“Let’s get that housing crisis fixed,” has been one of the rallying cries of the federal election campaign, with parties offering platforms and policies they say will solve the crisis.
The two major parties are promising aggressive, if impossible, levels of new home construction if they are elected. One promises to create bureaucracies to solve the crisis, while another promises to hold existing federal bureaucracies to account for not having yet found a solution.
Billions of taxpayers’ dollars have been promised to fund their plans to improve housing supply and promote affordability, but the solution is not predicated just on piles of cash or building bureaucracies, and promises are rarely based on common sense, nor business sense, during election battles.
Having reviewed the plans put forward by the Conservative Party of Canada and the Liberal Party, we see no evidence they have consulted the industries that would be most impacted by the plans: the development and home building industries, both of which would have a pragmatic, rather than ‘pie-in-the sky’ approach to solutions.
We spoke to industry executive, Shane Wenzel, president and CEO of Shane Homes in Calgary, to get his thoughts on the housing platforms of the Conservatives and Liberals, one of which will form the next government.
But first, an overview of the platforms.
Conservatives
Party Leader Pierre Poilievre says his party, if victorious, would have 2.3 million new homes built over the next five years, or 460,000 per year (compared to the current national average of about 200,000 per year.) The policy would be supported by a ‘carrot and stick’ approach of incentives for municipalities to reach goals and penalties if targets are not reached.
Under-performance would see a municipality lose federal funding, while those that exceed targets will be rewarded. The party plans to waive the GST on new homes priced at less than $1.3 million for all buyers; pre-approve zoning near transit and sell off 15% of federal buildings for conversion into housing.
A Conservative government would also hold Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation bureaucrats accountable for delays to application processes if they exceed 60 days. The party sees housing delivery to date as a bureaucratic failure rather than a systemic one.
The bottom line is a plan based on outcomes that gives the building industry the opportunity to do what it does best — build homes — with minimal bureaucratic intervention.
Liberals
Not surprisingly, the Liberals’ plan keeps the power to find solutions in the hands of government bureaucrats. Liberal candidate for prime minster, Mark Carney, has committed to building five million homes over the next decade, or 500,000 per year.
To supposedly speed up the rate of construction and delivery, the Liberals would provide $35 billion in financing for prefab and rental construction.
The Liberals if elected says Carney, would establish a new agency called Build Canada Homes, where the government becomes the developer and builder of affordable housing, raising the spectre of more bureaucratic bungling.
The plan also offers a GST break on new homes priced at less than $1 million for first-time home buyers only; proposes to cut development charges and speed up building-code reforms. These are both under the purview of municipalities and mirror the Liberals’ Housing Accelerator Fund introduced during the Justin Trudeau regime.
Shane Homes has been operating in Calgary and area for 45 years and has survived the housing busts and booms the city has experienced over that time.
The company’s namesake and president/CEO, Shane Wenzel, shares his views on the platforms from an industry point of view, not a political one.
“Mark Carney's proposed housing plan is a textbook case of overreach — more federal control, bureaucracy, and taxes. It is based on ideology rather than practicality,” says Wenzel. “His plan, which focuses on central planning and speculative taxes, has the potential to stifle investment and slow the very industry that Canada needs to grow — homebuilding.”
“Carney's proposals do little to address the root cause — a lack of housing supply — and instead impose red tape and financial penalties that discourage private-sector solutions. Canadians cannot afford further delays or failed experiments.”
The plan sounds good, politically, but makes little financial or practical sense, says Wenzel.
“You can’t build affordability on flawed assumptions,” he says. “Without addressing real market dynamics, supply chains, labour and development timelines, it is just another promise that will not deliver results for Canadians, only more costs and red tape."
On the Conservatives’ plan.
“Pierre Poilievre's plan, on the other hand, addresses the core issue: unleashing supply. By linking federal infrastructure funding to municipal housing approvals, he creates real accountability,” says Wenzel. “He recognizes that the obstacles are at the local level, including zoning delays, permitting backlogs, and anti-growth policies.”
“Poilievre wants to reward cities that build while penalizing those that do not. That is a sensible policy. He also supports removing barriers to construction, which we desperately need.”
It’s about giving Canadians the opportunity of achieving their dreams of homeownership.
“Carney offers platitudes and centralised planning. Poilievre takes bold action and achieves real results” says Wenzel. “One strategy will slow progress; the other may finally get shovels in the ground.”
“The choice should be clear.”
