SVCO Federal Election97
Party Policies on Housing

The following are the Canadian Federal Party Policy Postions with respect to non-profit housing as of May, 1997. We are still receiving comments from the political parties as of May 21, 1997.

Green Party Position On Housing

The Ontario Greens believe that decent housing is a universal social right and utilitarian necessity.
The primary obstacles to home ownership are policies that encourage an increase in population
which increases the demand on existing housing. This facilitates an environment of land speculationand created scarcity.

In the long term, Green policies of zero population growth once realized would alleviate all of the
current pressures on housing demand. There is a need for housing in four general categories:

1. privately owned homes
2. co-op housing
3. rental accommodations
4. socially-assisted housing

1.Privately owned homes

The Green Party is committed to encouraging home ownership through the following policies:

1.The Green Party of Ontario is committed to entering into negotiations with the Federal
government to regulate the funds raised from RRSPs to be used solely for the purpose
of providing mortgages for Canadians.

2.We are also committed to government support for the creation of community land
trusts. A community land trust is a non profit corporation which owns land. It leases the
land to individuals according to the use value of that land. Our needs for land are many
and often in conflict. Land can provide all the things we need if we plan carefully and
secure local control over land use decisions. The central principle motivating a land
trust is that buildings, and all things done in or on the land should be owned by
individuals, but the land itself should be owned by the community as a whole.

A land trusts primary function is to buy or accept gifts of land and lease it back to
members under a 99-year lease that is automatically renewable and inheritable. Part of
the process is determining, in conjunction with land use planners, local government and
the community at large, the most appropriate use for a given parcel of land.

The business of the land trust is conducted by a board of governors elected by the
membership. Members are encouraged to join or form committees to address
particular issues of land use. The Community Land Trust allows people to buy a house
for what it is worth without having to buy the artificially inflated land that it sits on.

The lease restricts the resale price of the home to the value of the building and other
improvements in or on the land, that is the cost of rebuilding the same house and
grounds again at the time of the sale. This makes it affordable for every subsequent
buyer, not just the first. No one buying the house will have to pay for the inflated price
of the land. The return to the seller is therefore equal to the increase in the price of
building materials and labour in the area. The same holds true for commercial land and
farm land. A leaseholder owns, buys and sells the result of real work, not the result of
speculation. At its core the community land trust is a management group. It can work
flexibly with individuals or organizations to accomplish the objectives of the community
for agricultural, commercial, industrial, open spaces, or other land uses. Community
land trusts are not abstract theories but living working organizations. There are dozens
of land trusts in existence in North America today.

2. Co-op housing

For first time and low income home buyers as well as for other taxpayers the most
cost-effective way to acquire a home is through a co-op. In co-ops individuals work together
to build (sweat equity), organize, and maintain their homes. Government loan guarantees,
small grants as seed money, and zoning changes are all that are needed to provide individuals
with their own homes. Personal initiative and pride will finish the project.

3. Rental accommodations

In a society freed from population pressures and land speculation rental properties could be
returned to the free market. For the large numbers of people who for whatever reason do not
want to own a home, or be part of a co-op, rental accommodation must be made available.
Greens do not see rent controls as being desirable, they are however necessary in our current
economic climate.

4. Socially-assisted housing

The Green Party of Ontario is committed to policies which facilitate decent, permanent shelter
for those in need. We are committed to making changes to the zoning regulations of our province which will encourage a mix of housing alternatives in every community. New communities (and renovated older communities) would be required to have as a percentage of total houses built:

1. More options for temporary housing such as Group homes, temporary shelters, and
rent-subsidized, public housing.

2. Every neighbourhood should have councils to consider building permits which would
ensure that every development would have a range of price variations.

Liberal Party

Comments from Peter Milliken, MP, Kingston & the Islands, Deputy Speaker

I am pleased to have this opportunity to
clarify the federal government’s position on non-profit housing.

The decision to transfer the management of the social housing portfolio to the
provinces was announced in the March, 1996 Budget. A new partnership arrangement is
proposed that offers to provinces and territories the opportunity to assume the
management of existing social housing resources, all on the condition, that the federal
subsidies on existing housing continue to be used for housing assistance for low-income
households, subject to national principles and an accountability framework.

It is important to note that the project operating agreements with non-profit
and co-operative housing sponsors are legally binding on provinces and territories that
take on the responsibilities for administration of federal social housing resources.

Two provinces, Saskatchewan and New Brunswick, have signed new
federal/provincial social housing agreements. Both have publicly confirmed that the
existing operating agreements with non-profit and co-operative housing groups are
unaffected by the transfer of administrative responsibility to the provinces.

I trust that the foregoing has clarified the federal government’s position on
this issue. Thank you for taking the time to write and express your views.

Peter Milliken, M.P.
Kingston and the Islands

We pledged not to use the federal spending power to create new cost-shared programs in areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction without the consent of a majority of the provinces, and to compensate any non-participating province if it undertakes equivalent or comparable initiatives. The federal government's role with respect to the provinces was clarified in sectors such as ... social housing... With the agreements and understandings we have secured in areas like .... social housing....we have been able to streamline government and reduce costly duplication and overlap.

We now understand that a clean environment, decent housing, and meaningful work as well as adequate levels of education, income, nutrition, and social support are the key determinants of good health.

New Democratic Party

1. Kick-start the construction industry, and jobs in that industry, by launching non-profit and co-operative housing programs.

2. Co-op and non-profit housing capital spending to be reintroduced as follows:

1997/98 $250 million
1998/99 $500 million
1999/00 $500 million
2000/01 $250 million
2001/02 $250 million

3. Increased federal government investment in Aboriginal community infrastructure, such as roads, housing and basic public utilities.

Reform Party

A Reform Government will recognize that responsibility for many important areas of policy should be placed as close to the people as possible. This will eliminate duplication and jurisdictional overlaps between various levels of government. Included among the powers that we will leave to the provinces are all areas designated by the Constitution as exclusive provincial jurisdiction, and also such areas as employment training, social services, language and culture, municipal affairs, sports and recreation, housing, and tourism.