind you, um it's it's by no means an exhaustive list of the kinds of housing challenges that exist for people. And unfortunately, you know, we all know that this list is growing and will continue to grow. So recent data from the latest reports by the National Housing Council shows that the trends they're they're not improving. And the voices I've heard over the past four years from across the country are they're clear. You know, Canada's housing c uh crisis is I'm going to use this word. It's big catastrophic for vulnerable populations. And I am using that word you know catastrophic deliberately and quite literally. You know, the situation it's catastrophic for people living in encampments and for those facing evictions whose belongings are destroyed or whose rents have become unaffordable and leaving them with nowhere else to go. It's catastrophic for people with disabilities, for seniors and others who need accessible housing who are forced into unsafe living conditions or into costly long-term care simply because appropriate affordable housing is unavailable. It's catastrophic for women, including single mothers with children and and d uh gender diverse people who are pushed to remain in unsafe or abusive situations or who face discrimination and exclusion within the housing and emergency shelter system. And it's cat catastrophic for indigenous and black communities many of whom are facing overcrowding a lack of basic supports and financialization which is um a a term financialization is a term that we use to describe investor umdriven housing loss. So in my visits to Inuit communities in Canada's north in my position as federal housing advocate, I also heard how housing overcrowding really negatively impacts people's physical and mental health, including for young people. And we know from our research that children's experiences with housing instability at a young age has lasting negative impacts from children's performance in school and their ability to secure future employment. So the people that I've talked to across the country, they represent a lot of diversity in our society and you know our country is pretty big. So I've seen how our systems fail to meet the standards of adequate housing, you know, time and time again and how the health outcomes of individuals without adequate housing are being compromised. And that brings me to the heart of what I do want to talk to you today and that's the undeniable and fundamental link between housing and health. The data is clear. Research shows that homelessness shortens the life expectancy often by 30 or 40 years. So consider this. You know, 40% of the people experiencing homelessness have a physical illness or medical condition. 60% experience mental health challenges. 62% struggle with substance use disorders. and 35% have a physical disability. So the data shows that indigenous people are profoundly over represented and are still likely underestimated among people experiencing homelessness and nationally indigenous peoples represent 5% of Canada's population while accounting for roughly 31% of people in Canada who are experiencing homelessness. So in western cities however the indigenous over representation in homelessness is even more stark with approximately 90% in Thompson Manitoba 90% in Saskatoon Saskatchewan and even simply higher levels reported in Prince George and BC. So with so many people caught at the intersection of homelessness and unmet health needs, provinces are still not expanding housing and voluntary supports. Yet they're increasingly moving towards involuntary detention and treatment. And emerging research from the University of Ottawa alongside with the voices of civic and community leaders warns that this shift, you know, means using coercion as a substitute for care where people are forced into involuntary systems because there's no other choice. And these system failures result in the worst possible kinds of outcomes. You know that people are dehumanized. their dignity is stripped away and eroded because the system couldn't provide the support that they needed and just simply left them behind. So with so many people from so many demographics experiencing severe barriers to adequate housing, we have to ask ourselves, what is it about our system that allows so many in need to be denied something so fundamental? And is this exclusionary approach truly what we intended? And why have we failed? and how do we do better attention class this is this is what we're going to be talking about just a warning so um but you know while we're thinking about those questions you know let me let me set up more detailed picture about the link between housing and health and and what exactly I mean when I call it medicine and with that I I do want to talk about one of the biggest projects that I've done so far and it's the work that we've done on encampments so uh For definitions purposes, I refer to encampments as a temporary outdoor shelter on public or private property. And encampments really are the result of accessible and affordable housing. Um the the lack of accessible housing and uh affordable housing with supports. Contrary to some of the rhetoric out there, you know, encampments, they're not a choice. You know, encampments are for many people the best available options out of many, many bad choices. And they're the last refuge when housing systems fail. And this is not about individual failure or life choices that result in homelessness or living in housing procarity. The people who live in encampments are among the most vulnerable and marginalized in society. and they're dealing with the combined effects of a housing crisis, a health crisis, and a severe economic downturn. And they've also faced discrimination linked to the historical legacy of colonialism, racism, sexism, abbleism, and other forms of marginalization. And they have limited or no access to social and health services. So last fall I visited southwestern Ontario to hear directly from uh residents of homeless encampments, frontline workers and community organizations as well as local decision makers. And the purpose of the trip was to assess how federal, provincial and municipal responses are impacting the lives and um to monitor the implementation of the federal investments in encampment responses. And uh my report from this trip is available online for anyone that's interested and it builds on the previous report that I've done on encampments that was published in 2024. But everywhere that I went on this trip, I kept seeing certain things there certain themes emerge. You know, I saw that shelters are not adequate. It's not housing and that enforcement first approaches they cause harm. that people consistently told me that they feel safer in encampments than in shelters and that evictions scatter people, destroy survival tools, and increase risk of violence and exploitation. So, think about this. You know, when people say, "Well, why don't they just go to a shelter?" And I always say, "Have you seen a shelter? Have you been a shelter? Can you imagine yourself staying in a shelter? How safe do you feel for one night, for two nights, for a year and a half? And this is why people are choosing encampments. And I saw how housing and health care are inseparable. You know, hospital discharges into homelessness, untreated chronic illness, and mental health crisis make clear that housing stability is essential to health. And I saw that women and gender diverse people face heightened and daily risks. testimonies describe sexual violence, trafficking, coercion, and exclusion within the emergency shelter system. And I saw community organizations carrying the burden with too little support. Mutual aid groups and nonprofits are having to innovate under extreme pressure. While federal funding, including the unsheltered homelessness and encampments initiative, well, it's a start. Uh but it still falls short of the scale of need. So when all of these failures converge, you know, the result is not just instability. Um, you know, it's it's constant displacement, surveillance, and punishment for people who have nowhere else to go. So, I heard firsthand from people in a state of constant displacement, being harassed, and facing trespass charges, bylaw infractions, and threatened with coercive care. And I've heard from people who are forced to move into remote isolated areas far from services and supports. And some are aging out of care or escaping a troubled home with nowhere to go and without any supports. And they become vulnerable to predators. And some have substance use disorders or face additional risk because of you know just the act of keeping nlloxxone at room temperature for stability is impossible. So that lifesaving device for people, you know, to save them from overdoses that are handed to people that there's a lot of effort to train people in encampments on how to use them. Just the act of being outside with varying temperatures renders this tool inactive. So taken as a whole, people who cannot access critical social supports including adequate housing, they're being punished. So I saw tremendous efforts in you know from community organizations and mutual aid groups continuing to hold the line and to provide care where governments still fall short but the gaps continue to grow and deepen and the failure to provide adequate housing is also a health issue and a justice issue. So you know people cycle between being on the streets in shelters in hospitals and jail. So without housing stability, people can't access any of the services they need and they're increasingly excluded from basic health care. So what we're seeing is a result of inadequate funding invested in supportive housing. And we're in inadvertedly relying on police to respond to social and health needs, courts to be a gateway to services, and jails to provide housing. So in many ways, we're inadvertedly criminalizing poverty. So the issues that result in encampments are increasingly complex and interrelated. And the fact is, you know, Canada's current system, they they weren't set up to respond to the complex needs that have emerged from multiple factors. Instead, our systems are siloed. And with our frameworks, they're disconnected and more reactive than responsive. And it's easier to in uh to overlook the connections between housing and health because our systems treat medical problem without necessarily questioning how a patient is living. So conversely, you know, we can provide housing but not question what other supports are necessary like access to primary health care. And as a result, our systems, they lose sight of those who most need our systems to work together. So, I made several recommendations in my encampment report, including ending forced uh encampment evictions, uh especially during extreme weather, scaling up supportive and non-market housing, integrating housing and health care, providing harm reduction services and preventing discharges into homelessness, addressing gender-based violence with targeted supports uh and women-led housing initiatives. sustaining and expanding federal investments for human rights based encampments responses, protecting and empowering community organizations by ending retaliation and surveillance, and ensuring human rights are the foundation and core of all policies and responses to homelessness. So, with that, I'm going to invite you to have a sip of water with me because uh I'm, you know, we're about halfway there. And um how are you all doing here? So, you know, I've thrown a lot of information at you and uh well, this is what happens when you get me started. So, feel sorry for my family just a just a tiny bit. But I I wanted to take this opportunity really to just to recap, you know. So, we talked about how housing is an international human right etched in stone since 1948. And we've talked about how upholding that human right um here in Canada and you know and where we're at now at a crisis you know catastrophic crisis point and we've talked about how housing is healthcare and I've just shared with you how all of this is reconfirmed um you know during my visits uh through Ontario last year. So now I'm going to if you'll give me about 10 more minutes of your time. I want to I want to give you a little bit of hope and share with you some examples of how housing is medicine and how that can work and then we can conclude today by talking about how all of this needs to inform a strong housing framework for Canada. So the firsthand examples that I've seen of supportive housing that combine health and housing, you know, they do bring me hope. So in Toronto I met with Dr. Andrew Bougie, the founding executive director of the UHN Hagatsuko Center for Social Medicine and a pioneer for in integrated solutions and he led the development of Dunhouse you know which is Canada's first social medicine supportive housing project built in 2024 and uh Dunhouse supports clients with complex needs transitioning out of homelessness by providing housing with integrated social services, health care and economic IC supports and I want to note that that Dun House is not it's not called transitional housing. You know that every client has a lease and security of tenure which means they can stay as long as they want. I want to talk about that a little bit. When someone is in crisis and they're given a set of keys and they're told, "This is your home. We're going to meet you where you're at, but you're safe. It makes all the difference in the world and getting them out of survival mode. So, I caution, you know, the term transitional housing because for me it's an oxymoron because transitional means it's there for a short period. So, you don't have security of tenure. You can call it something else and they do have a place. Don't call it housing though. And when someone is thinking about facing, you know, their their addictions, their um substance use disorder, mental health, reestablishing relationships, while at the same time wondering where they're going to go in a month or two or a year or two because we know there's a housing crisis out there. They're never going to get out of that survival mode because they're too worried about what's going to happen to me when my time here is up. It has to be on their terms when they want to go. That is what survival, you know, the survival mode is all about and that is what healing needs to be all about. So, you know, I that that lease, that security of tenure peace, it's it's not just intangible. It is just so incredibly significant. And this is what Denhouse provides as well. And it doesn't mean that the tenants are going to stay there forever, but they're going to leave on their terms and they're going to leave when they've got something that's better for them. And that piece is really, really important. You know, and when we're talking about, you know, supportive housing, they provide long-term stability really by by preventing that return to homelessness. But all too often really it does exist in a legal gray zone and without the clear tenency protections or that security of tenure and transitional housing like I said it does play a a necessarily you know a necessary role in offering greater autonomy than emergency shelters but we can't call it adequate housing we just can't and you know the basic premise really is to prescribe housing to patients at Dunhouse really their health care and social needs so that they are met and Dun House, you know, they provide 24/7 on-site supports that include mental health services, harm reduction, personal support assistance, and daily meals. And there's also support to maintain their housing and the social services are tailored to people's individual needs. So, early data from Dun House, they show that 48 residents made nearly 2,000 visits to an ER in the year before moving in. But a year later after living there for a year, you know, some of those those same residents, they reduced how often they visited the emergency uh rooms by 52%. So when we're, you know, from across the country, we know that there's a huge erosion of the healthcare system. There's longer wait times in emergency rooms. you know, just decreasing the number of emergency visits is really significant, not just on the stress of frontline workers and healthcare workers, but but on everyone else that also relies on these services. So, it's very significant. And, you know, to top it off, you know, the people living at Dun House, they experienced a 79% drop in their length of stay when they are admitted to hospital. So essentially the health outcomes of residents improved with stable housing and just recently the university health network announced that Denhouse will be expanding by an additional 54 housing units uh with funding from build Canada homes. So without a doubt um Dun House proves that medicine needs to be in include housing and that housing is medicine and adequate housing with on-site supports gives individuals the stability to access primary care and improve health outcomes. But at the same time our healthcare delivery model needs to integrate social services and stable housing so that no one is discharged from hospitals, long-term care or correctional facilities into homelessness. So, we have promising practices to turn to and well, that's a great thing. Um, but what we need now is a strong framework that will guide Canada over the next several years to get these principles get implemented and rooted into law. And it's my set of ideas that I want to share with you all about the framework for Canada. So, in the interest of time, I'm going to I'm going to get into some concrete details. Scaling up models like Dun House, they have to happen as a priority. And the need to invest in supportive non-market housing that's integrated with health care is critical and an urgent need. And at the same time, it reflects how the right to adequate housing can be implemented and what it means. But there there's other things we can and should do, especially as we attempt to build better and more responsive systems that are rooted in human rights. This is the challenge of implementing legislative commitments and ensuring we live up to what we said we're going to do. And Canada needs a non-market housing strategy with a framework grounded in human rights approach and building on the UN's sevenpillar criteria for adequate housing. We need meaningful data standards tied to legislative commitments and mechanisms to ensure cooperation. So first that meaningful data. We've got significant DA uh gaps right now and we have a lot of information on how much money is spent on federal housing programs. You probably heard all the the budget replies and the budget reports from the federal government. We spent x amount of dollars on x amount of doors and we're going to build x amount of units, right? We know all about that. We but we have very little data on how we meet any of the seven criteria of adequate housing. And as the National Housing Council notes, we know more about housing costs than we do about how well the population is housed and what outcomes they experience. It's easy to count dollars and doors. It's really difficult to count outcomes, but it can be done. So simply put, like we need to collect data that aligns with our intended outcomes of fulfilling the human right to adequate housing and ensuring that no one is left behind. So Canada's health care system, it actually went through a similar dark period in data collection and um you know as much as we can criticize our health care systems from you know every province and territory in this country in terms of data collection they did manage to make it better. In the '90s Canadian health researchers noted that there was lots of available information on the cost of health care systems but very little information about the health of the general population. So without this information aligning and improving the health care systems for better patient outcomes well it was impossible. So this gap led to a transformation in what and how health information was collected and they went about fixing it. So the Canadian Institute for Health Information, the CIHR was established by in 2000 by an act of parliament to better tackle the health challenges of present and future by making health research and its outcomes more effective. And it was mandated to break down barriers, become more collaborative, and do better job of directly addressing the healthcare needs of Canadians. So today the CHIR plays a central role in translating and coordinating data collection and research into improved health outcomes for Canadians and a system of person centered health information and a stronger Canadian health health care system well really is the result. So it is a powerful model for housing data and again we have lots of information on the cost of costs of housing but not enough information on how well people are housed especially marginalized and vulnerable populations. So for example there's a strong need for disagregated race-based housing data. But without this information, identifying the severity of systems barriers and racial gatekeeping to housing and subsequently addressing the root causes of these barriers, it's impossible. And we can't get into sustainable solutions without the right information and data. So the National Housing Council has underscored the need for housing data to undergo a transformation. So moving forward with common concepts, we need to collect housing data sets from all existing sources, the federal government, the provinces, territories, municipalities, private and nonprofit sectors. And then we would have a national set of data that could be continually refreshed and then analyzed to support improved housing outcomes for all segments of society. And at the same time, there needs to be accountability for the money that's being invested in adequate housing. And the way our country is set up, you know, with shared jurisdiction between the federal and provincial governments, it makes accountability for funds that are transferred quite challenging. I've spent two days listening to how this is just failing us. You know, this, oh, that's terrible, but that's them or them or them. This has to stop. So one way really we can ensure that accountability is to recommend that the federal government use its spending power to set standards through conditional funding and negotiated agreements. And once again drawing inspiration from the framework that manages our health system, the federal government ties the commitments to legislation to the funding provided to provinces and territories to shape specific outcomes. Health is also shared jurisdiction and where the federal government makes equalization payments to the provinces and territories to deliver health services and the conditions attached to the funds are the results of bilateral agreements and negotiations between the two levels of government and as a result we have a nationally cocoordinated system that has helped shape outcomes. So for housing commitments uh to the human right to adequate housing um there already is sconced in federal legislation and there is related funding uh provided to provinces and municipalities but the missing link is the tide of funding to standards that will shape outcomes and guarantee a right to adequate housing over time just like a contract. So, a human rights approach means that housing needs to be designed around people's real needs. And that starts with recognizing that those most affected by a crisis are contributors to the solution. People experiencing homelessness, housing insecurity, and displacement. They're they're fully capable of articulating what they need and why existing systems are failing them and why and what they need to be properly housed. So meaningful engagement and involvement requires a more more than just rubber stamping and afterthought consultation. It takes time. It takes trust and a willingness to listen and to challenge long-standing assumptions. And this is the only way to build durable solutions with real results and not just short-term fixes that waste public dollars and deepen harm. So what I've described really are elements of you know that form a robust framework for a human rights approach to realizing the right to housing. It starts with more meaningful data. It requires accountability for the money that's invested in housing by developing national standards for funding tied to commitments and legislation. And lastly and most importantly the people who are most affected by homelessness and housing procarity need to be involved in the solutions. And there's no other way to center people in human rights approach other than to ensure that they're engaged at all stages and are involved. So as I begin to conclude, you know, the question is now, you know, what next? So where where and how do we move forward? So what we're, you know, what we're telling, what people are telling us really quite clearly and consistently is that well the the private market alone it won't deliver the housing they need. And research shows that to meet and uphold the right to adequate housing, non-market housing must make up at least 20% of Canada's total housing stock. And given the depth of the current shortage, that means that roughly about 40% of all new housing built going forward must be non-market, you know, and that their homes that will be permanently affordable, secure, and uh, you know, protected from speculation. And I understand here in Nova Scotia is that you have a rent cap, but that rent cap doesn't exist when there's a turnover in the units. uh or that there's a possibility that this rent cap might be lifted in a few years and what's going to happen, right? Non-market housing, uh they're very different and they respond to the need, but they're also because they're operating as nonprofits, they cover their operating costs. So over the long term, they end up being uh they end up charging a lot less for their rents regardless of of of a household needing an additional subsidy. And that's the importance of non-market housing whether it's a housing co-op, a nonprofit or public housing and uh you know the the creation of the new build Canada homes agency it is a step in this direction and it reflects reflects really the going uh growing recognition that Canada does need more intentional coordinated approach to scaling non-market housing and you know the recent research by our partner Dr. Carolyn Whitesman sets out clear rights-based housing supply targets and creates mechanisms for rebuilding Canada's non-market housing system. And her work is helped provide direction to the federal government on what's really required, not simply to increase housing supply in the abstract, but to ensure that the new housing meets the existing needs. And you've all heard it. The government, the federal government is talking about supply, supply, supply. I'm seeing all these cranes all over Halifax. seems pretty impressive. But for who are they building? Who's going to live there? Is anyone going to live there? Is it all going to be Airbnbs? Is it all going to be investment vehicles? Are people actually going to be living there? I'm seeing this face back there. Yeah. Well, these are questions that I have when I see cranes on the horizon today. And who paid for it? Did we pay for it? We've got to get it right. We can't afford to get it wrong. So this is the work of Carolyn that's really pushing the federal government to make you know to ask these questions and really hold them to account on that you know but but that investment it's urgently needed but it needs to go to the right place. So the roll out of of the build Canada homes initiative we also need to see cooperation you know with the provinces and territories even matching the investments in this type of housing but you know funding alone is not it's not going to be enough. So we need to be clear about our commitment to fulfilling the human right to adequate housing and ultimately ensuring that no one is left behind. So as governments scale up their investments through build Canada homes and there is a growing need for share standards and accountability so that public dollars are building homes and not just building systems of accommodation that leave people permanently precarious. And that's why my office is is advancing the work to articulate clear human rights based standards for supportive and traditional or transitional do I call it housing do I call it accommodation but they have to be grounded in human rights and this includes security of tenure you know dignity autonomy and meaningful participation and it's essential that if we are to ensure that housing with supports truly delivers the stability rather than just recycling people through the system. You know, ultimately meaningful engagement and non-market supply must move together. So they must be matched with the right supports and clear standards and engagement without structural change risks becoming symbolic. So supply without engagement or without security and accountability risks reproducing the systems that exclude the very people that we're trying to to serve. So, if we center both, you know, if we can move beyond band-aid solutions and begin building a housing system that delivers lasting affordability, dignity, and stability for everyone in Canada, you know, I think we're going to get there. And with that, really, I have to tell you that being part of this lecture series, um, it is one of the great honors of my career. It's meant a lot to come back to Halifax and uh you've been incredible generous listeners and I'm really really grateful. Uh I do know that we have a lot of work ahead of us and and I say us right because the fact is no matter what field of study or expertise you work in you're all working on housing in one way or another and some of you like me you might even have a personal experience of housing procarity. And you know this this issue really is about us. It's about Canada's future and the kind of strong and resilient country that we want to be in a country where where no one is left behind. You know, social change, it's cumulative. It happens along an arc. It's incremental. We shave off one piece at a time. We never get it right the first time. We never get it all the first time. It's continuous work. I liken it a lot like a choir where you know it's not just a single person holding a note but as someone runs out of breath the others take it on and that is what the work of human rights is all about is that we're there to support each other through all of this and we just continue pushing on because to stop is catastrophic but you know we don't have decades to mull over this housing crisis. Um, you know, governments have an obligation to act now and to begin to make the systemic changes in our housing system that are so badly needed. And that's why I'm here to advocate with and alongside advocates, including people who are experiencing homelessness and whose circumstances are precarious and whose voices are marginalized. And you know, my office is only one node of a larger ecosystem. And I hope that many of you will treat this lecture not just as a one-off but as an invitation you know to stay in touch and to send us your research, your cases, your ideas and and to hold us accountable too. You know your experiences and the experiences of your communities hold the key to understanding what inequities need to be addressed and what programs will work. So it's going to take all of us together to end the housing and homelessness crisis. And I'm confident then that, you know, when we're all here in the same room and united in advocacy for human rights, we can achieve so much. And on that note, thank you so much. Merciu. We have plenty of time for questions. So interested in your questions for today. I'm not that scary. I promise. >> I can start us off as you're as you're thinking. I just I I'll start by thanking you. I thought that was wonderful. Really robust um content that you have, you know, delivered drawing on the many um uh encounters and observations that you made since you started I mean this role but also prior to it. So, thank you for that and I really appreciated the three kind of takeaways format. I mean the three major takeaways that at least I I heard you telling us about the collection of data, right? So, robust uh data to inform performance. Uh and I love the way that you tied that to CIHI. I had not thought about that before and I think that's a really neat um comparator. Uh I al and then the second piece um so uh make funding federal funding conditional on performance and meeting certain standards and that's the one I want to come back to with the question about the standards that might be put into play there and then the third one being really activating democracy in ways that you know those most affected are consulted and continually part of this feedback loop to improve the system. So, I love that because it it's a it's a nice um big picture vision of how we could try to work our way out of this um housing crisis including well as well as your observations on housing stock. So on the second one, the standards, >> I'm going to come back to something that is a kind of ubiquitous um concern here in Nova Scotia, and you've heard about it already from especially from some of our legal aid workers who met with us this morning to talk about the fixedterm lease problem. So you mentioned the procarity and the insecurity that people have in the shelter system or in you know near accommodation and not lease hold sort of arrangements but that is it's a ubiquitous problem among renters unfortunately for us in the sense that fixedterm leases are being used as we've heard right so fixedterm leases are more and more being used as a way for landlords to avoid the rent cap um so folks then right have their rent increased because the lease is not uh continued past one year or whatever the term is. And so I wondered whether the um legislative standards or the standards contingent, you know, on which funding is contingent might include something like I mean either you doing away with abolishing the fixedterm lease or requiring that uh fixedterm lease arrangement be justified on certain bases so that it's circumscribed in certain ways, you know, like are there have has that come up for you yet? I think Nova Scotia is really struggling. So I read recently that Ontario is considering adopting the same kind of model that we have in Nova Scotia. So it's potentially Canada. >> Well, okay. So, first I'm going to step back really far and just say that you know the >> Canada's economy has really um done well on pushing the home ownership and you know people who have the privilege of owning homes are have something that provides them a home but also an you know something to pass on intergenerational wealth that's that's known and documented mented. So, it's a two-tiered system that we have in Canada of having renters and homeowners and it's couched as the aspiration of all people in Canada to own a home and that's not the aspiration of a lot of people or not the reality for a lot of people and that needs to stop first of all and then when we're talking about the secondass citizens that are renters, you know, you can't have renters without landlords. ards and you can't have landlords without renters. And we can't move forward in establishing fair systems without recognizing this is a symbiotic relationship. It needs to be fair. And then we have the, you know, poverty law, the access to justice points. And I see these creative punitive unbalanced tweaks in legislation around residential tenency acts or relationships as a result of really the breakdown of these points of access systems. I see it in supportive housing um providers where they say they want to take a chance on housing someone who's has complex needs or who is leaving the the judicial, you know, you know, who has brushes with the judicial system and we're going to take them on with a program agreement, but we're not going to give them the same legal tenency rights, that same protection as anyone else who rents because we want to take a chance on Um, but the reality is that people can be evicted within 24 hours. They're not allowed pets. They're not allowed visitors. They're not It's a carceral setting. Nobody wants that. Let's make it very clear. Not a single person I have ever talked to wants that. They will choose to live in a tent where they're exposed to terrible, terrible conditions over that. That is not housing and that is not a viable option for people. But the providers I you know I'm trying to be compassionate with them and say they face challenges as well. They have all landlords have responsibilities around their their asset. They have responsibilities about the reasonable enjoyment of other people that are living on their properties. So you know the recources eviction or ensuring you have supports or something to resolve a lot of these issues education on tenant uh tenant rights and tenant responsibilities understanding you know most people they don't um a lot of people come from households where the parents own their homes. So how do you learn about being a good tenant when you leave your parents' home? And that's why you see a lot of prejudice and a lot of people won't rent to students because maybe they don't know how to be a good tenant. Or the minute you cross an invisible line called a provincial line, your rights or responsibilities as tenant changes. And I want to see because I I did most of my work in Ontario until this mandate. And the country is big. And I'm obsessed with something that I call an invisible line. The minute someone crosses an invisible line with a provincial territorial line, a municipal line, or if you're indigenous, if you're off your territory, your rights, your responsibility, the things you can access changes. We live in a federated country. We live in a country there needs to be national standards so that it's not so drastically different when we have something like the human right to adequate housing enshrined in our domestic law and yet it can't be enjoyed equally depending on where you live. That's a problem and that you know we have these mechanisms we have these bilateral agreements. Then there's the issue of co-opting language, right? We have all these amazing bud buzzwords. And so we need real standardized definitions of what that means. What does it mean? Well, you know, and I'm really honing in on this thing called transitional housing for me is is is an oxymoron because the UN gives us a definition of adequate housing. You can't call something housing if it doesn't give you security of tenure. And if it's only for a temporary then it you don't have the security of tenure. So you know that too is a framework to push back against these fixedterm leases. And the solution to these punitive, disbalanced um mechanisms, these legal frameworks such as, you know, these these tweaks in legislation that punish tenants is because landlords and tenants alike don't have good recourse over their rights and responsibilities. And that's where we need the fix. We need to invest in these points of justice where we have, you know, points of appeal, proper timelines and proper recourse, proper redress so that everyone feels secure. So that landlords feel secure that when things go sideways, there is a solution and they will get their money back. whether not directly from that tenant or that tenants when they need repairs. They're not going and they're living in squalor. They're not going to get punished by their landlord for going to the landlord tenant board or whatever the to to have these things done cuz they're paying real money to be there and they're living alongside bed bugs and rats and you know um mold and their health is at risk. And yet, you know, if they dare go make a complaint, well, then they're just going to be not have their lease renewed or, you know, the the rent cap. uh my first apartment in Edmonton. I lived in a lovely three-story walk up and uh we had a really creepy caretaker that lived in the building and uh he had designs on a young woman that lived in the unit across from me and she sent him packing and he rewarded her with a 100% rent increase. It's pretty disgusting, you know. So, luckily at the time there wasn't a housing crisis in Edmonton. She was able to find something. But imagine if she was stuck having to endure that, right? That was her punishment. We need to have better systems to protect against this kind of abuse. And for me, it's moving backwards, looking at the root causes and finding root solutions that address this instead of continuing to punish. So >> other questions. So um in terms I was also thinking about your funding would you see this going to be the same for provincial versus territorial versus self nations? >> Well the human right to housing still applies you know according to the covenants um to all levels of government including indigenous governments. So, you know, I think, you know, when we're looking at the continuation of the national housing strategy, it was, you know, put together in 2017. It's a 10-year strategy. It's coming to an end. So, it's being thought of right now. So, if you want to get active, this is the time to be heard to make a difference. um what we're hearing and I wish I had a better transparent relationship with elected officials uh that are working on this to have a better sense of where they're thinking is that and um they are doing consultation but they you know the first they are um the bilateral agreements are very very important but they it can't be the the housing strategy can't be funding programs it needs to be an actual strategy with definitions. Where are we going? What's the aim? And then how do we get there? As opposed to we're going to fund this and we're going to fund that and oh the funding's coming to an end and everything falls off the cliff, right? We need a strategy. Um everybody wants consistent um predictable funding. All levels of government want that. And so while government, the federal government invests in capital funding, the one-off, it leaves the provinces on the hook for the operating costs, which you know, if anyone understands a budget, it means a an annual draw on what they had planned to to spend. Whereas the government, federal government just goes, hey, we got a few billion dollars. Let's just spend it this year and walk away. But it's the provinces and territories that are left with the responsibility of it afterwards. So for it to work, it needs to be planned and it needs to be consistent and it needs to be predictable. And that's been a problem. And then the, you know, the provinces want to push back with their autonomy, but the reality is if you want federal money, you have to you have to accept a certain amount of standards. So or or expectations of results. So what does that look like? What you know, and what is that that game? What is that balance? Because often, you know, you get one federal official that shows up at the federal, provincial, territorial tables and there's 13 of them, 13 voices that decided in advance. Their message is f off government. We are independent. You give us the money and shut up. That doesn't lead to good discussion. So, we have to get back to what is the framework and what is the strategy. What's the outcome? Because nobody can deny there's a problem today. Yeah. Hi. >> You mentioned many times that the right housing is a human right and you linked it to the population. I wonder how is that anchored in the Canadian system. >> That's a really good question. >> I don't think the charter mentions. >> No, the charter doesn't. Uh it's insinuated, of course. Well, it's actually not just insinuated. It is very explicit in the charter. Uh I mean in the in the universal declaration of um uh sorry yeah uh on economic social and cultural rights it's mentioned in um the UN um charter or sorry it's it's it's in the UN declaration of human rights of 1948 as well. Um but how it's manifested in the national housing strategy is that it's a focus on on um systemic issues. So it's not well we in we're working on how to make the human right to housing real and judicial um juditiable in Canada. It's there's some jurorous prudence that's working in that direction uh based on some of the reports that I've released and and given to the federal minister uh responsible for housing like the the encampments report. It has been used in the court of law for some cases around uh evictions of people in in encampments. I've been called as a as a friend of the court or as an expert witness as well. So it's starting but it's not an individual recourse mechanism. However, you know that discussion around human rights, you know, you're looking at the various human rights commissions across Canada, the provincial territorial ones, the federal one, there's a complaints mechanism because it is around rights that are in the constitution. So, what is the mechanism of a human rights commission? Is it about dealing with complaints or is it about pushing boundaries and getting better outcomes one one hearing at a time? that takes decades and sometimes costs millions of dollars or is it about getting ahead of the issues and ensuring that we have changes in policies and investments to make change for the betterment of everybody. So that's that's the the discussion because the reality is a lot of the human rights commissions they can only deal with complaints and they can't do anything else. So uh and that's kind of an international discussion happening as well. So can we get ahead of the issues? Can we um can we compel government to make those changes? And if you're indigenous, you know very well that if you're fighting for your treaty rights and you go to court because before you go to court, you negotiate or you litigate. That's always the question for indigenous rights. And then you go to court and you litigate and you win. And then you're still negotiating. Doesn't matter if you won. you're still back to negotiating. You're still back to So that's that's the reality of the systems that we're working in. Even if you're declared the winner, what's the restitution and how do you make sure that that's made good on? So it's complex. It's not a linear thing and it's a constant fight. starting up to the front. Thank you. Is there a last burning question or comment? Move to about 20 after. So, I think what I'm going to do is just uh take an opportunity to thank you and I I just want to wind up with a couple things because uh I'm so grateful to you for coming. We all are so grateful to you for coming and speaking on the human right to housing and what your office is doing to advance that to advance that right. Uh and you've reminded us you know these are dark times. I'm mindful some people in this class are, you know, adjacent are in my poverty law class and last night we dined with Vincent Calderhead who has come and lectured in our poverty poverty law class and he's a longtime poverty law advocate locally and in the international sphere and uh I was reminded as you described the encampments of one of his clients in our class went and watched actually a hearing in which he advocated on behalf of Bradley Lo who lived in one of the encampments between the cathedral there and uh South Park Street. Uh and uh Vince worked in Pink Lwell works there pink Lark and right outside that park and could see the encampment was chatting with people sort of what was happening and uh took on this client Bradley Low and argued that his tent was a form of um uh accommodation which he owned such that he was due a higher rate and that all folks living in tents were due a higher rate. Anyway, we went and watched Vince argue this um case and Bradley Lo's parents were sitting right ahead of us and Lo had died himself during prior to the proceedings and and uh broke my heart some of uh both times we talked about this um case in our class in the last couple years. Brad Lo was a young man. There were students in the class who had gone to high school with them. It just it was very present and very local. the count was so close and people's relationships with this young man were so close and I was reminded of how much um advocacy there is to do like right here at home we're talking about the human right to housing and sometimes this sounds far far away uh actually the impulse and the imperative like it's so close and you all know that and some of you as you said have experienced it in your own lives um but at the very least experience it in the relationships that you have almost have uh as you move through our city. So I'm again really grateful uh for uh the role that you play in activating democracy. That's how I understand your role to activate democracy around the right to housing uh and reminding us of our place in that as well. Just want to say that we have one more uh seminar lecture coming up. It's March 20th. It's actually yours truly. I'll reflect a little bit on some of what we've heard so far and the title is fail better. uh health justice lessons for no uh uh from Nova Scotia's deinstitutionalization and prison abolition movements uh and uh and I'll be reflecting on uh the many uh insights that you shared with us today. Yeah. Thank you folks. Uh and thank you again. Please welcome. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thanks.