Canada News
Breaking down interprovincial barriers can tackle the housing crisis, too
Governments that allow this to happen are not only violating the human right to housing, they are failing morally as well. (Pexels photo)
Prime Minister Mark Carney’s recent meeting with provincial premiers in Saskatoon demonstrated a shared desire to collaborate on projects that will benefit Canadians facing an unpredictable trade war with the United States.
An adjacent and equally important issue calling for pan-Canadian co-operation is the growing housing, homelessness and affordability crisis.
All of these existential problems were discussed throughout the spring election campaign by the candidates as well as advocates and pundits. One common solution that kept coming up was breaking down interprovincial trade barriers.
Canada’s obstructive patchworks
Removing barriers – for example, by harmonizing regulations across jurisdictions – would reduce costs, increase jobs and boost GDP.
Under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadians have the right to live and work in any part of the country. Yet, these barriers can prevent that from happening in practice.
While the jury is still out on how effective breaking down these barriers would be to shield Canadian residents and businesses from the impacts of U.S. tariffs, they raise an important point: everyone in Canada should have access to the same goods, services and protections, regardless of where they live.
Regulatory differences between provinces and territories are especially misaligned around renter protections. Laws that should aim to uphold renters’ rights are a patchwork that varies significantly from one part of the country to the other.
Rental-law variations leave wide gaps
In five provinces and territories, rent increases are not regulated at all: landlords are free to raise rents to whatever amount the market will bear. That’s why there were no legal issues when a group of renters in Edmonton were recently notified of a 200-per-cent rent increase.
Depending on an individual’s financial ability to pay, such a radical increase would amount to “economic eviction” in most cases.
In other parts of the country, rent increases are regulated to a certain extent, but the rules do not apply to all renters.
In Ontario and British Columbia, rent-increase rules apply only to sitting renters, so landlords are incentivized to evict so they can raise rents. In Manitoba, on the other hand, rent increases are tied to the unit (known as vacancy control), which provides greater security and stability for renters. However, there are exemptions related to the age of the building, the amount of rent paid, and other factors, leaving many renters in precarious positions.
However, despite significant emphasis placed on breaking down internal trade barriers, there has been virtually no discussion about variations in renter protections between jurisdictions.
The Trudeau government did introduce a Blueprint for a Renters’ Bill of Rights to establish national standards that protect housing stability and affordability for renters. However, it lacked teeth, and was barely mentioned during the campaign that followed.
A national housing and homelessness crisis
A recent poll found that over 60 per cent of renters fear losing their homes and potentially experiencing homelessness due to the impacts of the U.S. trade war, which is causing people to lose their jobs and incomes. At the same time, half of renters want national rent-control rules.
When renters have safe, secure and affordable homes, they have stronger social and economic outcomes. That includes better physical and mental health and greater productivity and economic participation.
Homelessness also becomes a much less likely outcome. Governments that allow this to happen are not only violating the human right to housing, they are failing morally as well. Homelessness is also far more costly to governments – and thus to taxpayers – than building and protecting affordable housing, and the people who live there.
Why is housing cheaper in Quebec than in Ontario?
Why bricks and mortar alone won’t solve the housing crisis
Ottawa picked the dicey road to lower rents; Quebec is right not to follow
In the context of a pending economic downturn, regulating rents and preventing evictions would go a long way to protect lower-income families and others who are the most impacted by the affordability crisis.
Studies demonstrate that regulating rents does not deter rental-housing development.
Despite cancelling its temporary rent cap in 2022, New Brunswick saw new housing construction decrease the following year (the province introduced a rent-increase guideline earlier this year). Housing construction also declined in many other parts of the country last year, including in Ontario, which has several loopholes in its rent regulation framework.
On the other hand, Quebec, which has some of the strongest rent regulations in the country, saw the highest levels of construction.
Ultimately, a myriad of factors impacts the rate of rental-housing development, including availability of financing, labour, and construction costs.
Prime Minister Carney has committed to introducing legislation by July that would eliminate all federal barriers to interprovincial trade. If the new federal government is serious about tackling the housing and homelessness crisis, that legislation should be accompanied by measures that ensure minimum standards for renter protections across the country.
As with many other issues, matters between landlords and renters are primarily governed by provincial and territorial law. However, as it has done in the past, the time has never been more urgent for the federal government to defend the rights of the millions of renters across Canada.
This article first appeared on Policy Options and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
