Will the real Pierre Poilievre please stand up?

[Mad Mike]

If you take out the 'just' from this sentence, then I might agree...

You could do that if you compare Canada with the losers. I prefer to set comparisons with the winners.

There are lots of developed nations who's leaders managed monetary policy well enough to escape tripling their annual rate of inflation, tripling lending costs, and doubling housing costs.

The facts are clear.

 

[Shaman]

It always amazes me when I see "but he has no plan." That comes directly out of Liberal/NDP echo chambers.

Not only is a preliminary (pre-election) plan published on their website, there's many public statements about the policies that the CPC would bring forth. While I wouldn't call myself a CPC fan I absolutely can see that their policies are vastly better and less ideology-ridden compared to the LPC. They're both divisive, they both love big business but the LPC has single-handedly ruined and outright spat in the face of my industry - the CLEC / Independent ISP industry. They've funded and advantaged almost exclusively the big players, added huge costs to the smaller players, they've made sure that all the wireless spectrum went to the biggest players... ruined wholesale progress...

Not only will I never forgive the LPC for this, my skepticism of the role and functionality of the Canadian government has increased vastly, and it was hovering somewhere above "criminal gang" before this. Now we're at "organised crime." At some point when you've met with government 20+ times and every time they do the exact opposite of your suggestions to favor their big business oligarchies, then ghost you when you try to make them accountable... you have to realise it's not about incompetence, it's malice.

@#$% the LPC. I'll probably never vote for them again unless they reform entirely. But they won't, just look at the OLP, they've rammed McGuinty/Wynne era Premiers into place despite being punished hard for it in the voting booths. They're so arrogant they thought people would forget their corruption and toadying.

 

[nobbie48]

It always amazes me when I see "but he has no plan." That comes directly out of Liberal/NDP echo chambers.

Not only is a preliminary (pre-election) plan published on their website, there's many public statements about the policies that the CPC would bring forth. While I wouldn't call myself a CPC fan I absolutely can see that their policies are vastly better and less ideology-ridden compared to the LPC. They're both divisive, they both love big business but the LPC has single-handedly ruined and outright spat in the face of my industry - the CLEC / Independent ISP industry. They've funded and advantaged almost exclusively the big players, added huge costs to the smaller players, they've made sure that all the wireless spectrum went to the biggest players... ruined wholesale progress...

Not only will I never forgive the LPC for this, my skepticism of the role and functionality of the Canadian government has increased vastly, and it was hovering somewhere above "criminal gang" before this. Now we're at "organised crime." At some point when you've met with government 20+ times and every time they do the exact opposite of your suggestions to favor their big business oligarchies, then ghost you when you try to make them accountable... you have to realise it's not about incompetence, it's malice.

@#$% the LPC. I'll probably never vote for them again unless they reform entirely. But they won't, just look at the OLP, they've rammed McGuinty/Wynne era Premiers into place despite being punished hard for it in the voting booths. They're so arrogant they thought people would forget their corruption and toadying.

Never say never.

The PC's wiped themselves out in 1993 and are now being favoured to wipe out the Liberals. Name change etc but still.....

In the 1993 election, the PCs plunged from 154 seats to two — neither of which was Campbell’s

 

[Baggsy]

I 've read the motions put forward by the two NDP members. I can see why you wouldn't vote for them even if you weren't in power.
41st 140:
"That the House recognize that Canadians are faced with a housing crunch of rising costs and growing waiting lists due to chronic underfunding of affordable housing from 1993 to the present, and call on the government to work with the provinces, territories, municipalities, and with First Nations, Inuit, and Metis, to immediately renew long-term social housing funding and reinvest in the development of affordable housing units."

42nd 889:
"That, given that a housing crisis is raging in Canada and that 90% of the funding for the government's national housing strategy will only flow after the next election, and that much of the funding depends on collaboration with provincial governments and the private sector, the House call on the government to: (a) recognize the right to housing as a human right; and (b) bring forward 50% of the strategy’s funding before the next election to invest in (i) housing for Indigenous communities, (ii) the construction of new affordable housing, new social housing units and new co-ops units, (iii) a plan to end homelessness, (iv) the renovation of existing social housing and old housing stock, (v) the expansion of rent supplements, (vi) the administration of programs that meet the special needs of seniors and persons with reduced mobility."

42nd 987:
"That, in the opinion of the House, the government is failing to adequately address Canada’s housing crisis and that, therefore, the House call on the government to create 500,000 units of quality, affordable housing within ten years, and to commit in Budget 2019 to completing 250,000 of those units within five years."

You need to read and weigh each word carefully, if you're voting for these, as they can have serious repercussions.

Remember this crisis took years to build, so we should take a little bit of time to work out potential solutions and pick the best.

 

[nobbie48]

This is incorrect. The Liberals didn’t just cause inflation, they turbocharged.

It’s basic economics - increase demand without increasing supply will cause prices to rise through bid up (inflation).

1) Libersls blew $600billion if unplanned cash ito the economy at a time when good supplies were interrupted. Those billions chased scarce goods which caused prices to rise.

2) Libersls juiced demand for housing across the country by doubling immigration rates, and increasing student visa approvals from 140k to 900k. With no plan to manage population growth and housing supply, the again moved the dupply/demand equilibrium higher - record house price inflation.

3) Carbon taxes are simple, good cost increases at about 1.4x the tax. More inflation

4) The final killer was BOC fixing inflation. Raising prime by 500% inflated all financing costs and most real estate rents.

While there was some inflation around the world, Canada (and the USA) get a F. Most of the developed world has inflation under control -we dont. Canadas inflation rate is still 30% higher than the Euro zone, and our commercial lending rates 50 to 100% higher.

1) Someone discover anomalies around residential schools and JT, fearing having to coherently answer questions starts a smoke screen from burning $300 million.

The gift that keeps on taking.

Then he gives 335,000 civil servants a day off with pay. Their job was to look after the well being of all Canadians including the indigenous. They didn't do a great job but got the day off to shop, do lunch, spa day. Native people didn't get the day off. That should be about $70 Million a year plus inflation forever.

Add to that, a ton of other labour costs for federally regulated organizations.

The natives have mixed opinions about the day.

 

[FullMotoJacket]

The natives have mixed opinions about the day.

I'd be shocked if they didn't.

 

[Baggsy]

CBC is fact checking Pierre now.

 

[FullMotoJacket]

CBC is fact checking Pierre now.

Everyone should be held accountable.

I have serious misgivings about the CBC being the ones doing so, however.

 

[Mad Mike]

CBC is fact checking Pierre now.

Except they are not fact checking, they are lobbying for Liberals because they fear the alternative. Pierre talks about what a house costs for a new home buyer, he mentions 66% of gross income. CBC counters with 33% as the average, but their math includes all home owners, existing and new. If I sell and go buy a new 1m home, my mortgage is zero, my 24 year old daughter is looking at a $900k mortgage. Housing crisis and high finance rates aren’t hurting me, they are hurting my daughter.

This is the left media spinning into high gear. Fact checking out of context is straight out of the Trudeau/Freeland playbook. Watch CPAC question period on the days they show up.

 

[PrivatePilot]

Don't hit 15% housing growth every year? Then you don't get federal money.

I'm late to the party in this thread, but I just have to state something here.....last I checked, the overwheming majority of houses built in this province are built by the private for-profit sector. And I don't believe you can *force* these companies to build homes. A municipality can open up land, blah blah blah, but they can't force private companies to rush-build cheap homes to fill that land. To the contrary, when many of these homebuilders see land that they know they can make more money on 3-5 years down the road vs today, they'll often just decide to sit on that land and build later, or just not buy a parcel at all and look at it again down the road.

This is why housing starts are down considerably this year vs last - builders know that demand is down considering interest rates and other factors, prices have dropped, and they risk further depressing their own market (and profits) if they continue building with reckless abandon.

So I'd like to know exactly how "legislating 15% housing growth" isn't just pie in the sky rhetoric not based in any realistic chance it's going to accomplish anything in the end except potentially screw a municipality out of funds they need to actually operate when homebuilders basically say "We dont wanna flood the market" and take their dozers and dumptrucks and go home. Is PP going to put the federal government in the homebuilding business?

 

[GreyGhost]

I'm late to the party in this thread, but I just have to state something here.....last I checked, the overwheming majority of houses built in this province are built by the private for-profit sector. And I don't believe you can *force* these companies to build homes. A municipality can open up land, blah blah blah, but they can't force private companies to rush-build cheap homes to fill that land. To the contrary, when many of these homebuilders see land that they know they can make more money on 3-5 years down the road vs today, they'll often just decide to sit on that land and build later, or just not buy a parcel at all and look at it again down the road.

This is why housing starts are down considerably this year vs last - builders know that demand is down considering interest rates and other factors, prices have dropped, and they risk further depressing their own market (and profits) if they continue building with reckless abandon.

So I'd like to know exactly how "legislating 15% housing growth" isn't just pie in the sky rhetoric not based in any realistic chance it's going to accomplish anything in the end except potentially screw a municipality out of funds they need to actually operate when homebuilders basically say "We dont wanna flood the market" and take their dozers and dumptrucks and go home. Is PP going to put the federal government in the homebuilding business?

While municipalities can't build houses, they can sure as hell slow things down. Some gta municipalities are apalling and need a bomb dropped in to clear out all staff for a fresh start. Just wasting time and money with no benefit to anybody. Funding tied to progress provides the impetus to move things forward (or initiate the purge).

 

[Evoex]

I'm late to the party in this thread, but I just have to state something here.....last I checked, the overwheming majority of houses built in this province are built by the private for-profit sector. And I don't believe you can *force* these companies to build homes. A municipality can open up land, blah blah blah, but they can't force private companies to rush-build cheap homes to fill that land. To the contrary, when many of these homebuilders see land that they know they can make more money on 3-5 years down the road vs today, they'll often just decide to sit on that land and build later, or just not buy a parcel at all and look at it again down the road.

This is why housing starts are down considerably this year vs last - builders know that demand is down considering interest rates and other factors, prices have dropped, and they risk further depressing their own market (and profits) if they continue building with reckless abandon.

So I'd like to know exactly how "legislating 15% housing growth" isn't just pie in the sky rhetoric not based in any realistic chance it's going to accomplish anything in the end except potentially screw a municipality out of funds they need to actually operate when homebuilders basically say "We dont wanna flood the market" and take their dozers and dumptrucks and go home. Is PP going to put the federal government in the homebuilding business?

I imagine it incentivizes municipalities to shorten the red tape to get shovels in the ground.

 

[PrivatePilot]

While municipalities can't build houses, they can sure as hell slow things down. Some gta municipalities are apalling and need a bomb dropped in to clear out all staff for a fresh start. Just wasting time and money with no benefit to anybody. Funding tied to progress provides the impetus to move things forward (or initiate the purge).

That's not the reality everywhere.

I personally live in an area where development has been intentionally slowed down because both municipal, provincial, and federal infrastructure simply doesn't exist to support rapid expansion.

What is PP's solution for this very big reality in many areas when many of these same towns and cities are sometimes cash strapped (or at the mercy of another higher level of government) and simply don't have the money or time to build new infrastructure to support all these mandated new houses? A new house is no good if it doesn't have roads, water, power, sewer, garbage collection, and all the other endless list of things that make our world go round, but don't get built for free. Not to mention the *capacity* of existing infrastructure that may need to be expanded or completely ripped up and rebuilt.

Again, where I live we have a major thoroughfare that I've personally watched in the last 23 years (since we bought our home) become increasingly overloaded to the point of the road being sometimes backed up for almost a kilometre trying to get to and from the 401 during rush hour. The Municipality can do absolutely nothing about it as the problem area and interchange is provincially controlled, and the province has a timeline on updating things that makes it abundantly clear it's not a priority. Do we just keep building, **** everyone who already lives here?

There a bigger picture at play where just screaming "MUNICIPALITIES MUST BUILD NEW HOMES OR ELSE!" threats will have a lot of unintended consequences.

 

[PrivatePilot]

There was also a bunch of massive sewer main projects that happened in the last few years in Durham Region that were necessary to support the growth that *has* happened. You can't just jam tens of thousands of new houses into existing infrastructure without problems. And that's accommodating a "normal" pace of building.

Who foots the bill to ensure that this can all magically happen at an accelerated pace if this 15% every single year MUST happen (or else)? If every 6.5 years the size of a city potentially doubles. (!!!!), nobody wants a sh!t geyser in their basement because 100,000 new homes up the road all flushed their toilets on a commercial break during the Super Bowl and the 50-100 year old sewer lines couldn't handle it.

 

[Mad Mike]

I'm late to the party in this thread, but I just have to state something here.....last I checked, the overwheming majority of houses built in this province are built by the private for-profit sector. And I don't believe you can *force* these companies to build homes. A municipality can open up land, blah blah blah, but they can't force private companies to rush-build cheap homes to fill that land. To the contrary, when many of these homebuilders see land that they know they can make more money on 3-5 years down the road vs today, they'll often just decide to sit on that land and build later, or just not buy a parcel at all and look at it again down the road.

This is why housing starts are down considerably this year vs last - builders know that demand is down considering interest rates and other factors, prices have dropped, and they risk further depressing their own market (and profits) if they continue building with reckless abandon.

So I'd like to know exactly how "legislating 15% housing growth" isn't just pie in the sky rhetoric not based in any realistic chance it's going to accomplish anything in the end except potentially screw a municipality out of funds they need to actually operate when homebuilders basically say "We dont wanna flood the market" and take their dozers and dumptrucks and go home. Is PP going to put the federal government in the homebuilding business?

There are a few things to consider

Builders are willing to build as fas as they can, and they have been running at redline for years. What s holding up progress?

1. Municipal responsiveness. It’s bad, ask a small builder doing infill projects. Rezoning, minor variances, and permitting rolls too slow. 2-5 years in my city to redevelop an existing urban lot. Commercial can be worse.

Legislating growth with respect to municipalities is reducing permitting times, red tape, and setting sensible development fees. Don’t do those things - lose federal and provincial funding.

Many municipalities, including mine, got fat on development fees, transitioning them from a fee to cover infrastructure to a form of luxury tax to fund budget growth. Did the cost of building infrastructure to support redeveloping a 60x125 city lot really increase from $30k to $755k in 20 years? This is a dangerous practice.

2. Builders can’t get trades. Adding 500,000 people to the demand side without govt plans for skilled workers will govern building speed. Builders also have to react to changes in the market. So when the Feds lost their way on the economy (inflation, interest rates skyrocketed), builders adjust to changing demand. Changing a plan of subdivision from 2000sq singles to more affordable 1400sq towns could take 5 years.

At the end of the day, the federal govt created the housing mess. Too many people with the wrong mix of skills too fast. Then they made it worse by losing control of the economy.

I can see no path to fixing this under Liberal Leadership.

 

[timtune]

I'm late to the party in this thread, but I just have to state something here.....last I checked, the overwheming majority of houses built in this province are built by the private for-profit sector. And I don't believe you can *force* these companies to build homes. A municipality can open up land, blah blah blah, but they can't force private companies to rush-build cheap homes to fill that land. To the contrary, when many of these homebuilders see land that they know they can make more money on 3-5 years down the road vs today, they'll often just decide to sit on that land and build later, or just not buy a parcel at all and look at it again down the road.

This is why housing starts are down considerably this year vs last - builders know that demand is down considering interest rates and other factors, prices have dropped, and they risk further depressing their own market (and profits) if they continue building with reckless abandon.

So I'd like to know exactly how "legislating 15% housing growth" isn't just pie in the sky rhetoric not based in any realistic chance it's going to accomplish anything in the end except potentially screw a municipality out of funds they need to actually operate when homebuilders basically say "We dont wanna flood the market" and take their dozers and dumptrucks and go home. Is PP going to put the federal government in the homebuilding business?

Exactly my point. Demanding someone else fix your problem is not much of a plan.

 

[PrivatePilot]

Where to start.....

Builders are willing to build as fas as they can

Not true. As I stated, a lot of developers are sitting on property waiting for the values to go up. This is a well known phenomenon, and in Googling it I came across this excellent article from just a few weeks ago actually that summarize a lot of what I just stated, with the facts to back it all up.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-housing-doug-ford-developers-approvals-new-homes-1.7039776

Many municipalities, including mine, got fat on development fees, transitioning them from a fee to cover infrastructure to a form of luxury tax to fund budget growth

What municipalities are "fat" right now, presumably with what you're suggesting is gobs of excess money in their bank accounts? I don't think this is reality. The amount of infrastructure upgrades, expansion, and upkeep that is necessary for all these new homes has meant that municipalities have been hardly able to keep up without stretching their budgets thin, to the point where we're seeing many struggling right now and being left with no options except to increase taxes. And this is even WITH these "fat development fees".

So which municipalites have got "fat" on these fees?

Builders can’t get trades. Adding 500,000 people to the demand side without govt plans for skilled workers will govern building speed. Builders also have to react to changes in the market.

Absolutely agree, but again, I don't think there's a magic wand solution to this either. There's a huge need for trades, absolutely, Both the current federal and provincial governemts have added incentives to push trades schooling. There's no shortage of news articles covering this going back as far as 3-5+ years if you search. But there's still a shortage. It's proven tough to get a lot of kids into trades. So again, a new government coming in and trying to wave a magic wand while yelling "thou shalt build more houses!" is all fine and dandy, but you yourself demonstrate a significant roadblock to that actually happening in the end.

So when the Feds lost their way on the economy (inflation, interest rates skyrocketed),

Lets all take a step back and realize this is a global issue right now. Once again, I'm no fan of Trudeau, but he's not responsible for the entire globe experiencing the same thing we are, nor is he solely responsible for it happening here in Canada as well.

Changing a plan of subdivision from 2000sq singles to more affordable 1400sq towns could take 5 years.

Sure, that's too long. But sometimes it's not without merit if those changes mean that there's very real consequences that come with those changes like suddenly the need for 25% more parking, accomodating 25% more cars on the local road infrastructure, 25% more electricity, water, and sewer usage. It goes on and on and on. You can't just add 25 or 50% more density to housing and expect nothing to change when it comes to the overall planning picture.

Should a review or ultimatley a change to existing plans take 5 years? No. Should it just be rubberstamped by municipalties without any thought or consideration just because "more houses = better!" either? Absolutely not.

Too many people with the wrong mix of skills too fast.

Won't disagree there, to an extent.

Then they made it worse by losing control of the economy.

See earlier comment above about Trudeau not being responsible for a global phenomenon. Everyone repeating this nonsense needs to take a step back and look at the bigger picture. Are things perfect? No. Could some stuff be managed better right now? Hell yeah. But are we some economic outlier that's circling the bowl as some would like to believe because "truDeau bAd"? No, either. And there's no shortage of facts to prove it for those interested in reading them.

 

[TK4]

Back after WW2 the guv decided we need to build lots and lots of houses for returning veterans and their families. They worked with builders.
Neatness didn't count - slam 'em up - 1,200 sq ft, gravel driveways, unfinished basements, crappy fixtures but get roofs over peoples' heads.
Don Mills, Scarborough, Willowdale, Richmond Hill (where I grew up) and countless others. Let folks have a home, no matter how modest and let them build some equity, make improvements at their leisure.
No one NEEDS a 2,500 sq ft place with attached garage and if that's what they want then let them figure out how to get it.

 

[timtune]

Back after WW2 the guv decided we need to build lots and lots of houses for returning veterans and their families. They worked with builders.
Neatness didn't count - slam 'em up - 1,200 sq ft, gravel driveways, unfinished basements, crappy fixtures but get roofs over peoples' heads.
Don Mills, Scarborough, Willowdale, Richmond Hill (where I grew up) and countless others. Let folks have a home, no matter how modest and let them build some equity, make improvements at their leisure.
No one NEEDS a 2,500 sq ft place with attached garage and if that's what they want then let them figure out how to get it.

Those houses don't provide the fat returns a builder wants.

 

[PrivatePilot]

Back after WW2 the guv decided we need to build lots and lots of houses for returning veterans and their families. They worked with builders.
Neatness didn't count - slam 'em up - 1,200 sq ft, gravel driveways, unfinished basements, crappy fixtures but get roofs over peoples' heads.
Don Mills, Scarborough, Willowdale, Richmond Hill (where I grew up) and countless others. Let folks have a home, no matter how modest and let them build some equity, make improvements at their leisure.
No one NEEDS a 2,500 sq ft place with attached garage and if that's what they want then let them figure out how to get it.

How do you compel private for-profit businesses to sacrifice profit for "cheap and fast"? Things are a lot different than they were post ww2, so it's an apples and oranges comparison to make today.

The only way you accomplish that today? You have to throw money at them to make up for those lost profits, that's the only way. So is the federal government willing to pay say, $500,000 per house to compensate builders for building $250,000 homes instead of 2500sqft homes that they can sell for $800,000-$1m+ instead?

If they want to legislate homes are cheaper, good luck getting homebuilders to actually build anything. Again, I'm not sure with PP's magic-wand plan is here aside from yelling about it endlessly and making people believe he's got some magic wand solution, when in reality, that doesn't exist.

Again, there's no magic solution to this unless the federal government is willing to get into the homebuilding businesss, and the observant have seen how that pans out in the long term when even the province gets into the homebuilding business.