 | Friday, February 04, 2022
Reading this online? Sign up to get this delivered to your inbox every Friday. | | David Eby hoping to address 'Hunger-style Games' affordable housing struggle in fall session of legislature | | |  | | | This week, it was announced that home prices in southwest B.C. broke all-time records last month.
Selling prices for apartments in the suburbs have gone up close to 50 per cent in the last year.
And the provincial government is increasingly hinting at actions to take over some elements of housing policies from local governments — which are in charge of land-use decisions — rather than implementing new taxes or ownership regulations that would focus more on demand.
Given all that, we asked David Eby, B.C.’s minister responsible for housing, for a phone interview.
What follows is an edited transcript.
Metro Matters: I remember what David Eby in 2015 and 2016 was saying about spiking home prices in B.C. What are your overall thoughts when you see these record highs now?
Eby: It’s all unfortunately predictable … because we added about 25,000 net, new British Columbians in the last quarter of 2021. And they are engaged in a Hunger Games-style struggle with others who are already having trouble finding a place to live here. And so we need to be dramatically increasing the number of places for people to rent and to buy. And unfortunately, we're not meeting that demand currently with municipalities, especially in the area where most of these folks settle, which is Metro Vancouver.
MM: I have heard you talk about supply measures needed, and how you think municipalities need to step up a bit. But, thus far, it’s been mostly rhetoric from you: the government hasn't really changed a lot in terms of the dynamic or incentives. When can people expect action?
Eby: I hope we'll have a suite of measures in place to help address housing in the fall legislative session. We've already taken significant steps to address toxic demand … and the work on supply is really beginning in earnest, as it should. Our population is growing dramatically.
MM: You’ve been talking about this for a while. Why can't the government be ready? Why are you saying another seven months?
Eby: Well, you know, we've been trying a co-operative approach with municipalities, giving them voluntary tools to avoid public hearings on certain kinds of applications. The challenge that we've seen is — and we have many members telling us this — is that the structures that are in place aren't right for them to be able to approve this housing in a hurry. So, we're working as co-operatively as we can with cities. And when you're doing that, it takes a little bit more time, but it's important to do.
MM: In the fall, there are municipal elections coming up. Can you say whether the legislation will come before or after? Couldn’t it create slightly weird dynamics for politicians campaigning, but not knowing, what land-use policies will be in place?
Eby: For municipal politicians, I think this should be an issue that they're addressing in campaigns: the shortage of housing and what their plan is to address it. Residents are sick of not being able to find a place to rent. They're tired of the idea that it takes five to seven years to get a new rental building approved.
But, ultimately, I think we need to improve the tools available to local governments and also make sure that they're actually approving the housing that we need. It’s not optional whether or not to approve housing, but rather, the role of the city government is to talk about the where — and maybe what it looks like — but not whether or not the house goes ahead.
MM: Can you rule out taking more, shall we say, active jurisdiction in some of these things, like we've seen in Ontario, overriding municipalities on land-use decisions, for example?
Eby: Well, there's lots of interesting models that we've seen. What we've done is the first step of requiring local governments to prepare a housing needs study, so that they know what the growth is going to be in their community.
And the next step is to ensure they connect the housing approvals they're granting to the demand in their community, so that the provincial government doesn't have to sweep in and deal with encampments and people sleeping in their cars — which are the inevitable consequences as people get bumped out of the bottom of the housing market by those with higher wages at the top of the market trying to find a place to live.MM: One of the big arguments from anti-supply people is that a lot of these places upzone land too much. It creates land value inflation, and it ends up not doing anything to reduce the price of housing. Do you disagree with that critique, or do you slightly agree with it? And are you hoping to put in measures that mitigate that?
Eby: I mean, if that were true, if allowing additional density decreased affordability, then Shaughnessy and Dunbar would be the most affordable areas of Vancouver. They're single family home areas where you’re not allowed to build density. And therefore, they must be more affordable. They're not. They’re the least affordable.
And the insane nature of the argument defies the 25,000 net new British Columbians — 90 per cent of whom will end up in Metro Vancouver — and the idea that we don't need to meet that supply with new housing, that we don't need homes for those folks, that they can somehow find a place to live.
I think there's still some opportunity for us to free up some units through better regulation of short-term rentals. It’s not that we’re abandoning addressing speculation in the market or trying to find ways to address people who are flipping properties. But the bottom line is: if you've got 25,000 people every three months moving to Metro Vancouver, then you need to be building homes for them. | | |  | | | | | It's important to keep in mind that what's happening in housing in the last year is a fair bit different than the 2015-2016 boom.
Then, prices in detached homes were rising quickly — but aside from Vancouver, condo prices were not surging nearly as fast. The old argument of "young people can still move to smaller places in the suburbs" did have some merit, insofar as there were plenty of options for under $400,000 if you went far enough out.
In this wave though? Suburban condos are affected, even more so as a percentage than detached homes.
And that changes the equation slightly. | | |  | | | 1. Codes of conduct | | | Who is in the best position to police the words and tone of city councillors? Is it other people around the council table? And what defines "disrespectful behaviour?" That's at the heart of a debate over municipalities in B.C. being urged to adopt codes of conduct — and some of the messy controversies that have played out as a result.
Read more | | |  | | | 2. Surrey | As an example, Surrey was going to change its code of conduct so that councillors couldn't be investigated by the ethics commissioner in an election year. The motion was pulled at the last minute by Mayor Doug McCallum, but it was another example of how, ultimately, "majority rules" matters more than what's in "the code" at any one moment.
Read more | | | |  | | | 3. Bowen Island | Last year, B.C. Emergency Health Services began shifting away from its on-call model in rural or remote communities in favour of regular scheduled paramedic jobs with employer benefits and set hours. But that's caused issues in smaller communities — including Bowen Island, where they've had long gaps without ambulance service. Read more | | | | | | Share this newsletter | | or subscribe if this was
forwarded to you. | | | | That's it for this week! In the meantime, check out the latest headlines at cbc.ca/bc and follow our municipal affairs reporter Justin McElroy on Twitter. And if you have any questions you might want answered in a future mailbag, drop Justin a line at metromatters@cbc.ca. | | | |
