Mr. Knowles:

Could the leader of the house take advantage of this moment of interruption to tell us what the business will be for next week?

Mr. MacEachen:

On Monday we shall take the second reading of the tax bill, and the committee stage. We would then continue with supplementary estimates and interim supply.

Mr. Knowles:

What about third reading? Monday night?

Oh, oh.

Mr. Bert Leboe (Cariboo):

I shall detain the house for only a few moments because I do not consider that this simple amendment is a

National Housing Act

suitable occasion for a long speech on housing. We agree with the proposal which stipulates an increase in the amount available for mortgages and we shall support the move in this direction. I should like to leave one or two thoughts with the minister. I think it is time we all came to the conclusion, as we in the Social Credit party did many years ago, that financing in connection with housing should not be in competition with financing for industry. Industry can pass on its finance charges to the consumer, and this being the case it is in a much better position to bargain for finance than are people building houses. The purchaser of a home is simply buying a bill of expenses from the time he does so until he disposes of it. The home owner is therefore at a distinct disadvantage.

Surely we should reach the conclusion very quickly that funds for housing ought to be quite separate from any funds available to industry. In recognition of the special position of home owners and the value of home ownership, British Columbia many years ago instituted a home owners grant. It started out as a very small sum, $25 I believe for each home owner. Today it is $120-$130, my hon. friend tells me. The first $130 of an individual home owners taxes are paid by the provincial government.

It would be wise, in my view, to take the position adopted by the Social Credit party before the committee on banking and finance back in 1954, and set up a proper revolving fund to handle the needs of the housing industry. I think this would go a long way toward solving our housing problems. The money should be made available to home owners at the cost of operating the account and there should be no relation whatever between the interest rate charged and the rate charged for commercial loans. We believe the account could be handled with a rate in the neighbourhood of 2| per cent. Not only would we have a fund operating at a low interest rate, but we would be in the happy position of administering a fund which remained at a constant figure.

We have seen interest rates rise to astronomical heights-and not one more house has been built as a result. May I urge the government and the minister to take a good look at the possibility of setting up a revolving fund which would not be in competition with industry and which would be operated at the cost of handling the account quite distinct from prevailing commercial interest rates.

March 8. 1968

National Housing Act

Mr. Chaiterton:

Could the minister explain to the committee at what point after royal assent this new low down payment will apply in the processing of applications?

Mr. Benson:

We shall apply it as soon as we possibly can after royal assent. There always is difficulty in sorting out applications as to which are in time, and which are not. Now that the bill has passed second reading, and we hope it will shortly pass through parliament, we shall try to set a date as soon as possible after the legislation becomes effective.

Mr. Chalterion:

That is not quite the point I was trying to make. The applicable date will of course be immediately after royal assent. The contractors are anxious to know at what stage in the processing of applications the low down payment will apply. If the minister is not able to give us this information now, perhaps he will issue a statement as soon as possible after royal assent.

Mr. Benson:

I have discussed this matter with the officials of the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and they have it under consideration. There always is a difficulty in connection with the exact time, when something is done in stages, but I will undertake to issue a statement in this connection at the earliest opportunity.

Mr. Chaiierton:

I know that a change of this type always creates difficulties. May I suggest that when a decision has been made as to the point at which the decision will apply, the hon. gentleman leave room for an appeal to the minister. I have found there are always special cases in which special consideration is required.

Mr. Benson:

I should like to assure the hon. member that as long as I am minister anyone may appeal to me at any time when it appears he is being unfairly treated under legislation for which I am responsible.

[DOT] (5:10 p.m.)

Mr. Enns:

That gives rise to another question. The minister says this will be so, as long as he is minister. There may be an imminent change in government, and without reflecting on the abilities of the minister may I ask

[Mr. Leboe.l

whether this will be written into the regulations?

Mr. Benson:

Mr. Chairman, I will bring these representations to the attention of the officials of C.M.H.C., who want to administer this fairly, and I will make sure regulations are drawn up so that we will know the exact time of the cut-off. I will even show my hon. friend a copy of them before we publish them.

Mr. Gilbert:

Would the minister give us some details with regard to the differences in loan ratios? I understand the difference at best is only $1,500. I would like the minister to give us a few examples of how these changes would affect a mortgage loan.

Mr. Benson:

Mr. Chairman, I do not think I can be expected to make calculations in committee, but this means that on mortgages up to $18,000 we will be able to lend 95 per cent of the mortgage value. The previous level was $13,000, so the great benefit is in the area between $13,000 and $18,000.

Mr. Alkenbrack:

May I ask the minister if this applies to new housing only?