Entry of major private developers into social housing raises concerns

Construction workers on the roof of a residential building in Lévis on Tuesday, May 20, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jacques Boissinot

The intention of three major real-estate developers — Groupe Mach, Cogir Immobilier and Groupe Devimco — to build 2,500 housing units in Montreal for people experiencing homelessness, revealed in November by La Presse, has sparked imaginations.

They propose to build at zero profit and then hand the buildings over to the Société d’habitation du Québec to keep the units off the private market.

It is the largest, but not the only, private-sector initiative increasingly inserting itself into the social-housing landscape.

Examples include Toit à moi, which aims to buy and offer 1,500 low-rent condominiums to people aged 55 and over who are experiencing homelessness by 2035, and Mission Unitaînés, which is slated by 2027 to complete 17 buildings of 100 low-rent units for seniors across Quebec.

There is also UTILE, another non-profit organization that works in student housing.

Protecting their teams

But in the case of the three major developers, the initiative is surprising because they are not non-profits and the project does not fit within a profitable business model.

Anne Cormier, a specialist in social-housing issues at the Université de Montréal’s School of Architecture, believes they still see a benefit in a market where demand has collapsed for the luxury condos and apartments they usually build.

“They built too many, the market is totally saturated and they’re likely looking for work. The goal here is not to dismantle the teams they took time to build.”

Hélène Bélanger, a professor in the department of urban and tourism studies at UQAM and a specialist in social housing, agrees.

“Maybe there’s no profit margin like in private, for-profit construction, but their company keeps running, their workforce keeps working, so it keeps the machine going.”

Homelessness as a nuisance

Another motivation is image and urban environment, says Louis Gaudreau, also a social-housing expert in UQAM’s School of Social Work.

“It’s very clear that homelessness is seen by the business community as a brake on economic growth or, at least, on the smooth running of business.”

Bélanger goes further, noting that “this homelessness is increasingly visible, but it’s also increasingly ‘rough’ in the sense that we’re seeing very severe cases we didn’t see as frequently not so long ago. It creates a bad image for business.”

She says the business community has tolerated the issue for a long time, “but now the problem is too big. You can’t just ignore it or push it a few blocks away. There are homelessness issues everywhere now — in suburbs, in regions — and the business community has an interest in solving it.”

“These big developers have in some ways contributed to the housing crisis with large condo projects, whether rental or for sale, that are out of reach for most households,” she continues. “And now there’s an opportunity that hasn’t yet been filled because the government has stepped back from building social housing, so there’s a desperate need and they want to fill that gap.”

State failure

Private initiatives are multiplying specifically because of government withdrawal, says Véronique Laflamme, spokesperson for the Front d’action populaire en réaménagement urbain (FRAPRU), a group that has advocated for social housing for decades.

“It feels like governments, particularly Quebec, are abandoning their role as project lead. The Quebec government has no clear vision or measurable development targets and is falling behind the private sector.”

Georgia Cardosi, an assistant professor in the Université de Montréal’s School of Architecture, argues that growing private-sector involvement “is much more than a repudiation of government. What we’re living through is a general failure of the state’s presence in the central issue of housing. Many citizens can no longer pay their rent, but we saw this coming long ago. So there’s inefficiency and inaction on the part of the state.”

“We’re not simply in a housing crisis,” she adds, “but in a crisis of values, where the state is increasingly absent from issues at the core of civic life.”

Bélanger offers a similar diagnosis that goes beyond housing.

“The government’s withdrawal has been clear for years and we see it in several areas, not just housing. The current government relies heavily on the private sector to take over social programs and, to some extent, community services. This disengagement is evident on many fronts.”

Private execution, public money

Public authorities are not absent. These projects can be completed at low cost in part because municipalities often provide the land. And yes, the government draws on public funds, Gaudreau notes.

“What these philanthropists propose may not carry the name ‘social housing,’ but it has nearly all its characteristics. We’re talking about building housing that will become state-owned, via municipal housing offices, where tenants will pay rent proportional to their income. That’s the definition of a public, subsidized housing unit. And the irony is that Quebec’s official policies don’t even propose this.”

What Quebec is doing, he says, is funding projects piecemeal.

“Instead of creating programs or integrating projects into programs, it funds them individually.”

He gives the example of Unitaînés, where money was granted by decree to the non-profit Mission Unitaînés — founded by Groupe Maurice owner Luc Maurice — to complete the projects he proposed. Municipalities also provided the land for all 17 buildings.

No public funding has yet been granted to the three major developers, but they have been open about wanting Quebec to provide long-term mortgage financing.

That is why, Cardosi says, these projects must be closely watched.

“We must ensure the long-term stability of public resources being invested, even when the private sector is in charge. Public lands, subsidies and loans are always involved. We must ensure these public resources generate housing that will remain a collective asset over time.”

The most vulnerable left behind

Leaving social-housing development in private hands comes with consequences.

“What worries me most is that these developers are used to building for people without complex needs,” says Cormier. Many of the most visible people experiencing homelessness “have major disorganization issues and need support in order to return to more stable living patterns.”

She notes the developers are proposing buildings of 200 to 300 units. “But many people need support to reintegrate, and 300 people is far too many for a building serving this population. It’s concerning to see companies entering a type of housing aimed at a very different clientele without necessarily understanding the challenges. For people with certain adaptation difficulties, 50 units is usually the maximum.”

In other words, they may end up serving a very specific clientele: the newer group of people pushed into homelessness simply because they can’t find an affordable place to live.

In a Nov. 24 La Presse article, Groupe Mach president Vincent Chiara did not hide that he wanted to choose tenants without mental-health or addiction issues, even acknowledging that real-estate players were largely responsible for pushing many people out of their homes.

Loss of trust

Beyond the immediate concerns, Cardosi warns of long-term consequences from shifting responsibility from public to private hands.

“It’s absolutely negative because it undermines the meaning of the state’s presence and the role of public action. It weakens citizens’ trust in public authorities and risks triggering other issues we may not yet see — opening the door to solutions that neither governments nor citizens necessarily want.”

Most experts note that several European countries addressed housing crises by massively building social housing, but “there is no political will here to be an actor, promoter or developer to ensure people are housed,” Bélanger says.

“That’s why private actors step in — because there’s room. And I think that’s partly what the government wants, because it can continue to withdraw and say we have major developers with social conscience who agree not to make a profit to build these social units.”

“So the equation works: we’re all-in on private delivery. The private sector is there to meet needs, but it would be surprising if it were there to meet the needs of the most vulnerable or the most complex cases.”

In a Dec. 31 story, The Canadian Press incorrectly reported that money had been given by decree to Groupe Maurice, when it was granted to the non-profit Mission Unitaînés, founded by Groupe Maurice owner Luc Maurice.

By Pierre Saint-Arnaud

This report by The Canadian Press was first published in French on Jan. 3, 2026.