Approaching 1er July, National Moving Day, the Minister responsible for Housing, France-Élaine Duranceau, has a knack for getting people talking about her. Speak good of me, speak badly of me, but speak of me seems to be his motto.
On the last day of the parliamentary session, the rookie minister introduced her very first bill. She thought of the evicted tenants, but also of the owners. If a tenant does not sign the eviction notice, he will no longer be deemed to have agreed to vacate his dwelling; the burden of proof will thus be reversed. And for landlords, it will cost more to get rid of its tenants. On the other hand, the owners obtain what they claim with insistence: they will be able to refuse an assignment of lease and thus avoid being imposed the new tenant.
From the outset, we can only see that nothing in this bill will solve the housing crisis. Evictions may continue, but tenants who have occupied their homes for a long time will be better compensated. It is possible that the obligation to pay higher compensation could have the effect of reducing the number of evictions. As for lease assignments, they have multiplied due to the shortage of housing, deplore the owners, while some tenants make a profit by selling their lease. That a landlord, especially an owner-occupant, wants to choose his tenants is in the order of things, but the assignment of lease is still a way to prevent rent increases that exceed the standards enacted by the Administrative Tribunal housing. And the minister still rejects the idea of establishing a lease register.
To tenants who would like to keep this right of transfer, she replied with a joke, suggesting that they invest in real estate, with the risks that entails. In the balance that must exist between landlords and tenants, the former real estate broker seems more sensitive to the interests of the former than the latter.
What is curious in France-Élaine Duranceau’s approach is her eagerness to table this bill, when she plans to table an action plan in the fall to alleviate the housing crisis. We also wonder who the Minister consults outside of her knowledge of real estate, such as Annie Lemieux, her business partner in a flip in Montreal, this lucrative purchase-resale activity which often consists of transforming rental housing into condominiums.
In a collective letter published this week, representatives of the construction industry, owners and the business community, but also people from the community and cooperative sectors as well as several mayors asked the CAQ government to hold a major consultation to define a concerted action plan. But this kind of summit is not François Legault’s cup of tea. Damage.
It is obvious that market forces alone cannot solve the housing crisis in time. A crisis which, let us remember, does not only affect the poorest, but also many middle-class families.
Although vacancy rates are at their lowest in 20 years and Quebec is 100,000 units short, according to some estimates, housing starts for residential buildings have fallen massively this year, reaching a low historical. The Legault government repeats that the supply must be increased. It’s a truism. Right now—some call it a “perfect storm”—several factors make it impossible to build homes or residences that ordinary mortals can afford. Skyrocketing construction costs, rising interest rates, municipal fees and other taxes, difficulty obtaining permits, all combine to undermine supply. The promoters do not find their account there and wait for better days.
If we follow the logic of the market, rents should jump – the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation predicts a 30% increase by 2025 – and the balance between supply and demand should one day to re-establish. This is what Finance Minister Eric Girard told us two years ago. But when: in five years, in ten years? And at what price level? Let’s enrich Quebecers, says François Legault. But if to do this it is necessary to impoverish all those who will devote an ever greater share of their income to housing, society is no further ahead.
To have a roof over your head is more than a possession, more than capital and added value, it’s a necessity, it’s a right. It is up to the government, but also to all the players involved, to reconcile these dimensions. And to do this, consultation is essential, and also a good dose of imagination, which is said, moreover, to be the madwoman of the house.