Mr. Raymond Brunet, President of The Canadian Construction Association, before some 700 delegates of the Union of Municipalities of the Province of Quebec, on June 18th declared that :
“If we want our citizens to be adequately housed, no less than 125,000 houses should be built in Canada each year, for the next ten years."
In the last nine years less than 600,000 dwellings have been completed in Canada - little more than half the number required.
Canada is a land rich in forests, minerals, mills, factories, and skilled labour - everything necessary to build fine homes and look after all our housing needs. And yet this past winter found hundreds of thousands of Canadian workers unemployed, while our resources lay idle. The need was there. The physical resources and human skills to answer the need were available and idle. Only money in the would-be buyers' pockets was in short supply. It was strictly a money problem, not a building problem.
Powerful confirmation of the fact that financial policy is actually obstructing the full use of our labour and resources for the satisfying of our needs comes from Australia in a report in The New Times (Melbourne) :
"Most people, particularly young married couples, have a strong desire to own their own homes, no matter how small or humble they may be. But in spite of the present so-called prosperity, there are tens of thousands of good Australians who are unable to fulfill their desires...
“The problem is not one of production ; the necessary materials can now be readily obtained. The difficulty is finance.”
It is recognized that home ownership increases people's interest and sense of responsibility in their community. A diversified ownership — the owning of one's home and plot — is one of the bulwarks of Christian society, a great stabilizing force, and a powerful deterrent to the inroads of Marxism. In this connection, The New Times comments :
“People strongly desirous of owning their own homes are generally the nation's best citizens. But far too many of these people are being frustrated by financial policies which could be easily modified if only political leaders faced the fact that adequate homes are far more important than book-keeping conventions which bear no relationship to reality.”
After pointing out the fantastic sums spent on military defense, which ignores many of the most dangerous aspects of the Communist conspiracy, and the vast sums of the community's financial credit spent on socialistic programs and schemes and bureaucracy and State housing projects, The New Times adds :
“But this policy only results in a growing tenant class with the State as a landlord. It is a policy which has the approval of the Socialists and Communists. But it is not a policy for the creation of a community of sturdy, independent individuals prepared to resist any form of tyranny.”
In Canada, too, money is available when it is to be spent on large schemes, either by the Government (The St. Lawrence project, Chalk River, etc.) or by large corporations fattening on Government contracts (Alcan, Kitimat, and so on).
While not opposed to useful developments, the individuals' needs should have priority, and especially so in such elementary things as food, clothing and shelter.
Social Crediters, advocate a financial policy which would give individuals direct access to their own credit so that they might choose their own projects and look after their own needs rather than having the State monopolizing the community's (people's) credit for purposes over which the people have no control.
A policy of maximum private home ownership is an essential part of our defense program against Communism. This is materially and physically possible in Canada today. Social Credit will make financially possible what Providence and Science have made physically possible.
Subscribe