The committee has heard a consistent message that homelessness is not solely a housing problem but a complex policy failure at the intersection of housing, health, mental health, addictions, and social services. Witnesses across multiple meetings have argued that the current system is fragmented, with frontline organizations forced to bridge gaps between siloed federal, provincial, and municipal programs. A recurring theme is that prevention remains critically underfunded compared to crisis response, and that early intervention—particularly for youth leaving care, people with developmental disabilities, and those at risk of first-time homelessness—would be more effective and less costly than emergency shelter expansion. Several witnesses have also emphasized that people experiencing homelessness are not a single category, and that tailored solutions are needed for distinct populations, including women and girls, people with disabilities, and those with high-acuity health needs.

The Reaching Home program has been a central focus of criticism and recommendations. Witnesses from Montreal, rural Quebec, Saskatoon, and elsewhere have called for the program to be made permanent with predictable, multi-year, indexed funding, and for earlier funding announcements to prevent service disruptions. Many have argued that the current division between "designated communities" and "rural and remote homelessness" leaves rural and smaller communities underfunded despite rising need. There has been broad agreement that project-based funding cycles undermine staff retention, trust-building, and the continuity of care, and that organizations need the ability to carry over unspent funds between fiscal years. Some witnesses have also questioned whether the program's structure inadvertently incentivizes serving homelessness rather than ending it, and have recommended adopting functional zero as an operational target with mandated by-name data.

On housing supply and affordability, witnesses have consistently argued that housing starts are a lagging and potentially misleading indicator, and that policy should instead track completions, excavations, pre-sales, and units preserved. There is broad agreement that the federal government should prioritize deeply affordable and supportive non-market housing, with several witnesses recommending a target of 20% non-market housing stock. The role of Build Canada Homes has been discussed extensively, with witnesses generally supporting its creation but urging clear performance metrics, coordination with CMHC and other entities, and a focus on catalytic capital for projects where market economics alone are insufficient. Industry representatives have emphasized that taxes, fees, and development charges account for 25% to 40% of new home costs in some provinces, and have called for federal leadership to align all levels of government around reducing these costs and streamlining approval timelines.

Witnesses have disagreed on several points. There is a clear tension between those who argue that expanding shelters entrenches homelessness and those who maintain that shelters remain necessary for chronic populations with high-acuity needs. Some witnesses have advocated for a strict Housing First model with immediate access to permanent housing, while others have described transitional and pre-treatment recovery housing as essential bridges for people not yet ready for independent living. The role of the private sector has also been debated: some witnesses have argued that the federal government should focus on non-market housing and direct public investment, while others have emphasized that the private sector builds the vast majority of housing and that policy should enable builders through tax relief, regulatory certainty, and reduced fees. There has also been disagreement on whether the federal government should direct funding to provincial governments or directly to local organizations, and on whether a Canada housing benefit would stabilize households or exacerbate supply challenges without stronger tenant protections.