The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - How Affordable Housing Could Actually Be Affordable

Episode Date: September 7, 2023

The Random Ranter's return from the summer has him thinking about affordable housing and what may be needed to come up with an answer to a dilemma facing many Canadians. That in the middle of a Your Turn with lots of your thoughts on the housing situation.  

And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. You are just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge. It's a your turn day, and that also means it's a random renter day. Both coming right up. And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. As we creep towards the end of the first week of the fourth season of The Bridge. Thursdays means your turn, your opportunity to weigh in on some of the things we've discussed. And it's early in the season, and it's a short week. So as a result, we have letters, no doubt about it, but they're kind of restricted to a couple of particular areas. And to get to them now, I keep reminding you that send your letters to the Mansbridge podcast at gmail.com. Please always include your name and where you are

writing from. It gives us an opportunity to get a sense of the country on some of the issues of the day. Nothing scientific about this, just it all depends on your involvement, and we're happy to have it. Being the first week back, some have forgotten the golden rules of name and location. But nevertheless, let's get at it. I read all the communications that come in. Some of them make it on air. Others don't.

But I read them all, so I just want you to know that. Marge Andre from Richmond Hill, Ontario. I let out a yay when the bridge appeared in my podcast feed yesterday. I've really been relying on you and your team and guests to help make sense of the world. So often during your summer break did I wish for you to be there to interpret things. I'm sorry to hear about your ankle, but I must admit that when you started to say that you had an issue in August, I was so glad it was only your ankle. Trust me, that was painful enough. Are you going to mention soon that your next book is about to be published, or is it yet off the press?

I've already got my ticket for your appearance at Hot Dogs in November. Well, I'll admit that I'm reading this letter first as a way of flagging the book. Right? I didn't mention it the other day when I talked about what I did in the summer, but the summer was busy, among other things, finishing off the book, which comes out in mid-November this year from Simon and Schuster. You can pre-order it at any good bookstore across the country right now.

But Simon and Schuster have it. It is, once again, a combination. It's myself and Mark Bulgich. We wrote Extraordinary Canadians a couple of years ago. I guess that was 2020, four years ago. And this one is called How Canada Works. And it's not Extraordinary Canadians 2, but there are some similarities in the way we go about this book.

What we were looking for was literally the people who make the country work and not the obvious candidates, not the big major players in politics or business or the arts or entertainment or sports, but the people who go to work every day, do their jobs in different parts of the country, and in doing so, make the country work. So there's a real different cross-section of jobs and people. And this is about their story and how, without perhaps even realizing it,

we depend on them to make our country work. And so what Mark and I have done is captured somewhere between 25 and 30 different people and told their stories. You know the old saying, we're the sum of our parts? Well, these are our parts. Now, these aren't the couple of dozen or so most important jobs. They're not the only jobs that make the country work, but they are a reflection of some of the jobs, very different jobs.

I'm not going to tell you any more yet because we're still a couple of months away. But at some point in the next two months, I'll have Mark on the program and we'll talk about what we've been trying to achieve through this book and we're really looking forward to it. Now, one of the things, as you can recall, my last couple of books, both number one bestsellers, by the way, including Extraordinary Canadians with Mark helping out as the co-author. They were both number one bestsellers.

And we were very proud of that. But they also came out during the pandemic. And so I couldn't do the kind of regular book tours that some authors get to do but I will be this time but last time it meant that people who wanted signed books wrote to me and I sent out a signed book plate that they could stick in the front of their book and that is not the plan this time the plan this time is to go on a book tour to different parts of the country and give the opportunity to meet with people in bookstores and other locations.

Marge mentioned Hot Docs in November in Toronto, where I'll be talking to book buyers and booksellers and just people who are interested in books and about the work in this particular book. So that's the way you'll get signed copies this time around. So if you keep that in mind. Okay. Thank you, Marge, for that letter.

Much appreciated. Get the opportunity. Okay, let's move on here. A lot of comment about our program just, what it would have been just yesterday, on Smoke Mirrors and the Truth with Bruce, because we talked a lot about the Greenbelt issue in Ontario, and we talked about the Manitoba election. It's funny, after that, a lot of letters over the while saying,

you should just talk about, you know, Ontario politics, or you should talk about this part of Alberta politics. And I've always said, you know, we have to be careful. It's a national audience. It's not a regional audience. And so yesterday, yesterday we talked about two regional issues, and in fact tried to put them in a national perspective, which is what we did yesterday, I think.

But nevertheless, I got mail right away saying, don't talk about regional issues, just talk about national issues. That's funny. Can't win sometimes. Anyway, a lot of comment, excuse me, especially about the green belt issue in Ontario.

Including this one from Debbie Armstrong in Port Dover, Ontario. Doug Ford's environmental corruption is undeniable. Laws were fought for, made, and the Greenlands were protected. Laws seem immaterial to Ford, who chose to ignore them with no concern for the land and for our future health. His resolutions are driven by greedy self-interest instead. He circumvented the law and lied, my word, to Ontarians. You and your team

may think his provincial decisions unsuitable for lengthy conversation, but provincial environmental decisions affect all Canadians. Everything is intertwined and interconnected. That's true, and that's why we spent a good deal of time talking about it yesterday and have talked about this green belt issue a number of times over the past months. But thank you, Debbie, for that. Bill Archibald in Quebec, Quebec City. One of the things, and this is what Bill's relating to, one of the things we tried to do yesterday was break down to deconstruct a particular moment in this green belt issue between a reporter, Mr. DeMello from Global News, and Mr. Ford, the Premier of Ontario.

And it was a back and forth, and it was pretty, well, it was certainly engaging. But what did it actually achieve? And that's why we were trying to deconstruct it. So Bill Archibald from Quebec City writes about that. I have a few thoughts as an average Ontario citizen and one not connected to either media or government. I believe both reporter DeMello and Premier Ford overstepped, and here are my observations.

DeMello was, at the the outset repeating known facts in an aggressive tone and asking the Premier to own the situation in a personal way, not a mature or seasoned approach from a reporter who by your account is a respected journalist in the media. I believe it is a mistake by an ambitious young man trying to climb the media ladder. This diminishes his credibility as an astute journalist, one that needs thoughtful attention for future endeavors. His absence of apology to the Premier for this personal attack lacks a level of professionalism. Premier Ford, an emotional guy in an enormously difficult political position, responded in a way which could not be unexpected. He delivered a personal response to a personal question from DeMello,

a question which I believe was delivered to solicit a personal response from the Premier. Unfortunately for both parties, the message was not the response either expected or thoughtfully delivered. Premier Ford and his office was appropriately quick to deliver regrets to DeMello, a gesture which was not returned by a young man concentrating on career path as opposed to adopting intelligent journalistic procedure. Okay, well, obviously Bill actually lives in Ennismore, Ontario, but he does work also out of Quebec City. Bill, I don't agree with you about the reporter in this case. I don't think his personal professional path has got anything to do with the question he's asking.

He was asking a very pointed question about accountability. So we disagree on that, but I'm happy to hear your views. Sean Aiken of Whitby, Ontario. You asked what was on our mind this summer. It seems that Mother Nature has been under attack in Canada these past few months. The forest fires in Quebec were unsettling and shocking to us here in the GTA. That's Toronto. Not being used to such smog and poor air quality, but that passed.

News of Western Canada's fires is ongoing, but recently it seems Doug Ford has joined the assault on nature and declared his own personal war on Ontario's Greenbelt. The Greenbelt is a glacial moraine, an ancient silty deposit. It marks the boundary of Lake Ontario's watershed, effectively a giant water filtration system. Plus, it contains much of the limited agricultural land left these days. For me and most people I speak to here at Ontario's housing, sorry, here at home, this dominates our thoughts. Doug Ford's actions on the Greenbelt are proven unnecessary and will

not fix Ontario's housing requirements. He's showing his true colours, development at all costs. I hope Mother Nature has a forgiving soul. Liz Welsh of Petrolia, Ontario. Not surprisingly, a lot of comments coming out of Ontario on this. I think this story has stayed in the news cycle because they keep finding out more about who was involved in increasing nefarious activity and that the Premier's own hand-picked task force indicated that the Greenbelt lands were not necessary to increase housing in Ontario.

Municipalities have indicated that the infrastructure isn't there to accommodate the building and it will take years to put it in place. Municipalities have been planning and building for years to accommodate expansion and infill. Many have also indicated they can accommodate the increase in building now without disrupting the green belt. The homes to be built on the green belt will not be affordable to the average wage earner in Ontario. They will not be close to any transit infrastructure,

schools, and health care, or any services. From a municipal planning perspective, none of this makes any sense. Danny Ryan has this to say. I'm writing from Gatineau. Gatineau's across the river from Ottawa. It's actually in Quebec. I'm writing from Gatineau, currently in a two-bedroom basement with my family of four. We bought a house in Ottawa, but were held up moving in by a tenant using the backlog to their advantage. So I suppose we are somewhat directly impacted by the housing shortage.

I'm frustrated by how Ford has been permitted to shift the narrative when he's questioned about the green belt dissection. I know that this is the modern approach to political and business communications. Get your talking points, bullets, don't deviate. This was also my strategy in high school when my sister and I got caught throwing parties when my mom was out of town. Stick to the story, stick to the lie. Worked until the police were called in to report on their Saturday night noise disturbance call.

Man, how many of us did that, right? But this is where the questioners need more sophisticated techniques for pushing back, not to mention research on the myriad other possible solutions to the issue. I mean, the question being put to him is, how can you condone this abuse of power? And he's answering with, but the housing shortage. The exchange doesn't follow a logical thread. I had to abuse our power because there was no other way to solve housing. Or how can we have integrity when so many people need housing? I was not in the debate team, but aren't those the skills that journalists need to keep politicians like Ford accountable? Logic, not the emotional reaction to the non-sequitur.

Easy for you to say, we shouldn't abuse power, you probably have a home. Not bad, Danny. Not bad. Okay, we got one more on housing, and then we'll get to the random renter who wants to talk about housing today, too. This one comes from Jillian Trottier. Jillian forgot to say where she's running from. But she's clearly in Ontario.

As the mother of four adults between the ages 23 and 31, I've been thinking a lot about the current housing situation. It seems to me the main problem has more to do with our banking system and the method of calculating repayment of mortgages and the unrealistic down payment requirements. A couple of questions. One, why isn't interest on mortgages charged as accrued, the same as car loans and lines of credit? Two, what is the reason behind a minimum down payment? People are reliably paying their rent every month, however, are unable to save large amounts for down payments.

Also, requiring 50% down payment of the purchase price for vacant land has also eliminated the option of purchasing land and building on it? And three, what is the aim of the stress test? Seems to me the lenders are putting the cart before the horse and denying people mortgages by assuming the payment will end in arrears. Those are all good questions, Gillian, and you know what? I'm not a mortgage expert, so I'm not going to try to answer them, but I'm going to put this aside, and we'll get hold of a mortgage expert because it's on the minds of a lot of people these days,

and we'll do a show on that coming up in the next little while, next week or two, okay? All right. You know what? It's time to hear from the rander. He's had all summer to think about what he wants to say on any number of topics, and housing became the topic throughout the summer, and he told me a couple of times that he was interested in talking about housing.

So let's see what he has to say affordable housing seems to be all the rage these days and rage well that's a rant's best friend so here goes i'm sick and tired of hearing government excuses about affordable housing because it's really not that complicated. We don't have affordable housing because we're simply not building it anymore. But we used to. I grew up with three sisters in an 850 square foot house that was built in 1955. You could go for blocks and blocks in my neighborhood, and the biggest house you'd find might be 1,000 square feet.

Today, the average new home size in Canada is 2,200 square feet. So when you talk about affordable housing, it's not just price. Because like in a lot of things, size does matter, at least to municipalities and developers. And they're not interested in building smaller homes. Smaller homes don't generate as much municipal tax. But more importantly, they don't generate the same amount of profits for developers. And find me a politician that doesn't have a developer whispering in their ear. I'm not saying they're corrupt. Wink.

I'm saying they're at the very least complicit. The way I see it, this is a greed issue, pure and simple. Because the need for smaller, more affordable homes is nothing new. And our local governments have been doing nothing about it for years. And make no mistake, this is a national disaster built on the backs of municipal greed and provincial dereliction. Don't fall for all the talk blaming the federal government for interest rates, because they don't even control them. Those are set by the Bank of Canada, and if you think things are bad now, see how it goes if you let politicians muck about in monetary policy.

But back to smaller homes. They make sense to me. They can be built quickly. They can even be manufactured and assembled like something from Ikea. That's right. Affordable homes should not be custom. If you want affordable and you want fast, cookie cutter them 50 style. Want to build them really fast? Forgo basements. Want to make them

green? Go with heat pumps and subsidized solar arrays on the roofs. The demand for smaller homes is exponential. I mean, they're the perfect starter home for a young family and the perfect downsizer for seniors. And isn't that the community we're always striving for? A diversity of new immigrants, seniors, young people. You aren't going to get that in a neighborhood of big shacks, but you will in a community of smaller, affordable homes. I don't care what your political stripe is. This should not be a political issue. This isn't about immigration. This isn't about interest rates. This is about demanding our local governments start doing their jobs by serving their constituents instead of catering to a very greedy industry. Affordable housing isn't some kind of Mars mission.

We have the ability. We just need the will. The Random Ranter with his first take in season four. And the issue of housing is one that's on everybody's mind these days. And clearly it's on the mind of the ranter as well you know i find his point interesting i'm sure many of you do as well some of you disagree with what i had to say others are going to agree let me just say this you know i've lived in different parts of the country i've i haven't lived in atlantic I've been to Atlantic Canada many times, and I've had duties, if you wish. I was Chancellor of Mount Allison University

in Sackville, New Brunswick, and enjoyed every minute of the eight years that my term lasted there. But I've lived, obviously, in central Canada. I've lived in Quebec. I've lived in, obviously, in central Canada. I've lived in Quebec. I've lived in Ontario. I've lived in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, British Columbia. My parents lived in Alberta.

So I've been around. And one of the things you see in almost every community in the country, every city of some size, you go by, it's usually close to the airport or where the airport has been located over the last 75 years. What do you find? You find areas that were built up immediately following the war, the Second World War.

In the post-war housing boom, for baby boomers, homes that were built for young couples, sometimes still in the military, part of military bases. Most of those homes still stand today, right? You can drive in those areas and you'll see them. They're still there. They've been fixed up over time. They look terrific.

But what's the common factor? Just like the rancher was talking about. They're small. They're small compared with what we build today. But they were good enough then for starter families, for young families, for families with one or two kids. And those homes were built obviously to last because they're still there.

But those homes, and you know, the rancher talked about the place he grew up in, 850 square feet. Well, that's the kind of size you see in those communities. You know, I mentioned the other day how I was up at Petawawa, up the Ottawa River, a couple of weeks ago. And the base there, one of the largest military bases in the country, I think it's third largest in terms of the numbers of soldiers who are stationed there. In Petawawa itself, there's been a housing crunch as the base has expanded, as some elements of the forces have moved from other places into Petawawa. So there's been a housing crunch and new houses were built.

But the old houses that have been there for decades are still there and they're small. They look fantastic. I mean, they've really been cared for and looked after over the years. But they're small. So maybe the rancher's got a point. The answer to affordable housing is literally to make it affordable by looking at the size. And what you actually really need in today's world, size-wise.

Anyway, interesting thought. Hey, it's time for our break. Let's take a quick break. We'll be back right after this. And welcome back. You're listening to The Bridge, the Thursday edition, right here on Sirius XM channel 167 Canada Talks or on your favorite podcast platform.

Coming up tomorrow, good talk, of course. Chantal Hébert and Bruce Anderson will be joining for their take on the week's big issues, both past and the ones coming up. There's a big conservative convention this weekend. What should we expect from that? And the push on interest rates, that's all connected to the housing issue, right? And the push coming from premiers. How important is that? How wise is that. How important is that?

How wise is that? How appropriate is that? See what they have to say on those issues and more. Okay, let's get, oh, and I should tell you, next Monday, we'll kick off the week next week with the first edition of the Moore-Butts conversations. Jerry Butts, James Moore, liberal, conservative. But the goal of these conversations is to put partisan feelings aside and just talk constructively about particular issues. And the one next week we're going to discuss is this question of polarization

and how it has changed politics and the way a party can campaign and does campaign. And it's based on something I saw Reince Priebus say the other day. Priebus was the first chief of staff for Donald Trump after he won in 2016. He is also former head of the Republican Party in the United States. And he said this, in answer to that question, how does polarization impact how a party can campaign or should campaign or does campaign in this world of polarization? And his line was basically this. Division is a winner. Unity is a loser. Now that is an absolute change in tone from what most of us grew up listening to about politics.

Right? So what impact is that having? And how much of a crossover? There is some into Canada. So that's the basis of the Moribuds conversation on Monday. Hope you join us for that. All right, let's get back to some letters. Now, I usually duck away from those who are, you know, who don't follow the basic rules of name and location. But this one, this one tempted me. So I'm going to go with it anyway.

I don't know whether this is a real name, John Doe. I don't know. Does that sound like a real name to you? John Doe writes, no location. Why doesn't any news outlet in North America dare to have the debate of whether climate change is man-made or not? Okay, well, that just simply isn't true. Lots of different news organizations have had that debate many times.

And some still do. You ever watch Fox, John Doe? Watch Fox, John Doe, or any of the other conservative outlets. They're in North America, as you ask. And they hammer away at the climate change debate all the time. And I can recall many times during the late 90s and the early 2000s having those debates where I was working here in Canada, and to the point where 98% of the scientists, or whatever the figure is, it's around there, say there is no debate.

Climate change is real. At a certain point, you know, it's not an even on the one hand, on the other hand, and you move on. And you move on to what to do about it, as opposed to whether or not it's real. That is, as they say, settled science. But nevertheless, John keeps plugging along. Why do we constantly get the message that we're all going to die from climate change unless something drastic is done,

when there are scientists with the same education and experience, but have a totally different view? Yes, there are some. As I said, a small, extremely small percentage who still want to debate this issue. And in some places, they get to have that debate. In others, they've moved on. Anyway, John Doe's letter goes on and on and on along the same theme.

But that's my response. And every once in a while we get these kind of letters. And that's fine. Just use your name and your location. Carolyn Black from Waterloo, Ontario. Peter, it's so good to have you back and to have Brian back too. I've really missed Brian's insights and bringing Ukraine into focus after a year and a half.

It's so easy to gloss over what's happening in Ukraine. And it is easy to gloss over it. I will give the international media marks for the fact that they haven't dropped the ball on the Ukraine story in a year and a half. It's still a dominant story. Not like it was at the beginning, but it hasn't been forgotten either, like other parts of the world have been forgotten.

The Ukraine story is still very much there. And that's one of the reasons why we depend on Brian once a week to give us what he senses are the straight goods on what's happening on that story and breaking down certain elements of it. So it was great to have him back after a couple of months off just this past Tuesday. If you didn't have a chance to listen to it,

dial it back and grab it because it's a really good conversation. Anyway, back to Carolyn's letter. This summer was spent packing up more than 60 years of my parents' things after my dad's passing in June. My grandparents came to Canada from Ukraine in 1924, so we felt it was fitting to give as much of my parents' furniture as possible to the Ukrainian refugees arriving in our area. A fantastic organization, Grassroots Waterloo Region, is looking after welcoming and temporarily and then permanently housing the refugees. The reason I'm telling you

all of this is because we heard some of the stories of what people who are now here went through. It really brings the war to our doorstep. It suddenly isn't something that's happening in a faraway place. The experience of the refugees are unimaginable to those of us living our entire lives in a place of peace and privilege. You're right, Carolyn. You know, we should be down on our knees thanking whoever we believe is responsible. Often, for the fact we do live in a place of peace and privilege. Sure, do we have our issues? We darn right we do.

Do we have our differences? Absolutely. But we live in a place of peace and privilege. And you watch those pictures from Ukraine, and you go, oh my gosh, really? Is this really 2023? Bombing small communities, sending drone attacks into apartment-sized buildings, killing women and children, fighting from trenches.

You know, when Brian talks about how at times it looks like the First World War, that's what it looks like. It looks like the First World War. The same kind of tactics and butchery that marked that conflict. All right, getting around to the last one for this week. It's from Al Zwicker in Woodstock, Ontario. It's very unusual. Today's

your turn. Almost all the letters are from Ontario. One just creeped over the border into Gatineau. Everything else I think, I think all of them, unless I'm mistaken, were from Ontario, but we don't know where John Doe was from. But usually we get a lot of letters from Alberta, BC, Newfoundland, and then it's kind of little bits here, little bits there.

Always thoughts from Ontario, not surprisingly. What is it, 40% of the country lives in Ontario? Or more. Anyway, here's our last one. Al's Wicker from Woodstock, Ontario. Hi, Peter.

I was listening to the first podcast of the 23-24 season, and you mentioned the injury to your ankle during the summer and that it put a kibosh on your exercise regime. I am close to your age and suggest you do lane swimming in the pool. Not hard on the ankle, yet still a good source of exercise. Love your podcast. Well, thanks, Alan. You're right. You know, swimming can be a great healer.

Your body loves the water, loves the, you know, gentle friction that water can cause. And it works on building up strength in areas that have been hurt. Now, I didn't break my ankle. At first I thought I did, but I had x-ray and then I had an ultrasound. Or not an ultrasound. What's the thing where they put you into that machine? MRI. I have one of those to absolutely confirm there wasn't a break in what it was. And what it was turned out to be torn ligaments in my ankle, which caused enormous pain.

In fact, some people told me, you know, you're lucky it was only torn ligaments. Or you were unlucky that it was torn ligaments. It would have been easier on you if it had been a break. Anyway, it was a lot of pain for three weeks, but helped by swimming. The crazy thing about whatever happened to my ankle is that I still don't know how it happened. I was at one of those charity golf tournaments where I was playing with a great force, some terrific people, and, you know, played the whole 18 holes, and then when it was over, everybody sort of goes to the tent

for speeches and, you know, refreshments of some kind, and a meal. And when I was in the tent, I started thinking, my gosh, I can't even stand up. I've got this pain in my leg. And I wasn't sure what it was, but I had to sit down. And then the next morning I thought, I've got to get this checked. I don't know how it happened.

I don't remember any particular thing happening. It just happened. This was two weeks after my 75th birthday. And I started thinking, really, is this what it's going to be like now? Unexplained injuries, cramping in my already brutal golf game. Anyway, the important thing now is, as both Al and I said, is you've got to build back up.

So that means exercise. And finally, it's been more than a month since that moment, and it's still not, you know, the ankle is like 95% or better than that, but it's still going to take a while to get everything back in gear. Anyway, enough about my medical situation. I'm sure you're going, okay, Peter, really, that is enough. Can we get back to housing now? Okay.

Tomorrow, good talk. Monday, more butts conversation. It's a treat being back doing this. Love to talk with you. I'm Peter Mansbridge. Thanks for listening. Talk to you again in 24 hours.