The Senate’s Week: CUSMA, Gaza, and a Housing Crisis
Senators confront growing economic anxiety, the human cost of global conflicts, and the urgent need for legislative action on Indigenous rights, online safety, and environmental policy.
The Senate of Canada was a hive of activity, tackling a sprawling agenda that touched on nearly every major issue facing the country. From the future of the auto sector under the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) to the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, and from the spiraling housing crisis to the long-overdue rectification of discriminatory laws, Senate committees dug into the complex files shaping our national life. The discussions revealed deep anxieties about Canada’s economic competitiveness, frustration with bureaucratic inertia, and a profound sense of urgency on matters of human rights. Here’s a look at what unfolded.
Economic Storm Clouds Gather
A persistent theme across multiple committees was the precarious state of the Canadian economy, particularly in the face of aggressive U.S. trade policy and structural weaknesses at home.
CUSMA and the Auto Sector at a Crossroads
At the Foreign Affairs and International Trade Committee, leaders from Canada’s automotive sector delivered a stark warning about the upcoming CUSMA review. Brian Kingston, President of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association (CVMA), and Flavio Volpe, President of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers’ Association (APMA), painted a picture of an industry under immense pressure.
Kingston argued that Canada must do everything possible to renew the agreement and protect its preferential access to the U.S. market. A key priority, he stated, is the removal of U.S. Section 232 tariffs, which are doing “enormous damage” to the integrated North American supply chain. In a surprising twist, Kingston noted that it is now more cost-effective to manufacture a vehicle in Japan or Germany and export it to the U.S. than to build one in North America for the American market.
He also took direct aim at federal policy, calling for the elimination of Canada’s EV mandate. Kingston argued the mandate effectively makes it illegal for automakers to sell the vehicles they are currently building in Canada, describing it as “nonsensical” to negotiate a trade agreement to support an industry being undermined by domestic regulations.
Volpe echoed these concerns, emphasizing that the integrated auto sector is a single production ecosystem, not three competing jurisdictions. He recounted how parts can cross the Canada-U.S. border up to seven times before ending up in a finished car, highlighting the deep integration that policies like the Section 232 tariffs threaten. Both witnesses stressed the need for a unified, Team Canada approach to the 2026 CUSMA review.
The Housing Crisis: A Tale of Taxes and Inaction
The Banking, Commerce and the Economy Committee drilled down into another source of economic pain: Canada’s housing crisis. Witnesses argued that government taxes and fees are a primary reason why homes are both unaffordable for buyers and uneconomic for builders.
Mike Moffatt of the University of Ottawa’s Missing Middle Initiative provided a striking personal example. In 2004, he bought a new home in London, Ontario, for $168,000, of which about $16,000 was taxes and fees. Today, he told the committee, the taxes and fees alone on a similar home are roughly $168,000, the entire cost of his first house.
Jon Love, CEO of KingSett Capital, offered a similar analysis, stating that the combined tax load on a new apartment in Toronto, including HST, development charges, and land transfer taxes, can approach 30% of the total cost. He described a current $340-million residential project where taxes and fees total $88 million, an amount four times the cost of the land itself. This tax burden, he argued, has “stopped new development in its tracks.”
The solution, according to Love, is simple and bold: remove all taxes, fees, and levies from the creation of new housing. This would, he claimed, reduce new housing costs by 25% to 30% and kick-start the industry.
A Question of Rights and Recognition
Beyond the economic files, committees were seized with deeply personal and emotional issues of human rights, both at home and abroad.
Gaza: An “Unconscionable” Humanitarian Catastrophe
The Foreign Affairs committee heard harrowing testimony on the humanitarian situation in Gaza. Officials from Global Affairs Canada and representatives from CARE Canada, Oxfam Canada, and Save the Children Canada described a crisis of unimaginable proportions.
Tara Carney, Acting Director General of Humanitarian Assistance at Global Affairs, called the situation “unconscionable,” noting that nearly two million people have been displaced and over half a million are facing catastrophic levels of hunger. The death toll for humanitarian workers, she stated, is the highest in any conflict in modern history.
Representatives from the aid organizations provided visceral, on-the-ground accounts. Mary Bridger of CARE Canada spoke of doctors performing C-sections without anesthesia and mothers losing babies because there is no power for incubators. Dalia Al-Awqati of Oxfam described Gaza as a “post-apocalyptic killing field” where a “man-made famine” is being used as a method of warfare. Patrick Robitaille of Save the Children Canada relayed a message from a team member on the ground: “our supply of nutritional supplements is going to last only for two more days.” He shared that in therapeutic sessions, children who once wished for peace and food now say they wish to die.
A recurring theme was the deliberate obstruction of aid. Witnesses described how essential supplies are blocked at border crossings and how new bureaucratic hurdles, like demands for lists of Palestinian staff, are impeding their work.
The Indian Act: “Make It Stop”
The Indigenous Peoples committee held deeply emotional hearings on Bill S-2, legislation aimed at addressing historical, sex-based discrimination in the Indian Act. Witness after witness urged the committee to amend the bill to finally eliminate the “second-generation cut-off,” a rule that prevents status from being passed down beyond two generations if one parent is non-status.
Marjolaine Étienne of Quebec Native Women stated the progress in the bill is incomplete and that sex-based discrimination persists, creating “new waves of exclusions, legal challenges and family trauma.” Pamela Palmater, Chair in Indigenous Governance at Toronto Metropolitan University, was blunt: “Canada cannot wait any longer. It must make an amendment to eliminate the second-generation cut-off in this bill.” She noted that the government cannot consult on whether to respect the Charter and the Constitution now.
The most powerful testimony came from those with lived experience. Zoë Craig-Sparrow of Justice for Girls told the committee, “I am the cut-off.” A member of the Musqueam Nation with 6(2) status, she explained that because her fiancé is non-status, her future children will not be entitled to status, severing a legal link to their community, culture, and rights. Mélanie Savard of Les enfants d’Aataentsic shared her 18-year struggle as the mother of a child affected by the cut-off, describing the “immeasurable inequalities” and “lateral violence” experienced within communities as a result of the discriminatory law.
Regulating New Frontiers
Finally, a suite of bills and studies demonstrated the Senate’s focus on establishing regulatory frameworks for the digital age and for emerging environmental technologies.
The Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee continued its study of Bill S-209, an Act to restrict youth access to online pornography. The central debate revolved around the best method for age verification. Witnesses from Ethical Capital Partners, the owner of Pornhub’s parent company Aylo, argued strongly against site-based verification, which they claim has failed in other jurisdictions. They contend it exposes users to privacy risks and pushes traffic to non-compliant, unmoderated sites. Instead, they advocate for a mandatory, device-based system where operating system manufacturers like Apple, Google, and Microsoft would be required to provide an age signal to websites. However, witnesses from the UK and France, as well as age-assurance provider Yoti, testified that site-based systems, while imperfect, are a workable first step and that technologies like facial age estimation are becoming more accurate and privacy-preserving.
Meanwhile, studies on wildfires at the Agriculture and Forestry Committee and ocean carbon sequestration at the Fisheries and Oceans Committee highlighted the need for national strategies and clearer government policies to manage environmental risks and foster innovation. Witnesses on wildfires called for a massive increase in prescribed burning and a shift in forestry practices to prioritize mitigation. Those in the ocean carbon sector asked for regulatory certainty to assure investors and allow their technologies to scale up.
The Data Brief
Economic Anxiety: The upcoming CUSMA review and U.S. tariffs are creating significant uncertainty for Canada’s vital auto sector. High taxes and fees are crippling new home construction, exacerbating the housing crisis.
Human Rights in Focus: Aid organizations delivered devastating testimony on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, describing a man-made famine and the deliberate obstruction of aid. Indigenous women made powerful, emotional calls for the Senate to amend Bill S-2 to finally end all sex-based discrimination in the Indian Act, particularly the second-generation cut-off.
Regulatory Debates: Committees are grappling with how to regulate complex modern issues. A key debate on Bill S-209 is whether to mandate age verification at the website level or at the device (operating system) level.
A Call for National Strategies: From wildfires to housing to critical minerals, witnesses repeatedly called for clear, coordinated national strategies and an end to bureaucratic inertia and jurisdictional squabbling.
Source Documents
Standing Senate Committees (October 6, 2025 - October 10, 2025). Evidence.