It’s obvious the federal Liberals are not serious about solving Canada’s housing crisis. Liberals embrace ‘governing-by-crisis’. A crisis is a great way to get Canadians to pay attention to the Liberals’ policies and platforms. Once they have the attention of the electorate, they make massive promises to attack the ‘crisis’ with every weapon they can find, which usually is pissing away taxpayers' dollars on ineffective programs. What better crisis to create to get Canadians’ attention than one that threatens their homes? The Liberals purposefully created the housing crisis by allowing millions of immigrants into Canada over the last decade, giving no thought about where and how they would live, severely stressing housing supply. To be clear, I am in 100% in favour of welcoming new arrivals to Canada who for the most part arrive seeking a new and better life, with the will and force of conviction to achieve that life. They are an integral part of Canada’s lifeblood. During his tenure, former Prime Minister Trudeau spent, or committed to spend, $166 billion of taxpayers’ money to attack the housing crisis. .But any hope the overheated housing crisis was even remotely close to being eradicated, after having that much cash tossed at it, was extinguished last week when the Department of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada announced 817,000 immigrants were approved to enter Canada in the first four months of 2025. Where will they live? The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation says Canada is expected to see a decrease in new home construction compared to previous predictions, now estimating fewer than 250,000 new homes will be built in 2025. And it’s safe to say roughly 70% of those homes have been presold to buyers. Prime Minister Mark Carney’s attack on the housing crisis is to spend $25 billion more on a new bureaucracy called Build Canada Homes, using prefabricated modular homes. But it’s too little and too late, says Paul Betts a real estate consultant with experience in new home building, as well as resale homes. Betts opens with a shot across the bow of the Liberals' housing crisis. “I really do not see a housing issue, other than in select centres like the Greater Toronto Area, Vancouver, Victoria (where) prices are headed down by 20% to 25%, which is good.” .Betts says housing is likely too complicated for a government solution. “In my opinion, housing is an issue with so many layers it is really a tough fix,” he says. “The market itself is the best place to put your bets because in any artificial meddling there are unintended consequences.” “Who is the government, at any level, supposed to concentrate on? Renters, first-time buyers, builders, developers, investors? Increased numbers are not the total answer. “Will 500,000 additional homes a year fix affordability? No, it adds supply at the same or higher prices,” he says, pointing out additional labour, construction materials and time costs. “Where are these to be built anyway? The answer is where they are needed the most, which is where the population grows the most (which is where prices are higher). Carney’s plan to eliminate GST for first-time home buyers gets no love. “Only to the extent the buyer can afford a more expensive new home and will opt for that, so no,” says Betts, adding mandating reduced development charges incurred on developers and builders by municipalities only impacts those cities and taxes. .There’s a major ‘fly in the ointment’ of government involvement, which puts the number one objective, affordability, at risk. “Which level of government wants to be seen as the one forcing real estate values to drop?” he asks, answering with, “That would be none, because tax revenue drops and owners are in an uproar.” The focus should be on first-time buyers and renters, says Betts. “Forget investors and anyone who already owns. They are covered,” he says. Rather than a GST reduction, the old rule of downpayments needs ‘adjusting’. “If I had a magic wand there would be no downpayment required for first-time buyers and they would qualify under the stress test guidelines,” he says. “For example, a purchase price of $500,000 would be bought with a $500,000 mortgage and the federal government would protect the lender under CMHC as they do now. That would be a far better use of billions of dollars” “My justification for this is you can buy a depreciating car for $75,000 with no downpayment, why not an appreciating house? Strict qualifying would remain in place so those with the income could still buy. That immediately brings thousands into the buyer pool.”.Renters are critical to housing, says Betts. “If there is any social housing priority it needs to be concentrated on rental availability, assisting with costs, rent supplement, etcetera, based on income, family size and means,” he says. “Support for purpose-built speed and costs would be the priority.” Land costs, which add significantly to housing costs, are seldom brought into the discussion but should be, says Betts, who offers a solution. “I would add one last thought and that is the Indigenous leaders and community could be a real advantage here with land lease options which effectively reduces prices by 30% to 40% because of the land cost savings,” he says. “That is quite common in BC and it is widely accepted.”
