Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

My name is Paul De Berardis, and I am the VP of building standards and engineering with RESCON. We are the leading association of residential home builders in the province of Ontario, and we build a majority of new housing across Canada's largest province.

The motion before the committee today seeks to address issues related to emerging homebuilding technologies and materials, along with construction methods, energy efficiency systems and innovation. We believe that, in the midst of the most pressing housing affordability and supply crisis that Canada has ever seen, we must view all associated issues through the lens of prioritizing housing that is affordable for most Canadians.

Housing is a human right, the most fundamental right of every Canadian. It is difficult, if not impossible, to be a good employee, a successful student or a fully participant member of any community if you do not have a stable, comfortable and affordable place to live.

With respect to advancements in homebuilding technology, our industry is at the forefront of modern building practices. Examples of our leadership in modern building technologies are the vast array of engineered wood products, manufactured roof assemblies as well as off-site panelized wall and floor systems. The voluntary application of energy efficiency programs has improved the sustainability of Canada’s housing stock, and we continue to advance new approaches in recognition of the climate challenges we face in the country and around the world.

The private sector homebuilding industry in Canada has embraced modern digital approaches, spanning from the design stage through to final product construction. However, most municipalities in Canada are far behind their contemporaries around the world in terms of digital innovations. It is an endless source of frustration for our industry that we are unable to digitally engage with municipal planning and building authorities in a manner that reflects electronic approval services readily available in other jurisdictions.

Our industry already has the ability and capacity to perform three-dimensional building design and comprehensive building information modelling with clash detection, practices that are being used across the world successfully. However, these digital technologies cannot be fully exploited much beyond the design stage, as municipal approval authorities do not have the ability to integrate these technology platforms into their existing workflows. These digital limitations and lack of data transparency with municipal authorities that have jurisdiction play a role in the lengthy development approvals process.

CMHC research finds a correlation between the speed of development approvals and housing affordability. Vancouver and Toronto have the slowest planning approvals and, in turn, have the worst level of housing affordability. Municipalities need to be accountable for the impacts of their approval timelines on the cost of delivering new housing, and approvals must be streamlined through digitization.

The committee’s motion makes specific reference to building code issues. Our prevailing concern is that, in an attempt to develop a comprehensive model national building code, the result is a sequence of ever-expanding requirements that have a compounding effect on construction costs, leading to new homes that Canadians simply cannot afford to purchase. The code has always represented a minimum standard with the objective of ensuring fire, health and safety, and structural integrity. Mandating measures far beyond these parameters is neither realistic, nor does it consider the cost-benefit realities of delivering housing products to Canadians that they can afford to purchase.

Current and future planned updates to the model national building code are attempting to implement a multitude of social objectives, using the code as the enabling regulatory mechanism. It is ill-advised that building codes are increasingly being used as a vehicle to implement a wide array of social policies now rather than focusing on the primary need to facilitate the construction of housing that consumers can afford.

The code cycle priorities being carried forward include code harmonization among construction codes across Canada, climate change mitigation through greenhouse gas reductions, climate change adaptation solutions against overheating indoors, alterations to existing buildings, expansion of accessibility requirements, fire and life safety of emergency responders and protection against future anticipated extreme weather events.

We note that the committee seeks to explore policies promoting the adoption of innovative homebuilding technologies and supporting the growth of the construction and homebuilding industry. The reality is simply that, if the objective is to support growth and the construction of the homebuilding industry across Canada, it is not possible under the given framework, as every five years the goalposts are moved in an unpredictable and drastic manner that is not sustainable.

We cannot do both—build more homes people can afford while, at the same time, make regulations that preclude the ability to deliver on the overarching responsibility of providing places for people to live.

As noted, we as an industry are among the most advanced in the world in terms of sustainability, modern technology applications and construction techniques that deliver on all of these objectives while seeking to maintain affordability for Canadians. We hope that the committee shares our commitments in this regard.

I am happy to take any questions. Thank you.