The Ben Mulroney Show - Who has the better Housing Plan? Pierre Poilievre or Mark Carney?

Episode Date: April 24, 2025

Guests and Topics: -Who has the better Housing Plan? Pierre Poilievre or Mark Carney? with Guest: Lauren Heuser, founder, publisher, and editor of Canadian Affairs If you enjoyed the podcast, tell a friend! For more of the Ben Mulroney Show, subscribe to the podcast! https://globalnews.ca/national/program/the-ben-mulroney-show Follow Ben on Twitter/X at https://x.com/BenMulroney Enjoy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

From early morning workouts that need a boost, to late night drives that need vibes, a good playlist can help you make the most out of your everyday. And when it comes to everyday spending, you can count on the PC Insider's World Elite MasterCard to help you earn the most PC optimum points everywhere you shop. With the best playlists, you never miss a good song. With this card, you never miss out on getting the most points on everyday purchases. The PC Insider's World's elite MasterCard. The card for living unlimited.

Conditions apply to all benefits. Visit PCFinancial.ca for details. Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney show. I want to talk about housing and the housing crisis in Canada. And I want to talk about the solutions that are being brought to bear by both the liberals and the conservatives. They both have put forth their housing plans. But before we get into that, I just want to remind

everybody that this is a problem. It is an insidious problem. It is when people cannot access adequate housing at an affordable price, it causes so many knock on effects. Last week on this show, we had a discussion about Canada's dwindling birthrate, and the problems that come from that. And despite all of the incentives that the government offers people to make their lives more comfortable, to give them the freedom to go back to work,

to hire somebody to help them in the home, it has not helped. And so I went to the calls and I asked the listeners of the Ben Mulroney show, are you somebody who has stopped at one kid, even though you wanted four? And almost to a person, the answer was, we can't afford the house that we need to grow our family.

So that's just one example. That's not just about a house, it's about a family, it's about a community, it's about safety, it's about all sorts of things. So that's why to me, this is one of the paramount issues of this election. And so we're gonna, right now we're in this next segment, we are going to compare and contrast the blueprints for fixing the housing crisis in Canada with Lauren Huser, founder

and publisher and editor of Canadian Affairs. Lauren, you wrote a piece in the walrus. Why don't you tell us, well, let's go through them. Let's talk about the differences between the conservative plan and the liberal plan. Thanks, Ben. through them. Let's talk about the differences between the conservative plan and the liberal plan. Thanks, Ben. So I'd say the key difference between liberals and conservatives, the liberals under Kearney have proposed how what he said is getting the government into the home building business. So he has proposed creating a new government agency called Build Canada Homes that would actually develop affordable housing and also offer favorable financing to affordable home

developers as well as prefabricated home developers. In terms of similarities, the key similarity, I'd say, is both the Liberals and Conservatives are offering to cut the or abolish the GST for the liberals they're saying it would be just for first-time homebuyers on homes under a million and for conservatives they're saying it's for all homebuyers on homes under 1.3 million. I think of those two proposals the conservatives is preferable because it's, it's applying to all homebuyers. So the, it doesn't blunt the impact of that measure in the same way. What we want to do is kind of spur housing development. And it doesn't really matter if

it's a first time home buyer or a multi-time home buyer. And I want to get back to the expression we're going to get the government is want to get back to the expression, the government is going to get back into the business of building homes. I don't think that I'm a right wing crackpot to suggest that the government has no business in the business of building homes. They should create the environment

so that the people who are good at building homes can do so. Absolutely. Absolutely and I as I said in the piece, I agree with the conservatives their criticism is that under the Trudeau government there is not a particularly strong record of the government even handling in some cases quite basic services like passports or immigration and so it doesn't inspire confidence when we then are thinking about creating a new agency to do to solve what I think can be solved through the right incentives for municipalities and provinces as well as the right incentives in the private sector.

Let's talk about some maybe some misconceptions that are out there. I want to make sure that as we discuss this, we're discussing the facts and not, you know, the rumors and the speculation that tend to find, you know, seeds are planted online, they find purchase and next thing you know, you're having a debate about something that isn't even real. Is it true that the liberal platform is has a plan to build these prefabricated homes on crown land? In other words, you'd buy a home that, that rests on land that you don't actually own. So I guess I want to separate two points there. They have talked about building on public lands. The Conservatives have also talked about, I think, using public lands to, or opening up public lands for development by the private sector.

The liberals have said they would offer favorable financing to prefabricated home builders. So what that means exactly is, I'm not sure, but there are certainly more and more providers of either prefabricated materials that are used in the construction of original homes or the developers of the homes that are entirely prefabricated and kind of quite easy to put up. And that's something that's a sticking point that if people think about it just long enough,

because I don't want to just beat up on the liberals and suggest that every idea they have is terrible. You know, there's this notion 30, 40 years ago, even as like 10 years ago, the idea of a prefab home, we all knew what that was. That was a double wide trailer or something like that. But prefabricated homes today are not what they once were. With new technologies and 3D printing,

you can use these new technologies to build homes indoors and then ship them at scale and you can build them a lot faster and the amenities are there and the quality of the build is there so it's not the knock on a prefab home is not what it used to be. Absolutely. I totally agree. But I do think that we want to be careful in the effort to address the housing crisis. We also want to be creating neighborhoods that long term people want to live in. And I do think there's a risk in just trying to get things up quickly and in expensively

that we create a whole neighborhood that don't actually stand the test of time and aren't aren't ones around which families actually want to build communities to circle back to your initial point. Lauren, I think it's a very smart political point for the liberals to say we are going to build homes at a rate not seen since the end of the Second World War when all the soldiers came home and they deserved an affordable place to live. The fact that they in the minds of voters, they're putting us on a quote unquote war footing as it relates to the threat from south of the border. I think politically, that's a very good, that's a very good emotional string to pull.

What are the differences in why we were able to build those homes back then versus why it's so gosh darn hard today? Well, I think what Paulia has been credited for, not just in Canada, but throughout the Western world, is identifying that there are barriers at the municipal level that need to come down to address the housing crisis. And these are things that have built up over time, like from the kind of 70s, 80s on, that have fostered NIMBYism and have enabled people to oppose dense construction in kind of urban areas. And so that's the change, I would say, the key change from the post World War II era. And I think that the liberals claim is that their incentives and proposals

are gonna lead to 500,000 new homes being created in the first year. And I don't think that's realistic because last year there was about 250,000 homes created that was up just slightly from the year before and so to suggest that we can double the number in a single year is is not realistic whereas the the conservatives are saying kind of in their first year there would be 300,000 new homes and then it would kind of incrementally increase from there.

So I think it's more realistic to look at the numbers they're putting forward. I think it's far more realistic that the liberals in an endeavor to build homes double the size of the bureaucracy that oversees home building. I do not see them doubling the size of the number of homes that they actually build. And it does feel to me like the Tories have adopted,

as it relates to the municipalities, a carrot and a stick approach, where they've got incentives. There's money for you if you build more homes, and there's penalties if you don't. Yeah, and I personally think that that's the right approach. You know, I think housing is a provincial and municipal issue. And so there are limits to what the federal government can do, but it is across all sorts

of policy matters. The municipalities and provinces want money from the feds. And so I think you have to give them reason to get that money, right? Because this is such a crisis for all Canadians. And so creating those incentives, like you say, the carrots and the sticks, that they're incentivized to address housing barriers, and then they're actually rewarded if they exceed housing targets. It makes a lot of sense.

Lauren, we're going to leave it there. Thank you so much. The article is called, Which Party Has the Best Blueprint in Fixing the Housing Crisis? It's in the walrus.ca thank you so much. Thank you Ben. Hi I'm Donna Friesen from global national life moves fast these days and we want to make it even easier for you to get the news you need. That's why you can now get global national every day as a podcast the biggest stories

of the day with analysis from award winning global news journalists, new episodes drop every day. So take this as your personal invitation to join us on the global national podcast. You can find it on Apple podcasts, Spotify, Amazon music, and wherever you find your favorite podcasts. We got a lot to get to. Don't forget today's Thursday, which means we've got two more days in this week, then a weekend, and then it's election. So it's a very, very consequential few days that we've got to go through. And it does feel like every time the polls tighten a little bit, Donald Trump opens his mouth, the Liberal Party smiles, because they have successfully tied their fate to the narrative that without them to stave off Donald Trump's crazy tariff attacks on Canada, we will fall apart.

I dispute that entirely, but that's not the point of this conversation. And so as he's been relatively quiet recently, and I don't think it's by accident that while he's been quiet, the polls have tightened. But Donald Trump did come out and he had a few things to say about his relationship with Canada, the United States relationship with Canada. If we needed something, that would be a different subject.

So I'm working well with Canada. We're doing very well. We're working on a deal. We'll see what happens. But again, you know, why, representing this country, why are we spending $200 billion to support and subsidize another country? Because if they didn't have us,

and if we didn't spend that money, as Trudeau told me, they would cease to exist. He said that to me, they would cease to exist, which is true, certainly as a country. And look, I think it's important to go back to the beginning of this crisis. When Justin Trudeau went down to Mar-a-Lago and sat down at a dinner table, and I think Donald Trump asked him, what would happen if we didn't support you anymore?

What would happen if we threw the, oh, what would happen if we applied these tariffs? And I think Justin Trudeau said we would cease to exist. I think that was the moment. That was the moment that Donald Trump got it in his head that he has been, the United States has been carrying Canada for too long and we should just give up and allow them to take us over where we would be their beautiful 51st state.

It happened in that moment when our prime minister said that we were so weak as a country that 10 years of bad decisions and ideologically driven policy made it so our prime minister went to a foreign country and spoke to a foreign leader and said that were were if you if you treat us poorly we will cease to exist and he ran with it this entire crisis is due to that conversation. Because Donald Trump doesn't do research. Donald Trump doesn't read binders full of information. He goes with the stuff that he feels in his gut. And it felt right in his gut

to say that. And he's been writing that this entire time. Don't let anybody tell you otherwise. This started when Justin Trudeau essentially said, we can't do this ourselves. And he said, Well, then why should you just join us? Just join us. But that's not the narrative the Liberal Party wants you to adopt. In fact, they want you to be afraid of Donald Trump. And there's a lot to be unhappy with with Donald Trump for sure. But they want you to be afraid of Donald Trump. And there's a lot to be unhappy with with Donald Trump for sure. But they want you to be afraid of Donald Trump. And here's what Mark Carney recently said about Donald Trump, and the role the Liberal Party will play in saving

Canada. You have to distinguish between what you can change and what you can't. But you can change and what you can. And after 78 years, can. And after 78 years, I don't think we can change President Trump. So what we need, what we need is a leader and a party that can stand up to him. That is not that leader is not Pierre Poliev. Yeah, he goes on. He goes on. There's a whole lot that I don't like about that. Those comments again, I'll say this again.

This does not feel this does. These do not feel like the tactics of a front runner campaign. If these the liberals were truly comfortable in the lead in the polls that they supposedly have, I don't believe they would be running this campaign. This is far too negative for a front runner campaign as far as I'm concerned. When he says, oh, you can't change Donald Trump, you might be right, but have you really tried? Because I know you've had a phone call with him. And that's terrific.

And later on in the show, we're gonna unpack a French language news story out of Radio Canada that says that Mark Carney lied when he told us that in his phone call on the 28th of March with Donald Trump, that Donald Trump gave up talking about Canada being the 51st state. He respected him so much that he gave up that talk.

He didn't respect Justin, but I'm nothing like Justin. And in that moment, I got him to respect our national sovereignty. Well, based on the readout that the Radio Canada got, that's a lie. That was a lie. He stood in front of a microphone and told you something that he knew wasn't true. I am not a politician. I don't have to say, oh, he misspoke or that wasn't the truth. No, no, that was a lie. Mark Carney lied to Canadians in one of the first times he had the opportunity to tell us the truth. He didn't, he did no such thing. We're gonna unpack that a little bit later. But meanwhile, I'm sure you remember last week,

maybe the week before, I was musing on this show. I was theorizing. When Mark Carney gets up and says, our relationship with America is over, that really rubs me the wrong way. I do not believe you get to say that. You've had one phone call and in that one phone call you lied about what actually happened.

You have not been elected dog catcher. You do not have a mandate yet to say that. On behalf of my dad who worked tirelessly to improve relations, I don't believe that you get to say that. The relationship is one that is required work and care. Is it different? Is it at a low point?

Yes. Can it recover? A person with vision would say yes. Do we have to diversify who we do trade with? Of course, we should have been doing it for the last 10 years. You'd have to be a frigging idiot to suggest otherwise. But to say it's over is self-serving,

it's small-minded, and it's dangerous. But I did wonder, okay, so if it's over, if the door is closed with America as the liberals want us to believe, where do we look next? Yes, obviously Europe, but that's not enough. That's not enough. And I thought, well, maybe given the fact

that it's really hard to find anything negative that Mark Carney has ever said about China. In fact, almost everything that you can find is glowing about China. I think last week was the first time he ever went on record and said something negative. I was not surprised to read that China says it wants to partner with Canada to push back against American bullying.

The ambassador says Beijing is offering to form a partnership with Canada to push back against American bullying, suggesting the two countries could rally other nations to stop Washington from undermining global rules. Now, I'm not saying that there's a cause and effect here. I'm not saying that there was a plan. I'm saying it's really convenient that all of a sudden, after for years and years of Mark Carney singing the praises of the Communist Party of China, in his odd defense of Paul Chang, not turfing that guy. He hasn't said a word about the canola subsidies or the canola tariffs that are crippling the economy. That a lot of things were lining up to suggest maybe he's got a

warm part of his heart for China. And if he's closing the door on a relationship with America, maybe he's opening the door to a new relationship with China. Maybe, maybe not. I don't know. What I do know is China is open to that possibility. China is says Canada, China is Canada's opportunity, not Canada's threat, says the ambassador. And I just find it really convenient that here we find ourselves in a in a in a during the biggest the biggest crisis of our lifetime. America is no longer a friend. They are no longer reliable partner. We have to look elsewhere to grow the Canadian economy.

And like like a Deus Ex Machina that comes out in a play that solves the problem of the protagonist, here is China presenting itself as the solution to all our problems. I find it really convenient. That's all I'm saying. Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney show and the city of Toronto is dealing with another gun crime in our city where a 16 year old pulled out a gun at a routine traffic stop and the cops opened fire and he passed away. And so the streets are as dangerous today as they were four or five months ago. Nothing's changed. They've probably gotten worse.

And the liberals somehow have managed to convince a whole lot of Canadians that that doesn't matter because Donald Trump is a worse threat. Donald Trump is a worse threat than the dangers that have befallen the streets of big cities in this country. Donald Trump is a bigger threat than the opioid epidemic that has grown by leaps and bounds over the past 10 years because of careless, senseless, and ideologically driven choices made by the liberal government.

And we're currently witnessing something I haven't seen since the 80s. The majority of Canadian voters are coalescing behind either the liberals or the conservatives. The NDP by and large are a non-factor and the Bloc Québécois hasn't really made too, too many gains in its own province. So it's almost a binary choice right now. And according to the experts, we don't have a whole lot of undecided voters left. We've got, by and large,

the party you've picked is the party you've picked. But I think it's incumbent upon us to ask ourselves those people who were lined up to vote for Pierre and the conservatives, those people who were lined up to vote for Pierre and the conservatives. Those people who had decided that 10 years of liberal ineptitude was enough. Who've now decided that Mark Carney is the agent of change. Ask yourselves, are the streets any safer today? Ask yourselves, has the drug epidemic improved?

Ask yourself if you've seen enough changes. Are you surprised that crime hasn't been a bigger issue in this election? I want to hear from you. I want you to give me a call and let me know. Are you surprised that crime hasn't been a bigger issue in the election? It feels like there's only room for Trump and a little bit of cost of living. I'm sorry. We are a complex country with a lot of problems, a lot of problems, and a lot of those problems are self-induced. A lot of those problems are due entirely to bungled decisions made in Ottawa. And I don't know about you, but I am not inclined to give the keys back

to the people who caused the problems in the first place because they replaced one guy especially when I hear that the platform was written by all the old guys like he's literally demonstrating that he is in a lot of ways a figurehead. They brought him in because he has a resume and he's very proud of that resume. He should be, but he's so proud of it that he lets it slip every time somebody questions him or challenges him. I'm smarter than the guy criticizing me, rolling his eyes, dripping with condescension. Even though the party platform was written by the

same people who wrote the party platform in election one two and three those those governments that got us into the mess that we're in today George welcome to the show are you doing okay today Ben I'm doing great every day okay listen here's the here's the reason that crime hasn't been the focus. It's because the mainstream media is making orange band bad the focus, because they support the liberals and you and I both know that. Yeah, look, and George, I'm not suggesting that Donald Trump is not a problem that needs to be overcome. Oh sure he is.

But I feel like I've taken crazy pills when I hear that this is the greatest crisis we've ever had. Forgetting we just came out of a once in a lifetime pandemic that caused chaos around the world. Don't tell me this is worse. Don't tell me this is worse. I believe in a lot of ways, we've already seen the worst of what Donald Trump can do. I think we've already seen the worst of what Donald Trump can do.

I think we've already seen the worst and I think he's using it as the negotiation tool. Even my young daughter in university came to me and she says, hey dad, we were just learning about how to negotiate. She says, no, I understand what Trump is doing. Yeah, hey George. Throwing something huge out there, making it and hoping to settle for something smaller. Yeah. Pierre Pauliev can handle this, no problem. Oh yeah, I mean, I agree. If Justin Trudeau, who was a teacher, could be trusted to renegotiate NAFTA, Pierre Pauliev can handle Trump 2.0. Especially when we've seen that Donald Trump

has limits to what he can accomplish, and those limits are the stock market.0, especially when we've seen that Donald Trump has limits to what he can accomplish. And those limits are the stock market. Like it's not other politicians. The stock market is telling him where the limits are, and he doesn't like it, but it is it is a fact. Thanks for the call, George. Let's welcome Vince to the show. Yeah.

Hi there, Ben. Thanks for taking my call. Yeah. I just want to start off saying, you know, we're a family of four, we're all voting conservative. But I do think that a lot of it has to do with Polly F possibly not resonating or not just being the most likable guy for some reason. So I think it has to be that because as you mentioned, thoroughly, things are not great for the last 10 years.

And unless Canadians are maybe not suffering enough. Yeah, candidate. Look, you know, if people are voting over whether or not they like Pierre poliev, then I can't help them. They need to strap on a helmet and bubble wrap themselves because they because there's no way they can fully function in society. I'm sorry. Like you're after 10 years of watching everything get more expensive, the streets get more dangerous because there's no way they can fully function in society. I'm sorry.

After 10 years of watching everything get more expensive, the streets get more dangerous, our infrastructure crumbling, watching our status in the world and our productivity fall off a cliff, you're concerned with whether or not you would have the guy over for dinner? I don't care if he's the meanest SOB on the planet. If he's gonna do what he says he's gonna do,

Canada will be in a better place. 99.9% of Canadians will never meet the Prime Minister. Why do you care if he's likable? Donald Trump isn't likable. Why don't you put... I mean you're gonna go with who's the nicest guy to go toe-to-toe with a mean son of a bitch like, like Donald Trump? No, I agree. I agree. I agree. I just I just can't. I don't have any other explanation why you know, yeah, to your points, you know, it's just like I said, you know, we're voting conservative, or liberal the last time. Yeah, I'm going conservative now. Yeah, I mean, and I appreciate that.

I liked it. I don't know how you vote, Vince, but for me it's about who has earned my vote. You know, I haven't been a member of a party since 1993, and I don't believe anybody owns my vote. They have to earn it. And in this election, Pierre Poliev has earned my vote. Vince, thank you so much for giving us a call.

Laura, welcome to the show. Hi, Ben. Hi. I'm well, thank you. I'm so happy to hear your voice on the radio. I haven't turned it on because I wanted to hear what happened at the airport. And it's so disappointing what's happening in our in our city in our country. We had an attempted break into my home a couple weeks ago. It took three hours for the police to arrive, show up at my house. And the only thing they said, they broke, they broke my door. Thankfully our alarm system that we had to finance ourselves in order to secure our own home worked. My kids are terrified, but it took three hours for the police to arrive. And they said just a regular Monday morning for them. Yeah, I mean, this, this is the reality of the country that we live in now.

And it didn't happen by accident. It didn't happen in a vacuum. It happened because of choices and priorities and values that would that translated into policies that have made the streets less, less and, and, and they are not taking ownership over their failure. They're saying we changed the guy at the top. We don't have to talk about the change. The change is Mark Carney. I want it. If you want me, if you want to earn my vote liberals, I need you to, I need to hear the words we F'ed up.

We are sorry. There's been zero discussion on crime and what they're planning to do to keep our safe, our streets safer. Yeah. Hey, thank you, Laura. I got to run. I got a couple more calls I gotta get to, but thank you very much. And let's welcome George to the Ben Mulroney Show.

Ben, totally agree with you, but first you gotta deal with your problems internally. Once you get that straight out, then you can deal with stuff externally. And for the other guy that called in about likeable, Justin Trudeau had nice hair. That didn't do anything for me. Yeah.

So let's get to the point, get our stuff mixed up here, and then you'll work with the stuff outside. George, thank you so much for the call. I appreciate it. And I want to thank everybody for calling in. There's no limit to how far criminals will go to cover their tracks. But investigators will go even further to uncover the truth. I'm Nancy Hicks, a senior crime reporter for Global News.

This season on Crime Beat, I'll take you from the crime scene to the courtroom and inside some of Canada's most high-profile cases and some you've likely never heard of before. Search for and listen to Crime Beat on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music and wherever you find your favorite podcasts.