UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Continuity and change : provincial housing policy in British Columbia 1945-1985 Grieve, Beverly Jean 1985

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1985_A8 G75.pdf [ 8.84MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0096500.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0096500-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0096500-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0096500-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0096500-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0096500-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0096500-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0096500-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0096500.ris

Full Text

CONTINUITY AND CHANGE: PROVINCIAL HOUSING POLICY IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 1945-1985 by B e v e r l y Jean G r i e v e B.A., Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y , 1980 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES THE SCHOOL OF COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming t o the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May, 1985 Beverly Jean Grieve, 1985 In presenting t h i s thesis i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t f r e e l y available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of t h i s thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by h i s or her representatives. I t i s understood that copying or publication of t h i s thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission. School BX&JSad3D©Kfc of Community and Regional P lanning The University of B r i t i s h Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date July 9, 1985 DE-6 (3/81) Abstract T h i s t h e s i s reviews the e v o l u t i o n of B r i t i s h Columbia's p r o v i n c i a l h o using p o l i c y and programs from 1945 t o the present. T h i s overview permits the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of what the p e r i o d s are, what the major p o l i c i e s and programs have been, and what has changed or remained constant through the years. T h i s o v e r v i e w a l s o p r o v i d e s a broader context w i t h i n which t o e v e n t u a l l y assess i n g r e a t e r d e t a i l , p a s t and p r e s e n t p r o v i n c i a l h o u s i n g p o l i c i e s and programs. A review of f e d e r a l h ousing programs and j u r i s d i c t i o n a l i s s u e s p r o v i d e s the context f o r p r o v i n c i a l h o u s i n g p o l i c y . The f o r t y year time span of i s d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e p e r i o d s : 1945-1972, 1972-1976 and 1976 t o the present. The major forms of h o u s i n g p o l i c y i n t e r v e n t i o n i n each p e r i o d are i d e n t i f i e d through the review of budget speeches, government documents, annual r e p o r t s , newspaper c l i p p i n g s , p u b l i s h e d and u n p u b l i s h e d r e p o r t s and d i s c u s s i o n with government o f f i c i a l s . T h i s t h e s i s f i n d s t h a t d u r i n g the l a s t f o r t y years, there has never been a s e r i o u s c h a l l e n g e t o the r o l e of urban l a n d and housing markets by B.C. p r o v i n c i a l h o using p o l i c y makers. The encouragement of homeownership f o r as many households as p o s s i b l e and h o u s i n g a s s i s t a n c e f o r s e n i o r c i t i z e n s have a l s o been a major and continuous focus o f housing p o l i c y s i n c e the 1950's. I t i s p r o b a b l e t h a t the homeownership a s s i s t a n c e programs have had, " i i however, o n l y a m a r g i n a l impact on i n c r e a s i n g the r a t e of homeownership. An a c t i v e s e n i o r s ' housing c o n s t r u c t i o n program was m a i n t a i n e d from 1955 t o the l a t e 1970's with the m a j o r i t y of u n i t s sponsored by n o n - p r o f i t groups. In 1977, the focus of s e n i o r s ' h o u s i n g a s s i s t a n c e changed from a c o n s t r u c t i o n a s s i s t a n c e approach t o an income a s s i s t a n c e approach. A l t h o u g h the names and d e t a i l s o f homeownership and s e n i o r c i t i z e n h o u s i n a s s i s t a n c e programs c o n t i n u o u s l y changed, the g o a l s and content o f the programs remained e s s e n t i a l l y the same. In t h e a n a l y s i s o f h o u s i n g p o l i c y t r e n d s i t i s f o u n d t h a t the p h i l o s o p h i c a l p o s i t i o n of the p r o v i n c i a l government determined i t s "terms of r e f e r e n c e " f o r h ousing p o l i c y . In the 1945-1972 and 1976-1985 p e r i o d s , the f r e e e n t e r p r i s e o r i e n t a t i o n of the governments determined a v e r y narrow r o l e f o r government housing p o l i c y . In the former case, the narrowness of the parameters f o r h ousing p o l i c y was caused m a i n l y by a b e l i e f t h a t h o u s i n g p o l i c y was the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the f e d e r a l government, w h i l e i n t h e l a t t e r c a s e t h e narrowness was due t o a n e a r l y complete r e l i a n c e on the p r i v a t e s e c t o r t o p r o v i d e housing. While the NDP government of the 1972-1976 p e r i o d had a s o c i a l democratic o r i e n t a t i o n , i t was s t i l l c o n s t r a i n e d i n i t s a b i l i t y t o e f f e c t i v e l y d e a l w i t h housing problems. These c o n s t r a i n t s i n c l u d e d a l i m i t e d term i n o f f i c e , the emergence of d i f f e r e n t f e d e r a l p r i o r i t i e s , the l a c k of f i n a n c i a l r e s o u r c e s and the r e s i s t a n c e w i t h i n the p r o v i n c e t o change. I t i s apparent t h a t these changes i n the terras of r e f e r e n c e of p o s t -war B.C. housing p o l i c y have p r e v e n t e d any chance of a comprehensive and s y s t e m a t i c approach t o housing problems. i v C O N T E N T S A b s t r a c t i i L i s t of Tables v i i L i s t of Figures v i i i Acknowledgement i x 1. I n t r o d u c t i o n 1 2. The H i s t o r i c a l and J u r i s d i c t i o n a l Context for P r o v i n c i a l Housing P o l i c y i n Canada 7 2.1 F e d e r a l Housing A c t i v i t i e s Since 1945: An Overview . . 7 2.2 The F e d e r a l - P r o v i n c i a l J u r i s d i c t i o n a l Issues 19 2.3 F e d e r a l - P r o v i n c i a l R e l a t i o n s 21 2.4 C o n c l u s i o n 27 3. B.C. Housing Policy i n the 1945-1972 Period 29 3.1 Overview of B.C. P r o v i n c i a l P o l i t i c s : 1941-1972. . . . 30 3.2 The Post-War Housing S i t u a t i o n i n B.C 33 3.3 B.C.'s Response t o the Wartime and Post War H o u s i n g Need: 1942-1949 38 3.4 The Emergence of the B.C.'s Role i n P u b l i c H o u s i n g : 1949-1972 . . . . 42 3.5 The Emergence o f B.C.'s Role i n Seni o r C i t i z e n s ' Housing A s s i s t a n c e 49 3.6 The Emergence o f B.C.'s Role i n Homeownership A s s i s t a n c e Programs 52 3.7 C o n c l u s i o n . 5 6 4. B.C. Housing Policy i n the 1972-1976 Period 59 4.1 Housing C o n d i t i o n s : 1972-1976 60 4.2 The Department of Housing: A New A d m i n i s t r a t i v e S t r u c t u r e f o r Ho u s i n g P o l i c y 65 4.3 Homeownership A s s i s t a n c e Programs 70 4.4 Re n t a l Housing and Renter A s s i s t a n c e Programs 77 4.5 S o c i a l Housing A s s i s t a n c e Programs 83 4.6 C o n c l u s i o n 91 v 5. B.C. Housing Policy i n the 1976-1985 Period 94 5.1 Housing C o n d i t i o n s : 1976-1985 94 5.2 B a s i c Tenets of Housing P o l i c y : 1976-1985 96 5.3 The R e o r g a n i z a t i o n of Housing P o l i c y A d m i n i s t r a t i o n . .103 5.4 Homeownership A s s i s t a n c e Programs 104 5.5 Land Supply and S e r v i c i n g Programs I l l 5.6 Rental Housing and Renter A s s i s t a n c e Programs 117 5.7 S o c i a l Housing A s s i s t a n c e Programs 123 5.8 C o n c l u s i o n 127 6. Continuity and Change i n B.C. Housing P o l i c y 131 6.1 C o n t i n u i t y i n Housing P o l i c y 131 6.2 Major Changes i n B.C. Housing P o l i c y 151 6.3 Con c l u s i o n s 160 B i b l iogr aphy 163 Appendix A Outline History of Canadian Housing Policy 169 Appendix B Outline History of B r i t i s h Columbia Housing P o l i c y : 1940 - 1985 171 Appendix C B.C. Mousing Star t s : 1945 - 1984 175 v i LIST OF TABLES Table I Housing C o n d i t i o n s i n S e l e c t e d Larger Canadian C i t i e s , 1941 36 T a b l e II Community and Government Sponsored Se n i o r C i t i z e n Housing U n i t s Completed i n B.C 51 T a b l e I I I A f f o r d a b i l i t y C a l c u l a t i o n f o r an A v e r a g e - P r i c e d House i n Vancouver CMA, 1971-1983 62 Ta b l e IV R e n t a l Housing Market I n d i c a t o r s , Vancouver CMA., 1962-83 63 Table V Housing P r o d u c t i o n by Year and A c t o r 85 Table VI AHOP - B.C. Summary 106 T a b l e V I I A c t i v i t y Under the Home Purchase A s s i s t a n c e Program, 1980-1984 108 Table V I I I Major Land Sales P r o j e c t s 116 Table IX ARP - B.C. Summary 118 Table X Summary of SAFER Program i n B.C.: 1982 125 T a b l e XI Comparative Housing Costs, 1981 and 1984, Vancouver.139 T a b l e XII Seni o r C i t i z e n s ' Housing C o n s t r u c t i o n , 1978-1984 . .145 Ta b l e XIII The SAFER Program i n B.C.: A n a l y s i s of B e n e f i t s f o r S i n g l e s 149 v i i L I S T O F F I G U R E S F i g u r e 1 Vacancy Rates i n Vancouver, 1965 - 1984 64 F i g u r e 2 B.C. Apartment S t a r t s : 1955 - 1984 121 Fi g u r e 3 Summary o f B.C. Homeownership A s s i s t a n c e Programs . .135 F i g u r e 4 Homeownership Rates i n Canada and B.C. 1921 - 1981. .137 F i g u r e 5 Summary of B.C. Renter and R e n t a l Housing A s s i s t a n c e Programs 143 Fi g u r e 6 Summary o f B.C. Senior C i t i z e n Housing A s s i s t a n c e Programs 146 v i i i Ackmowledgement I wish t o extend my thanks to Dr. David H u l c h a n s k i f o r h i s t h o u g h t f u l a d v i c e and support d u r i n g the p r e p a r a t i o n and c o m p l e t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s . I a l s o wish t o thank Dr. Ann McAfee and Dr. Henry Hightower f o r t h e i r i n s i g h t s and comments. A s p e c i a l word o f t h a n k s i s a l s o due t o my husband Graham, f o r h i s moral support and encouragement d u r i n g the l a s t two years o f s t u d y . F i n a l l y , I wish to express my g r a t i t u d e t o Canada Mortga^-^ and Housing C o r p o r a t i o n f o r awarding me a U n i v e r s i t y S c h o l a r s h i p which enabled me t o undertake t h i s r e s e a r c h . ix Chapter 1 Introduction As one of the more important sectors of the economy and one of the fundamental human needs, housing has always played an important r o l e i n our economic and s o c i a l l i f e . Although the federal government, through the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, has played the most s i g n i f i c a n t r o l e i n housing p o l i c y formulation and implementation over the past forty years, p r o v i n c i a l governments have o c c a s i o n a l l y asserted t h e i r c onstitu-t i o n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n over housing, i n i t i a t i n g t h e i r own d i s -t i n c t i v e p o l i c i e s and programs. This p r o v i n c i a l housing a c t i v i t y i s sometimes carried out i n co-operation with the federal govern-ment while at other times separate and unique programs have been implemented by the provinces to meet t h e i r own economic, s o c i a l or p o l i t i c a l objectives. In B r i t i s h Columbia, p r o v i n c i a l housing p o l i c y has p r i m a r i l y consisted of the creation of a variety of programs administered through disparate ministries, agencies and crown corporations. Although program names and content has changed continuously, the goals of encouraging homeownership and providing senior c i t i z e n housing have remained constant. Nevertheless, d i f f e r e n t approaches to housing p o l i c y r e s u l t i n g from changes i n government has permitted some innovation and experimentation. 1 The l a c k of c o - o r d i n a t i o n i n B r i t i s h Columbia housing programs has g e n e r a l l y p r e vented the e s t a b l i s h m e n t of an o v e r a l l l o n g term housing p o l i c y framework. Housing programs have been used t o address a v a r i e t y of economic, s o c i a l or p o l i t i c a l g o a l s . The short-term nature of many programs has i n h i b i t e d the a b i l i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia housing p o l i c y makers from i d e n t i f y i n g major t r e n d s i n p o l i c y and e x a m i n i n g t h e impact o f t h o s e t r e n d s on t h e province's housing s e c t o r . In c o n s i d e r i n g B r i t i s h Columbia housing p o l i c y over the l a s t f o r t y years, t h e r e f o r e , i t i s important t o i d e n t i f y the elements or p r i n c i p l e s of housing p o l i c y t h a t have changed and those elements or p r i n c i p l e s t h a t have remained the same. In t h i s t h e s i s , i t i s argued t h a t the changing u n d e r l y i n g p h i l o s o p h i e s of the governments of B r i t i s h Columbia has determined the s e t of parameters f o r housing p o l i c y of each government, which, i n t u r n has a f f e c t e d the government's a b i l i t y t o d e a l with housing problems. F u r t h e r , i t i s argued t h a t w h i l e the s e t of parameters or "terms of r e f e r e n c e " u n d e r l y i n g housing p o l i c y have changed i n t h e l a s t f o r t y y e a r s , t h e c o n t e x t o f a p r i v a t e u r b a n h o u s i n g and lan d market has not been c h a l l e n g e d . T h i s t h e s i s reviews the e v o l u t i o n of B r i t i s h Columbia's p r o v i n c i a l housing p o l i c y and programs from 1945 t o the present. C o v e r i n g such a long p e r i o d of time permits the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of l o n g term t r e n d s i n p o l i c y as w e l l as departures from these trends. A b e t t e r understanding of the nature of and reasons f o r the c o n t i n u i t y and change i n p r o v i n c i a l h o using p o l i c y s h o u l d p r o v i d e c u r r e n t p o l i c y a n a l y s t s and a d v i s o r s w i t h an improved 2 b a s i s f o r c o n s i d e r i n g the f e a s i b i l i t y and d e s i r a b i l i t y o f a l t e r n a t i v e o p t i o n s . T h i s overview a l s o p r o v i d e s a broader context w i t h i n which t o e v e n t u a l l y assess i n much g r e a t e r d e t a i l than i s p o s s i b l e i n t h i s t h e s i s , p a s t and prese n t housing p o l i c y and programs. There i s a t h r e e f o l d r a t i o n a l e f o r undertaking t h i s study. F i r s t , t h e r e i s a s i g n i f i c a n t gap i n the l i t e r a t u r e r e g a r d i n g p r o v i n c i a l l y i n i t i a t e d and ad m i n i s t e r e d housing programs i n B r i t i s h Columbia. The i n f o r m a t i o n and l i t e r a t u r e t h a t does e x i s t i s p a r t i a l and fragmented. Yet the p r o v i n c e i s c o n t i n u a l l y r e v i s i n g i t s housing p o l i c i e s and changing i t s programs. An improved understanding o f programs t h a t have been t r i e d i n the past, and an assessment of t h e i r l o n g term impacts i s necessary i n order t o permit p o l i c y makers t o g a i n a b e t t e r p e r s p e c t i v e on how t o proceed i n the f u t u r e . A broad overview o f p a s t housing p o l i c i e s and programs, p l a c i n g them i n context with one another, i s a necessary f i r s t step i n p e r m i t t i n g a much more d e t a i l e d assessment and e v a l u a t i o n of the p r o v i n c i a l r o l e i n housing. A second r a t i o n a l e r e l a t e s t o the f e d e r a l housing r e s e a r c h agenda. The Canada Mortgage and Housing C o r p o r a t i o n has r e c e n t l y i d e n t i f i e d as one of i t s p r i o r i t i e s the need t o encourage' r e s e a r c h e r s t o undertake a n a l y s e s of the e v o l u t i o n of Canadian housing p o l i c y , a t a l l j u r i s d i c t i o n a l l e v e l s , f o r the p e r i o d s i n c e 1945. T h i s h i s t o r i c a l a n a l y s i s has become necessary and t i m e l y , a c c o r d i n g t o CMHC, due t o the c u r r e n t government budgetary r e s t r i c t i o n s and the need f o r a much more thorough 3 analysis of past and current approaches to housing p o l i c y . F e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l j u r i s d i c t i o n a l issues r e l a t i n g to housing i s one of the important topics which must be addressed. It i s hoped that t h i s thesis w i l l contribute to t h i s broad research agenda. F i n a l l y , recent indications from the new federal government point to an expanded r o l e i n housing p o l i c y for the provinces. This expanded r o l e may take the form of greater f e d e r a l -p r o v i n c i a l partnership i n program design and administration, or federal a l l o c a t i o n of block grants for housing p o l i c y purposes, allowing the provinces to design t h e i r own programs r e f l e c t i n g p r o v i n c i a l and l o c a l needs and p r i o r i t i e s . This thesis provides a research base upon which to b u i l d a much more d e t a i l e d understanding of the experience of the past so as to a s s i s t p r o v i n c i a l housing p o l i c y makers i n any expanded r o l e they may undertake. In s p e c i f i c terms, the objectives of t h i s research are: 1) to i d e n t i f y and provide an i n i t i a l analysis of the major forms of housing intervention undertaken by B.C. governments between 1945 and 1985. This includes not only i n d i v i d u a l housing programs but a l s o organizational structures designed to administer B.Chousing p o l i c y and programs. 2) to i d e n t i f y the s i g n f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t periods i n post-war h i s t o r y of B.C. housing p o l i c y . 3) to i d e n t i f y and analyze the elements and p r i n c i p l e s of housing p o l i c y that have changed and remained the same throughout the 1945-1985 period. 4 F o l l o w i n g t h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n , Chapter Two d i s c u s s e s the h i s t o r i c a l and j u r i s d i c t i o n a l c ontext f o r post-World War II p r o v i n c i a l housing p o l i c y i n Canada. A d i s c u s s i o n of p r o v i n c i a l h o u sing p o l i c y must be p l a c e d i n the context of f e d e r a l housing p o l i c y . Therefore, a b r i e f o v e rview of f e d e r a l housing programs s i n c e 1945 i s presented, f o l l o w e d by a d i s c u s s i o n of f e d e r a l -p r o v i n c i a l j u r i s d i c t i o n a l i s s u e s , and an examination of f e d e r a l -p r o v i n c i a l r e l a t i o n s r e l a t i n g t o housing p o l i c y . Chapter Three c o v e r s the p r o v i n c i a l housing p o l i c y and programs a d m i n i s t e r e d i n the 1945-1985 p e r i o d , c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o the c o a l i t i o n and S o c i a l C r e d i t governments. A review of the h i s t o r y of B.C. p a r t y p o l i t i c s between 1945 and 1972 p r o v i d e s background i n f o r m a t i o n f o r t h i s chapter. The post-war housing s i t u a t i o n i n the p r o v i n c e i s d i s c u s s e d , a l o n g with an examination of the p r o v i n c i a l response t o the housing shortage. F i n a l l y , the emergence of a p r o v i n c i a l r o l e i n p u b l i c housing, s e n i o r c i t i z e n s h ousing a s s i s t a n c e , and homeownership a s s i s t a n c e i s presented. Chapter Four and Chapter F i v e d e a l r e s p e c t i v e l y with the 1972-1976 and 1976-1984 p e r i o d s . Each commences with a g e n e r a l d i s c u s s i o n of housing c o n d i t i o n s a s s o c i a t e d with the p e r i o d , f o l l o w e d by a d i s c u s s i o n of the unique i s s u e s r e l e v a n t t o the s p e c i f i c p e r i o d . The i n d i v i d u a l p o l i c y and programs are d i s c u s s e d under the headings of homeownership a s s i s t a n c e , l a n d s u p p l y and s e r v i c i n g a s s i s t a n c e , r e n t a l h o using and r e n t e r a s s i s t a n c e and s o c i a l housing a s s i s t a n c e programs. Each chapter concludes with a d i s c u s s i o n of the period's p h i l o s o p h i c a l b a s i s 5 f o r housing p o l i c y . Chapter S i x concludes the t h e s i s by p l a c i n g the three i d e n t i f i e d p e r i o d s i n a l a r g e r context so t h a t the broader themes of c o n t i n u i t y and change i n housing p o l i c y can be examined. An a n a l y s i s of those elements of B.C. housing p o l i c y t h a t have been continuous i s presented, f o l l o w e d by an a n a l y s i s of those elements t h a t have changed. F i n a l l y , the t h e s i s concludes with a summary of the broad themes i n post war B.C. housing p o l i c y . 6 Chapter Two The H i s t o r i c a l and J u r i s d i c t i o n a l Context for P r o v i n c i a l Housing P o l i c y i n Canada In terms of i n t e r - g o v e r n m e n t a l r e l a t i o n s , the h i s t o r y of housing p o l i c y i n Canada has always presented a paradox. While the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l power f o r housing l e g i s l a t i o n c l e a r l y r e s t s with the p r o v i n c e s , the f e d e r a l government p l a y e d and continues t o p l a y a dominant r o l e i n the development of post-war housing p o l i c y . An examination of p r o v i n c i a l housing p o l i c y , t h e r e f o r e , must be p l a c e d i n the broader context of f e d e r a l housing p o l i c y , i n c l u d i n g the h i s t o r y of f e d e r a l programs, an understanding of the j u r i s d i c t i o n a l i s s u e s , and the nature of changing r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the f e d e r a l government and the p r o v i n c e s . 2 . 1 Federal Housing A c t i v i t i e s Since 1945; An Overview The h i s t o r y of post-war Canadian housing programs has l a r g e l y been the h i s t o r y of f e d e r a l l e g i s l a t i o n and i t s implementation through the Canada Mortgage and Housing C o r p o r a t i o n . Appendix A p r o v i d e s an o u t l i n e chronology of s i g n i f i c a n t Canadian housing l e g i s l a t i o n from 1945 t o the p r e s e n t , i n o r d e r t o h e l p p l a c e t h e key programs i n t h e i r b r o a d e r h i s t o r i c a l context. U n t i l World War I, t h e r e were no f e d e r a l h ousing programs. T e n t a t i v e i n i t i a t i v e s i n housing were taken between the wars, but the programs were g e n e r a l l y s m a l l i n s c a l e , impact and importance. 7 The f i r s t s i g n i f i c a n t d i r e c t i n v o l v e m e n t of government i n the p r o v i s i o n of housing took p l a c e s h o r t l y a f t e r Canada's e n t r y i n t o World War I I . Wartime Housing L i m i t e d , a Crown C o r p o r a t i o n c r e a t e d i n 1941 by the f e d e r a l government under the War measures Act, b u i l t 45,930 housing u n i t s f o r i n d u s t r i a l workers d u r i n g the war and veterans a f t e r the war. Wartime Housing L i m i t e d was absorbed by Canada Mortgage and Housing C o r p o r a t i o n i n 1947. CMHC then began t o d i s m a n t l e the program, and by the e a r l y 1950's has s o l d the government's wartime housing stock. (See Wade, 1984) When i t began t o appear t h a t t h e end o f W o r l d War I I was c l o s e a t hand, the f e d e r a l government began p l a n n i n g f o r the r e t u r n t o a peacetime economy. In 1943 the f e d e r a l government appointed the A d v i s o r y Committee on R e c o n s t r u c t i o n and i n March 1944 a sub-committee produced a study on housing and community p l a n n i n g . T h i s document, known as the C u r t i s Report, a f t e r C l i f f o r d C u r t i s , who was the chairman of the Housing and Community P l a n n i n g Subcommittee of the A d v i s o r y Committee on Re c o n s t r u c t i o n , c l e a r l y documented the enormous need f o r low and moderate c o s t housing i n Canada. The C u r t i s Report recommended a n a t i o n a l h o u s i n g and p l a n n i n g program t o p r o v i d e f o r town p l a n n i n g , home ownership, home improvement, slum c l e a r a n c e , low-r e n t a l p r o j e c t s and c o - o p e r a t i v e and r u r a l housing. The r e p o r t e s t imated t h a t the accumulated urban housing need f o r 1939-1945 was about 500,000 u n i t s . A l t h o u g h the f e d e r a l government r e a l i z e d from i t s wartime ho u s i n g experience t h a t d i r e c t government a c t i o n c o u l d q u i c k l y 8 and e f f i c i e n t l y put housing into place, i t rejected t h i s option. Indeed, i n 1944 and 1945, the ministers of the Finance and the Reconstruction and Supply departments discussed and rejected the f e a s i b i l i t y of a reconstruction-based low and medium income re n t a l housing d i v i s i o n to be administered by the President of Wartime Housing Limited, Joe Pigott. (Wade, 1984, 2) Instead, the federal government reasserted i t s pre-war p o l i c y of i n d i r e c t f i n a n c i a l assistance to promote the homeownership sector. In 1944, major amendments to the 1938 National Housing Act were adopted. The l e g i s l a t i o n ignored most of the recommendations of the Curtis Committee. The focus was s o l e l y on homeownership and the use of an expanded p r i v a t e sector house construction sector as a means of creating post-war employment. The preamble to the 1944 NHA revealed the p r i v a t e sector, job creation orientation of the federal housing p o l i c y : An Act to Promote the Construction of New Houses, the Repair and Modernization of E x i s t i n g Houses, the Improvement of Housing and L i v i n g Conditions, and the Expansion of Employment i n the Postwar Period. In planning for the post-World War II period, housing was considered an economic le v e r to help enhance peacetime employment and o v e r a l l economic growth. The government a l s o considered housing a s t a b i l i z a t i o n t o o l to aid i n smoothing the t r a n s i t i o n from wartime to peacetime economies. Although there was a stated aim of analyzing, measuring and meeting the needs of low-income Canadians through p r o v i s i o n of low rent housing, the federal r o l e was l i m i t e d to a s s i s t i n g access to homeownership. (Dennis and Fish, 1972, 128) 9 In 1946, the C e n t r a l (now "Canada") Mortgage and Housing C o r p o r a t i o n was e s t a b l i s h e d with a mandate t o ad m i n i s t e r the NHA and t o p r o v i d e mortgage d i s c o u n t i n g f a c i l i t i e s f o r l e n d i n g i n s t i t u t i o n s . I t s main purpose was "to s t i m u l a t e p r i v a t e e n t e r p r i s e t o s e r v e as l a r g e an area as p o s s i b l e o f the housing f i e l d , thus r e d u c i n g the p r e s s u r e f o r p u b l i c l y a s s i s t e d housing." (Memorandum t o Cabinet, Re: C e n t r a l Mortgage and Housing C o r p o r a t i o n B i l l , " Oct. 2, 1945, c i t e d i n Wade, 1984, 160) CMHC was the " f e d e r a l machinery f o r post-war housing expansion."(Rose, 1980, 29) As A l b e r t Rose has concluded i n h i s r e c e n t study of Canadian housing p o l i c y : The emphasis on the expansion of employment i n the post-war p e r i o d makes i t c l e a r t h a t the fundamental i n t e n t i o n o f the [NHA and CMHC] l e g i s l a t i o n was more economic - i n terms of the avoidance of a post-war d e p r e s s i o n a k i n t o 1919-21 - than a s o c i a l concern w i t h the w e l l - b e i n g of a l l Canadians i n terms of t h e i r h o u sing requirements." (Rose, 1980, 28-29) Late i n 1947, CD. Howe, the m i n i s t e r r e s p o n s i b l e f o r CMHC, summed up the f e d e r a l government's r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r housing. He s t a t e d t h a t the f e d e r a l government o n l y had a r o l e i n the d i r e c t p r o v i s i o n o f housing d u r i n g c o n d i t i o n s of n a t i o n a l emergency. (Howe, 1947, 217) Ac c o r d i n g t o Howe, "the fundamental p r i n c i p l e " of f e d e r a l housing p o l i c y was "to c r e a t e more f a v o u r a b l e c o n d i t i o n s t h a t would encourage r e s i d e n t i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n . " (Howe, 1947, 218) Thus, the 1935 Dominion Housing Act and the 1938 N a t i o n a l Housing Act e s t a b l i s h e d the p r i n c i p l e o f i n d i r e c t i n t e r v e n t i o n i n house b u i l d i n g b e f o r e the war; the 1944 NHA r e a f f i r m e d i t . 10 The j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r t h i s f e d e r a l p o s i t i o n was, a c c o r d i n g t o Howe, based on a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l c o n s t r a i n t . The f e d e r a l government pursued i n d i r e c t i n t e r v e n t i o n "since housing i s a f u n c t i o n o f p r o p e r t y and c i v i l r i g h t s , a matter w i t h i n the j u r i s d i c t i o n of p r o v i n c i a l and m u n i c i p a l governments." As a r e s u l t , Howe argued t h a t " d i r e c t p a r t i c i p a t i o n by the Dominion i n a housing program i s circumscribed." (Howe, 1947, 217) Moreover, " s u b s i d i z a t i o n o f l o w - r e n t a l housing...is r i g h t l y a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of m u n i c i p a l and p r o v i n c i a l a u t h o r i t i e s , " s i n c e "they are the p a r t i e s d i r e c t l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r s o c i a l welfare." (Howe, 1947, 220) Alt h o u g h the f e d e r a l government had d i r e c t l y i n t e r v e n e d i n the housing market d u r i n g the war based on wartime emergency powers, i t c i t e d c o n s t i t u t i o n a l c o n s t r a i n t s as p r e c l u d i n g i t s a b i l i t y and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t a k i n g a c t i o n i n the post-war p e r i o d i n ad d r e s s i n g the the housing needs o f low income Canadians. Howe d i d admit t h a t the l o w - r e n t a l housing s i t u a t i o n was "of such a magnitude t h a t no one l e v e l o f governmment can see i t through." (Howe, 1947, 220) The s o l u t i o n t o the problem would be the a c t i v e c o - o p e r a t i o n of the thr e e l e v e l s o f government, as w e l l as the a c t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f p r i v a t e l i m i t e d d i v i d e n d c o r p o r a t i o n s . Howe s t a t e d t h a t t h e r e i s no reason why such c o r p o r a t i o n s , apart from the q u e s t i o n of s u b s i d i z a t i o n , s h o u l d not do a good job of p r o v i d i n g and o p e r a t i n g low-rent housing i f they r e c e i v e the a c t i v e c o - o p e r a t i o n of the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s i n which they operate.' 1 (Howe, 1947, 221) While the f e d e r a l government i n s i s t e d t h a t i t was unable t o a s s i s t i n the p r o d u c t i o n o f low- and moderate-income r e n t a l housing due t o c o n s t i t u t i o n a l c o n s t r a i n t s , these c o n s t r a i n t s d i d not p r e v e n t the f e d e r a l government from a s s i s t i n g homeownership. Howe s t a t e d t h a t " i t i s c l e a r t h a t t h e N a t i o n a l H o u s i n g A c t i s an e f f e c t i v e means of p r o v i d i n g urban housing f o r owner-occupiers" and t h a t " t h i s w i l l , i n t h e c o u r s e o f time, m a t e r i a l l y r a i s e t h e p r o p o r t i o n of Canadians owning t h e i r own homes." (Howe, 1947, 219) Leonard Marsh, who was r e s e a r c h a d v i s o r t o the C u r t i s Subcommittee, i n response t o Howe's p o s i t i o n , noted t h a t "the i m p l i c i t assumption of the C u r t i s Report recommendations i s t h a t the n a t i o n a l programme would be d i v i d e d r e a s o n a b l y between homeownership and r e n t a l housing, which c o n t a i n a d e f i n i t e p r o p o r t i o n o f genuine l o w - r e n t a l p r o j e c t s (as w e l l as some farm housing), and would mark a be g i n n i n g i n slum cle a r a n c e . " (Marsh, 1947, 234) The f e d e r a l government, however, ignored the recommendations of the C u r t i s Subcommittee as w e l l as the p o l i c y a d v i c e o f prominant housing a n a l y s t s such as Leonard Marsh. In the immediate post-war p e r i o d , t h e r e f o r e , t h r e e areas of p r i o r i t y i n f e d e r a l housing p o l i c y were c l e a r l y i d e n t i f i e d : f i r s t , the promotion of homeownership, second, the p r i n c i p l e o f complete r e l i a n c e on the p r i v a t e s e c t o r i n the p r o v i s i o n of housing, and t h i r d , the p r i n c i p l e of governmental non-competition with the p r i v a t e s e c t o r . By 1947, t h e r e was a f e e l i n g t h a t once the nation's o b l i g a t i o n t o the veterans was f u l f i l l e d , the r o l e of a f e d e r a l crown c o r p o r a t i o n , t h a t i s , Wartime Housing L i m i t e d , as l a n d l o r d t o many thousands of Canadians, was not d e s i r a b l e . F e a r i n g t h a t 12 i t would permanently remain the l a n d l o r d o f thousands of r e n t a l u n i t s , the f e d e r a l government i n s t r u c t e d CMHC t o s e l l Wartime Housing's p o r t f o l i o o f r e n t a l u n i t s t o i t s tenants. (Carver, 1975, 109-110) I t was not u n t i l the end of the 1940's t h a t the f e d e r a l government i n t r o d u c e d a r e n t a l housing program. In 19 49 S e c t i o n 35 of the N a t i o n a l Housing Act ( l a t e r renumbered S e c t i o n 40) pe r m i t t e d a f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l p a r t n e r s h i p i n the development of p u b l i c a l l y a s s i s t e d r e n t a l housing p r o j e c t s . The p a r t i c i p a t i o n of the f e d e r a l government was p e r c e i v e d t o be necessary a c c o r d i n g t o the M i n i s t e r , R.H. Winters, because " i t was c l e a r t h a t the p r o v i n c e s r e c o g n i z e d t h e i r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l and p r a c t i c a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i n t h i s f i e l d , but the m a j o r i t y i n d i c a t e d t h a t f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e would be r e q u i r e d from the F e d e r a l Government." (Winters, 1949) In order t o take advantage o f S e c t i o n 35 o f the 1949 NHA, each p r o v i n c e had t o p a s s e n a b l i n g l e g i s l a t i o n . The 1949 amendments were designed t o r e q u i r e the p r o v i n c e s t o take a l a r g e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r housing. An i n t e r n a l CMHC memorandum w r i t t e n i n 1949 i n d i c a t e d a concern f o r the growing f e d e r a l r o l e i n housing and i t s c o s t i m p l i c a t i o n s : The r o l e of the F e d e r a l government was t o be p r i m a r i l y f i n a n c i a l ; t h e r e was t o be no d i r e c t f e d e r a l c o n s t r u c t i o n and o p e r a t i o n ; s u b s i d i z e d r e n t a l housing was t o be a j o i n t f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l matter. The P r o v i n c e s have escaped v e r y l i g h t l y o v e r the l a s t t h ree or f o u r years, and I am a f r a i d the very a c t i v i t i e s of the Dominion f o r veterans has c r e a t e d the b e l i e f i n the p u b l i c ' s mind t h a t the Dominion i s indeed the o n l y a u t h o r i t y who can p r o v i d e p u b l i c housing. P r o g r e s s c o u l d be made i f t h e t h o u g h t c o u l d be got a c r o s s t h a t the Dominion accepts some r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r p u b l i c h o u s i n g i n an o v e r a l l s o c i a l s e c u r i t y program, b u t i s i n c a p a b l e o f a c t i n g a l o n e i n the f i e l d , ( c i t e d i n Runge, 1975, 66) Between 1949 and 1960, the number of p u b l i c d w e l l i n g u n i t s c o n s t r u c t e d d i d not exceed 12,000. (Rose, 1980, 36) Disappointment i n the meagre q u a n t i t a t i v e achievement of the program was compounded by a down t u r n i n the l e v e l o f Canadian economic a c t i v i t y i n 1957-1958. By the l a t e 1950's those p r o v i n c i a l governments who had p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the f e d e r a l -p r o v i n c i a l housing p a r t n e r s h i p d u r i n g the 1950's d i s c o n t i n u e d t h e i r encouragement of a d d i t i o n a l p r o j e c t s and con c e n t r a t e d on completing those p r o j e c t s t h a t were under way. By 1961 i t was e v i d e n t t h a t the f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l p a r t n e r s h i p with r e g a r d t o the p r o v i s i o n of low r e n t a l , s u b s i d i z e d housing had c o l l a p s e d . ( I b i d . , 37) In c o n t r a s t , however, d u r i n g the same 1949-1960 p e r i o d , the government strengthened i t s committment, and expanded programs aimed a t the encouragement of homeownership. Homeownership f o r a l l Canadians was the primary g o a l o f housing p o l i c y . T h i s g o a l was e n u n c i a t e d from t i m e t o ti m e i n P a r l i a m e n t and i n s p e e c h e s o f m i n i s t e r s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r CMHC. E v e r y e f f o r t was made, through i n d i r e c t i n t e r v e n t i o n , t o p r o v i d e adequate s u p p l i e s of mortgage money, t o manipulate the i n t e r e s t r a t e , and t o g e n e r a l l y c r e a t e c o n d i t i o n s conducive t o encouraging i n d i v i d u a l homeownership. In 1954 amendments t o the NHA pe r m i t t e d CMHC t o i n s u r e the mortgage loans made by approved l e n d e r s thereby guaranteeing repayment s h o u l d owners d e f a u l t . T h i s p e r m i t t e d the c h a r t e r e d banks t o 14 enter the r e s i d e n t i a l mortgage l e n d i n g market, opening up a new source of funds f o r mortgage loans. Amendments t o the N a t i o n a l Housing Act i n 1964 e s s e n t i a l l y rewrote the e n t i r e Act. Four major changes t o the l e g i s l a t i o n were adopted. F i r s t , a new s e c t i o n was added t h a t a u t h o r i z e d l o a n s t o n o n - p r o f i t o r g a n i z a t i o n s owned by a p r o v i n c e , m u n i c i p a l i t y , or t h e i r agent, or by a c h a r i t a b l e o r g a n i z a t i o n f o r the c o n s t r u c t i o n or purchase o f a housing p r o j e c t f o r l o w - r e n t a l housing. Second, the urban renewal s e c t i o n s were s u b s t a n t i a l l y r e w r i t t e n t o broaden the scope o f urban redevelopment by p r o v i d i n g f e d e r a l support f o r the p r e p a r a t i o n o f an urban renewal p l a n , f e d e r a l s u b s i d i e s f o r implementing the renewal p l a n , and in s u r e d loans f o r housing p r o j e c t s i n renewal areas. The s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r the p r o v i n c e s was t h a t they were c l e a r l y r e c o g n i z e d as the a u t h o r i t y which must approve l o c a l urban renewal p l a n s , with the f e d e r a l government paying o n e - h a l f o f the c o s t s . T h i r d , S e c t i o n 35 ( l a t e r 43 and 44) broadened the f i e l d o f p u b l i c h o u s i n g by p e r m i t t i n g loans t o be made t o p r o v i n c e s , m u n i c i p a l i t i e s or p u b l i c agencies f o r a c q u i r i n g l a n d f o r the c o n s t r u c t i o n , a c q u i s i t i o n and o p e r a t i o n of p u b l i c h ousing p r o j e c t s . These loans c o u l d not exceed 90 perc e n t o f the c o s t o f th e p r o j e c t as d e t e r m i n e d by CMHC and wo u l d be f o r a maximum term of f i f t y y e a rs. CMHC was a l s o a u t h o r i z e d t o c o n t r i b u t e 50 perce n t of the o p e r a t i n g l o s s e s f o r p u b l i c housing p r o j e c t s . As a r e s u l t o f t h e s e major changes t o t h e NHA, CMHC t o o k on a new r o l e as banker t o p r o v i n c i a l h ousing c o r p o r a t i o n s . (Dennis 15 and F i s h , 1972, 13) The new s e c t i o n s of the NHA were geared towards new i n i t i a t i v e s by p r o v i n c i a l and m u n i c i p a l governments. The terms presented under the new p u b l i c housing l e g i s l a t i o n (90% f e d e r a l funding, 10% p r o v i n c i a l / m u n i c i p a l ) were more f a v o u r a b l e than the terms p r o v i d e d under the 1949 f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l p a r t n e r s h i p (75% f e d e r a l , 25% p r o v i n c i a l / m u n i c i p a l ) a l t h o u g h the o l d p r o v i s i o n s were r e t a i n e d as a l t e r n a t i v e s i f a p r o v i n c e d e c i d e d t o use them. (Rose, 1980, 40) The development of housing p o l i c i e s i n Canada took another s i g n i f i c a n t t u r n i n 1968, with the e l e c t i o n of Prime M i n i s t e r P i e r r e Trudeau. During h i s e l e c t i o n campaign, Trudeau promised t o pay s i g n i f i c a n t a t t e n t i o n t o the problems of Canadian c i t i e s . S h o r t l y a f t e r h i s e l e c t i o n he appointed a s e n i o r c a b i n e t m i n i s t e r , Paul H e l l y e r , t o c h a i r a n a t i o n a l Task Force on Housing and Urban Development. The recommendations of the task f o r c e can be grouped under fou r main concerns: 1. t o f a c i l i t a t e and expand homeownership; 2. t o reduce the c o s t of housing, e s p e c i a l l y f o r low income tenant households, and average income f a m i l y households a s p i r i n g t o homeownership; 3. t o de-emphasize the nature and r o l e of p u b l i c housing; 4. t o suggest the most a p p r o p r i a t e forms of urban development f o r the f u t u r e . (Rose, 1980, 46) 16 A l t h o u g h the He 1 I y e r report's recommendations were r e j e c t e d by the government, and He 1 I y e r , i n turn, r e s i g n e d h i s c a b i n e t p o s t , i t i s e v i d e n t t h a t t h e r e p o r t l a i d t h e groundwork f o r t h e s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n f e d e r a l housing p o l i c y t h a t were adopted i n the e a r l y 1970's. What was never implemented was a more comprehensive approach t o n a t i o n a l urban p o l i c y . The 197 3 amendments t o the NHA i n t r o d u c e d programs such as the A s s i s t e d Homeownership Program (AHOP), the N o n - P r o f i t and C o o p e r a t i v e Housing programs, the Neighbourhood Improvement Progam (NIP) and the R e s i d e n t i a l R e h a b i l i t a t i o n A s s i s t a n c e Program (RRAP). The i n t r o d u c t i o n o f the s o c i a l l y mixed non-p r o f i t and c o - o p e r a t i v e housing programs r e s u l t e d from d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h p u b l i c housing. The i n t r o d u c t i o n o f the Neighbourhood Improvement Program and R e s i d e n t i a l R e s i d e n t i a l R e h a b i l i t a t i o n A s s i s t a n c e Program r e s u l t e d from d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with the " b u l l dozer" approach of the Urban Renewal Program. However, the funding was r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l compared t o the p r i v a t e r e n t a l programs i n t r o d u c e d i n 1974 and 1975. In response t o a s i g n i f i c a n t drop i n housing s t a r t s i n the e a r l y 1970's, the government i n t r o d u c e d the M u l t i p l e U n i t R e s i d e n t i a l B u i d i n g s (MURB) tax i n c e n t i v e aimed a t encouraging wealthy i n d i v i d u a l s t o i n v e s t i n r e n t a l accommodation, and the R e g i s t e r e d Homeownership Savings P l a n (RHOSP) aimed a t encouraging i n d i v i d u a l s t o save enough f o r a down payment on a home. The i n i t i a t i o n of these two programs r e p r e s e n t a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l i a n c e on tax expenditures as a p o l i c y instrument. That year, two d i r e c t subsidy programs, the A s s i s t e d R e n t a l Program (ARP) and the A s s i s t e d Home Ownership Program (AHOP) were a l s o i n t r o d u c e d . Between 1978 and 1980, both AHOP and ARP were phased out, w h i l e the MURB tax b e n e f i t s were c a n c e l l e d , then r e i n t r o d u c e d , and f i n a l l y c a n c e l l e d a g a i n i n 1982. A major theme i n t h e 1978 NHA amendments was f e d e r a l disentanglement, i n v o l v i n g the sys t e m a t i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and e l i m i n a t i o n of d u p l i c a t e d c o n t r o l s and s e r v i c e s , and the c l a r i f i c a t i o n as t o which l e v e l would become the main l o c u s of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r program d e l i v e r y . T h i s was, i n p a r t , t o encourage g r e a t e r f i n a n c i a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n of the p r o v i n c e s . CMHC " d i s e n t a n g l e d " a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the p u b l i c n o n - p r o f i t program, l e a v i n g d e t a i l e d p r o j e c t reviews t o the p r o v i n c e s or m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . (CMHC, 19 8 3 , 48) The push f o r disentanglement was l a r g e l y r e l a t e d t o the c l i m a t e of f e d e r a l -p r o v i n c i a l r e l a t i o n s a t t h a t time i n t h a t s e v e r a l p r o v i n c e s were pushing f o r the t r a n s f e r of tax p o i n t s or f e d e r a l b l o c k funding of s o c i a l housing programs. Instead, the f e d e r a l government countered with disentanglement which e s s e n t i a l l y o f f e r e d u n i l a t e r a l f e d e r a l funding o f a core housing program f o r which the f e d e r a l government would s e t the o b j e c t i v e s and c r i t e r i a , and the p r o v i n c e s c o u l d d e l i v e r and enhance the program. However, i n 1980 disentanglement arrangements were h a l t e d s i n c e few p r o v i n c e s would agree t o the c o n d i t i o n s o f the f e d e r a l government. In 1982, two d i r e c t subsidy programs were i n t r o d u c e d i n response t o low l e v e l s o f housing s t a r t s , the Canada 18 Homeownership S t i m u l a t i o n P l a n (CHOSP) and the Canada R e n t a l Supply P l a n (CRSP). In response t o the h i g h l e v e l of mortgage i n t e r e s t r a t e s , the temporary Canada Mortgage Renewal P l a n (CMRP) was i n t r o d u c e d i n 1981, being r e p l a c e d by a permanent mortgage insurance scheme i n 1984, the Mortgage Rate P r o t e c t i o n P l a n . 2.2 The F e d e r a l - P r o v i n c i a l J u r i s d i c t i o n a l Issues Canadian housing p o l i c y has been p l a g u e d by the d i v i s i o n of r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s between f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l governments. The e v o l u t i o n of Canadian housing p o l i c i e s must be viewed, t h e r e f o r e , i n the context of the s h a r i n g o f p o l i t i c a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y between the f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l governments. Al t h o u g h the major f o r c e i n h o using p o l i c y has been a f e d e r a l agency, CMHC, the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r housing c l e a r l y r e s t s w i t h the p r o v i n c e s under the f o l l o w i n g s u b - s e c t i o n s of the Canada C o n s t i t u t i o n Act, f o r m e r l y known as the B r i t i s h North America Act : 2. D i r e c t T a x a t i o n w i t h i n the P r o v i n c e i n order t o the r a i s i n g of a Revenue f o r P r o v i n c i a l Purposes. 8. M u n i c i p a l I n s t i t u t i o n s i n the P r o v i n c e . 10. L o c a l Works and Undertakings. 11. The I n c o r p o r a t i o n of Companies with P r o v i n c i a l O b j e c t s . 13. Property and C i v i l Rights i n the P r o v i n c e . 16. G e n e r a l l y a l l Matters of merely l o c a l or p r i v a t e Nature i n the Province. (Canada, Department of J u s t i c e , 1983, 33-34) The c o n s t i t u t i o n a l b a s i s f o r f e d e r a l i n t e r v e n t i o n i n housing r e s t s on s e c t i o n 91 (la) and 91 (3), the former g i v i n g P a r l i a m e n t 19 the r i g h t t o l e g i s l a t e on p u b l i c debt and property, i n c l u d i n g the C o n s o l i d a t e d Revenue Fund which P a r l i a m e n t can spend on any purpose as l o n g as the l e g i s l a t i o n a u t h o r i z i n g the expenditure does not amount t o a r e g u l a t o r y scheme f a l l i n g w i t h i n p r o v i n c i a l powers, and the l a t t e r g i v i n g the f e d e r a l P a r l i a m e n t power t o r a i s e money through t a x a t i o n . (Runge, 1975, 78) J u d i c i a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the BNA Act has supported the p r o v i n c i a l c o n s t i t u t i o n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n with regards t o housing. The Rowel1 S i r o i s r e p o r t on Dominion P r o v i n c i a l r e l a t i o n s noted t h a t " i f a proposed p i e c e of Dominion l e g i s l a t i o n does not f a l l w i t h i n the s p e c i f i e d enumerations o f s e c t i o n 91, i t i s beyond the e n a c t i n g power of the Dominion, and w i t h i n the powers of the... p r o v i n c e s . " (Runge, 1975, 78) Since housing i s not s p e c i f i c a l l y mentioned among the s p e c i f i e d powers of e i t h e r l e v e l o f government, the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l power f o r housing l e g i s l a t i o n i s found i n the p r o v i n c i a l r e s i d u a l powers. Alt h o u g h the p r o v i n c e s ' c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r i g h t s over housing are unquestioned, f i s c a l r e a l i t y has p e r m i t t e d the f e d e r a l government t o assume the major housing r o l e . The f e d e r a l government t r a d i t i o n a l l y has had the g r e a t e s t revenue r a i s i n g powers. To bypass such c o n s t i t u t i o n a l problems, d e v i c e s such as c o n d i t i o n a l grants and shared-cost programs have been used. N e v e r t h e l e s s , the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l ambiguity has r e v e a l e d i t s e l f i n c o n f l i c t s i n p r i o r i t i e s between the p r o v i n c e s and the f e d e r a l government wi t h r e s p e c t t o the r o l e o f housing i n the economy i n g e n e r a l , and the s t r u c t u r e and o b j e c t i v e s o f housing programs i n p a r t i c u l a r . 20 2.3 F e d e r a l - P r o v i n c i a l Relations I t i s e v i d e n t t h a t a l t h o u g h the p r o v i n c e s were c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r housing, they d i d not o b j e c t t o the dominant f e d e r a l r o l e i n housing p o l i c y and urban development f o l l o w i n g World War II . Rose (1980, 30) o u t l i n e s f o u r major f a c t o r s t h a t combined d u r i n g the s i x years a f t e r the war t h a t made a s t r o n g f e d e r a l r o l e i n ho u s i n g p o s s i b l e t o emerge. F i r s t , the f e d e r a l government's wartime emergency powers were p e r c e i v e d as the a p p r o p r i a t e means t o d e a l w i t h s e r i o u s housing c o n g e s t i o n a s s o c i a t e d with s h e l t e r requirements f o r wartime workers and r e t u r n i n g v e t e r a n s . Moreover, f o l l o w i n g the war, s e r i o u s shortages of consumer d u r a b l e goods, b u i l d i n g m a t e r i a l s , s t e e l , rubber, petroleum and other products v i t a l t o the growth of the n a t i o n a l economy made i t e s s e n t i a l t o continue c e r t a i n wartime emergency powers and i n t e r g o v e r n m e n t a l agencies such as Wartime Housing L i m i t e d . Wartime Housing L i m i t e d n e g o t i a t e d d i r e c t l y with m u n i c i p a l i t i e s and p r o v i n c e s , who p e r c e i v e d t h a t the wartime housing shortage was a n a t i o n a l problem f o r which the f e d e r a l government s h o u l d f i n d a s o l u t i o n . (Wade, 1984, 51) Second, Rose s t a t e s t h a t as the housing i n d u s t r y developed momentum i n the second h a l f of 1946, the incomes and p r e f e r e n c e s of f a m i l i e s began t o r e f l e c t a h i g h e r l e v e l of e x p e c t a t i o n s . These e x p e c t a t i o n s r e s u l t e d i n the implementation o f the Veterans' R e n t a l Housing Program which undertook t o c o n s t r u c t 10,000 d w e l l i n g s per year of a more d u r a b l e q u a l i t y than those p r o v i d e d by Wartime Housing L i m i t e d . Thus, a s e r i o u s attempt was made t o p r o v i d e permanent housing, which r e q u i r e d the f e d e r a l government t o n e g o t i a t e d i r e c t l y with m u n i c i p a l governments, with l i t t l e or no apparent o b j e c t i o n from the p r o v i n c e s . A t h i r d f a c t o r o f s i g n i f i c a n c e i n the e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f the major r o l e of the f e d e r a l government i n housing d u r i n g the e a r l y post-war years was the apparent weakness, i n economic and p o l i t i c a l terms, o f p r o v i n c e s t o d e a l with housing problems. The p r o v i n c e s were not prepared, a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l y or p o l i t i c a l l y , t o d e a l with the wartime and post-war housing c o n g e s t i o n and su p p l y problems. The f e d e r a l government was, t h e r e f o r e , the o n l y p o s s i b l e source o f housing a s s i s t a n c e . Moreover, the f i n a n c i a l resources of the p r o v i n c e s d u r i n g and f o l l o w i n g the war were t o t a l l y inadequate t o meet the new c h a l l e n g e s they encountered. Fourth, the prominant f e d e r a l r o l e i n housing was f o s t e r e d by the absence of s t r o n g o p p o s i t i o n t o p u b l i c housing programs and p r o j e c t s . There was never s t r o n g h o s t i l i t y t o p u b l i c h ousing l e g i s l a t i o n d i r e c t e d towards the f e d e r a l government as th e r e was d i r e c t e d towards p r o v i n c i a l and m u n i c i p a l governments. A c c o r d i n g t o Rose, the l a c k of p u b l i c o p p o s i t i o n t o f e d e r a l h ousing p o l i c i e s was due t o a decade of i n t e r v e n t i o n i n housing with Wartime Housing Limited, and the o p e r a t i o n of a s u b s t a n t i a l l e n d i n g program t h a t had weakened antagonsim towards p u b l i c i n t e r v e n t i o n t o a c h i e v e s o c i a l g o a l s . (Rose, 1980, 31) However, at the m u n i c i p a l and p r o v i n c i a l l e v e l s , the experience o f the Depression had made many d i s s a t i s f i e d with the method by which f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e t o the disadvantaged and w o r k - r e l i e f programs was handled. Rose c i t e s the o p p o s i t i o n t o the Regent 22 Park low income h o u s i n g p r o j e c t i n 1947 as an example o f o b j e c t i o n t o p u b l i c housing a t the m u n i c i p a l l e v e l . (Ibid.) In a d d i t i o n t o the four f a c t o r s i d e n t i f i e d by Rose, another f a c t o r of c o n s i d e r a b l e importance t o the expansion of the f e d e r a l r o l e i n the e a r l y post-war years was the es t a b l i s h m e n t o f a f e d e r a l crown c o r p o r a t i o n , CMHC, c r e a t e d e x p r e s s l y t o ad m i n i s t e r housing programs. The p r o v i n c e s assumed t h a t the f e d e r a l government had taken l e a d e r s h i p i n d e a l i n g with the nation's housing problems. For example, the Int e r i m Report by the B.C. C o u n c i l f o r Post-War R e h a b i l i t a t i o n s t a t e s t h a t i n "the NHA, and the Home Improvement Act, the Dominion Government has a l r e a d y assumed l e a d e r s h i p i n d e a l i n g with t h i s Chousing] problem." (B.C., Post-War R e h a b i l i t a t i o n C o u n c i l , 1943, 163) Thus, when p r o v i n c i a l governments might have been expected t o begin t o a s s e r t t h e i r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r i g h t s over housing, a l a r g e f e d e r a l h o u s i n g apparatus with a major committment o f f e d e r a l expenditures had been f i r m l y e s t a b l i s h e d . As noted p r e v i o u s l y , the f e d e r a l government was aware of and concerned about i t s expanding r o l e i n housing v i s - a - v i s the p r o v i n c e s i n the l a t e 1940's. The d i s a p p o i n t i n g f e d e r a l -p r o v i n c i a l p a r t n e r s h i p program i n t r o d u c e d i n 1949 was an attempt t o d e a l with t h i s concern. N e v e r t h e l e s s , f e d e r a l domination o f housing p o l i c y was maintained u n t i l the 1960's when the p r o v i n c e s began t o a s s e r t t h e i r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l a u t h o r i t y t o a d m i n i s t e r housing programs w i t h i n t h e i r j u r i s d i c t i o n and t o d e v e l o p housing p o l i c i e s o f t h e i r own, • alt h o u g h o f t e n i n c o n j u n c t i o n with the f e d e r a l government. The f e d e r a l government was expected, a f t e r a l l , t o pay the major p o r t i o n o f program c o s t s . In the e a r l y 1960's, l o c a l h o using a u t h o r i t i e s became i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e i r own programs, p a r t i a l l y i n response t o the f a i l u r e o f the f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l p u b l i c h ousing program. The M e t r o p o l i t a n Toronto C o u n c i l , f o r example, supported the c r e a t i o n of a m e t r o p o l i t a n - w i d e housing a u t h o r i t y which would absorb a l l e x i s t i n g a u t h o r i t i e s i n the area and would have d i r e c t access t o f e d e r a l funds. In 1964, aware t h a t the NHA was being amended, the O n t a r i o p r o v i n c i a l government c r e a t e d the O n t a r i o Housing C o r p o r a t i o n t o permit the assumption of s i g n i f i c a n t p u b l i c housing c o n s t r u c t i o n by l o c a l or p r o v i n c i a l a u t h o r i t i e s . (Rose, 1980, 38) The y e a r 1964 i a a l s o c o n s i d e r e d a major t u r n i n g p o i n t i n f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l r e l a t i o n s i n housing. The 1964 NHA amendment p e r m i t t e d the c o n s t r u c t i o n and o p e r a t i o n o f p u b l i c h ousing by means of a 90 percent l o a n t o p r o v i n c e s and m u n i c i p a l i t i e s and a 50 per c e n t share o f s u b s i d i e s . T h i s amendment a l l o w e d the p r o v i n c e s t o a c t much more in d e p e n d e n t l y compared t o the p r e v i o u s f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l 75/25 percent p a r t n e r s h i p arrangement wi t h CMHC. The r e p o r t o f t h e f e d e r a l Task F o r c e on H o u s i n g and Urban Development ( H e l l y e r Report) and the e v e n t u a l implementation of some of i t s recommendations upset some of the r e l a t i o n s t h a t had developed between the f e d e r a l government and the p r o v i n c e s d u r i n g the l a t e 1960's. A c c o r d i n g t o Rose, (1980, 69) the r e p o r t was, i n s u b s t a n t i a l measure, aimed a t the O n t a r i o Housing C o r p o r a t i o n 24 which had undergone f e v e r i s h governmental housing a c t i v i t y i n 1967-1969. However, the r e p o r t d i d permit a s e r i o u s examination and re-examination of p r o v i n c i a l housing p o l i c i e s . Between 1970 and 1973, a l l of the p r o v i n c e s undertook important changes i n t h e i r housing l e g i s l a t i o n t o meet the new f e d e r a l p o l i c y and t o take advantage of i t s p r o v i s i o n s . During the e a r l y 1970's, the f e d e r a l government i n i t i a t e d a number of new programs, both u n i l a t e r a l l y and i n c o o p e r a t i o n with the p r o v i n c e s . The 1973 amendments t o the NHA removed the requirement f o r matching funds from the p r o v i n c e s . The f e d e r a l government, as a r e s u l t , p r o v i d e d 100% f i n a n c i n g f o r n o n - p r o f i t low r e n t housing p r o j e c t s . P r o v i n c i a l a i d was p r o v i d e d by " s t a c k i n g a d d i t i o n a l s u b s i d i e s " on those p r o v i d e d by CMHC. The arrangements t h a t r e s u l t e d from t h i s amendment are now viewed as being v e r y c o m p l i c a t e d , l e a d i n g t o i n e q u i t i e s i n the o v e r a l l l e v e l of s u b s i d i e s p r o v i d e d t o meet the needs of households i n d i f f e r e n t circumstances. Thus, the p r o v i n c e s began t o implement a wide v a r i e t y of housing programs on t h e i r own i n i t i a t i v e i n order to d e a l with problems not d e a l t w i t h by f e d e r a l programs. Moreover, p r o v i n c i a l programs were used t o a t t a i n maximum input t o unique p r o v i n c i a l housing problems. By 1976, there were f i f t y - t h r e e h o u sing programs t h a t were ad m i n i s t e r e d by the p r o v i n c e s i n d e p e n d e n t l y of the N a t i o n a l Housing Act, i n c l u d i n g d i r e c t c o n s t r u c t i o n and r e n t a l s u b s i d i e s , housing r e h a b i l i t a t i o n , c a p i t a l f i n a n c i n g and r e n t c o n t r o l s . (CMHC, 1983, 49) Two f o r c e s t h a t would change t h e p a t t e r n o f e v e n t s a t t h e f e d e r a l l e v e l became apparent by 1977. F i r s t , the f e d e r a l government had become concerned with r e d u c i n g the f e d e r a l budgetary d e f i c i t , and second, there was a change i n the housing market with evidence of o v e r b u i l d i n g and reduced demand. At the same time, however, the p r o v i n c e s were i n c r e a s i n g t h e i r demand f o r b l o c k funding of c a p i t a l e xpenditures; r e q u e s t i n g tax p o i n t s be t r a n s f e r r e d as a s u b s t i t u t e f o r f e d e r a l program s u b s i d i e s ; and p r o p o s i n g t h r e e - y e a r forward budget committments and p r o v i n c i a l r e view and concurrence of f e d e r a l funding r e d u c t i o n s or a l t e r a t i o n s . The common p r o v i n c i a l p o s i t i o n was t h a t g r e a t e r p r o v i n c i a l f l e x i b i l i t y was r e q u i r e d i n the development and implementation o f housing p o l i c i e s and programs and t h a t there s h o u l d be l e s s d u p l i c a t i o n of p r o v i n c i a l and f e d e r a l e f f o r t s i n program d e l i v e r y . In February 1978, a conference of f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l h ousing m i n i s t e r s was h e l d . A dramatic r e d u c t i o n i n d i r e c t f e d e r a l c a p i t a l f o r p u b l i c housing was proposed and i n r e t u r n , more generous subsidy arrangements and i n c r e a s e d program d e l i v e r y r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s were o f f e r e d t o the p r o v i n c e s through the S e c t i o n 56.1 N o n - P r o f i t and C o o p e r a t i v e Housing Programs. These i n c r e a s e d d e l i v e r y r e s p o n s i b i l i t e s were t o be i n the context of " g l o b a l agreements" signed with each p r o v i n c e . (Ibid., 49) A l l p r o v i n c e s , with the e x c e p t i o n of Newfoundland, have signed g l o b a l funding agreements. These agreements g i v e f u l l d e l i v e r y r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r p u b l i c n o n - p r o f i t p r o j e c t s t o the p r o v i n c e s . With regards t o p r i v a t e n o n - p r o f i t housing, the p r o v i n c e may assume the l e a d r o l e o n l y where they p r o v i d e a grant 26 or annuity e q u i v a l e n t t o 25 percent o f the c a p i t a l c o s t o f the p r o j e c t . T h i s grant i s a p p l i e d a g a i n s t c o s t s before the S e c t i o n 56.1 a s s i s t a n c e i s p r o v i d e d . B r i t i s h Columbia and Saskatchewan have chosen t o make use of t h i s p r o v i s i o n . In B r i t i s h Columbia, the p r o v i n c e has assumed the l e a d r o l e on p r i v a t e n o n - p r o f i t s e n i o r c i t i z e n housing p r o j e c t s . In Saskatchewan, the p r o v i n c e has assumed the l e a d r o l e f o r p r i v a t e n o n - p r o f i t p r o j e c t s , w i t h the e x c e p t i o n of Urban N a t i v e and on-reserve programs. In November, 1980, a d e c i s i o n was reached t o h a l t arrangements f o r the disentanglement o f p r i v a t e n o n - p r o f i t h o u sing p r o j e c t s . The p r i n c i p a l r a t i o n a l e g i v e n was the l a c k of f e d e r a l v i s i b i l i t y i n p r o j e c t s t h a t were p r o v i n c i a l l y a d m i n i s t e r e d . 2.4 Conclusion D e s p i t e i t s experience w i t h Wartime Housing L i m i t e d the f e d e r a l government r e j e c t e d the o p t i o n o f the d i r e c t p r o v i s i o n o f housing as a s o l u t i o n t o the nation's post-war housing problems. Three main o b j e c t i v e s o f f e d e r a l housing p o l i c y emerged t h a t c o ntinue t o the p r e s e n t : the promotion of homeownership; the p r i n c i p l e of r e l i a n c e on the p r i v a t e s e c t o r f o r the p r o v i s i o n o f housing; and the p r i n c i p l e o f government non-competition with the p r i v a t e s e c t o r . Another p r i n c i p l e t h a t g r a d u a l l y emerged was t h a t government has some r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r p r o v i d i n g h o u s i n g t o ve r y low income people who cannot access p r i v a t e market housing. The f e d e r a l government attempted t o p l a c e the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y on p r o v i n c i a l 27 governments due t o the d i v s i o n o f powers under the C o n s t i t u t i o n . The r e l a t i v e l y u n s u c c e s s f u l S e c t i o n 40 f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l p a r t n e r s h i p i n p u b l i c h ousing was an example of the f e d e r a l government's attempt t o get the p r o v i n c e s i n v o l v e d i n l o w - r e n t a l housing. However, the p r o v i n c e s saw housing p o l i c y as a f u n c t i o n of the f e d e r a l government due t o i t s s u p e r i o r f i n a n c i a l powers, the wartime housing a c t i v i t y and the f a c t t h a t a f e d e r a l housing agency, CMHC, had been e s t a b l i s h e d t o d e a l with housing matters. The p r o v i n c e s o n l y began t o i n i t i a t e t h e i r own housing programs i n the 1970's i n order t o respond t o s p e c i f i c problems not addressed by f e d e r a l programs. In r e a c t i o n t o p r o v i n c i a l demand f o r "block funding" of programs, and t o reduce budgetary committments, the f e d e r a l government undertook t o " d i s e n t a n g l e " f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l program d e l i v e r y i n 1978. In 1980, however, disentanglement a c t i v i t y was h a l t e d due t o the concern of the f e d e r a l government ov e r the l a c k of f e d e r a l v i s i b i l i t y i n f e d e r a l l y f i n a n c e d by p r o v i n c i a l l y a d m i n i s t e r e d programs. T h i s long h i s t o r y of f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l b a r g a i n i n g o v e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r h o using p o l i c y i s c u r r e n t l y o c c u r r i n g as p a r t of the P r o g r e s s i v e C o n s e r v a t i v e government's c o n s u l t a t i o n process on housing p o l i c y . The problem of r e d e f i n i t i o n of r o l e s f o r d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f government as w e l l as the s p e c i f i c f e d e r a l programs are b e i n g r e a s s e s s e d i n t h i s c o n s u l t a t i o n process. T h i s chapter has p l a c e d p r o v i n c i a l h o using p o l i c y i n the context of f e d e r a l housing p o l i c y . The next chapter begins the d e t a i l e d examination the P r o v i n c e of B r i t i s h Columbia's housing p o l i c y , s t a r t i n g with the immediate post-World War II p e r i o d . 28 Chapter Three B.C. Housing P o l i c y i n the 1945-1972 Period Immediately f o l l o w i n g World War I I , the p r o v i n c e of B r i t i s h Columbia f a c e d a s e r i o u s h ousing shortage caused m a i n l y by wartime m i g r a t i o n t o urban areas and post-war d e m o b i l i z a t i o n . The r e s o l u t i o n of t h i s shortage was p e r c e i v e d by the p r o v i n c e t o be the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the f e d e r a l government through t h e i r wartime emergency powers and t h e i r s u p e r i o r f i n a n c i a l resources. Over time, the p r o v i n c e d e v e l o p e d i t s own p o l i c y of i n d i r e c t i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the h o u s i n g s e c t o r with a focus on two o b j e c t i v e s : encouraging and a s s i s t i n g widespread homeownership and the c o n s t r u c t i o n of s e n i o r c i t i z e n housing. The emergence and e v o l u t i o n of t h i s p r o v i n c i a l r o l e i n housing p o l i c y was i n p a r t a response to changing f e d e r a l housing program parameters and i n p a r t a response t o the province's own p r i o r i t i e s . B r i t i s h Columbia's p r o v i n c i a l h o using p o l i c y i n the 1945-1972 p e r i o d i s d i s c u s s e d i n s e v e r a l c ontexts. F i r s t , an h i s t o r i c a l o v e r v i e w of the p o l i t i c a l context i n the p r o v i n c e i s presented. Second, a d e s c r i p t i o n o f the post-war housing s i t u a t i o n i n B r i t i s h Columbia p r o v i d e s a b a s i s f o r understanding the government's response t o the housing problem. An emphasis i s p l a c e d on post-war housing c o n d i t i o n s i n Vancouver, the province's l a r g e s t c i t y . T h i r d , the s p e c i f i c response of the 29 p r o v i n c i a l government t o the wartime and post-war housing s i t u a t i o n i s examined. F i n a l l y , the emergence o f p r o v i n c i a l h o u sing programs i n the areas of p u b l i c housing, s e n i o r c i t i z e n housing, and a s s i s t a n c e t o homeownership i s d e s c r i b e d . 3.1 Overview of B.C. P r o v i n c i a l P o l i t i c s ; 1941-1972 Between 1941 and 1952 the p r o v i n c e was governed by a c o a l i t i o n of the L i b e r a l and C o n s e r v a t i v e P a r t i e s and from 1952 t o 1972 by the S o c i a l C r e d i t Party. The h i s t o r y o f the p a r t y system i n B.C., from the L i b e r a l - C o n s e r v a t i v e c o a l i t i o n arrangement of t o the post 1974 S o c i a l C r e d i t " c o a l i t i o n " , i s l a r g e l y a h i s t o r y o f a s e r i e s o f a t t e m p t s t o keep t h e CCF/NDP from power. In the 1941 e l e c t i o n the CCF managed t o win the most votes o v e r a l l but p l a c e d second i n the number of l e g i s l a t i v e s e a t s . The L i b e r a l s , under the l e a d e r s h i p of John Hart, won the e l e c t i o n but with a m i n o r i t y government. Consequently, the L i b e r a l s and C o n s e r v a t i v e s agreed t o form a c o a l i t i o n government u n t i l the end of the war, r a t h e r than c a l l another e l e c t i o n i n the midst of the war and thereby r i s k a CCF m a j o r i t y . During the 1945 e l e c t i o n s the C o n s e r v a t i v e and L i b e r a l p a r t i e s d e c i d e d t o keep t h e i r own i n d i v i d u a l i d e n t i t i e s , but a g r e e d t o o n l y r u n one c a n d i d a t e from e i t h e r p a r t y i n each r i d i n g . L i b e r a l and C o n s e r v a t i v e incumbants were guranteed renomination i n t h e i r r i d i n g s without c o m p e t i t i o n from t h e i r f e l l o w c o a l i t i o n i s t s . In h i s a n a l y s i s of B r i t i s h Columbia p o l i t i c s , M a r t i n Robin (1973, 82) notes t h a t " p a r t r i o t i s m i n s p i r e d the f ormation of the C o a l i t i o n , and p a t r i o t i s m i n s u r e d 30 i t s continuance." The war i n Europe was over, but the b a t t l e a t home a g a i n s t the "pink menace" continued as ever, and prudence demanded t h a t the f r e e - e n t e r p r i s e p a r t i e s remained u n i t e d t o f u r t h e r the p u b l i c w e l f a r e . (Ibid., 82) The C o a l i t i o n government once agai n won the e l e c t i o n on the promise of "sound b u s i n e s s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n with p r o g r e s s i v e measures based on the t r a d i t i o n a l f o u n d a t i o n of f r e e e n t e r p r i s e . " ( I b i d . , 88) F o l l o w i n g the r e s i g n a t i o n of Hart i n 1947, Bjorn Johnson was e l e c t e d l e a d e r of the L i b e r a l p a r t y and became Premier. A l o n g with h i s Finance M i n i s t e r , Herbert Anscomb, the L i b e r a l s f o l l o w e d the c e n t r i s t g o a l pursued by Hart of "an economic system generous enough t o keep t h e mass o f p e o p l e q u i e t , and p r o f i t a b l e enough t o a t t r a c t new people t o the province." (Ibid., 97) The c o a l i t i o n a l s o won the 1949 e l e c t i o n . While the CCF's p o p u l a r v o t e was o n l y reduced 2%, t h e i r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n the l e g i s l a t u r e was c u t i n h a l f , p r o v i n g the sound a r i t h m e t i c of anti-CCF e l e c t o r a l co-o p e r a t i o n . However, by t h i s time, members of both p a r t i e s were becoming disenchanted with the c o a l i t i o n . The C o n s e r v a t i v e s were e s p e c i a l l y f r u s t r a t e d with the Hart formula which e s s e n t i a l l y guaranteed t h a t the L i b e r a l p a r t y would have more sea t s , the premiership, and c o n t r o l over the most important c a b i n e t p o s t s . The o r i g i n a l reasons f o r the c o a l i t i o n , t h a t i s , the t h r e a t of a CCF v i c t o r y and the wartime s i t u a t i o n , were no l o n g e r present. One C o n s e r v a t i v e MLA, W.A.C. Bennett, who had c h a l l e n g e d the C o n s e r v a t i v e l e a d e r s h i p and l o s t , c r o s s e d the f l o o r of the l e g i s l a t u r e with another C o n s e r v a t i v e , T i l l y R o lston, i n 1951 and s a t as independents. By the end of the year Bennett had j o i n e d the S o c i a l C r e d i t Party and became t h a t party's f i r s t MLA. In 1952 the gover n i n g c o a l i t i o n was d i s s o l v e d and the L i b e r a l s and C o n s e r v a t i v e s f a c e d the v o t e r s as separate p a r t i e s . However, b e f o r e the e l e c t i o n , the e l e c t o r a l system was r e v i s e d by i n t r o d u c i n g the an " a l t e r n a t i v e b a l l o t " system designed t o ensure t h a t the L i b e r a l s and C o n s e r v a t i v e s would not knock each other o f f a t t h e p o l l s a l l o w i n g the CCF t o win. The a s s u m p t i o n was t h a t L i b e r a l s would g i v e t h e i r second b a l l o t c h o i c e t o the C o n s e r v a t i v e s , and v i c e v e r s a . No c o n s i d e r a t i o n was g i v e n t o the growing support f o r the new S o c i a l C r e d i t Party. Thus, the f i r s t p o s t - c o a l i t i o n e l e c t i o n produced a S o c i a l C r e d i t government with W.A.C. Bennett as Premier. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o note t h a t the CCF l o s t by one s e a t under the a l t e r n a t i v e b a l l o t system. Under the o l d e l e c t o r a l system they would have won by seven seats. In another g e n e r a l e l e c t i o n h e l d the f o l l o w i n g year, the S o c i a l C r e d i t Government won by a ma j o r i t y . Upon t a k i n g o f f i c e i n 1952 Premier Bennett s t a t e d : I t w i l l be the p o l i c y o f our government t o g i v e f a i r treatment t o a l l , s p e c i a l p r i v i l e g e s t o none. I want t o make i t c l e a r t h a t our government w i l l not be a government o f the r i g h t o r t h e l e f t . A S o c i a l C r e d i t government w i l l be a middle o f the road government. (Neerey, 1981, 31) I t i s c l e a r t h a t the g o a l o f the S o c i a l C r e d i t government was progress and p r o v i n c i a l development through s t a t e - a i d e d growth. (Morley e t a l . , 1983, 87) Emphasis was p l a c e d on the development of major i n f r a s t r u c t u r e such as roads, dams and r a i l r o a d s p r o v i d i n g g r e a t e r access t o the pr o v i n c e ' s resources f o r p r i v a t e i n v e s t o r s . F u r t h e r , these major development programs h e l p e d the S o c i a l C r e d i t m a i n t a i n i t s broad base of support i n r u r a l areas f o r twenty years. A c c o r d i n g t o Bennett: P r i v a t e e n t e r p r i s e can b r i n g about s o c i a l reform. You can't have reforms without development; that's where the s o c i a l i s t s are wrong. They b e l i e v e i n no-growth p o l i c i e s . I f there's no growth, you can't a f f o r d t o g i v e p e o p l e s o c i a l b e n e f i t s . (Keene and Humphreys, 1980, 32) Although the economy remained s t r o n g and v i b r a n t , by the e a r l y 1970's, the S o c i a l C r e d i t government began t o show signs of f a t i g u e . Seven of seventeen c a b i n e t m i n i s t e r s had been i n o f f i c e s i n c e the e a r l y 1950's. O n l y one new c a b i n e t appointment was made between 1968 and 1972. (Employer's C o u n c i l o f B.C., 1978, 1) Thus, by 1972 the p u b l i c was ready f o r a change and subsequently, the New Democratic Party was e l e c t e d . 3.2 The Post-War Housing S i t u a t i o n i n B r i t i s h Columbia An acute housing problem t r o u b l e d wartime and post-war Canada. The housing problem may be d e f i n e d as an immense u n s a t i s f i e d demand a r i s i n g from a problem with the q u a n t i t y o f accommodation a v a i l a b l e , and a problem of the poor q u a l i t y o f u n i t s t h a t were a v a i l a b l e . The housing shortage was caused by three f a c t o r s . F i r s t , wartime s c a r c i t i e s i n s k i l l e d l a b o u r and b u i l d i n g m a t e r i a l s between 1942 t o 1945 r e s u l t e d i n depressed r a t e s of new c o n s t r u c t i o n d e s p i t e r i s i n g incomes and c l i m b i n g marriage and f a m i l y formation r a t e s . ( F i r e s t o n e , 1951, 199-203 and see Appendix C Housing Starts i n B.C. 1945-1884) These manpower and m a t e r i a l shortages i n the wartime and post-war 33 p e r i o d a l s o c o n t r i b u t e d t o s t e a d i l y r i s i n g b u i l d i n g c o s t s , thereby f u r t h e r d i s c o u r a g i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n and adding t o housing c o n g e s t i o n . A second cause of the housing shortage was the m i g r a t i o n o f wartime workers t o urban i n d u s t r i a l areas and the m i g r a t i o n o f servicemen's f a m i l i e s t o urban centres near armed f o r c e s bases. The wartime economy d r a m a t i c a l l y i n c r e a s e d the demand f o r urban h o u s i n g b u t was u n a b l e t o meet t h e demand w i t h s u p p l y . The r e s u l t was s e v e r e h o u s i n g congestion. The 1941 Census i n d i c a t e d t h a t B r i t i s h Columbia had r e c e i v e d 26,614 migrants and g i v e n up o n l y 8,949 between 1939 and 1941. (Canada, Census, 1941, 922) T h i s m i g r a t i o n aggravated the housing problem, e s p e c i a l l y i n the r e n t a l s e c t o r by i n c r e a s i n g the amount of d o u b l i n g up and overcrowding and by redu c i n g v a c a n c i e s . The post-war d e m o b i l i z a t i o n o f service-men was the t h i r d f a c t o r which exacerbated the housing shortage. A c c o r d i n g t o a Department of N a t i o n a l Defence sur v e y o f p e r s o n n e l a w a i t i n g d i s c h a r g e from August t o October 1945, B r i t i s h Columbia was the o n l y p r o v i n c e l i k e l y t o g a i n ex-servicemen and t h a t Vancouver stood t o g a i n d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y more ex-servicemen than any other l a r g e urban centre, ( c i t e d i n Wade, 1984, 35) The shortage o f housing i n the 1940's was manifested i n overcrowding and d o u b l i n g up of households. Overcrowding and d o u b l i n g up had begun t o d e v e l o p i n many c i t i e s b e f o r e 1930. I t was i n t e n s i f i e d d u r i n g the d e p r e s s i o n and the war due t o the slump i n c o n s t r u c t i o n o f new u n i t s and t o m i g r a t i o n . A c c o r d i n g t o the 1941 Census, 13.2% of a l l households i n Vancouver, and 11.1% 34 i n V i c t o r i a were crowded. (Table I) F a m i l i e s w i t h the s m a l l e s t earnings, f a m i l i e s with the lowest average income, and f a m i l i e s of f i v e or more s u f f e r e d the most. ( A d v i s o r y Committe on R e c o n s t r u c t i o n , 1944, 94 and 99) The other element of the wartime and post-war housing problem was the the d e t e r i o r a t i o n of the e x i s t i n g r e s i d e n t i a l s t o c k . Due l a r g e l y t o t h e i n a b i l i t y o f owners t o pay f o r improvements t o t h e i r d w e l l i n g s d u r i n g the depression, many b u i l d i n g s i n l a r g e r c i t i e s by 1941 r e q u i r e d e x t e n s i v e r e p a i r s . (Ibid., 105) The overcrowding caused by wartime m i g r a t i o n o n l y exacerbated the problem of widespread d e t e r i o r a t i o n i n B.C.'s housing stock. The Post-war Housing S i t u a t i o n i n Vancouver. By the end o f the war Vancouver encountered an immense housing shortage. In c o n t r a s t t o the n a t i o n a l experience, however, Vancouver's housing problem developed more from wartime r a t h e r than pre-war c o n d i t i o n s . As shown i n T a b l e I, the c o n d i t i o n of the h o u s i n g s t o c k i n Vancouver and V i c t o r i a i n 1941 ranked about the same as t h a t of M o n t r e a l , Toronto, and Hamilton and b e t t e r than t h a t of H a l i f a x , Winnipeg, Regina Edmonton or Calgary. In a d d i t i o n , the r a t e of homeownership decreased v e r y l i t t l e i n Vancouver and V i c t o r i a between 1931 and 1941 as compared t o other Canadian urban centres i n d i c a t i n g t h a t a r e l a t i v e l y s t a b l e housing s i t u a t i o n e x i s t e d . 35 TABLE I Housing C o n d i t i o n s i n S e l e c t e d Larger Canadian C i t i e s , 1941 (1931 F i g u r e s i n Parantheses) S e l e c t e d Doubled-up Overcrowded Substandard Owner-•occupp l a r g e r households households d w e l l i n g s d w e l l i n g s c i t i e s % % % H a l i f a x 17.2 (9.2) 26.1 43 36. 5 (35.2) Montreal 7.5 (6.4) 24.4 27 11.5 (14.9) Toronto 19.1 (8.4) 12.4 29 43.8 (46.5) Hamilton 12.4 (7.8) 10.7 28 44.0 (48.0) Winnipeg 15.1 (7.3) 19.0 36 43.9 (47.0) Regina 10.0 (4.5) 24.0 43 38.7 (50.3 ) C a l g a r y 12.1 (5.2) 18.5 38 44.6 (51.7) Edmonton 7.6 (4.3) 22.2 46 46.3 (53.0) Vancouver 8.5 (5.1) 13.2 27 50.1 (51.0) V i c t o r i a 10.5 (4.9) 11.1 26 45.8 (46.8) Source: c i t e d i n Wade, 1984, Wartime Housing L i m i t e d , 1941-1947:  Canadian Housing P o l i c y a t the Crossroads, M.A. T h e s i s , H i s t o r y , U.B.C. 36 While overcrowding and d o u b l i n g up d i d become apparent f o l l o w i n g the war, t h e y were l e s s s e v e r e t h a n the r e s t o f Canada. A c c o r d i n g t o two housing r e p o r t s r e l e a s e d i n 1937 and 1946, the overcrowding t h a t d i d e x i s t i n Vancouver was c o n c e n t r a t e d i n the downtown area bounded by B u r r a r d S t r e e t , C l a r k D r i v e , B u r r a r d I n l e t , and 6th Ave. (Wade, 1984, 28) Crowding p a r t i c u l a r l y a f f e c t e d low income tenants who c o u l d not a f f o r d b e t t e r housing. ( A d v i s o r y Committee on R e c o n s t r u c t i o n , 1944, 93) The need f o r accommodation f o r r e t u r n i n g ex-servicemen was the most s e r i o u s cause of Vancouver's post-war housing problem. A memorandum prepared by Vancouver's Emergency S h e l t e r A d m i n i s t r a t i o n on May 1, 1945 estimated t h a t 40,000 veterans would come t o the area. (Wade, 1984, 36) A s c a r c i t y of b u i l d i n g m a t e r i a l s and s k i l l e d labour a l s o f u r t h e r c o m p l i c a t e d the s i t u a t i o n . Low vacancy rates d u r i n g and immediately f o l l o w i n g the war i n d i c a t e d the s e v e r i t y of the housing congestion. The vacancy r a t e f o r r e n t e d d w e l l i n g s dropped from 1.5% i n 1937, to below .257% f o r a l l housing i n September 1942, r e a c h i n g .004% i n June 1945. (Wade, 1984, 70) The immediate post-war housing need i n Vancouver was d e s c r i b e d by the B r i t i s h Columbian h i s t o r i a n Ormsby i n the f o l l o w i n g way: E v e r y c i t y and e v e r y town experienced a housing shortage, but the g r e a t e s t need f o r new r e s i d e n c e s e x i s t e d i n m e t r o p o l i t a n Vancouver. There, by August 1944, o v e r 2,000 u n i t s were u r g e n t l y r e q u i r e d f o r f a m i l y d w e l l i n g s , and a f t e r the s e r v i c e men r e t u r n e d the l a c k of accommodation was so acute t h a t v e t e r a n s desperate f o r l i v i n g - q u a r t e r s s e i z e d the o l d H o t e l Vancouver. (Ormsby, 1971, 482) 37 Thus, d u r i n g the wartime and p o s t - World War II p e r i o d , Vancouver, being the primary p o p u l a t i o n c e n t r e i n the p r o v i n c e , had encountered an acute accommodation problem which the p r i v a t e s e c t o r was unable t o d e a l with and which demanded a government response. . 3.3 B . C.'s Response to Wartime and Post War Housing Need;  1942-1949 In 1942, B r i t i s h Columbia e s t a b l i s h e d the Post-War R e h a b i l i t a t i o n C o u n c i l with the mandate t o make " p r o v i s i o n f o r advance p l a n n i n g of r e h a b i l i t a t i o n measures, i n d u s t r i a l r e o r g a n i z a t i o n , and employment p r o j e c t s designed t o meet post-war c o n d i t i o n s . " (B.C. Post-War R e h a b i l i t a t i o n C o u n c i l , 1943, i ) T h i s C o u n c i l i n c l u d e d members from government and o p p o s i t i o n s i d e s of the p r o v i n c i a l l e g i s l a t u r e , i n c l u d i n g W.A.C. Bennett. The s e c t i o n of the r e p o r t of the Post-War R e h a b i l i t a t i o n C o u n c i l d e a l i n g with p l a n n i n g and h o u s i n g d e s c r i b e d the h ousing problems i n the f o l l o w i n g terms: The evidence p l a c e d b e f o r e the C o u n c i l i n a l l the p r i n c i p a l c e n t r e s of B r i t i s h Columbia r e v e a l e d a s e r i o u s shortage of s u i t a b l e housing, apa r t from abnormal c o n d i t i o n s of c o n g e s t i o n due t o war a c t i v i t i e s . War-time requirements i n r e s p e c t of l a b o u r and b u i l d i n g m a t e r i a l s have i n c r e a s e d the "back-log" of c o n s t r u c t i o n which had not been o v e r t a k e n upon the outbreak of h o s t i l i t i e s . Housing accommodation i n r u r a l d i s t r i c t s has never r e c e i v e d adequate a t t e n t i o n and a h i g h l y u n s a t i s f a c t o r y s i t u a t i o n i s growing p r o g r e s s i v e l y worse. Unwholesome slum c o n d i t i o n s and b l i g h t e d areas e x i s t i n towns and c i t i e s . Everywhere a h i g h percentage of houses need s u b s t a n t i a l r e p a i r s . Only l a r g e s c a l e p l a n s with p u b l i c a i d w i l l meet the s i t u a t i o n which w i l l demand a c t i o n a t the end of the war. (B.C. Post-War R e h a b i l i t a t i o n C o u n c i l , 1943, 163) While the C o u n c i l agreed with the d e s i r a b i l i t y of a 38 / province-wide home b u i l d i n g program t o d e a l w i t h t h i s problem, i t s t a t e d t h a t through the N a t i o n a l Housing A c t and Home Improvement Act, the f e d e r a l government had a l r e a d y assumed l e a d e r s h i p i n d e a l i n g with the housing problem. The C o u n c i l , t h e r e f o r e , s t a t e d t h a t t h e r e was "no a l t e r n a t i v e but t o make r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s t o the Dominion Government with r e s p e c t t o a problem of such p r o p o r t i o n s as t o r e q u i r e n a t i o n a l p l a n n i n g and f i n a n c i a l a i d " . (Ibid., 164) The C o u n c i l d i d see a r o l e f o r the P r o v i n c e i n f i t t i n g housing programs i n t o the l a r g e r problems o f urban r e p l a n n i n g and r e b u i l d i n g as w e l l as r u r a l r e h a b i l i t a t i o n . The C o u n c i l c a l l e d f o r a p r o v i n c i a l p l a n n i n g and hou s i n g a u t h o r i t y , e n a b l i n g l e g i s l a t i o n f o r r e g i o n a l p l a n n i n g and hou s i n g a u t h o r i t i e s , f e d e r a l s u b s i d i e s or loans t o m u n i c i p a l i t i e s t o undertake housing p r o j e c t s , and adjustments t o the NHA t o f u r n i s h s u b s i d i e s f o r l o w - r e n t a l p r o j e c t s . A l t h o u g h the C o u n c i l ' s recommendation d i d not g r e a t l y i n f l u e n c e a c t i o n s and p o l i c i e s o f the government, they d i d i n f l u e n c e and were used by o r g a n i z a t i o n s such as the Co - o p e r a t i v e Commonwealth F e d e r a t i o n and the Labour P r o g r e s s i v e Party, who advocated the implementation o f a comprehensive program t o s o l v e the l o n g and s h o r t term aspects of the housing problem. (Wade, 1984, 68) These two groups, a l o n g with the Vancouver Housing A s s o c i a t i o n , v e t e r a n s organizatons, churches, p r o f e s s i o n a l groups, s e r v i c e c l u b s , s o c i a l w e l f a r e o r g a n i z a t i o n s and women's o r g a n i z a t i o n s , formed a campaign f o r a c t i o n on the housing problem. (Wade, 1984, 73) As w e l l , newspapers and j o u r n a l s brought the post-war ho u s i n g i s s u e t o p u b l i c a t t e n t i o n and d i s c u s s e d a 39 v a r i e t y of p o t e n t i a l s o l u t i o n s , (see f o r example, Sun, A p r i l 1, 1946, p . l , A p r i l 3, 1946, p. 23, A p r i l 5, 1946, p. 12, A p r i l 8, 1946, p. 6, A p r i l 9, 1946, p. 6, A p r i l 13, 1946, p. 15.) P u b l i c p r o t e s t s about housing c o n d i t i o n s went t o f e d e r a l , p r o v i n c i a l and m u n i c i p a l government o f f i c i a l s and p o l i t i c i a n s . Since p r o v i n c i a l and m u n i c i p a l o f f i c i a l s c o n s i d e r e d the d i r e c t i n t e r v e n t i o n i s t r o l e p l a y e d by the f e d e r a l government as necessary under i t s wartime powers, they c o n s i s t e n t l y r e f e r r e d r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s from p r o t e s t groups t o f e d e r a l m i n i s t e r s and o f f i c i a l s . A c c o r d i n g t o both R.L. M a i t l a n d , the A t t o r n e y -General, and H.G.T. Perry, E d u c a t i o n M i n i s t e r and Chairman o f the R e h a b i l i t a t i o n C o u n c i l , c o n g e s t i o n and e v i c t i o n s were a "war problem" and a " n a t i o n a l problem" with which the lower governments l a c k e d the resources to cope. (Wade, 1984, 79) The 1945 F e d e r a l - P r o v i n c i a l Conference. The f i r s t p r o v i n c i a l i n i t i a t i v e f o r d e a l i n g with the post-war h o u s i n g shortage o c c u r r e d a t the D o m i n i o n - P r o v i n c i a l Conference on R e c o n s t r u c t i o n h e l d i n August 1945. A b r i e f presented by B r i t i s h Columbia's Premier i n c l u d e d the f o l l o w i n g comment on housing: Another problem of immediate concern, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n urban areas, d e a l s w i t h housing. My Government i s anxious t o f a c i l i t a t e any arrangement t h a t w i l l s p e e d i l y a l l e v i a t e p r e s e n t c o n d i t i o n s and i s prepared t o co-operate with the Dominion and the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s i n t h i s connection. I t i s my i n t e n t i o n t o make s p e c i a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n t h i s r e g ard t o the a p p r o p r i a t e department. (B.C., L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly, 1946, p.7) Here we see, once agai n t h a t B.C. viewed the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r f i n a n c i n g and a d m i n i s t r a t i n g h o u s i n g programs t o l i e w i t h the 40 f e d e r a l government. B.C.'s c o n t r i b u t i o n amounted to the p a s s i n g of e n a b l i n g l e g i s l a t i o n t i t l e d the Slum C l e a r a n c e Act which a l l o w e d the p r o v i n c e t o take advantage of S e c t i o n 12 of the N a t i o n a l Housing Act. Under S e c t i o n 12, the p r o v i n c e c o u l d p r o v i d e a s s i s t a n c e t o m u n i c i p a l i t i e s by paying f i f t y percent of t h e i r p o r t i o n of c o s t s i n c u r r e d f o r a c q u i r i n g and c l e a r i n g land s u i t a b l e f o r low- and moderate-income housing p r o j e c t s b u i l t by the p r i v a t e s e c t o r on a l i m i t e d d i v i d e n d b a s i s . A c c o r d i n g t o the Budget Speech of 1946, the sum of $500,000 was a l l o c a t e d f o r t h i s purpose. The p r o v i n c i a l b r i e f t o the D o m i n i o n - P r o v i n c i a l Conference on R e c o n s t r u c t i o n c o n t a i n e d the f o l l o w i n g e x p l a n a t i o n : Housing has been accepted by the Dominion Government as a n a t i o n a l problem. The Dominion " N a t i o n a l Housing Act" i s i n o p e r a t i o n and g r a d u a l l y r e l i e v i n g the s i t u a t i o n . M a t e r i a l s , l a b o u r and p r i c e s are under Dominion c o n t r o l . Low r e n t a l h ousing i s the most p r e s s i n g need. "The N a t i o n a l Housing Act" p r o v i d e s a b a s i s of f i n a n c i n g l i m i t e d d i v i d e n d c o r p o r a t i o n s f o r l o w - r e n t a l p r o j e c t s and slum c l e a r a n c e . The Dominion w i l l now pay o n e - h a l f of the l o s s i n c u r r e d by m u n i c i p a l i t i e s i n s i t e c l e a r a n c e and l a n d . The C o a l i t o n Government pledges i t s e l f t o pay 50 per cent of the balance, borne by m u n i c i p a l i t i e s , as P r o v i c i a l a i d t o l o w - r e n t a l housing and slum c l e a r a n c e . ( I b i d . , 8) A c c o r d i n g t o a statement of p o l i c y i n 1946, the P r o v i n c i a l Government was of the o p i n i o n t h a t the p r o v i s i o n s of the N a t i o n a l Housing Act p r o v i d e d s u f f i c i e n t funds f o r housing c o n s t r u c t i o n loans a t r e a s o n a b l e i n t e r e s t r a t e s . Consequently, the d e l a y i n c o n s t r u c t i o n experienced a t t h a t time was seen t o be due t o a shortage of m a t e r i a l s . The p o l i c y statement notes: 41 I t i s a w e l l known f a c t t h a t t h e d i f f i c u l t y i s due p r i n c i p a l l y t o the shortage of m a t e r i a l s . At the pr e s e n t time, t h e r e i s a great number of houses i n the course of c o n s t r u c t i o n , both i n V i c t o r i a and Vancouver, but these cannot be made ready f o r occupancy owing t o the shortage of s u p p l i e s . (Ibid., 7) Again, i t i s apparent t h a t the p r o v i n c e p e r c e i v e d t h a t the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r d e a l i n g with the shortage of b u i l d i n g s u p p l i e s r e s t e d with the f e d e r a l government. The p o l i c y statement of 1946 d e s c r i b e s l i m i t e d scope of p r o v i n c i a l a c t i o n taken to d e a l with t h i s problem: During the conference, I (Premier Hart) had s e v e r a l i n t e r v i e w s with the M i n i s t e r of Supply, and was a d v i s e d t h a t he c o u l d not see what we can do t o improve t h e m a t t e r as i t was a q u e s t i o n o f s h o r t a g e s o f s u p p l i e s t o which h i s department was bending e v e r y e f f o r t . During the November Conference, I was g i v e n assurance by the M i n i s t e r of Supply t h a t p r o d u c t i o n would c a t c h up with the shortage e a r l y i n t h i s year. (Ibid., 8) Therefore, the p r o v i n c e was u n w i l l i n g t o undertake a c t i o n t o d e a l with the s e r i o u s post-war h o u s i n g shortage, except f o r encouraging of the f e d e r a l government t o do more. Since the housing problem was viewed as r e s u l t i n g from the war, i t was deemed t o be the the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the f e d e r a l government through t h e i r wartime and post-war r e c o n s t r u c t i o n a c t i v i t i e s . Moreover, the p r o v i n c e was c o n v i n c e d t h a t the f e d e r a l government had taken r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r housing problems s i n c e they had undertaken the i n i t i a t i v e f o r housing programs i n the past. 3.4 The Emergence o f B . C . ' s R o l e i n P u b l i c H o u s i n g : 1949-1972 By 1948, w i t h the post-war emergency p e r i o d over, the f e d e r a l government wished t o resume i t s r o l e of encouraging p r i v a t e house b u i l d i n g and c o n f i n i n g i t s d i r e c t h o using 42 a s s i s t a n c e t o m a r g i n a l cases where the p r i v a t e s e c t o r was unable t o p r o v i d e housing. While the f e d e r a l government was concerned w i t h i t s g r o w i n g r o l e i n h o u s i n g , i t was a l s o c o g n i z a n t o f t h e shortage of low r e n t housing. (Howe, 1947, 220) S i m i l i a r l y , the p r o v i n c i a l government p e r c e i v e d problems with the adequacy of s u p p l y of low r e n t housing: The Government has been d e e p l y concerned with r e g a r d t o the housing s i t u a t i o n i n t h i s P r o v i n c e and has kept i n c l o s e touch with the veterans' housing programme sponsored by the F e d e r a l a u t h o r i t i e s and c a r r i e d out l a r g e l y by the C e n t r a l Mortgage and Housing C o r p o r a t i o n . Since the i n c e p t i o n of t h i s programme, there have been b u i l t i n t h i s P r o v i n c e more than 9,000 homes, and I have been assured t h a t s e v e r a l thousand more homes w i l l be c o n s t r u c t e d d u r i n g the p r e s e n t year. I t i s t h e i n t e n t i o n o f t h i s Government t o a t t e n d a meeting of Dominion, P r o v i n c i a l and M u n i c i p a l a u t h o r i t i e s , which i t i s proposed w i l l be h e l d t h i s year, t o formulate a p l a n t o p r o v i d e low r e n t a l h o using p r o j e c t s . T h i s request was made by the Union of B r i t i s h Columiba M u n i c i p a l i t e s at t h e i r l a s t meeting at H a r r i s o n . I am p l e a s e d t o say t h a t t h i s Government i s p r e p a r e d t o enter i n t o a D o m i n i o n - P r o v i n c i a l - M u n i c i p a l j o i n t conference t o work out a p l a n h a v i n g as i t s o b j e c t i v e the c o n s t r u c t i o n of l o w - r e n t a l housing p r o j e c t s . (B.C., L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly, 1949, 23) S e c t i o n 35 of the NHA ( l a t e r S e c t i o n 40), was the f i r s t l e g i s l a t i o n t h a t p e r m i t t e d the c o n s t r u c t i o n of s u b s i d i z e d s o c i a l housing. T h i s l e g i s l a t i o n , adopted i n 1949, was designed to l i m i t the f e d e r a l c o n t r i b u t i o n t o 75% of the c a p i t a l c o s t t o d e v e l o p p u b l i c h ousing as w e l l as 75% of any o p e r a t i n g l o s s e s . The p r o v i n c i a l government had t o p r o v i d e the remaining 25% w i t h the o p t i o n o f p a s s i n g on a s h a r e o f e i t h e r c a p i t a l c o s t s o r o p e r a t i n g 43 d e f i c i t s t o the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . I t i s c l e a r t h a t t h i s l e g i s l a t i o n c o u l d o n l y be implemented by p r o v i n c i a l i n i t i a t i v e . The p o l i c y statement of 1950 i n d i c a t e s t h a t the amendment was a g r e e a b l e t o the p r o v i n c e : At the l a s t Session, the Government committed i t s e l f t o endeavour t o arrange a conference between the Dominion, P r o v i n c i a l and our m u n i c i p a l governments t o go i n t o the q u e s t i o n of housing. In an e f f o r t t o implement t h i s pledge, s e v e r a l meetings were h e l d with the Honourable Robert Winters, M i n i s t e r of R e c o n s t r u c t i o n and Supply, t o d i s c u s s the p o s s i b i l i t y of a j o i n t D o m i n i o n - P r o v i n c i a l - M u n i c i p a l arrangement whereby an e f f o r t c o u l d be made to break the h o u s i n g shortage i n our P r o v i n c e . I may say t o members, Madam Speaker, t h a t the d i s c u s s i o n which I had with Mr. Winters were, t o say the l e a s t , v e r y s a t i s f a c t o r y indeed. I want the members t o know t h a t a s s u r a n c e was g i v e n t o t h e Honourable Winters t h a t t h i s Government would be i n t e r e s t e d i n and would co-operate with the F e d e r a l Governent i n any reasonable e f f o r t which was made t o end the h o u s i n g shortage. The p r o p o s a l s which are embodied i n the amendments t o the " N a t i o n a l Housing Act" passed a t the l a s t S e s s i o n of t h a t p a r l i a m e n t , i n my opinion, p r o v i d e the medium which t o b u i l d the homes t h a t may be r e q u i r e d . (B.C., L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly, 1950, 7) The Budget Speech of 19 49 announced the submission of l e g i s l a t i o n t h a t p r o v i d e d f o r the borrowing o f $5,000,000 t o be a p p l i e d i n meeting the 25% share r e q u i r e d from the p r o v i n c e , and a l s o p r o v i d e d f o r the e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a r e v o l v i n g fund t h a t w i l l enable the use of repayments, r e n t a l fees, and other revenues f o r l i k e p u r p o s e s . (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Finance, 1949, 49-50) The P o l i c y s t a t e m e n t of 1950 a l s o n o t e d t h a t i t was t h e i n t e n t i o n of the government t h a t each p u b l i c h ousing p r o j e c t be p e r m i t t e d t o be purchased, or rented with the r e n t being 44 e s t a b l i s h e d a t as low a l e v e l as c o n s t r u c t i o n and maintenance would permit. I t was emphasized t h a t every encouragement was t o be g i v e n t o homeownership. (B.C., L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly, 1950, 8) I t must be remembered t h a t the 1949 NHA amendments d i d not r e p r e s e n t a b e l i e f t h a t government had a s i g n i f i c a n t r o l e t o p l a y i n h o using markets. In h i s Budget Speech of 1950, the p r o v i n c i a l M i n i s t e r of Finance s t a t e d t h a t : I t i s my understanding t h a t n e i t h e r the Dominion nor the P r o v i n c e i s anxious t o engage i n housing a c t i v i t i e s — c e r t a i n l y I am n o t — s u c h as would i n t e r f e r e w ith the normal c o n s t r u c t i o n of new houses from p r i v a t e s o u r c e s , and t h a t p r i o r i t y w o u l d be g i v e n t o t h e k i n d of f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e t h a t would promote i n c r e a s i n g l y the s u p p l y of new houses through o r d i n a r y channels. (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Finance, 1950, 49-50) Desp i t e the r e l u c t a n c e of the p r o v i n c i a l government t o become i n v o l v e d i n housing programs, i t was e v i d e n t t h a t by the 1950's there was a need f o r low r e n t housing. A s u r v e y of rooming houses i n the West End and downtown a r e a s o f V a n o u v e r i n 1952 and 1953 found t h a t o n l y 15 percent of tenants were s a t i s f i e d with t h e i r accommodation, and t h a t 85 p e r c e n t were anxious t o move i f they c o u l d f i n d accommodation at a r e n t they c o u l d a f f o r d . Rents appeared t o bear no resemblance t o the q u a l i t y of accommodation p r o v i d e d , e s p e c i a l l y f o r accommodation re n t e d t o f a m i l i e s with c h i l d r e n . (Wheeler, 1955, 12) In h i s 1955 study o f p u b l i c housing i n Vancouver, M i c h a e l Wheeler a n a l y s e d the responses t o the 1951-52 survey and concluded: To date the b u i l d i n g programme has shown l i t t l e response t o t h i s need f o r low and moderate income r e n t a l housing. With the e x c e p t i o n of s p e c i a l p r o j e c t s f o r veterans, and some s m a l l s c a l e housing f o r o l d e r people, v i r t u a l l y no housing o f t h i s s o r t has been 45 c o n s t r u c t e d s i n c e the war. The c o n s t r u c t i o n of the L i t t l e Mountain l o w - r e n t a l p r o j e c t marks the f i r s t step towards coping with the problem on a r e a l i s t i c b a s i s . P l a n s f o r the p r o j e c t were o r i g i n a l l . y made i n 1950 under the p r o v i s i o n of the 1949 amendments t o the N a t i o n a l Housing Act e n a b l i n g the j o i n t u n dertaking of r e n t a l p r o j e c t s , e i t h e r on an economic or s u b s i d i z e d b a s i s , by the Dominion and P r o v i n c i a l governments. The f i r s t o f the 224 u n i t s d i d not come a v a i l a b l e , however, u n t i l A p r i l 1, 1954. The remaining u n i t s f i l l e d as they were c o m p l e t e d and by t h e end o f t h e y e a r t h e r e had been e i g h t times as many a p p l i c a n t s as p l a c e s . (Wheeler, 1955, 12-13) Pro d u c t i o n of p u b l i c h o using under S e c t i o n 35 was d i s a p p o i n t i n g l y meager. I t i s e v i d e n t t h a t the purpose of t h i s program was not to get the f e d e r a l government i n t o p r o v i d i n g h o u s i n g on a l a r g e s c a l e , b u t r a t h e r f o r i t t o g e t o u t o f t h e e x t e n s i v e p r o d u c t i o n f u n c t i o n i t had assumed d u r i n g the Second World War through Wartime Housing L i m i t e d . As a r e s u l t , there was v e r y l i t t l e a c t i v i t y i n p u b l i c housing, with o n l y seven p r o j e c t s p r o v i d i n g 786 u n i t s b u i l t i n B r i t i s h Columbia between 1950 and 1964 a t a c o s t o f $5.5 m i l l i o n t o t h e f e d e r a l government. (Runge, 1975, 147) The f i r s t mention of p u b l i c h o using p r o j e c t s i n B r i t i s h Columbia o c c u r r e d i n the 1958 Budget Speech: Press r e p o r t s i n d i c a t e t h a t the second major step towards r i d d i n g Vancouver of i t s worst slum areas has been taken by C i t y C o u n c i l who have approved a p l a n t o rezone two l i g h t i n d u s t r i a l areas t o r e s i d e n t i a l , thus p r o v i d i n g space where m u l t i - l e v e l h o u s i n g b l o c k s w i l l be b u i l t t o accommodate p e o p l e who a r e moved out o f the slum areas. It i s understood t h a t the C o u n c i l has approved i n p r i n c i p l e a $75,000,000 20 year slum c l e a r a n c e and redevelopment p l a n t o c l e a n up b l i g h t e d areas f r i n g i n g F a l s e Creek and running east to McLean. I hope t h a t the Government of the P r o v i n c e w i l l be p r o v i d e d with plans and s p e c i f i c a t i o n s t o e x p e d i t e t h i s p r o j e c t . (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Finance, 1958, 25) P r o v i n c i a l government investment i n p u b l i c h o using p r o j e c t s 46 was a l s o r a t i o n a l i z e d on the b a s i s o f employment c r e a t i o n . A c c o r d i n g t o the 1958 Budget Speech: Of t h e many ways and means t o combat unemployment i t i s works of t h i s nature t h a t l e n d themselves best t o p r o v i d e work, t o s u p p l y improvements and t o promote l o c a l development. (Ibid., 25) In 1964, S e c t i o n 43 was added t o the N a t i o n a l Housing Act t o encourage the p r o v i n c i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n of P u b l i c Housing. Three p a r t s of the Act were s u b s t a n t i a l l y r e v i s e d , Part II on R e n t a l Housing, Part I I I on Slum C l e a r a n c e , renamed Urban Renewal, and P a r t VI on P u b l i c Housing. CMHC p r o v i d e d l o a n s o f up t o 90% o f the c o s t s of c o n s t r u c t i o n o f new p r o j e c t s t o the p r o v i n c e s or m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . S u b s i d i e s on t h i s h o using were t o be p a i d through S e c t i o n 44 of the NHA which s p l i t s the s u b s i d i e s 50/50 with the p r o v i n c e s . The f e d e r a l government assumes the r o l e o f banker under t h i s s e c t i o n , the p r o v i n c i a l share o f the subsidy i s c o n s i d e r a b l y i n c r e a s e d . S e c t i o n 43 housing c o s t s the p r o v i n c e s a s m a l l e r i n i t i a l c a p i t a l o u t l a y , but a l a r g e r long-term subsidy expense. These amendments r e q u i r e d p r o v i n c i a l i n i t i a t i v e and d i r e c t i o n . While other p r o v i n c e s , most n o t a b l y Ontario, took f u l l advantage o f t h i s more generous f e d e r a l f u n d i n g f o r p u b l i c housing, B r i t i s h Columbia continued t o b u i l d p u b l i c h ousing under the 1949 NHA s e c t i o n 35 ( l a t e r S e c t i o n 40). A c c o r d i n g t o A l b e r t Rose, (1980, 81) the government of Premier W.A.C. Bennett was cau t i o u s i n the expansion o f the p u b l i c h ousing s t o c k and was c l e a r l y opposed t o the ver y p r i n c i p l e of p u b l i c i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the housing market. Rather than a s s i s t p u b l i c housing, the 47 government f a v o u r e d the encourgement of homeownership f o r low-and middle-income f a m i l i e s . A pamphlet i s s u e d by the government i n 1972 noted: W h i l e t h e r e i s a p l a c e and a need f o r p u b l i c h o u s i n g , the g r e a t e s t need i s f o r the p r o d u c t i o n of p r i v a t e housing, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the moderate and low-cost f i e l d s . T h i s i s where the need i s g r e a t e s t , and t h i s i s where a great d e a l more c o u l d be done. The Government of B r i t i s h Columbia would l i k e t o a s s i s t more p e o p l e toward owning a home o f t h e i r own r a t h e r than encourage f a m i l i e s i n t o p u b l i c s u b s i d i z e d housing. (B.C., L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly, 1972, not paged) From 1964 t o 1974, 56 p r o j e c t s with 6,259 u n i t s and 297 h o s t e l beds were c o n s t r u c t e d or improved i n B r i t i s h Columbia under S e c t i o n 40 a t a c o s t t o the f e d e r a l governent o f $87.9 m i l l i o n . More than 41% of the funds were spent i n 1973-74, d u r i n g the NDP a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . (Runge, 1975, 147) S e c t i o n 43 of the N a t i o n a l Housing Act was not used i n B.C. u n t i l 1975. In 1967, the p r o v i n c i a l government c r e a t e d the B r i t i s h Columbia Housing Management Commission (BCHMC) with i t s o n l y r e s p o n s i b i l i t y b e i n g the c e n t r a l i z e d a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of f e d e r a l -p r o v i n c i a l p u b l i c housing p r o j e c t s . The Commission's r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s were extremely l i m i t e d , extending o n l y t o p u b l i c housing, and not i n c l u d i n g other forms of low-cost housing such as c o - o p e r a t i v e housing, l i m i t e d d i v i d e n d h ousing or n o n - p r o f i t s e n i o r c i t i z e n housing. The two l o c a l h o using a u t h o r i t i e s , the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y and P r i n c e Rupert Housing A u t h o r i t y were disbanded. (Rose, 1980, 81) I t i s c l e a r t h a t there was d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with the s m a l l p r o v i n c i a l r o l e i n low-income housing and the d e l a y t o get 43 a p p r o v a l s . A 1967 newspaper r e p o r t , f o r example, c i t e s a 6 year d e l a y i n the a p p r o v a l process f o r the Raymur p u b l i c h ousing p r o j e c t i n Vancouver. In t h a t r e p o r t , M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s M i n i s t e r Dan Campbell s t a t e d t h a t the government's p o l i c y f o r low c o s t h ousing was: To support and encourage the purchase and upgrading of e x i s t i n g o l d e r s t r u c t u r e s i n c i t i e s ; t o s c a t t e r low-c o s t homes through m u n i c i p a l i t i e s and r e g i o n s ; and t o f o l l o w a r e g i o n a l approach t o housing, i n s t e a d of l e t t i n g i t t o d e v e l o p b i t by b i t . (Sun, Feb 2, 1967) Thus, i t i s e v i d e n t t h a t the p r o v i n c i a l r o l e i n the p r o v i s i o n of p u b l i c housing i n the 1945-1972 p e r i o d was extremely l i m i t e d . However, d u r i n g t h a t p e r i o d two p r o v i n c i a l h o u s i n g p o l i c y p r i o r i t i e s d i d emerge, one of a i d f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n of s e n i o r c i t i z e n s housing, and another encouraging widespread homeowership. These two p o l i c y p r i o r i t i e s c o ntinued t o be o f major s i g n i f i c a n c e up u n t i l r e c e n t times. 3.5 The Emergence of B.C.'s Role i n Senior C i t i z e n s ' Housing  Assistance The P r o v i n c e of B.C. has had one of the most a c t i v e programs i n Canada f o r s e n i o r c i t i z e n s ' housing, beginning with the E l d e r l y C i t i z e n s ' Housing A i d Act of 1955. N o n p r o f i t s e n i o r c i t i z e n h o using has been the mainstay of s o c i a l h o using programs i n B r i t i s h Columbia. There were two approaches t o the p r o v i n c e ' s p r o v i s i o n of senior's housing. The most w i d e l y used approach was through B.C.'s E l d e r l y C i t i z e n s Housing A i d Act of 1955 combined with S e c t i o n 15 of the NHA. The two programs to g e t h e r a l l o w e d development, c o n s t r u c t i o n and management of s e n i o r c i t i z e n s ' 49 housing by n o n - p r o f i t and c h a r i t a b l e o r g a n i z a t i o n s such as church groups, s e r v i c e c l u b s , and f r a t e r n a l s o c i e t i e s . R e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t s and m u n i c i p a l i t i e s c o u l d a l s o a c t as sponsoring o r g a n i z a t i o n s . The sponsoring o r g a n i z a t i o n was r e q u i r e d t o fund 10% of the t o t a l c o s t s , i n c l u d i n g l a n d and b u i l d i n g s , d e s i g n a t e the s i t e and s e l e c t the a r c h i t e c t . The p r o v i n c e p r o v i d e d a grant o f o n e - t h i r d the t o t a l c o s t of l a n d and b u i l d i n g s through the E l d e r l y C i t i z e n s Housing Aid Act. A l o n g term l o a n a t p r e f e r r e d i n t e r e s t r a t e s f o r the b a l a n c e of the c a p i t a l c o s t was p r o v i d e d by CMHC. The housing was exempt from m u n i c i p a l t a x a t i o n . The Budget Speech of 1968 d e s c r i b e d the program i n the f o l l o w i n g terms: The p r o v i s i o n of s e n i o r c i t i z e n s ' housing by p r i v a t e , n o n - p r o f i t o r g a n i z a t i o n s i s encouraged and f i n a n c i a l l y supported by the P r o v i n c i a l Government. The i n v o l v e m e n t of l o c a l s e r v i c e , e t h n i c and r e l i g i o u s groups i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n and o p e r a t i o n of these p r o j e c t s ensures a c l o s e r and c o n t i n u i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p between the community and s e n i o r c i t i z e n r e s i d e n t s . Since 1955, the P r o v i n c e has c o n t r i b u t e d i n o u t r i g h t grants o v e r $8,000,000 toward 190 p r o j e c t s undertaken by 118 l o c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s , which have p r o v i d e d almost 5,400 accomodation u n i t s . (B.C., M i n i s t r y o f F i n a n c e , 1968, 20) The second approach t o the p r o v i s i o n of s e n i o r c i t z e n s housing was t o use f e d e r a l funding under S e c t i o n 40 of the NHA. P r o j e c t s b u i l t under t h i s s e c t i o n had t o be sponsored by r e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t s or m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . Being p u b l i c a l l y owned, they came under the c o n t r o l of B.C. Housing Management Commission. As i n d i c a t e d i n T a b l e I I approximately 1907 s e n i o r c i t i z e n u n i t s f o r were completed under S e c t i o n 40, and 6,395 u n i t s were completed under the E l d e r l y C i t i z e n s ' 'Housing Aid Act between 1957 and 1972. 50 TABLE I I COMMUNITY AND GOVERNMENT SPONSORED SENIOR CITIZENS'  HOUSING UNITS COMPLETED IN BRITISH COLUMBIA (1957 - 1978) Year Community Sponsored Government Sponsored To t a l P r o j e c t s Units Projects Units Projects Units 1957 9 402 1 36 10 438 1958 9 290 - - 9 290 1959 5 111 - - 5 111 1960 4 149 - - 4 149 1961 8 624 - - 8 624 1962 9 418 1 69 10 487 1963 3 94 1 121 4 215 1964 3 87 - - 3 87 1965 5 124 - - 5 124 1966 5 219 1 188 6 407 1967 8 343 1 135 9 478 1968 14 474 - - 14 474 1969 10 558 3 367 13 925 1970 23 1,016 2 242 25 1,258 1971 15 945 3 234 18 1,179 1972 13 541 3 515 16 1,056 1973 17 685 1 60 18 745 1974 9 880 5 449 14 1,329 1975 15 1,171 15 1,456 30 2,627 1976 14 760 6 321 20 1,081 1977 22 1,447 2 179 24 1,626 1978 13* 521 13 1,158 26 1,679 T o t a l 233 11,859 58 5,530 291 17,389 Notes: (1) Community sponsored u n i t s are those b u i l t under the E l d e r l y C i t i z e n s ' Housing Aid Act. (2) Government sponsored u n i t s are those r e l a t i n g to Sections 40, 43 and 44 (1) (b) of the National Housing Act. (3) *Projects that were complete or under construction as of June 13, 1978. B.C., M i n i s t r y o f M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s . 1978. Housing Q u a r t e r l y , V o l . 1, No. 1, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . For comparison, o n l y about 3600 p u b l i c h o using u n i t s were b u i l t between 1955 and 1972. 3.6 The Emergence of a P r o v i n c i a l Role i n Homeownership Assistance  Programs The encouragement of homeownership i s the second major element of B r i t i s h Columbia Housing P o l i c y . Some housing a n a l y s t s p o i n t out t h a t B.C. surpassed the other p r o v i n c e s i n i t s e f f o r t t o extend homeownership t o as many p e o p l e as p o s s i b l e . For example, Susan F i s h concluded t h a t i n B r i t i s h Columbia the "emphasis i s e n t i r e l y on home-ownership, with a w i l l i n g n e s s t o a s s i s t even those w i t h v e r y low incomes t o become homeowners". (Runge, 1975,72) In 1967, the government contemplated i n i t i a t i n g a p l a n whereby w e l f a r e r e c i p i e n t s would be a s s i s t e d t o purchase homes. (Vancouver Sun, Dec. 5, 1967) A c c o r d i n g t o F i s h , t h i s p o l i c y r e s u l t e d from "the c o n v i c t i o n t h a t homeowners w i l l become r e s p o n s i b l e and p r o d u c t i v e members of the community". (Runge, 1975, 72) T h i s i n p a r t e x p l a i n s the l a c k of i n t e r e s t and e f f o r t i n d e v e l o p i n g p u b l i c h o u s i n g i n the p r o v i n c e . In the 1945-72 p e r i o d , the encouragement of homeownership was implemented through two important programs, d e s c r i b e d by the S o c i a l C r e d i t government i n e l e c t i o n r h e t o r i c as "the most p r o g r e s s i v e homeownership programs i n the world". (B.C., L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly, 1972, not paged) F i r s t , the P r o v i n c i a l Home-owner Grant Act, i n t r o d u c e d i n 1957, p r o v i d e d a p r o p e r t y tax rebate f o r homeowners. The Homeowner Grant f i r s t was designed "to r e l i e v e the s p e c i f i c tax burden on homeowners". (B.C. 52 M i n i s t r y of Finance, 1957, 33) The s t a t e d purpose was broadened i n the Budget Speech of 1963: They (homeowner grants) are designed t o encourage M u n i c i p a l C o u n c i l s t o reduce t h e i r tax requirements, to p r a c t i s e economics and t o r e l i e v e f u r t h e r the burden on home-owners. T h i s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , as f i r m b e l i e v e r s i n the d e s i r e a b i l i t y of i n d i v i d u a l homeownership, wishes to encourage more of our c i t i z e n s t o a c h i e v e t h a t end. (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Finance, 1963, 21) The grant, which was a v a i l a b l e t o a l l homeowners who pay p r o p e r t y taxes s t a r t e d a t $28 and grew i n c r e m e n t a l l y t o $200 i n 1973 when i t was f r o z e n . The p r o p o r t i o n o f grant t o t o t a l taxes payable seems t o have remained r o u g h l y constant a t 25% to 30% of the t o t a l tax b i l l . The program was implemented through the d e d u c t i o n of the c u r r e n t v a l u e of the grant from p r o p e r t y taxes. I f t h e v a l u e o f t h e t a x e s was l e s s t h a n t h e g r a n t , t h e g r a n t was e q u a l t o the taxes minus $1.00. The r e f o r e , the grant, e s s e n t i a l l y a deduction from the m u n i c i p a l tax b i l l , was not a d i r e c t expenditure but a form of i n t e r g o v e r n m e n t a l t r a n s f e r . The money t h a t was not c o l l e c t e d by the m u n i c i p a l i t y through the p r o p e r t y tax was c o l l e c t e d through p r o v i n c i a l taxes, and then t r a n f e r r e d t o the m u n i c i p a l i t y . The second major program designed t o encourage homeownership was the P r o v i n c i a l Home A c q u i s i t i o n Act, f i r s t i n t r o d u c e d i n 1967. The s t a t e d purpose of the program was t o a s s i s t people w i t h t h e down payment on a f i r s t home t h r o u g h p r o v i s i o n o f a $500 grant. The P r o v i n c i a l Home A c q u i s i t i o n Program was i n t r o d u c e d a t a time when, a c c o r d i n g t o news r e p o r t s of the day, a major "housing c r i s i s " t a k i n g p l a c e i n t h a t people w i t h moderate incomes c o u l d no l o n g e r a f f o r d t o purchase homes. (Vancouver Sun, Aug. 5, 1967) The P r o v i n c i a l Home A c q u i s i t i o n Program proved t o be the f i r s t of many home buyer grant programs t h a t were cont i n u e d u n t i l 1984. In a d d i t i o n t o the o b j e c t i v e of a s s i s t i n g p e o p l e t o become homeowners, i t i s apparent t h a t another o b j e c t i v e of the program was t o encourage new house c o n s t r u c t i o n . New c o n s t r u c t i o n was t a r g e t t e d with a l a r g e r grant i n order t o s t i m u l a t e the supply of h o u s i n g f o r a r a p i d l y i n c r e a s i n g p o p u l a t i o n : A new f a c e t of P r o v i n c i a l Government support of h ousing was i n t r o d u c e d a t the 1967 L e g i s l a t i v e S e s s i o n w i t h the enactment of the P r o v i n c i a l Home-acquisition Grant Act. T h i s Act has i t s a p p l i c a t i o n t o the p r i v a t e h ousing s e c t o r and i s intended to encourage r e s i d e n t s t o own t h e i r own homes. The response i n the f i r s t year of o p e r a t i o n has been g r a t i f y i n g and i n d i c a t e s t h a t the P r o v i n c i a l Government P l a n has f i l l e d a need. I w i l l be r e f e r r i n g t o proposed changes i n t h i s l e g i s l a t i o n l a t e r i n t h i s budget, b u t I s h o u l d l i k e t o say a t t h i s p o i n t t h a t the Home-acquisition Grant fund w i l l be augmented by a f u r t h e r $10,000,000 i n the c u r r e n t f i s c a l year. (B.C., M i n i s t r y of F i n a n c e , 1967, 20) Honourable Members w i l l r e c a l l t h a t the P r o v i n c i a l Home-Acquisition Grant A c t was passed at the 1967 L e g i s l a t i v e S e s s i o n , and a $25,000,000 fund t h e r e f o r was e s t a b l i s h e d . Intended as a means of a s s i s t i n g B r i t i s h Columbia r e s i d e n t s towards home-ownership, and t o permanently l o c a t e i n the community, the Act c u r r e n t l y p r o v i d e s a maximum grant o f $500.00 f o r homes a c q u i r e d between A p r i l 1, 1966 and March 31, 1968, i n c r e a s i n g to $525.00 f o r homes a c q u i r e d from A p r i l 1, 1968. The p l a n has been eminently s u c e s s f u l , from i t s i n c e p t i o n , p r o v i d i n g t o date o v e r 25,000 of our c i t i z e n s with a t o t a l of $10,000,000 towards ownership of a home. However, with our r a p i d l y growing p o p u l a t i o n , the h i g h e s t i n the n a t i o n , the main problem i s now not one of g e t t i n g people i n t o e x i s t i n g homes, but r a t h e r of encouraging new c o n s t r u c t i o n . In r e c o g n i t i o n of t h i s problem, the Government proposes t o seek a p p r o v a l t o amend the P r o v i n c i a l Home-Acquisition Grant Act t o g i v e complete emphasis t o house c o n s t r u c t i o n and i n c r e a s i n g the grant t o $1,000 a p p l i c a b l e t o new homes. (Ibid., 26) 54 In 1969, a major a d d i t i o n t o the P r o v i n c i a l Home-acquisition program was i n t r o d u c e d whereby home buyers would have the ch o i c e o f r e c e i v i n g a $1;000 d o l l a r g r a n t , o r a se c o n d mortagage o f up to $5,000 when pur c h a s i n g a new home. A c c o r d i n g t o the government, the purpose of the second mortgage was t o permit a c q u i s i t i o n of a new home without a down payment, thereby broadening the a s s i s t a n c e t o a l a r g e r group, e s p e c i a l l y young f a m i l i e s . (B.C. M i n i s t r y of Finance, 1969, 21-22) However, i t i s probab l e t h a t the e f f e c t o f the Second Mortgage program was t o broaden p u r c h a s i n g power a t the margins, so t h a t those who c o u l d purchase a home were a b l e t o buy a s l i g h t l y more expensi v e home. The announcement of the changes t o the program i n the 1969 Budget Speech i n d i c a t e s t h a t the o b j e c t i v e s of the program had been expanded t o i n c l u d e encouragement of homeownership, i n c r e a s i n g the s u p p l y of d w e l l i n g u n i t s i n the p r o v i n c e t o accommodate an expanding p o p u l a t i o n , and now t o i n c r e a s e employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s through i n c r e a s e d house b u i l d i n g a c t i v i t i e s . The maximum second mortgage a l l o w a n c e under the N a t i o n a l Housing Act makes i t d i f f i c u l t f o r many d e s e r v i n g f a m i l i e s now r e n t i n g from t r a n s f o r m i n g t h e i r own home i n t o a r e a l i t y . The new P r o v i n c i a l Government p o l i c y w i l l now be a major step forward i n p r o v i d i n g many a d d i t i o n a l new homes throughout the Pr o v i n c e , a step taken when there i s u n d e r u t i l i z e d c a p a c i t y i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n i n d u s t r y , and i s , t h e r e f o r e , aimed a t i n c r e s i n g employment and our p r o d u c t i v e output. By keeping pace of our housing needs, the P r o v i n c e w i l l p r e v e n t the development of many s o c i a l d i f f i c u l t i e s t h a t r e s u l t from poor and inadequate housing, and i s , t h e r e f o r e , an investment i n a greater, more p r o d u c t i v e f u t u r e , both f o r the i n d i v i d u a l c i t i z e n and the P r o v i n c e as a whole." (Ibid., 21-22) In 1968, the government recommended a method whereby new 55 homes c o u l d be p r o v i d e d t o d e a l with the h ousing shortage of t h a t time, t h a t i s , the encouragement of the use of advanced te c h n o l o g y i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n of homes. R e j e c t i n g i n c r e a s e s i n the h o m e - a c q u i s i t i o n grant, the government i n s t e a d sponsored a c o n t e s t t o encourage ideas f o r low c o s t , good q u a l i t y housing. (Sun, J u l y 24, 1968.) The d e s i g n c o m p e t i t i o n was seen by some c r i t i c s as a method of a v o i d i n g the r e a l h o using problem. (Sun, J u l y 24, 1968) However, i t i s more l i k e l y t h a t the p r o v i n c i a l government d i d not wish t o take f u r t h e r a c t i o n i n h o u s i n g i s s u e s u n t i l the He 1 I y e r task f o r c e had completed i t s study, and the f e d e r a l housing p o l i c y was made e x p l i c i t . T herefore, there were no new programs or changes t o p o l i c y i n t r o d u c e d i n the p r o v i n c e u n t i l 1972. 3.7 Conclusion The P h i l o s o p h i c a l Basis f o r Housing P o l i c y 1945-1971. The c o a l i t i o n and S o c i a l C r e d i t governments of the p e r i o d 1945-1971 s u b s c r i b e d to a f r e e e n t e r p r i s e or f r e e market p h i l o s o p h y . Proponents o f a f r e e market approach b e l i e v e t h a t the r o l e of the s t a t e i s r e s t r i c t e d t o the p r o v i s i o n of e s s e n t i a l economic s e r v i c e s conducive t o p r i v a t e accumulation of wealth and maintenance of law and order. The d o c t r i n e of l a i s s e z - f a i r e and the p r i v a t e ownership of p r o p e r t y are the foundations of economic o r g a n i z a t i o n . Government i n t e r v e n t i o n i s o n l y j u s t i f i a b l e i f i t promotes and not h i n d e r s p r i v a t e c a p i t a l accumulation. For example, the S o c i a l C r e d i t government under WAC Bennett o f t e n i n t e r v e n e d by b u i l d i n g roads, r a i l w a y s , hydro dams and the l i k e 56 i n order t o p r o v i d e the necessary i n f r a s t r u c t u r e f o r the resource development of the p r o v i n c e . Moreover, government i n t e r v e n t i o n i s viewed as necessary t o p r o v i d e s u b s i s t e n c e l e v e l a i d to those t h a t are unable t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e l a b o u r market due t o age and m e n t a l o r p h y s i c a l d i s a b i l i t y , o f t e n d e s c r i b e d as the " t r u l y needy". Trends i n Housing P o l i c y 1945-1972. I t i s e v i d e n t t h a t the above p h i l o s o p h i c a l p o s i t i o n g r e a t l y l i m i t e d the scope f o r a c t i o n i n h o u s i n g p o l i c y . The p r o v i s i o n o f housing was c o n s i d e r e d the r i g h t f u l r o l e o f the p r i v a t e s e c t o r , with government i n t e r v e n t i o n o n l y a c c e p t a b l e i n emergency c o n d i t i o n s or where government i n t e r v e n t i o n can a s s i s t the p r i v a t e market. When emergency c o n d i t i o n s d i d a r i s e a f t e r the Second World War, the p r o v i n c e c o n s i d e r e d the s o l u t i o n t o the post-war housing problems as being the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f the f e d e r a l government through t h e i r wartime emergency powers. The r e l u c t a n c e o f the p r o v i n c i a l government t o become i n v o l v e d i n p u b l i c h o using a l s o r e f l e c t s the b e l i e f t h a t housing s h o u l d be p r o v i d e d by the p r i v a t e market. Where the p r i v a t e market c o u l d not p r o v i d e housing, i t was the r o l e of the f e d e r a l government, r a t h e r than the p r o v i n c i a l government t o d e a l w i t h t h i s aspect o f the housing problem. F i n a l l y , i t i s e v i d e n t t h a t t h e two a r e a s t h a t t h e p r o v i n c i a l government d i d a c t i v e l y i n t e r v e n e , t h a t i s , homeownership a s s i s t a n c e and s e n i o r c i t i z e n h o u s i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n a s s i s t a n c e are i n accordance w i t h the government's f r e e market p h i l o s o p h y . The encouragement of homeownership f o r as many 57 households as p o s s i b l e , i n c l u d i n g low income f a m i l i e s , was an important p o l i c y f o r the S o c i a l C r e d i t government. S e n i o r c i t i z e n h o u s i n g a s s i s t a n c e was r a t i o n a l i z e d on the b a s i s t h a t s e n i o r c i t i z e n s formed the core of the " t r u l y needy" and t h e r e f o r e government housing a s s i s t a n c e c o u l d be j u s t i f i e d . The g e n e r a l e l e c t i o n of 1972 brought the d e f e a t of the S o c i a l C r e d i t government a f t e r twenty years i n o f f i c e . The New Democratic Party was determined t o undertake a new approach to housing p o l i c y , with the focus on housing as a b a s i c human need. 58 Chapter Four B.C. Housing P o l i c y i n the 1972-1976 Period The second d i s t i n c t p e r i o d i n the e v o l u t i o n of housing p o l i c y i n B r i t i s h Columbia g e n e r a l l y corresponds t o the New Democratic Party's term of o f f i c e . For the f i r s t time the p r o v i n c i a l government f o l l o w e d an e x p l i c i t l y d i r e c t i n t e r v e n t i o n i s t s t r a t e g y i n the h ousing market, with the g o a l o f p r o d u c i n g as much ho u s i n g as q u i c k l y as p o s s i b l e . A lthough the government encouraged a l t e r n a t i v e tenure systems and p r o v i d e d a i d t o r e n t a l h o u s i n g and r e n t e r s , the g r e a t e s t amount of resources continued t o be a l l o c a t e d t o the homeownership s e c t o r and t o housing f o r s e n i o r c i t i z e n s . T h i s chapter examines B.C. housing p o l i c y from 1972 t o 1976 by f i r s t , d i s c u s s i n g h ousing c o n d i t i o n s and problems d u r i n g the p e r i o d , and second, d e s c r i b i n g the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e and s t r a t e g y chosen by the NDP government t o d e a l with the h o u s i n g problem. T h i r d , the major housing program i n i t i a t i v e s w i l l be reviewed under the c a t e g o r i e s of homeownership a s s i s t a n c e , r e n t a l h o using and r e n t e r a s s i s t a n c e programs, and s o c i a l h o using a s s i s t a n c e programs. Due t o the s u b s t a n t i a l number o f programs i n i t i a t e d and a d m i n i s t e r e d d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d , emphasis w i l l be p l a c e d on those programs t h a t were i n n o v a t i v e . F i n a l l y , t h i s chapter concludes with a d i s c u s s i o n of the p h i l o s o p h i c a l b a s i s 59 f o r housing p o l i c y i n the 1972-1976 p e r i o d . A c h r o n o l o g i c a l t a b l e of program i n i t i a t i v e s i s i n c l u d e d f o r r e f e r e n c e i n Appendix B. 4.1 Housing Conditions; 1972-1976 The p e r i o d 1972 t o 1976 corresponds t o a major housing shortage i n the p r o v i n c e , d e s p i t e h i g h numbers of housing completions. The shortage was c r e a t e d by a number of f a c t o r s t h a t r e s u l t e d i n i n c r e a s e d demand f o r housing u n i t s . One major f a c t o r was the h i g h r a t e o f m i g r a t i o n t o t h e p r o v i n c e due t o t h e employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s o f f e r e d by the r e l a t i v e l y buoyant B r i t i s h Columbia economy. Moreover, i n c r e a s i n g h ousehold headship r a t e s a l s o strengthened the demand f o r housing u n i t s . The i n c r e a s e i n headship r a t e s was caused by f o u r f a c t o r s . In the f i r s t i n s t a n c e , g r e a t e r a f f l u e n c e i n the 1970's a l l o w e d more peop l e t o support a separate household. Second, changing l i f e s t y l e s encouraged many s i n g l e people t o occupy separate households r a t h e r than share u n i t s or remain with the f a m i l y . T h i r d , the i n c r e a s e d number of d i v o r c e s and s e p a r a t i o n s d i r e c t l y i n c r e a s e d the headship r a t e . F i n a l l y , d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d the baby boom g e n e r a t i o n reached the household f o r m a t i o n stage. ( C l a y t o n Research A s s o c i a t e s , 1984, 10) On the s u p p l y s i d e there was some evidence t h a t m u n i c i p a l governments were not a b l e t o r e a c t t o the h o u s i n g shortage due t o neighbourhood r e s i s t a n c e t o i n c r e a s e d d e n s i t i e s and l a c k o f m u n i c i p a l f i n a n c i a l resources t o pay f o r s e r v i c i n g raw land. Further, changes t o f e d e r a l tax laws i n 1972 removing the C a p i t a l Cost Allowance deduction f o r r e n t a l b u i l d i n g s a f f e c t e d the 60 v i a b i l i t y o f p r i v a t e r e n t a l c o n s t r u c t i o n . The s e v e r i t y o f the housing problem was a major i s s u e c overed e x t e n s i v e l y i n newspaper a r t i c l e s i n 1973. These a r t i c l e s c o n t i n u o u s l y r e f e r r e d t o the "housing c r i s i s " and the need f o r government t o s e t p r i o r i t i e s and take r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a c t i o n i n the h o u s i n g s e c t o r . (For example, see: Vancouver Sun, June 2, 1973 and P r o v i n c e , March 12, 1973) The c h i e f m a n i f e s t a t i o n of the housing shortage was the s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e s i n the c o s t of housing and the s i g n i f i c a n t decreases i n vacancy r a t e s . In Vancouver, the r a t i o o f annual mortgage payment necessary t o pay f o r an average house, t o average f a m i l y income i n c r e a s e d from 16.1% i n 1972 t o 27.3% i n 1974. (Table I I I ) The average r e a l r e n t f o r an apartment i n a p r i v a t e l y i n i t i a t e d r e n t a l b u i l d i n g of 6 u n i t s or more, i n c r e a s e d 10% from 1970 t o 1973. (Table IV) In 1976, 29.5% of a l l r e n t e r households i n B r i t i s h Columbia had an a f f o r d a b i l i t y problem compared t o an average of 20.2% of r e n t e r househlds i n Canada. ( S t a t i s t i c s Canada, 1980) In t h i s context, households are d e f i n e d as h a v i n g an a f f o r d a b i l i t y problem i f they are paying more than 30 per cent of t h e i r gross income f o r re n t . The vacancy r a t e f o r r e n t a l u n i t s i n Vancouver dropped from 2.6 i n December 1971 t o 0.5 i n December 1972, and d i d not c l i m b above 1 percent u n t i l 1977. The vacancy r a t e reached as low as 0.1 p e r c e n t i n December 1974 and October 1975. (Figure 1) 61 TABLE III AFFORDABILITY CALCULATION FOR AN AVERAGE-PRICED HOUSE VANCOUVER CMA, 1971-1983 *  Average MLS Mortgage Mortgage Payment Annual Mortgage Average Family Ratio of Annual House Price Amount Interest Rate Per $l y000 Payment Income Mortgage Payment to Dollars Percent Dollars Avg. Family Income 1971 22,585 9.43 8.62 1,869 12,177 15.3 1972 27,007 9.21 8.45 2,191 13,596 16.1 1973 35,376 9.59 8.62 2,927 15,146 19.3 1974 48,701 11.25 9.80 4,582 16,803 27.3 1975 54,619 11.44 9.97 5,228 19,284 27.1 1976 58,683 11.78 10.14 5,712 20,832 27.4 1977 61,001 10.36 9.12 5,341 22,088 24.2 1978 62,539 10.59 9.29 5,577 24,291 23.0 1979 66,906 11.98 10.32 6,629 27,902 23.8 1980 94,182 14.32 11.92 10,777 31,269 34.5 1981 137,430 18.15 14.85 19,592 35,344 55.4 1982 102,439 16.00 ** 13.19 12,971 38,525 33.7 1983 105,794 13.30 11.21 11,385 40,900 27.8 * Assumes 5 year conventional mortgage rates, 25 year amortization period and a 20% dcwnpayment. ** 1982 effective rate assumed at 16%. Source: Clayton Research Associates and Wcodbrige, Reed and Associates, 1984. TABLE IV RENTAL MARKET INDICATORS VANCOUVER CMA, 1962-1983 Vacancy Average Money Consumer Average Real Year-to-Year % Change Rates Rents Price Index Rents Average Average Real (%) ($) (1962=100) ($) Money Rents Rents 1962 n/a 85.6 100.0 85.6 — _ 1963 4.3 85.8 100.4 85.5 0.2 -0.1 1964 4.7 86.2 100.5 85.8 0.5 0.4 1965 4.0 88.0 100.5 87.6 2.1 2.1 1966 1.5 90.4 101.2 89.3 2.7 1.9 1967 1.0 102.0 106.8 95.5 12.8 6.9 1968 1.3 115.0 110.7 103.9 12.7 8.8 1969 1.2 123.1 113.7 108.3 7.0 4.2 1970 2.7 134.5 118.0 114.0 9.3 5.3 1971 4.1 140.0 120.6 116.1 4.1 1.8 1972 2.4 145.8 123.2 118.3 4.1 1.9 1973 1.0 152.6 127.7 119.5 4.7 1.0 1974 0.3 164.4 140.4 117.1 7.7 -2.0 1975 0.2 191.3 155.8 122.8 16.4 4.9 1976 0.4 222.2 170.9 130.0 16.2 5.9 1977 1.6 234.0 183.0 127.9 5.3 -1.6 1978 1.5 241.1 197.1 122.3 3.0 -4.4 1979 0.9 266.0 212.3 125.3 10.3 2.5 1980 0.1 299.5 232.3 128.9 12.6 2.9 1981 0.1 361.0 265.3 136.1 20.5 5.6 1982 0.6 394.9 293.1 134.7 9.4 -1.0 1983 2.6 419.0 309.2 135.5 6.1 0.6 Source: Clayton Research AsscciaeB and Woodbridge, Reed and Associates, 1984. FIGURE 1 V a c a n c y Rates in V a n c o u v e r 1 9 6 5 - 1 9 8 3 1 9 6 5 1 9 6 9 1971 1 9 7 3 1 9 7 5 1 9 7 7 1 9 7 9 1981 1983 Source: Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Canadian Housing S t a t i s t i c s , S t a t i s t i c a l Services D i v i s i o n , Ottawa, Various years. 64 4.2 The Department, of Housing: A New Administrative Structure f o r  Housing P o l i c y When t h e t h e N.D.P. came t o power i n 1972 i t had t o r e s p o n d q u i c k l y to what was w i d e l y p e r c e i v e d t o be a s e r i o u s housing c r i s i s . In May 1973, the P r o v i n c e newspaper d e s c r i b e d the newly c r e a t e d p o s i t i o n of M i n i s t e r without P o r t f o l i o r e s p o n s i b l e f o r h o using as "the toughest job of the year." (Province, May 12 1973) In November of t h a t year, the Department of Housing was c r e a t e d by the adoption of the Department of Housing Act. The B r i t i s h Columbia Department of Housing was the f i r s t p r o v i n c i a l department devoted e n t i r e l y t o h ousing i s s u e s i n Canada. During the announcement of the c r e a t i o n of the Department of Housing, Premier B a r r e t t d e s c r i b e d the f u n c t i o n of the department was t o b r i n g down the p r i c e of homes, c o - o r d i n a t e l a n d assembly and p u b l i c h ousing programs, and t o c r e a t e a low-cost h o u s i n g program. (Province, May 9, 1973) The Budget Speech of 1974 s t a t e d "the c i t i z e n s of B.C. asked f o r a broader p u b l i c d i r e c t i o n i n housing. Our budget today w i l l fund s e v e r a l programmes of l a n d assembly, s e r v i c i n g , housing c o n s t r u c t i o n and mortgage f i n a n c i n g t h a t w i l l make t h i s democratic r i g h t more a c c e s s i b l e t o our c i t i z e n s . " (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Finance, 1974, 3) The g o a l o f the government's housing p o l i c y was s t a t e d i n Housing M i n i s t e r L ome Ni c o l s o n ' s f i r s t budget i n the f o l l o w i n g terms: T h i s government i s d e d i c a t e d t o the p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t good h o u s i n g a t a r e a s o n a b l e c o s t i s t h e r i g h t o f each and e v e r y B r i t i s h Columbian, r e g a r d l e s s of whether he i s r i c h or poor, l i v e s i n Vancouver or Chetwynd, comes from pio n e e r stock or i s a newcomer to t h i s p r o v i n c e . (B.C. Hansard, Feb. 14, 1974, 209) 65 The NDP government, t h e r e f o r e , intended t o adopt a comprehensive approach t o housing p o l i c y t h a t would expand both the scope of the programs and the s c a l e of government i n t e r v e n t i o n . The d i r e c t l y i n t e r v e n t i o n i s t r o l e i n h o u s i n g t h a t the government intended t o take i s i n d i c a t e d i n the mandate of the Department of Housing: "to s u p e r v i s e , develop, a c q u i r e , maintain, improve and d i s p o s e of housing i n the province." (B.C., Department of Housing, 1975, p.5) I t was c l e a r t h a t the p r o v i n c i a l r o l e i n h o u s i n g was t o be much more than s i m p l y making money a v a i l a b l e t o p r i v a t e d e v e l o p e r s . The new p r o v i n c i a l r o l e i n c l u d e d a s s i s t a n c e w i t h p l a n n i n g and development of housing, i n c l u d i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n o f h o u s i n g t o be owned by the p r o v i n c e . The c r e a t i o n of the Department of Housing a l s o p e r m i t t e d g r e a t e r c o - o r d i n a t i o n of e x i s t i n g programs t h a t were p r e v i o u s l y a d m i n i s t e r e d by s e v e r a l departments, such as the M i n i s t r y o f M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s , the M i n i s t r y of Finance, and other agencies such as the B r i t i s h Columbia Housing Management Commission. The Department's p o l i c i e s departed from the p r e v i o u s p r o v i n c i a l r o l e i n housing i n both the range o f tenures i n c l u d e d and the p o p u l a t i o n groups t a r g e t t e d . The programs a d m i n i s t e r e d by the Housing Department i n c l u d e d the e x i s t i n g programs as w e l l as a range of newly c r e a t e d ones. The programs t h a t were continued i n c l u d e the Senior C i t i z e n ' s housing program which was, f o r the f i r s t few years, maintained i n t a c t , but with a d d i t i o n a l funds. The P r o v i n c i a l Home A c q u i s i t i o n Program was a l s o continued with amendments, but s i n c e the grant was not i n c r e a s e d , the b e n e f i t s became l e s s s i g n i f i c a n t as housing p r i c e s i n c r e a s e d 66 with i n f l a t i o n . The Home Owners Grant was f r o z e n a t 1972 l e v e l s , b u t was supplemented by the School Tax Removal and Resource Grant. The most important a c t i v i t y o f the Department o f Housing was supposed t o be the d i r e c t p r o v i s i o n o f h o u s i n g on a l a r g e s c a l e . (Runge, 1975, 163) T h i s p o s i t i o n i s i n c o n t r a s t t o the p r a c t i s e of CMHC which, d e s p i t e the f e d e r a l government's p r e v i o u s Wartime Housing Ltd. experience, f e l t i t s purpose was t o p r o v i d e programs through which p r o v i n c i a l and p r i v a t e i n i t i a t i v e s c o u l d be accommodated. Housing Production Strategies. A t h r e e stage s t r a t e g y f o r housing p r o d u c t i o n was adopted. The f i r s t stage i n v o l v e d g e t t i n g p r o j e c t s b u i l t or purchased where and when a v a i l a b l e . The l e a s e h o l d mortgage program and p r o p o s a l c a l l system were u t i l i z e d t o purchase or b u i l d such p r o j e c t s . The second stage i n the housing p r o d u c t i o n s t r a t e g y was represented by comprehensive developments which i n v o l v e d s e v e r a l types o f housing. These "new neighbourhoods", l i m i t e d t o m e t r o p o l i t a n areas, were designed to be f a i r l y l a r g e , with between 600 t o 5000 u n i t s . Examples o f proposed new neighbourhoods were developments i n Har o l d Winch Park i n Burnaby, and a ten stage p r o j e c t i n Port Moody. The f i n a l stage i n v o l v e s the development o f "new communities" o v e r a l o n g p e r i o d . An example of the "new community" approach was the Burke Mountain development i n C o q u i t l a m where the development o f over 26,000 homes on 2600 acres was p r o j e c t e d . D e s p i t e the o p t i m i s t i c a s p i r a t i o n s o f the Housing Department, the p r o d u c t i o n o f h o u s i n g 67 u n i t s i n the "new neighbourhoods" and "new communities" would take many years. In the case o f the Burke Mountain development, many of the housing s i t e s were s o l d t o p r i v a t e d e v e l o p e r s by the subsequent government, where c o n s t r u c t i o n i s c u r r e n t l y o c c u r r i n g . N e v e r t h e l e s s , the Department of Housing programs d i d r e s u l t i n l a n d assembly and p l a n n i n g which u l t i m a t e l y a f f e c t e d the nature of the developments. Des p i t e the extent o f i t s proposed i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the housing market, the government d i d not see i t s e l f assuming the major r o l e i n the p r o v i s i o n o f housing but c o n s i d e r e d i t s e l f a pa r t n e r with a l l other p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the market. The M i n i s t e r o f Housing s t a t e d i n an i n t e r v i e w i n February 1974 t h a t the p r o v i n c i a l government was not t a k i n g o v e r housing from t h e p r i v a t e s e c t o r and t h e e f f e c t o f t h e government's program c o u l d be "wiped out" i f p r i v a t e h o u s i n g was not b u i l t . (Sun, Feb. 15, 1974) It i s apparent t h a t top p r i o r i t y was g i v e n t o l a n d assembly and s e r v i c i n g . The Housing I n c e n t i v e Fund, renamed the Housing Fund i n 1975, p r o v i d e d $20 m i l l i o n f o r l a n d assembly and s e r v i c i n g purposes i n 1974, and another $50 m i l l i o n i n 1975. (B.C., Department of Housing, 1976, 12) D e l i v e r y Mechanisms. The P r o v i n c e d e v e l o p e d two mechanisms t o d i r e c t l y produce housing. F i r s t , the P r o v i n c e purchased 90% o f the a s s e t s o f D u n h i l l Development C o r p o r a t i o n , a p r i v a t e l a n d development company which had a number of s u b s i d i a r y companies, a l a n d i n v e n t o r y , and experience i n l a n d development. The purchase of D u n h i l l a l l o w e d the p r o v i n c e t o g a i n access to l a n d and 68 housing development e x p e r t i s e q u i c k l y s i n c e the p r o v i n c e r e t a i n e d the c o r p o r a t i o n ' s s t a f f of experts. Moreover, by a c q u i r i n g D u n h i l l ' s a s s e t s , the p r o v i n c e a l s o a c q u i r e d the c o r p o r a t i o n s h o u s i n g i n v e n t o r y . The a l t e r n a t i v e t o a c q u i r i n g D u r i h i l l would have been the e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a new crown c o r p o r a t i o n , which was seen as t a k i n g too long, or r e l y i n g on c o n s u l t a n t s , which was seen as c o s t i n g t o much and not p e r m i t t i n g the government t o d e v e l o p i t s own group of experts.(Sun, Feb 15, 1974) D u n h i l l r e t a i n e d i t s own name u n t i l 1976, when i t became The Housing C o r p o r t i o n of B r i t i s h Columbia. In a d d i t i o n , t o the d i r e c t p r o d u c t i o n of housing, D u n h i l l a c t e d as the p r o v i n c e ' s agent i n la n d purchasing, and h a n d l e d the p r o p o s a l c a l l program. The P r o p o s a l C a l l program was supposed t o be the NDP government's second primary mechanism f o r the d e l i v e r y of housing. The p r o p o s a l c a l l system was used t o a s s i s t the c o n s t r u c t i o n of ground o r i e n t e d f a m i l y r e n t a l accomodation which was tu r n e d over t o BCHMC f o r management. D u n h i l l Development C o r p o r a t i o n i s s u e d the p r o p o s a l c a l l , e v a l u a t e d the p r o p o s a l s , h e l p e d with the f i n a n c i n g and m u n i c i p a l a p p r o v a l s , and arranged the s a l e o f the u n i t s . The program was i n i t i a t e d by the Department of Housing i n response t o the need f o r the immediate c o n s t r u c t i o n of housing. P r o p o s a l s were submitted to D u n h i l l f o r e v a l u a t i o n and, i f found s a t i s f a c t o r y , the Department of Housing and the d e v e l o p e r entered i n t o an agreement whereby the d e v e l o p e r had the o p t i o n of e i t h e r s e l l i n g the f i n i s h e d p r o j e c t a t a f i x e d p r i c e o r a t t h e a u d i t e d c o s t o f t h e f i n i s h e d p r o j e c t p l u s a p r o f i t of 5% a f t e r taxes. In the l a t t e r o p t i o n , the p r o v i n c e 69 p r o v i d e d i n t e r i m f i n a n c i n g o f up t o 85% o f t h e v a l u e o f t h e l a n d and t h e c o m p l e t e d v a l u e o f t h e p r o j e c t a t an i n t e r e s t r a t e o f 8%. (Runge, 1975, 165) I f the government chose not t o purchase the p r o j e c t a f t e r i t has been completed, the f i n a n c i n g charges were set a t 12%. U n l i k e the f e d e r a l p r o p o s a l c a l l techniques under the L i m i t e d D i v i d e n d ( E n t r e p r e n e u r i a l Housing) program which had few g u i d e l i n e s , and the tender c a l l p r ocess f o r p u b l i c housing which c o n t a i n e d s t r i c t s p e c i f i c a t i o n s , the P r o v i n c i a l p r o p o s a l c a l l method s p e c i f i e d the area where a p r o p o s a l i s wanted and p r o v i d e d d e t a i l e d g u i d e l i n e s . The requirements u s u a l l y s e t g u i d e l i n e s f o r d e n s i t y , s e t a minimum number of u n i t s per p r o p o s a l , i n d i c a t e d the type and tenure of housing, and p r o v i d e d standards f o r open space, n o i s e c o n t r o l , r e c r e a t i o n f a c i l i t i e s , s a f e t y f o r c h i l d r e n and the l i k e . The g u i d e l i n e s were not b i n d i n g , b u t the c l o s e r the p r o p o s a l f o l l o w e d them, the more l i k e l y i t was accepted. A c c o r d i n g t o the Runge study the terms o f the p r o p o s a l c a l l program were q u i t e f a v o u r a b l e and the f i n a n c i n g was p a r t i c u l a r l y h e l p f u l t o s m a l l b u i l d e r s . (Runge, 1975, 165) Due t o the s h o r t time p e r i o d the program was operable, from May 1974 t o e a r l y 1976, o n l y 477 u n i t s were c o n s t r u c t e d r e p r e s e n t i n g a s m a l l p o r t i o n of the s o c i a l housing p o r t f o l i o . 4.3 Homeownership Assistance Programs The P r o v i n c i a l Home A c q u i s i t i o n Act. A l t h o u g h c r i t i c i z e d by the o p p o s i t i o n f o r not a s s i s t i n g the p r o s p e c t i v e buyer of a s i n g l e f a m i l y d w e l l l i n g on p r i v a t e land, the Government co n t i n u e d 70 t o implement the P r o v i n c i a l Home A c q u i s i t i o n Program. The Budget Speech of 1973 noted: While the Government may not agree w i t h a l l the d e t a i l s of the Home A c q u i s i t i o n Programme and have i t under r e v i e w , we c e r t a i n l y agree with the p r i n c i p l e of a i d i n g our c i t i z e n s t o o b t a i n homes by p r o v i d i n g them with f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e . (B.C. M i n i s t r y of Finance, 1973, 12) The program was amended c o n t i n u o u s l y between 1973 t o 1976. The most s i g n i f i c a n t amendment i n c l u d e d extending the grant to mobile home owners and members of n o n - p r o f i t c o - o p e r a t i v e s i n 1973. A l s o i n t h a t year p r o v i s i o n s were e s t a b l i s h e d so t h a t homebuyers c o u l d r e c e i v e b e n e f i t s more than once p r o v i d e d t h a t the amount of p r e v i o u s grants were p a i d back and t h a t o n l y the second mortgage p r o v i s i o n s a p p l y t o the second home. Approximately 33,000 a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r the program were approved i n 1974, and 32,000 were approved i n 1975. By 1975 i t became obvious t h a t i n f l a t i o n had eroded the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the program. In 1968, the $1,000 grant comprised 3.9% of the purchase p r i c e of an average suburban home w h i l e i n 1975 the grant comprised 1.7% of the purchase p r i c e . S i m i l i a r l y , the percentage of the house p r i c e t h a t i s c o v e r e d by the second mortgage d e c l i n e d from 17.2% t o 8.7% i n the p e r i o d from 1968 t o 1975. (Runge, 1975, 113) The P r o v i n c i a l Homeowner Grant and The School Property Tax  Removal and Resource Grant. An important o b j e c t i v e of the NDP government was t o e s t a b l i s h a program t h a t would e l i m i n a t e s c h o o l taxes from r e s i d e n t i a l p roperty. T h i s program was i n i t i a t e d 71 through an e x t e n s i o n of the Homeowner Grant, c a l l e d the S c h o o l Property Tax Removal and Resource Grant. The new grant e n t i t l e d each homeowner t o a minimum of $30.00 t o meet educ a t i o n tax c o s t s . I f the homeowner's tax b i l l d i d not exceed the then c u r r e n t $200.00 homeowner grant, a cheque f o r $30.00 was i s s u e d . I f the tax b i l l was more s u b s t a n t i a l , the homeowner would be e n t i t l e d t o $40.00 or 20% of the d i f f e r e n c e between the homeowner's grant and the t o t a l tax, whichever was l e s s . (Sun, Feb. 14, 1974) In 1975, the maximum amount of the School Tax Removal and Resource Grant was doubled to $80.00. From the p e r s p e c t i v e of government housing expenditures, the homeowner grant appears t o be the most important housing p o l i c y , even c o n s i d e r i n g the 1972-1976 p e r i o d of i n c r e a s e d government hou s i n g a c t i v i t y . The budget f o r the Homeowner and School Property Tax Removal and Resource Grant was $107 m i l l i o n , which was $17 m i l l i o n more than the e n t i r e Department of Housing budget. From the p e r s p e c t i v e of i n t e r g o v e r n m e n t a l t r a n s f e r s , however, the expenditure i s s i m p l y a s h i f t from m u n i c i p a l t a x a t i o n t o p r o v i n c i a l t a x a t i o n . (Runge, 1975, 123) The Homeowner Grant had two major e f f e c t s . F i r s t , the grant tends t o make the p r o p e r t y tax somewhat more p r o g r e s s i v e , s i n c e the p r o p e r t y tax i s i n h e r e n t l y r e g r e s s i v e i n t h a t those with l ower incomes t e n d t o pay a h i g h e r p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e i r income i n p r o p e r t y taxes. The grant i s a somewhat p r o g r e s s i v e subsidy s i n c e the amount i s uniform r e g a r d l e s s of income. (Runge 1975, 122) The p r o g r e s s i v i t y of the p r o p e r t y tax f o r homeowners c o u l d have been b e t t e r achieved, however, through the mechanism of a tax c r e d i t , as p r a c t i s e d i n O n t a r i o and Manitoba. The second major e f f e c t i s t o t r a n s f e r the tax burden from homeowners t o r e n t e r s , thereby s u b s t a n t i a l l y f a v o u r i n g homeownership. The Renter's Tax C r e d i t was intended t o d e a l with t h i s drawback, alt h o u g h the b e n e f i t s of the Homeowner Grant comprising o f a maximum grant of $280, and Renter's Tax C r e d i t comprising of a maximum grant of $100 were not e q u i v a l e n t . The Leasehold Mortgage Program. The L e a s e h o l d Mortgage Program p r o b a b l y r e p r e s e n t s the most i n n o v a t i v e , as w e l l as the most c o n t r o v e r s i a l housing program o f the NDP government. The program p r o v i d e d a f u n d a mentally d i f f e r e n t method f o r a s s i s t i n g homeownership from t h a t of the P r o v i n c i a l Home A c q u i s i t i o n Program, and the f e d e r a l A s s i s t e d Homeownership Program (AHOP). The essence of the program was the d i r e c t p r o v i s i o n of l a r g e mortgages at s u b s i d i z e d r a t e s on l a n d l e a s e d from the p r o v i n c i a l government under the R e s i d e n t i a l Land Lease Program. The purpose of the mortgage program was to "enable moderate-income f a m i l i e s t o get a s t a r t on homeownership without p r o v i d i n g them wi t h a l i f e - l o n g subsidy." (B.C., Hansard, Feb. 14, 1974, 215, quote from Lome Nicholson) The p h i l o s o p h y behind the program can be found i n the f o l l o w i n g statement of the Housing M i n i s t e r : "we b e l i e v e t h a t i t i s proper t h a t f u t u r e f u r t h e r p r i v a t e s p e c u l a t i o n be p r o h i b i t e d and t h a t any w i n d f a l l p r o f i t t h a t occurs from an i n c r e a s e i n l a n d v a l u e s h o u l d be enjoyed by a l l members of the community." (Vancouver Sun, Feb. 15, 1974) The program was i n i t i a t e d i n the s p r i n g of 1974, f o l l o w i n g 73 a d o p t i o n o f the e n a b l i n g l e g i s l a t i o n , the L e a s e h o l d Conversion Mortgage Loan Act. E l i g i b i l i t y c r i t e r i a i n c l u d e d l i m i t i n g the program t o f a m i l i e s with a t l e a s t one c h i l d and r e q u i r i n g a minimum r e s i d e n c y i n the p r o v i n c e . The program o f f e r e d a l o a n f o r 95% o f t h e l e n d i n g - va l u e o f a home , o r $ 30, 000 , w h i c h e v e r was l e s s , f o r homes c o n s t r u c t e d on l a n d l e a s e d from the Crown. The mortgage was amortized over t h i r t y - f i v e y e ars with a f i v e year term, and with a maximum i n t e r e s t r a t e of 10%. The i n t e r e s t r a t e was a d j u s t e d down t o 5% to a s s i s t f a m i l i e s t o l i m i t monthly payment t o a maximum of 25% of t h e i r a d j u s t e d f a m i l y income. For the purposes of the program, a d j u s t e d means t o t a l income l e s s $1,000 per annum f o r a working spouse or s i n g l e parent. The i n t e r e s t r a t e d eduction was c a l l e d a " f r e e loan" and was a v a i l a b l e f o r a p e r i o d o f th r e e years, renewable once f o r a f u r t h e r t h r e e years. S u b s i d i z a t i o n was t h e r e f o r e , l i m i t e d t o a maximum s i x year p e r i o d . An u n d e r l y i n g assumption of the program was t h a t f a m i l y income would i n c r e a s e 6% p e r y e a r so t h a t t h e f u l l i n t e r e s t r a t e c o u l d be p a i d i n year s i x . (Runge, 1975, 115) The " f r e e l o a n " was r e p a y a b l e upon s a l e o r t r a n s f e r o f t h e l e a s e , l e s s a c e r t a i n f o r g i v e n e s s o f one t h i r d , o r a maximum $25 p e r month. When the homeowner ceased normal o c c u p a t i o n and ren t e d or s u b l e t the house, the i n t e r e s t r a t e on the mortgage was i n c r e a s e d to 10% and the ground r e n t was r e a s s e s s e d a t the then market v a l u e of the land. The r e a s s e s s m e n t o f l a n d was t h e key a s p e c t o f t h e program t h a t kept p r i c e s low. I n i t i a l l y , the l o t s were l e a s e d a t development c o s t s , which were g e n e r a l l y much lower than market 74 v a l u e s . I f the program had c o n s i s t e d of s e l l i n g the l o t s a t c o s t , r a t h e r than l e a s i n g them, they c o u l d have been r a p i d l y r e s o l d by owners a t market v a l u e . The owners, would thereby reap a c a p i t a l g a i n , b u t t h e u n i t s w o u l d q u i c k l y be p u t out o f r e a c h o f moderate income f a m i l i e s . Since the mortgage o n l y c o v e r s the c o s t of c o n s t r u c t i o n , u n l i k e t r a d i t i o n a l mortgages which cover l a n d and c o n s t r u c t i o n , the average mortgage under the l e a s e h o l d mortgage program was s m a l l e r . Two forms of l e a s e were o f f e r e d : 1. The 60 year l e a s e A 60 y e a r l e a s e was o f f e r e d a t 8% o f t h e i n i t i a l c o s t of the land. No down payment was r e q u i r e d , and the l e a s e was not payable f o r the f i r s t year. When the l e a s e e x p i r e d the Housing Department had the o p t i o n of extending the l e a s e of compensating the l e s s e e f o r the v a l u e of the improvements. In essence, the buyer o b t a i n e d 100% f i n a n c i n g of the land, which was e v a l u e a t e d a t c o s t r a t h e r than market v a l u e . These p r o v i s i o n s enabled moderate income people t o purchase t h e i r own home a t a f f o r d a b l e p r i c e s . For p a r t i c i p a n t s , there i s a t r a d e - o f f between lower monthly payments and a v e r y low downpayment and the l i m i t a t i o n s the mixed form o f tenure imposes upon chances f o r c a p i t a l g a ins. 2. The 99 year p r e p a i d l e a s e A 99 year p r e p a i d l e a s e was i n t r o d u c e d s h o r t l y a f t e r t h e 60 y e a r l e a s e . The 99 y e a r l e a s e o f f e r e d l o t s a t development c o s t . When the demand f o r the l o t s exceeded supply, a l o t t e r y system was e s t a b l i s h e d . With the e x c e p t i o n of some c o n t r o l o v e r changes i n l a n d use, the 99 year l e a s e was v e r y c l o s e t o fee simple ownership i n t h a t the l e a s e was f r e e l y a s s i g n a b l e t o o t h e r s . The l o n g e r term i n c r e a s e d the r e s a l e v a l u e of the house at the expense of l o s i n g 100% f i n a n c i n g on the l a n d and the a d d i t i o n of monthly charges f o r repayment of the p r i n c i p l e on the land. The 99 year l e a s e , t h e r e f o r e , r e q u i r e d a l a r g e r downpayment and somewhat h i g h e r c a r r y i n g charges. From the p e r s p e c t i v e of the p r o v i n c e , the 99 year l e a s e p e r m i t t e d l e s s c o n t r o l o v e r the p u b l i c l y produced housing, but o f f e r e d the advantage of producing a much l a r g e r s h o r t term cash flow. (Runge, 1975, 115-116, B.C., Department of Housing, 1976, 19) 75 The l e a s e h o l d mortgage program was c r i t i c i z e d i n two ways. F i r s t , i t i g n o r e d the reasons why homeownership i s seen as d e s i r e a b l e t o the m a j o r i t y of the p o p u l a t i o n , t h a t i s , owning a home o f f e r e d a chance t o b u i l d up e q u i t y . A c c o r d i n g the B i l l Bennett, the l e a d e r of the o p p o s i t i o n a t the time: I t i s u n a c c e p t a b l e t o t h e p u b l i c t h a t t h e y do not h a v e the o p p o r t u n i t y t o own a p i e c e of t h e i r own c o u n t r y which comes with homeownership. Owning a home i s the o n l y hedge the p u b l i c has a g a i n s t i n f l a t i o n and i t s one chance f o r an investment and independence. (Vancouver Sun, Aug. 31, 1974) Second, the program was c r i t i c i z e d on i d e o l o g i c a l grounds. The l e a s e h o l d mortgage program, which e s s e n t i a l l y a l l o w e d one t o purchase a house, but o n l y l e a s e the l a n d from the government, was seen.as an a t t a c k on t h e p r i n c i p l e o f t h e p r i v a t e o w n e r s h i p of land. Moreover, the program was viewed as being the l e a d i n g edge of " s o c i a l i s t " government l a n d ownership. Mr. Bennett, whose S o c i a l C r e d i t P a r t y p l a t f o r m c o n t a i n e d a r e a f f i r m a t i o n o f the r i g h t t o p r i v a t e ownership of land, argued t h a t : People have come here from c o u n t r i e s where they were tenants of the s t a t e and couldn't own land. I can't imagine anyone f i g h t i n g or going t o war when they don't own land—when they're o n l y a tenant i n t h e i r own c o u n t r y . " (Sun, Feb. 13, 1975) Consequently, s h o r t l y a f t e r the e l e c t i o n of the S o c i a l C r e d i t Government i n December 1975, the program was c a n c e l l e d . H o l d e r s of the approximately 700 mortgages which had been approved under the program were g i v e n the o p t i o n t o purchase t h e i r l e a s e h o l d l o t s . (Runge, 1975, 116 and Sun, May 6, 1978) 76 4.4 Rental Housing and Renter Assistance Programs The Renter's Resource Grant and The Renter's Tax C r e d i t . The Renter's Resource Grant and the Renter's Tax C r e d i t comprise the pr o v i n c e ' s programs of d i r e c t a i d t o r e n t e r s . The Renter's Resource Grant e s t a b l i s h e d i n 1974, was an e x t e n s i o n t o a l l r e n t e r s o f the E l d e r l y C i t i z e n ' s Renters Grant i n i t i a t e d i n 1972. The program p r o v i d e d an annual grant of $30.00 t o r e n t e r s up t o the age of 65, and $80 f o r r e n t e r s o v e r the age of 65. Thus, s e n i o r c i t i z e n s remained the primary b e n e f i c i a r y i n terms of the amount r e c e i v e d . T h i s l e g i s l a t i o n was r e p e a l e d i n 1975 and r e p l a c e d with a Renter's Tax C r e d i t , which p r o v i d e d b e n e f i t s t o a l l r e n t e r s . A t r a n s i t i o n a l grant f o r s e n i o r c i t i z e n s was maintained f o r one year under s p e c i a l l e g i s l a t i o n . The Renter's Tax C r e d i t , a d m i n i s t e r e d through the income tax system, p r o v i d e d tax r e l i e f t o r e n t e r s up t o a maximum o f $100.00 per year. U n l i k e the Renter's Resource Grant, or indeed the Homeowner's Grant, the tax c r e d i t i s extremely p r o g r e s s i v e i n i t s d i s t r i b u t i o n b e n e f i t s i n t h a t the amount of the subsidy was i n v e r s e l y r e l a t e d t o l e v e l of income. The maximum grant of $100.00 was a v a i l a b l e f o r those with no t a x a b l e income. For those w i t h income, the $100 grant was reduced by 1% o f t a x a b l e income with b e n e f i t s v a n i s h i n g when t a x a b l e income reached $10,000. No grant would exceed 10% of rent p a i d , except f o r s e n i o r c i t i z e n s , who r e c e i v e d a minimum grant o f $80 r e g a r d l e s s o f income. However, i t i s c l e a r t h a t even the maximum grant l e v e l o f $100 per year f o r those with no income, and $80 per year f o r s e n i o r s , was meager and would not be o f much a s s i s t a n c e i n r e d u c i n g 77 housing c o s t s . Since the tax c r e d i t was a tax expenditure, i t was i n c l u d e d i n t h e budget o f t h e M i n i s t r y o f F i n a n c e r a t h e r t h a n t h e budget of the Department o f Housing. In 1976, i t was estimated t h a t $132 m i l l i o n would be spent on the Homeowner Grant and School Tax Removal and Resource grant, compared t o $12 m i l l i o n f o r the Renter Tax C r e d i t . Thus, the p r o v i n c e spent approximately t e n times as much on homeowners, who comprised approximately 64% of households as compared t o r e n t e r s who comprised approximately 36% of households. Home Conversion Mortgage Loan Program. The second program f o r the r e n t a l s e c t o r was the Home C o n v e r s i o n Mortgage Loan program, i n c l u d e d i n the Leas e h o l d and Conversion Mortgage Loan Act. The purpose o f the program was to " i n c r e a s e r e n t a l accommodation and r e s i d e n t i a l d e n s i t i e s i n l a r g e urban areas without d i s r u p t i n g neighbourhoods with comprehensive redevelopment." (B.C., Department of Housing, 1975, 12) The program o f f e r e d low i n t e r e s t l o a n s t o homeowners who c r e a t e d new r e n t a l u n i t s i n e x i s t i n g d w e l l i n g s . The Home Conversion Mortgage Loan Program r e p r e s e n t s a f i r s t attempt t o i n t r o d u c e r e s i d e n t i a l l a n d use i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n , which has s i n c e become a w i d e l y d i s c u s s e d p l a n n i n g s t r a t e g y . However, s i m i l i a r t o many c u r r e n t r e s i d e n t i a l i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n attempts, the program was not s u c c e s s f u l i n i n c r e a s i n g the s u p p l y of r e n t a l u n i t s due to r e s t r i c t i v e zoning p r a c t i c e s and neighbourhood r e s i s t a n c e t o changing s i n g l e f a m i l y r e s i d e n t i a l zoning. (Sun, Dec.2, 1975 and 78 Jan. 14, 1975)) In the f i r s t two years o f o p e r a t i o n , o n l y 60 loan s were made. Rent Control and Tenant-Landlord Regulation. U n t i l 1970, the body of law r e g u l a t i n g l a n d l o r d - t e n a n t r e l a t i o n s i n B.C. remained e s s e n t i a l l y unchanged from i t s 1858 o r i g i n s . Rooted i n common law, i t drew no d i s t i n c t i o n between r e s i d e n t i a l and i n d u s t r i a l / c o m m e r c i a l t e n a n c i e s . In A p r i l 1970, a s e r i e s of amendments brought s i g n i f i c a n t reform, i n c l u d i n g the requirement f o r t h r e e months n o t i c e of ren t i n c r e a s e s and l i m i t i n g r e n t i n c r e a s e s t o once a year. In 1973, a comprehensive review of l a n d l o r d - t e n a n t r e l a t i o n s was undertaken by the Law Reform Commission o f B r i t i s h Columbia. The r e p o r t recommended the need f o r i n c r e a s e d s e c u r i t y of tenure and advocated the e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a Rentalsman. Although the Commission d i d not recommend a system o f r e n t c o n t r o l s , i t d i d recommend t h a t : The proposed Act empower the Rentalsman, on the complaint of a tenant t h a t he has been d i s c r i m i n a t e d a g a i n s t i n the s e t t i n g o f a ren t i n c r e a s e w i t h the purpose of d i s l o d g i n g him from the premises. The b u r d e n o f p r o v i n g which s h a l l be on t h e t e n a n t , t o d e c l a r e t h a t the i n c r e a s e i s d i s c r i m i n a t o r y and i n e f f e c t i v e . (Law Reform Commission of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1973, 7) On A p r i l 9, 1974 t h e new L a n d l o r d and Tenant A c t was i n t r o d u c e d i n the l e g i s l a t u r e . The A c t i n c l u d e d s i g n i f i c a n t changes, such as c r e a t i o n of the o f f i c e o f the Rentalsman and s e c u r i t y o f tenure p r o v i s i o n s p e r m i t t i n g e v i c t i o n s o n l y f o r s p e c i f i c " j u s t causes". Part o f the Act was subsequently r e v i s e d 79 t o permit a scheme of r e n t r e g u l a t i o n whereby the c a b i n e t , on the Rentalsman's recommendation, c o u l d s e t an a l l o w a b l e r e n t i n c r e a s e , with c o n s i d e r a t i o n g i v e n t o o p e r a t i n g expenses and c a p i t a l expenses, as w e l l as t o r e n t i n c r e a s e s above the a l l o w a b l e i n c r e a s e where j u s t i f i e d by the l a n d l o r d . On May 2, 1974, the R e s i d e n t i a l Premises I n t e r i m Rent S t a b i l i z a t i o n Act was adopted, p r o v i d i n g an i n t e r i m measure t o s t a b i l i z e r e n t i n c r e a s e s u n t i l a r e v i s e d L a n d l o r d and Tenant Act was p r o c l a i m e d . The Interim Act p r o v i d e d t h a t l a n d l o r d s c o u l d not i n c r e a s e r e n t s by more than 8% of the the r e n t charged d u r i n g t h e l a s t r e n t a l p e r i o d i n 1973. The A c t was made r e t r o a c t i v e t o January 1, 1974. M u n i c i p a l i t i e s were a u t h o r i z e d t o a p p l y t o the Lieutenant-Governor i n C o u n c i l f o r exemption from the Act. The 1974 L a n d l o r d and Tenant Act subsequently r e c e i v e d Royal Assent on June 20, 1974, with o n l y the s e c t i o n e s t a b l i s h i n g the Rentalsman being proclaimed. The rentalsman was appointed on J u l y 1, 1974. Dr. John Cragg of UBC was commissioned t o undertake a study p r o p o s i n g the a p p r o p r i a t e a l l o w a b l e r e n t i n c r e a s e t o r e p l a c e the 8% i n t e r i m l i m i t . Dr. Cragg concluded t h a t r e n t c o n t r o l s c o u l d be s a f e l y used t o lower r e n t s i f l a n d l o r d s i n g e n e r a l "are r e a p i n g and can expect t o reap p r o f i t s i n excess of those needed t o induce them to p r o v i d e housing". (Runge, 1975, 295) In September 1974, Dr. Cragg o r a l l y r e p o r t e d t o the Rentalsman t h a t r e n t s s h o u l d i n c r e a s e by 30% t o compensate l a n d l o r d s f o r r e n t i n c r e a s e s t h a t c o u l d not be captured between 1972-1974 due t o r e n t c o n t r o l . At t h a t p o i n t , the Rentalsman asked t o be r e l i e v e d of h i s d u t i e s , 80 u r g i n g t h a t the o f f i c e of the Rentalsman not be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r s e t t i n g a l l o w a b l e r e n t i n c r e a s e s . ( I b i d . , 296) F o l l o w i n g a p r o t e s t by tenants groups on October 18, 1974, the A t t o r n e y - G e n e r a l announced on October 25, t h a t a Rent Review Commission would be e s t a b l i s h e d separate from the Rentalsman t o a d m i n i s t e r r e n t review. On November 4, the A t t o r n e y - G e n e r a l i n t r o d u c e d the Landlord-Tenant Amendment Act which i n c r e a s e d the c e i l i n g r a t e from 8% t o 10.6%, w i t h an a l l o w a n c e f o r major r e n o v a t i o n s . No r e n t l i m i t was a p p l i e d t o new accommodation f o r the f i r s t f i v e years. The l e g i s l a t i o n e s t a b l i s h i n g the Rent Review Commission was p r o c l a i m e d on December 2, 1974. In February 1975, the I n terdepartmental Study Team on Housing and Rents was commissioned by the A t t o r n e y - G e n e r a l and the M i n i s t e r of Housing to "document the magnitude of t r e n d s i n the h ousing and r e n t a l markets, c o n s i d e r a l t e r n a t i v e s and recommend s u i t a b l e p o l i c i e s . " ( J a f f e r y , 1975, 5) Thus, the Study Team was appointed t o examine the f u t u r e of r e n t c o n t r o l i n B.C. and the i m p l i c a t i o n s of r e n t c o n t r o l i n the h o u s i n g s e c t o r . Its u l t i m a t e task appeared t o be t o recommend t o the B.C. government a s e t of h ousing p o l i c e s which would respond t o the p u b l i c concern w i t h the h ousing s i t u a t i o n i n B.C. as i n d i c a t e d i n p r e s s a r t i c l e s c i t e d e a r l i e r . In September 1975, K a r l J a f f a r y , Chairman of the Study Team, r e l e a s e d a r e p o r t e n t i t l e d Housing and Rent  C o n t r o l i n B r i t i s h Columbia. In the f o l l o w i n g month Dal l a r d Runge, the D i r e c t o r of the Study Team, r e l e a s e d another r e p o r t e n t i t l e d A Comprehensive S o c i a l Housing P o l i c y f o r B r i t i s h 81 Columbia. The f i r s t r e p o r t was the o f f i c i a l r e p o r t , w h i l e the second r e p o r t was the r e s e a r c h s t a f f r e p o r t . The two r e p o r t s are v e r y s i m i l i a r i n content. Both r e p o r t s , f o r the f i r s t time, presented background i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g the h i s t o r y o f p r o v i n c i a l government a c t i v i t y i n housing, e x i s t i n g housing programs, h o u s i n g and t a x a t i o n , r e n t c o n t r o l , and s t a t i s t i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g housing c o n d i t i o n s i n B.C. Both r e p o r t s make the case f o r a s t r o n g i n t e r v e n t i o n i s t r o l e f o r government i n housing i s s u e s . The d i f f e r e n c e s i n the r e p o r t s are minor and t e c h n i c a l , r e p r e s e n t i n g o n l y s l i g h t v a r i a t i o n s i n emphasis. For example, i n the recommendations r e g a r d i n g h o u s i n g s u p p l y p o l i c y both r e p o r t s recommend t h a t p r o d u c t i o n s u b s i d i e s s h o u l d be used t o ensure an "adequate" s u p p l y of housing, with the Runge Report adding t h a t "over the next f i v e years, the Housing Department s h o u l d expand i t s present d e l i v e r y mechanism t o be i n a p o s i t i o n t o s u p p l y a t l e a s t h a l f t h e h o u s i n g need i n the province." (Runge, 1975, 15) The two r e p o r t s were c r i t i c i z e d by Raymond Heung (1976) an economist who wrote on b e h a l f of the F r a s e r I n s t i t u t e , as h a v i n g m e t h o d o l o g i c a l shortcomings and a l s o i n d i c a t i n g a p e r i p h e a l understanding of the o p e r a t i o n of the h ousing market. (Heung, 1976, 2) A l t h o u g h t h e Runge and J a f f a r y r e p o r t s f a i l e d t o h a v e a s i g n i f i c a n t i n f l u e n c e on p o l i c y makers due t o a change i n government, they c o n s t i t u t e the f i r s t major endeavour i n the a n a l y s i s o f p r o v i n c i a l h o u s i n g p o l i c y . 82 4.5 S o c i a l Housing Assistance Programs P u b l i c Housing. In 1974, B.C. f i n a l l y took advantage of the f e d e r a l government's ten year o l d S e c t i o n 43 p u b l i c housing program. Under S e c t i o n 43, CMHC p r o v i d e d l o a n s of up t o 90% o f the c o s t s of c o n s t r u c t i o n o f new p r o j e c t s . In a d d i t i o n , r e n t geared t o income s u b s i d i e s on S e c t i o n 43 p u b l i c housing were p a i d through S e c t i o n 44 of NHA which s p l i t s the subsidy 50/50 with the p r o v i n c e s . S e c t i o n 43 h o u s i n g c o s t s the p r o v i n c e s a s m a l l e r i n i t i a l c a p i t a l o u t l a y but a l a r g e r long-term r e n t supplement subsidy as compared t o the p r o v i s i o n s of S e c t i o n 40 housing. The amount of p u b l i c housing t h a t c o u l d be b u i l t by B r i t i s h Columbia was l i m i t e d by the amount of money t h a t the f e d e r a l government was w i l l i n g t o a l l o c a t e i n each budget year. In 1975, the p r o v i n c i a l government requested $22.5 m i l l i o n d o l l a r s f o r S e c t i o n 40 housing and $227.6 m i l l i o n f o r S e c t i o n 43 housing. The f e d e r a l a l l o c a t i o n , however, housing was o n l y $10.4 m i l l i o n f o r S e c t i o n 40, and $34.5 f o r S e c t i o n 43. By 1972 and 197 3 the f e d e r a l government had a l r e a d y begun t o move towards a s s i s t e d homeownership and e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l r e n t a l housing s u b s i d i e s as a s u b s t i t u t e f o r p u b l i c housing i n order t o l i m i t i t s subsidy committment. (Runge, 1975, 147) The p u b l i c housing stock developed under S e c t i o n 40 and 43 was managed by B.C. Housing Management Commission (BCHMC) which had i t s mandate r e c o n s t i t u t e d i n 1974 t o permit d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of management with an emphasis on improved communication with tenants. In a d d i t i o n , i t s maintenance c a p a b i l i t y was enhanced. 83 New p u b l i c housing was c o n s t r u c t e d through the Pr o p o s a l C a l l program of D u n h i l l Development C o r p o r a t i o n , w i t h the f i n i s h e d u n i t s turned o v e r t o BCHMC f o r management. A major change i n p o l i c y o c c u r r e d i n 1974, when t h e f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l government reached an agreement r e g a r d i n g an 'income mix' p o l i c y t o ensure a mix of income l e v e l s i n each f a m i l y development. P r o v i n c i a l p u b l i c housing was not t o be r e s e r v e d f o r those most i n need, r a t h e r a r e s i d e n t p o p u l a t i o n was to be sought t h a t r e f l e c t e d the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the surrounding p o p u l a t i o n . To a c h i e v e the d e s i r e d income balance, 35% o f Commission managed f a m i l y u n i t s were o f f e r e d t o f a m i l i e s of moderate income. In accordance t o the new p o l i c y , the p r o v i n c i a l program was renamed " P r o v i n c i a l R e n t a l Housing". D e s p i t e not o b t a i n i n g a l l the funding i t d e s i r e d from the f e d e r a l government, the p r o v i n c i a l government a s s i s t e d the c o n s t r u c t i o n of about 1,300 new u n i t s under S e c t i o n s 40 and 43 i n 1974, a 36% i n c r e a s e i n the e x i s t i n g s t o c k of p u b l i c housing. In 1975, another 1,800 u n i t s were a s s i s t e d . Between December 31, 1974 and December 31, 1976, the s o c i a l h o using p o r t f o l i o o f BCHMC grew from 4,200 u n i t s t o 8,450 u n i t s . (B.C., Department o f Housing, 1975 and 1976 and B.C., M i n i s t r y o f M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s and Housing, 1976) Therefore, i t i s apparant t h a t a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n o f the p r o v i n c i a l government d u r i n g the 1972-1976 p e r i o d was t o a s s i s t the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a : s u b s t a n t i a l p o r t i o n o f the p u b l i c h o using s u p p l y f o r the p r o v i n c e . T a b l e V shows p u b l i c housing p r o d u c t i o n under S e c t i o n 40 and 43 of the NHA from 1971 t o 1982. 84 TABLE V FEDERAL/PROVINCIAL HOUSING PRODUCTION BY YEAR AND BY PROGRAM Year 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 198: PROGRAMS: AHOP, Direct & Private 0 0 329 989 2481 5921 4893 1574 0 0 0 0 ARP, Direct & Private 1869 4269 9254 838 Sec.40, Public Housing N/A 301 218 417 898 639 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sec.43, Public Housing 0 0 0 0 1055 911 29 0 0 0 0 0 Sec.40, Rural and Remote 0 0 0 120 120 158 253 157 50 195 215 0 Sec.15, 15.1 Non-Profit 2185 799 2098 2288 1648 2714 846 515 0 0 0 0 Sec.34, 18 Co-op 0 0 74 466 805 125 66 44 0 Source: Alberta Housing and Public Works, 1980, Future Fiscal /Arrangements For Housing In Canada. Co-operative Housing. Changes t o the N a t i o n a l Housing Act i n 1973 encouraged the development of n o n - p r o f i t c o - o p e r a t i v e housing. In 1974, the B.C. P r o v i n c i a l government re c o g n i z e d co-o p e r a t i v e s as a l e g i t i m a t e h o u s i n g a l t e r n a t i v e and p r o v i d e d v a r i o u s programs t o a s s i s t t h e i r development. A c c o r d i n g t o the government: due t o i n f l a t e d c o s t s , s p i r a l l i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t s and abnormal i n t e r e s t r a t e s , few wage earners i n B.C. can a f f o r d a house today. The Department has t h e r e f o r e p l a c e d emphasis on h o u s i n g c o - o p e r a t i v e s as i t i s a most s a t i s f a c t o r y and f u l f i l l i n g way of p r o v i d i n g good and adequate housing a t a r e a s o n a b l e p r i c e . Co-o p e r a t i v e h ousing s u b s c r i b e s t o the p r i n c i p l e t h a t h o u s i n g i s f o r s h e l t e r , not p r o f i t . (B.C., Department of Housing, 1975, 15) There are two k i n d s o f h o u s i n g c o - o p e r a t i v e s ; the c o n t i n u i n g c o - o p e r a t i v e and the b u i l d i n g c o - o p e r a t i v e . The c o n t i n u i n g c o - o p e r a t i v e i n v o l v e s c o l l e c t i v e ownership and management o f a p r o j e c t a f t e r completion, w h i l e a b u i l d i n g c o - o p e r a t i v e i s made up o f a group o f p e o p l e who c o l l a b e r a t e i n the b u i l d i n g of h ousing u n i t s t h a t are then owned i n d i v i d u a l l y . B u i l d i n g c o - o p e r a t i v e s are r e l a t i v e l y unimportant i n B.C., a l t h o u g h the p r o v i n c e p r o v i d e d a s s i s t a n c e through p r o v i s i o n of l e a s e d l o t s , l e a s e h o l d mortgages, i n t e r i m f i n a n c i n g and c o n s u l t i n g s e r v i c e s . C o n t i n u i n g c o - o p e r a t i v e s are much more s i g n i f i c a n t . The p r o v i n c e p r o v i d e d f i v e c a t e g o r i e s of a s s i s t a n c e , which, a l o n g with f e d e r a l a s s i s t a n c e , made development of c o - o p e r a t i v e s v i a b l e . F i r s t , the p r o v i n c e purchased l a n d f o r h o u s i n g co-o p e r a t i v e s , or g i v e them p r e f e r e n c e i n the d i s p o s i t i o n of Crown Land. Second, the p r o v i n c e l e a s e d l a n d t o c o - o p e r a t i v e s at 4% of 86 market v a l u e p e r y e a r , w i t h t h e f i r s t payment due one y e a r a f t e r e x e c u t i o n o f the l e a s e . T h i s a s s i s t a n c e was p a r t i c u l a r l y important as the l e a s e removes the c o s t l y and r i s k y process of o b t a i n i n g an o p t i o n t o purchase l a n d without any guarantee from CMHC t h a t the p r o j e c t would be approved. T h i r d , the p r o v i n c e p r o v i d e d i n t e r i m f i n a n c i n g because a p p r o v a l from CMHC c o u l d take as l o n g as three months, d u r i n g which time the p r o j e c t c o u l d be s t a l l e d without the i n t e r i m f i n a n c i n g . F o u r t h l y , the p r o v i n c e p r o v i d e d a "High Impact Grant" o f up t o 10% o f the c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t s i n s p e c i a l c a s e s t o l o w e r r e n t s f o r a p e r i o d o f not l e s s t h a n f i v e y e a r s and not more t h a n 10 years. The High Impact Grant was a form o f p r o d u c t i o n subsidy i n response t o a c r i s i s caused by i n f l a t i o n . The i n t e n t o f the g r a n t was t o lower t h e i n i t i a l r e n t s i n a p r o j e c t o v e r a f i v e t o ten year p e r i o d , on the assumption t h a t household incomes would r i s e o v e r t h e l i f e o f t h e p r o j e c t , so t h a t by t h e end o f t h e grant p e r i o d , economic r e n t s c o u l d be pa i d . F i n a l l y , the p r o v i n c e and the f e d e r a l government s u b s i d i z e d up t o 25% o f the u n i t s i n c o - o p e r a t i v e s f o r v e r y low income h o u s e h o l d s t h r o u g h S e c t i o n 40 o f t h e NHA up t o Fa 11 1975, and through S e c t i o n 44 a f t e r F a l l 1975. Under S e c t i o n 40, the p r o v i n c e p a i d f o r 25% of the subsidy, under S e c t i o n 44 t h i s was i n c r e a s e d t o 50%. Between 1973 and l a t e 1975, there were 895 government-assisted c o o p e r t i v e h o u s i n g u n i t s completed and 360 under c o n s t r u c t i o n . (B.C., Department of Housing, 1976, 17) Ta b l e V shows the number of c o - o p e r a t i v e u n i t s produced by the f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l governments between 1973 and 1978. The 87 major r e s t r i c t i o n t o the development o f c o - o p e r a t i v e housing i n B.C. was the l a c k adequate f e d e r a l funding l e v e l s . The p r o v i n c e asked CMHC f o r 60.4 m i l l i o n f o r c o - o p e r a t i v e s i n 1975 but was o n l y a l l o c a t e d $10 m i l l i o n . In order t o f a c i l i t a t e the development of c o - o p e r a t i v e housing, the government o f f e r e d t o support an e x i s t i n g n o n - p r o f i t o r g a n i z a t i o n , U n i t e d Housing Foundation, as the main development agency f o r c o - o p e r a t i v e h o u s i n g i n the p r o v i n c e . The Department of Housing gave U n i t e d Housing Foundation a grant r o u g h l y e q u a l l i n g two t h i r d s o f t h e i r o p e r a t i n g budget on the c o n d i t i o n t h a t the o r g a n i z a t i o n be acco u n t a b l e t o the government. (Runge, 1975, 133-134) N o n - P r o f i t Housing. U n t i l v e r y r e c e n t l y , p r i v a t e n o n - p r o f i t s e n i o r c i t i z e n h o u s i n g has been one of the most s u s t a i n e d and e x t e n s i v e o f the s o c i a l h o using programs i n B r i t i s h Columbia. V i r t u a l l y a l l p r i v a t e n o n - p r o f i t h o u s i n g i n B r i t i s h Columbia has been f o r s e n i o r c i t i z e n s . T h i s housing has been produced through c l o s e c o o p e r a t i o n between the B.C. Department of Housing and CMHC. Seni o r c i t i z e n h o using was funded under t h r e e s e c t i o n s of the NHA, S e c t i o n 40 p u b l i c housing, S e c t i o n 43 p r o v i n c i a l r e n t a l housing, and S e c t i o n 15.1 n o n - p r o f i t housing. In February 1975, an estimate of a c t i v i t y under the three programs showed 1,502 u n i t s under S e c t i o n 40, 2,255 under S e c t i o n 43, and 3,005 under S e c t i o n 15.1. (Runge, 1975, 141) The f e d e r a l p r i v a t e n o n - p r o f i t program, amended i n 197 3, p r o v i d e d n o n - p r o f i t o r g a n i z a t i o n s with 100% loan s a t f a v o u r a b l e 88 i n t e r e s t r a t e s , amortized o v e r f i f t y years. In a d d i t i o n , o r g a n i z a t i o n s were e l i g i b l e t o r e c e i v e up t o 10% of the c a p i t a l c o s t as a g r a n t , which was s i m p l y g i v e n by f o r g i v i n g 10% o f the l o a n repayment. Further, a $10,000 grant was g i v e n t o newly o r g a n i z i n g groups. The p r o v i n c e t a r g e t t e d i t s a i d t o low income n o n - p r o f i t h o u s i n g by o f f e r i n g a o n e - t h i r d c a p i t a l grant f o r s e l f - c o n t a i n e d u n i t s and 35% grant f o r s p e c i a l care u n i t s . Moreover, the p r o v i n c e o f f e r e d t o purchase s u i t a b l e s i t e s f o r low-income non-p r o f i t h o using and t r a n s f e r e d the t i t l e t o the n o n - p r o f i t o r g a n i z a t i o n f o l l o w i n g a p p r o v a l of the mortgage and repayment of purchase p r i c e t o CMHC. In 1975, ve r y s t r i c t income l i m i t s f o r i n d i v i d u a l s were r e l a x e d t o permit a l a r g e r mix of incomes i n a p r o j e c t . Between 1973-1975 the r i s e i n c a p i t a l c o s t s f o r new housing was so l a r g e t h a t the whole n o n - p r o f i t program was put i n jeopardy. For example, the average, p r i c e per u n i t produced i n c r e a s e d approximately 30% from $7,775 i n 1973 to $10,078 i n 1974. (Runge, 1975, 143, and CMHC Reg i o n a l O f f i c e S t a t i s t i c s ) Due to the h i g h r e n t s t h a t had to be charged t o make the program v i a b l e the n o n - p r o f i t program was i n danger of being unable t o a s s i s t low-income people. CMHC was faced with the p o s s i b i l i t y of coming i n t o p o s s e s s i o n o f a l a r g e number of s e n i o r c i t i z e n h ousing p r o j e c t s . In order t o save the program, i t was necessary to make s h e l t e r s u b s i d i e s a v a i l a b l e through S e c t i o n 44 of the NHA. The f e d e r a l government and p r o v i n c i a l government came t o an 89 agreement i n 1975 t o share e q u a l l y the S e c t i o n 44 r e n t supplement subsidy. I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t t o note t h a t the p r o v i n c e c o u l d have saved money by c o n s t r u c t i n g senior's h o u s i n g under S e c t i o n 40 of the NHA, where the f e d e r a l government's share of s u b s i d i e s would be 75%. T h i s s i t u a t i o n may have p r o v i d e d the impetus t o the f e d e r a l government t o a l l o w the S e c t i o n 44 r e n t supplement s u b s i d i e s t o be used f o r n o n - p r o f i t s e n i o r c i t i z e n s ' h o using programs. The p r o v i n c e a p p a r e n t l y chose n o n - p r o f i t s e n i o r c i t i z e n ' s housing as i t s p r e f e r r e d s t r a t e g y s i n c e i t b e l i e v e d t h a t the management of such p r o j e c t s would be more r e s p o n s i v e t o the needs of the r e s i d e n t s than p u b l i c housing would be. (Runge, 1975, 144) The p r o v i n c e d i d not a s s i s t f a m i l y n o n - p r o f i t housing. However, i n 1974, the Greater Vancouver R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t c r e a t e d the Greater Vancouver Housing C o r p o r a t i o n t o a c q u i r e and b u i l d r e n t a l accommodation f o r f a m i l i e s u s i n g S e c t i o n 15.1 p r o v i s i o n s . The p u b l i c n o n - p r o f i t p r o v i s i o n s of S e c t i o n 15.1 were more f a v o u r a b l e t o m u n i c i p a l c o r p o r a t i o n s , as compared t o p r o v i n c i a l c o r p o r a t i o n s . M u n i c i p a l c o r p o r a t i o n s r e c e i v e d the same terms as p r i v a t e n o n - p r o f i t s o c i e t i e s , t h a t i s , m u n i c i p a l c o r p o r a t i o n s can r e c e i v e 100% f i n a n c i n g as compared t o o n l y 95% f i n a n c i n g f o r p r o v i n c i a l c o r p o r a t i o n s . 90 4.6 Conclusion The P h i l o s o p h i c a l Basis f o r Housing P o l i c y ; 1972-1976. The New Democratic p a r t y s u b s c r i b e s t o a p h i l o s o p h y o f s o c i a l democracy. S o c i a l democrats do not q u e s t i o n c a p i t a l i s m i t s e l f , b u t argue t h a t contemporary democratic c a p i t a l i s t n a t i o n s have f a i l e d t o r e a l i z e or are i n c a p a b l e o f r e a l i z i n g h u m a n i s t i c and moral v a l u e s . Thus, governments must r e s o l v e the s t r u c t u r a l problems of c a p i t a l i s t economies. (Offe, 1984, 124) Government i n t e r v e n t i o n i s seen as e s s e n t i a l and continuous i n order t o r e g u l a t e the p r i v a t e market t o make i t r e s p o n s i v e t o human needs. Where the p r i v a t e market i s unable or u n w i l l i n g t o meet the needs of s o c i e t y i n g e n e r a l , or a p a r t o f i t , the government has a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o ensure t h a t the n e g l e c t e d needs are being met. S o c i a l democrats b e l i e v e t h a t b a s i c human needs, such as food, s h e l t e r , e d u c a t i o n and m e d i c a l care s h o u l d be p r o v i d e d t o a l l people without stigma. Trends i n Housing P o l i c y : 1972-1976. The p h i l o s o p h i c a l p o s i t i o n o f the New Democratic p a r t y p e r m i t t e d a wide scope f o r government i n t e r v e n t i o n i n housing. Moreover, the widespread acknowledgement of the e x i s t a n c e o f housing problems i n the e a r l y 1970's p r o v i d e d o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r a c t i o n . A l t h o u g h the government d i d continue t o encourage homeownership, a s s i s t a n c e was a l s o g i v e n t o r e n t a l housing, p u b l i c housing and r e l a t i v e l y non-c o n v e n t i o n a l h o u s i n g and l a n d tenures such as c o - o p e r a t i v e housing and l e a s e h o l d l a n d tenure. F u r t h e r , a s s i s t a n c e was not l i m i t e d t o a s p e c i f i e d group of " t r u l y needy" r e s u l t i n g i n programs aimed a t 91 a broader range of groups, e s p e c i a l l y low and moderate income f a m i l i e s . The NDP government a l s o attempted new methods o f housing p r o d u c t i o n t h a t i n v o l v e d d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f government i n t e r v e n t i o n . It must be acknowledged t h a t the l e v e l of housing p r o d u c t i o n under many of the programs, f o r example, the Pr o p o s a l C a l l Program and the R e s i d e n t i a l Land Lease Program, d i d not approach the o p t i m i s t i c g o a l s s e t by the government. The r e l a t i v e l y d i s a p p o i n t i n g performance of the Department of Housing can be a t t r i b u t e d t o three major c o n s t r a i n t s . F i r s t , the NDP government was o n l y i n o f f i c e f o r s l i g h t l y o v e r t h r e e y e a r s . There was, t h e r e f o r e , l i t t l e time t o p l a n , analyse, implement and f i n e tune many of the programs. F o l l o w i n g the d e f e a t o f the NDP government, many of the programs were a b o l i s h e d or s u b s t a n t i a l l y changed. Second, the p r o v i n c e f a c e d a l a c k of c a p i t a l t o f i n a n c e a l l the programs i t wished t o undertake. On the one hand, the p r o v i n c e c o u l d not o b t a i n the u n i t a l l o c a t i o n and f i n a n c i n g t h a t i t d e s i r e d from the f e d e r a l government f o r f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l programs. On the other hand, l i m i t s t o the pro v i n c e ' s budget r e s t r i c t e d the number of u n i t s t h a t the Department c o u l d r e a l i s t i c a l l y c o n s t r u c t . T h i r d , the p r o v i n c e encountered r e s i s t a n c e t o i n n o v a t i v e programs such as the Home Co n v e r s i o n Loan Programme and the R e s i d e n t i a l Land Lease Programs s i n c e they were seen as undermining the s a n c t i t i y o f homeownership and p r i v a t e property. In s p i t e o f these c o n s t r a i n t s there were a number of achievements. Probably the most s i g n i f i c a n t achievement of the NDP was the d o u b l i n g of the p u b l i c h o using stock. Another achievement was i n c l u s i o n , f o r the f i r s t time, of the r e n t a l h o u sing s e c t o r and r e n t e r s i n p r o v i n c i a l housing p o l i c y . The d e f e a t of the NDP i n December 1975 marked the end of an attempt t o undertake a more comprehensive approach t o housing p o l i c y i n the P r o v i n c e of B r i t i s h Columbia. The newly e l e c t e d S o c i a l C r e d i t government q u i c k l y changed the d i r e c t i o n of h o using p o l i c y t o a g r e a t e r r e l i a n c e on the p r i v a t e s e c t o r . 93 Chapter Five B.C. Housing P o l i c y i n the 1976-1985 Period The e l e c t i o n of the S o c i a l C r e d i t P a r t y i n December 1975 marked a s i g n i f i c a n t t r a n s i t i o n i n B r i t i s h Columbia h o u s i n g p o l i c y from an a c t i v e d i r e c t i n t e r v e n t i o n i s t s t r a t e g y t o a p a s s i v e i n d i r e c t i n t e r v e n t i o n i s t s t r a t e g y . The b a s i c t e n e t s of h o using p o l i c y under the S o c i a l C r e d i t Party i n c l u d e r e l i a n c e on and a b e l i e f i n the a b i l i t y of the p r i v a t e market t o p r o v i d e adequate housing, b e l i e f i n m i n i m i z i n g r e s t r i c t i o n s on the r i g h t s o f p r i v a t e property, encouragement o f homeownership, and r e s t r i c t i o n of government a i d t o a n a r r o w l y d e f i n e d group of " t r u l y needy". T h i s chapter examines housing p o l i c y and programs i n the 1976-1984 p e r i o d by f i r s t , d e s c r i b i n g h ousing c o n d i t i o n s and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d and second, r e v i e w i n g the b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s u n d e r l y i n g h o u s i n g p o l i c y . T h i r d , housing programs t h a t were adopted are d i s c u s s e d under the c a t e g o r i e s of homeownership a s s i s t a n c e , l a n d s e r v i c i n g and supply, r e n t a l h o u s i n g a s s i s t a n c e , and s o c i a l h o u s i n g a s s i s t a n c e . F i n a l l y , t h i s chapter concludes with a d i s c u s s i o n of the p h i l o s o p h i c a l b a s i s f o r housing p o l i c y i n the 1976-1985 p e r i o d . 5.1 Housing Conditions 1976-1985 By 1975 the s e r i o u s housing shortage of 1972-1974 was over. Housing s t a r t s had i n c r e a s e d by 8.7% i n 1975 and by 10.5% i n 1976. (See Appendix C) The vacancy r a t e , w h i l e e x c e p t i o n a l l y low i n 1975, began t o i n c r e a s e s l i g h t l y and remained above 1.3% u n t i l 1979. ( F i g u r e 1) Thus, housing was not the major p u b l i c i s s u e i t had been i n the 1972 e l e c t i o n campaign. However, by l a t e 1979 another housing shortage was emerging. Vacancy r a t e s f e l l from 0.9% i n A p r i l 1979 to 0.2% i n October and then remained a t 0.1% u n t i l August 1982. Housing s t a r t s decreased by approximately 30% between 1977 and 1980. Although t h i s decrease was p a r t i a l l y compensated by a 37.3% i n c r e a s e i n h o u s i n g s t a r t s i n 1980, there was s t i l l s u b s t a n t i a l u n f u l f i l l e d need. The housing shortage was caused, i n p a r t , by the i n c r e a s e i n m i g r a t i o n t o the p r o v i n c e due t o employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s c r e a t e d by the buoyant economy of the r e s o u r c e - r i c h western r e g i o n of the country. The a f f o r d a b i l i t y c a l c u l a t i o n f o r the Vancouver Census M e t r o p o l i t a n areas, as shown i n T a b l e I I I , i n d i c a t e s the s e v e r i t y o f the e a r l y 1980's housing problem. Between 1979 and 1981, the average MLS mortgage house p r i c e f o r Vancouver more than doubled from $66,906 t o $137,430. The i n c r e a s e i n house p r i c e s , a l o n g with a h i g h r a t e of i n f l a t i o n , caused a p a n i c i n the h o u s i n g market whereby t h o s e who d i d not own a home b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e y had t o purchase immediately or f a c e f u r t h e r s u b s t a n t i a l p r i c e i n c r e a s e s , and those who d i d own a home saw the p o t e n t i a l of r e a p i n g huge c a p i t a l gains through s p e c u l a t i o n . At the same time, mortgage i n t e r e s t r a t e s were i n c r e a s i n g , r e a c h i n g a h i g h of 21.46% i n September 1981. (CMHC, 1983, Canadian Housing 95 S t a t i s t i c s , T a b l e 75, p. 65) The combination o f h i g h house p r i c e s and h i g h mortgage r a t e s r e s u l t e d i n an i n c r e a s e of the r a t i o o f annual mortgage payments t o average f a m i l y income from 23.8% i n 1979 t o 55.4% i n 1981. (Table I I I ) Newspaper r e p o r t s noted q u i t e a c c u r a t e l y t h a t the purchase of a home was beyond the f i n a n c i a l c a p a b i l i t i e s of an average income f a m i l y . (Sun, Nov. 24, 1982) Renters a l s o f a c e d some i n c r e a s e s i n the c o s t o f s h e l t e r . As i n d i c a t e d i n Tab l e IV, average r e a l r e n t s i n c r e a s e d by 11% from 1979 t o 1981. In e a r l y 1982, the housing shortage had eased c o n s i d e r a b l y . By October 1982, vacancy r a t e s i n Vancouver reached 1.9%. In the house buying market, the housing boom had turned i n t o a bust as p r i c e s reached t h e i r peak and began t o drop. The once buoyant p r o v i n c i a l economy f e l l i n t o a p e r i o d o f r e c e s s i o n i n 1981, a r e c e s s i o n t h a t continues t o the present. In 1982 e x c e e d i n g l y h i g h i n t e r e s t r a t e s c o n t r i b u t e d t o a 52.4% decrease i n housing s t a r t s . As i n d i c a t e d i n Appendix C, ho u s i n g s t a r t s remain a t h i s t o r i c a l l y low r a t e s . 5.2 Basic Tenets of Housing P o l i c y : 1976-1984 Reliance on the P r i v a t e Market. F o l l o w i n g the e l e c t i o n o f the S o c i a l C r e d i t Party i n 1975, a p r e f e r e n c e f o r an i n d i r e c t i n t e r v e n t i o n i s t s t r a t e g y f o r housing a s s i s t a n c e emerged o v e r the d i r e c t i n t e r v e n t i o n i s t s t r a t e g y g e n e r a l l y f a v o u r e d by the New Democratic Party. The S o c i a l C r e d i t government b e l i e v e d t h a t h o u s i n g i s p r o p e r l y and most e f f i c i e n t l y s u p p l i e d through the p r i v a t e market, r a t h e r than by government. T h i s b e l i e f stems from 96 a p h i l o s o p h y o f s u p p o r t f o r a f r e e market and s u p p o r t f o r f r e e e n t e r p r i s e i n g e n e r a l . A pamphlet i s s u e d by the S o c i a l C r e d i t P a r t y i n 1981 o u t l i n e s i t s b a s i c b e l i e f s : We b e l i e v e i n the f r e e e n t e r p r i s e system, p a r t i c u l a r l y as r e p r e s e n t e d by the i n d i v i d u a l . We f u r t h e r b e l i e v e t h a t government s h o u l d encourage growth by the p r i v a t e s e c t o r , not pose the t h r e a t of takeover which produces a n e g a t i v e b u s i n e s s c l i m a t e , h a rmful t o our economy. We b e l i e v e t h a t the n a t u r a l resources of B r i t i s h Columbia b e l o n g t o the p e o p l e of our p r o v i n c e and t h a t revenues d e r i v e d from resource development s h o u l d p r o v i d e s e r v i c e s t o p e o p l e i n a l l r e g i o n s of B.C. (Morley, e t a l . , 1983, 105-106) The b e l i e f i n the r o l e o f t h e p r i v a t e s e c t o r i n the p r o v i s i o n of h o using has two important consequences f o r government i n t e r v e n t i o n . F i r s t , government housing p o l i c y i s b e s t aimed at s u p p o r t i n g and p r o v i d i n g i n c e n t i v e s f o r p r i v a t e i n d u s t r y t o c o n s t r u c t h o u s i n g t o meet the needs of the p o p u l a t i o n . For example, government does not b u i l d r e n t a l housing, but i n s t e a d p r o v i d e s s u b s i d i e s or tax i n c e n t i v e s t o the p r i v a t e market t o encourage the c o n s t r u c t i o n of r e n t a l u n i t s . Further, government has a r o l e t o p l a y i n m a i n t a i n i n g a s t a b l e investment c l i m a t e which encourages the h ousing i n d u s t r y t o c o n s t r u c t housing. The removal of r e n t r e g u l a t i o n and programs aimed at s t a b i l i z i n g mortgage r a t e s are two examples of measures aimed a t improving the h ousing investment c l i m a t e . The second consequence f o r government i n t e r v e n t i o n i s the p r i n c i p l e of non-competition with the p r i v a t e s e c t o r . D i r e c t government i n t e r v e n t i o n i s l i m i t e d t o a s s i s t i n g o n l y those i n d i v i d u a l s whose s p e c i a l needs cannot be met through the p r i v a t e market, or where the p r i v a t e s e c t o r i s unable t o c o n s t r u c t 97 h o u s i n g . The government's committment t o the r o l e of the p r i v a t e s e c t o r i n t h e p r o v i s i o n o f h o u s i n g was d e s c r i b e d i n 1976 i n t h e f o l l o w i n g terms: The p h i l o s o p h y of the h o u s i n g department was a l s o changed i n 1976. Fundamental t o the M i n i s t r y ' s e x i s t e n c e i s the committment t o p r o v i d e a v a r i e t y of housing f o r a l l c i t i z e n s — p r e s e n t and f u t u r e . That committment means a s s i s t i n g i n the d e l i v e r y of housing through the p r i v a t e s e c t o r i n c o - o p e r a t i o n with l o c a l governments and, where a b s o l u t l e y e s s e n t i a l , by government i n i t i a t i v e s a l o n e . (B.C., M i n i s t r y of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s and Housing, 1976, 50) The change i n emphasis i n t h e m i n i s t r y was r e f l e c t e d i n t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of new housing programs and the c a n c e l l a t i o n of other programs. For example, p r o v i n c i a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the f e d e r a l A s s i s t e d Rental program, d e s c r i b e d as "the happy marriage of p r i v a t e f i n a n c i n g , p r i v a t e i n i t i a t i v e and government a s s i s t a n c e , r e s e a r c h and s u b s i d i e s " r e p l a c e d the p r o p o s a l c a l l program where government c o n t r a c t e d w i t h p r i v a t e d e v e l o p e r s t o b u i l d r e n t a l accommodation t h a t remained i n government ownership. (B.C., M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s , 1976, 51) T h i s emphasis on the r o l e of the p r i v a t e s e c t o r extended beyond h o u s i n g i s s u e s t o i n c l u d e a l l economic matters. In the budget speech of 1978, the government a r t i c u l a t e d i t s b e l i e f t h a t the p r i v a t e s e c t o r p r o v i d e d the key to long-term economic growth and i t must r e s t r a i n i t s spending t o f a c i l i t a t e p r i v a t e s e c t o r growth. In order t o a c c o m p l i s h t h a t c h a l l e n g e , the government d i r e c t e d i t s p o l i c y towards: -the p r a c t i c e of f i s c a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o c o n t r o l p u b l i c spending and reduce the government's share of 98 t o t a l economic a c t i v i t y ; -the achievement of g r e a t e r e f f i c i e n c y i n p u b l i c s e c t o r spending; -the r e d u c t i o n of government c o n s t r a i n t s on the f r e e market system. (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Finance, 1978, 9) I t i s e v i d e n t t h a t the S o c i a l C r e d i t government's b e l i e f i n and r e l i a n c e on the p r i v a t e s e c t o r t o p r o v i d e h o u s i n g has become st r o n g e r over time. A statement of government housing p o l i c y i n 1982 p r o v i d e d the f o l l o w i n g r a t i o n a l e f o r h o u s i n g p o l i c y : The p r o v i n c e recognizes t h a t the s o l u t i o n s t o many ho u s i n g i s s u e s l i e i n the i n d i v i d u a l d r i v e and i n i t i a t i v e of our people, expressed through the p r i v a t e s e c t o r of the economy. The r o l e of government p o l i c y i s t o p r o v i d e the c l i m a t e f o r i n d i v i d u a l i n i t i a t i v e t o t h r i v e and t o encourage the B r i t i s h Columbia housing i n d u s t r y t o p r o v i d e the housing needed i n the p r o v i n c e . (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing, 1982a, not paged) By 1984, the p r o v i n c e s t a t e d i t s case u s i n g much s t r o n g e r language. A c c o r d i n g t o a 1984 statement of government housing p o l i c y : The p r o v i n c e i s c o n v i n c e d t h a t the s u p p l y of h o u s i n g i s best a c h i e v e d through the i n d i v i d u a l d r i v e and i n i t i a t i v e o f our people, expressed through the p r i v a t e s e c t o r of the economy. (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing, 1984b, not paged) A review of the housing g o a l s a r t i c u l a t e d i n the 1982 and 1984 documents r e v e a l a much s t r o n g e r r e l i a n c e on the p r i v a t e s e c t o r and an even f u r t h e r d i m i n i s h e d r o l e f o r the p u b l i c s e c t o r i n h o u s i n g i n the most recent p o l i c y statement. The 1984 statement o f g o a l s focuses on measures t o c r e a t e a more s t a b l e investment c l i m a t e , to d e r e g u l a t e the housing i n d u s t r y , to e n c o u r a g e t h e more e f f i c i e n t use o f l a n d and h o u s i n g and t o s t r i c t l y l i m i t government i n t e r v e n t i o n i n housing t o those whose 99 s p e c i a l needs cannot be met by the housing i n d u s t r y . F u r t h e r , the p o l i c y a l s o s t a t e d the d e s i r a b i l i t y of encouraging the f e d e r a l government t o d e v e l o p s i m i l i a r housing p o l i c e s , t h a t i s , t o d e v e l o p housing p o l i c i e s which induce the p r i v a t e s e c t o r t o make long-term investment i n housing and t a r g e t s o c i a l housing expenditures t o those most i n need. The e a r l i e r p o l i c y statement c o n t a i n e d the same o b j e c t i v e s of encouraging a s t a b l e investment c l i m a t e , encouragement of a more e f f i c e n t use of land, and a s s i s t i n g those h a v i n g s p e c i a l needs, but a l s o c o n t a i n e d broader o b j e c t i v e s aimed a t e n s u r i n g an adequate s u p p l y of housing f o r a wide range of tenure types, encouragement o f home-ownership, and f u l f i l l i n g the Province's c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r housing. Encouragement of Homeownership. Another p r i n c i p l e o f the S o c i a l C r e d i t government i s the b e l i e f i n p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ownership i n g e n e r a l , and the encouragement of homeownership i n p a r t i c u l a r . As the f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n of p r o v i n c i a l homeownership a s s i s t a n c e programs i n d i c a t e s , programs aimed a t encouraging homeownership f o r as many as B r i t i s h Columbians as p o s s i b l e , t o the e x c l u s i o n o f other types o f ho u s i n g programs, i s a dominant o b j e c t i v e o f housing p o l i c y s i n c e 1976. Indeed, as d e s c r i b e d i n Chapters 3 and 4, p r o v i d i n g o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r homeownership i s a l o n g s t a n d i n g p a r t of p r o v i n c i a l housing p o l i c y . Programs such as the home-owner p r o p e r t y tax grant, home buyer grant, second mortgage programs and i n t e r e s t r a t e r e d u c t i o n programs have f a v o u r e d ownership o v e r r e n t a l housing. 100 The b e l i e f i n p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y and p r e f e r e n c e f o r p r i v a t e homeownership i s p a r t o f a l a r g e r p o l i c y o f encouragement of i n d i v i d u a l ownership i n s t e a d o f government ownership: Our government b e l i e v e s i n p e r s o n a l economic freedom. I t has c o n s t a n t l y d e d i c a t e d i t s e l f t o p r o v i d i n g g r e a t e r investment and ownership o p p o r t u n t i e s f o r the i n d i v i d u a l i n B.C. Our committment i s t o i n d i v i d u a l ownership not b i g government o w n e r s h i p — w h i c h l e a v e s l i t t l e or nothing f o r the i n d i v i d u a l . (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Finance, 1979, 37) A s s i s t i n g only the t r u l y needy. A l t h o u g h the S o c i a l C r e d i t government b e l i e v e s t h a t i t i s t h e r o l e o f t h e p r i v a t e s e c t o r t o p r o v i d e housing, i t acknowledges t h a t some groups are not s e r v e d by the p r i v a t e h ousing market and, as a r e s u l t , the government must a s s i s t those w i t h " s p e c i a l " housing needs. T h i s p r i n c i p l e was a r t i c u l a t e d i n the f i r s t Budget Speech d e l i v e r e d by the newly e l e c t e d S o c i a l C r e d i t government: Mr. Speaker, no one p o l i t i c a l movement can l a y e x c l u s i v e c l a i m t o s e r v i n g the i n t e r e s t s o f a l l the people. The government, even be f o r e approaching o f f i c e , was concerned f o r the w e l f a r e of a l l groups i n s o c i e t y , b o t h t h e p e o p l e who a r e a b l e t o c o n t r i b u t e t o our economic growth, and those who through no f a u l t of t h e i r own are unable t o do so the e l d e r l y , the s i c k , the u n d e r p r i v e l a g e d , the handicapped, and the unemployable. T h i s l a t t e r group, above a l l o t h ers, needs compassionate h e l p from governments at a l l l e v e l s t o p r o v i d e them w i t h hope and t o f r e e them from t h e i n d i g n i t i e s they may s u f f e r . As government, we are pl e d g e d t o ma i n t a i n and t o improve the s o c i a l programs which s u s t a i n these people. At the same time, we want t o make i t ve r y c l e a r we w i l l not p r o v i d e an atmosphere i n t h i s P r o v i n c e which w i l l encourage the s o - c a l l e d " f r e e - r i d e r " — t h o s e who are a b l e but u n w i l l i n g t o p l a y t h e i r p a r t i n b u i l d i n g f o r the economic s e c u r i t y o f a l l . (B.C. M i n i s t r y of Finance, 1976, 5) It i s apparent t h a t the p r o v i n c e had c a r e f u l l y d e f i n e d and s e v e r e l y l i m i t e d the groups e n t i t l e d t o government a s s i s t a n c e . 101 The e l i g i b l e groups i n c l u d e o n l y the e l d e r l y , the c h r o n i c a l l y i l l , the handicapped and the v e r y poor. The working poor, those employable but unable t o f i n d work, and those w i t h moderate or low incomes but unable t o f i n d s u i t a b l e h o u s i n g are not i n c l u d e d i n t h e i r d e f i n i t i o n of needy, and t h e r e f o r e , are expected t o fend f o r themselves i n the housing market. T h i s p o s i t i o n of the p r o v i n c i a l government i n 1976 i s i n d i r e c t c o n t r a s t t o the p o s i t i o n of the NDP government which s t a t e d t h a t good h o u s i n g a t a reasonable c o s t was the r i g h t of each B r i t i s h Columbian r e g a r d l e s s o f income. (B.C., 1974, 213) The p r i n c i p l e s presented i n the 1976 budget speech have remained t o the present, a l t h o u g h the d e f i n i t i o n o f those with s p e c i a l housing needs has become even more r e s t r i c t e d . A statement on housing p o l i c y p u b l i s h e d i n 1982 c o n t a i n e d the f o l l o w i n g g o a l : To d e v e l o p government programs t o h e l p those B r i t i s h Columbians whose s p e c i a l h o using needs cannot be met by the housing i n d u s t r y . (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing, 1982a, not paged.) In the 1982 p o l i c y statement, those w i t h s p e c i a l housing needs i s narrowly d e f i n e d t o mean those "most i n need", t h a t i s , "the e l d e r l y , the d i s a b l e d and f a m i l i e s who are housed i n p r o v i n c i a l l y managed u n i t s or i n p r o v i n c i a l l y s u b s i d i z e d u n i t s managed by non-p r o f i t groups or the p r i v a t e sector." (Ibid.) In a l a t e r statement of housing p o l i c y r e l e a s e d i n 1984 the d e f i n i t i o n of those w i t h s p e c i a l h o using needs i s f u r t h e r l i m i t e d t o i n c l u d e those w i t h a f f o r d a b i l i t y and adequacy problems. A f f o r d a b i l i t y problems were d e f i n e d as low income households who 102 spend more t h a n 30% o f income on r e n t and adequacy p r o b l e m s were d e f i n e d as housing which d i d not meet h e a l t h and s a f e t y standards or was u n s u i t a b l e t o the requirements of those w i t h s p e c i a l h o u s i n g needs. A s s i s t a n c e was l i m i t e d t o the minimum l e v e l r e q u i r e d t o ensure s a f e and adequate housing. S p e c i f i c income support and housing s u p p l y programs are o n l y p r o v i d e d f o r s e n i o r s , o l d e r s i n g l e s (over 55) and the d i s a b l e d with a f f o r d a b i l i t y and adequacy problems. For f a m i l i e s , a s s i s t a n c e i s l i m i t e d t o e x i s t i n g p u b l i c housing u n i t s . In 1984, s o c i a l a s s i s t a n c e payments, t h a t i s , w e l f a r e b e n e f i t s , were i n c l u d e d i n the p o l i c y statement as housing a s s i s t a n c e . S o c i a l h ousing programs are d e s c r i b e d i n g r e a t e r d e t a i l l a t e r i n the chapter. 5.3 The Reorganization of Housing P o l i c y Administration The h o u s i n g p o l i c y f u n c t i o n became somewhat of an orphan i n the post-1976 p e r i o d . In 1976 the p o l i t i c a l agenda had changed, and housing was seen t o be o f l e s s importance. Immediately f o l l o w i n g the e l e c t i o n the Department of Housing was disbanded. F o l l o w i n g a d o p t i o n of the Government R e o r g a n i z a t i o n Act, the o p e r a t i o n s of the Department of Housing and Department of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s were c a r r i e d on under the new M i n i s t r y of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s and Housing. In 1978, the h ousing p o l i c y s e c t i o n was t r a n s f e r r e d t o the M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks, amd Housing, p a r t i a l l y r e f l e c t i n g the new emphasis on c r e a t i n g programs t h a t i n c r e a s e the s u p p l y of l a n d f o r r e s i d e n t i a l purposes, and a s s i s t i n s e r v i c i n g of r e s i d e n t i a l land. In t h a t year, r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the SAFER ( S h e l t e r A s s i s t a n c e f o r 103 E l d e r l y Renters) and the Renter's Tax C r e d i t (Rentaid) were t r a n s f e r r e d t o the M i n i s t r y of Human Resources. Moreover, r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the p r o v i n c i a l i n v o l v e m e n t i n the Neighbourhood Improvement Program was t r a n s f e r r e d back t o the M i n i s t r y of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s . A l t h o u g h the M i n s t r y o f Lands, Parks and Housing tends t o undertake the r o l e of c o o r d i n a t i n g the d i s p a r a t e elements of the h ousing programs, there i s no attempt t o p r o v i d e a w e l l c o o r d i n a t e d and i n t e g r a t e d a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of h o using p o l i c y and programs. T h i s l a c k of o r g a n i z a t i o n tends t o r e f l e c t the S o c i a l C r e d i t government's c u r r e n t p o l i t i c a l p r i o r i t i e s of which government housing a c t i v i t y i s not i n c l u d e d . S i g n i f i c a n t changes a l s o o c c u r r e d with the r e s p o n s i b l i t i e s of crown c o r p o r a t i o n s i n v o l v e d with housing. In 1976, D u n h i l l Development C o r p o r a t i o n was renamed the Housing C o r p o r a t i o n o f B r i t i s h Columbia. The f u n c t i o n of the c o r p o r a t i o n was l i m i t e d t o c a r r y i n g out s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t s f o r s a l e i n order f o r the C o r p o r a t i o n t o monitor on b e h a l f of the M i n i s t r y o f M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s and Housing, t r e n d s i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n i n d u s t r y . The c o r p o r a t i o n e s s e n t i a l l y a c t e d as the development and s e r v i c i n g agent f o r the p r o v i n c e . (B.C., M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s and Housing, 1976, 68) In 1978, the government decided t o cease o p e r a t i o n of the c o r p o r a t i o n , and dispose of i t s a s s e t s . 5.4 Homeownership Assistance Programs In 1976 the p r o v i n c i a l government agreed t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n the f e d e r a l A s s i s t e d Homeownership Program (AHOP). T h i s program i s i n accordance with the province's p r e f e r e n c e f o r i n d i r e c t 104 i n t e r v e n t i o n i n t h a t i t i s designed t o a c h i e v e i t s o b j e c t i v e s through i n c e n t i v e s t o the p r i v a t e s e c t o r . F o l l o w i n g the i n i t i a t i o n of p r o v i n c i a l AHOP the Le a s e h o l d Mortgage Loan Program was d i s c o n t i n u e d and the approximately 700 p a r t i c i p a n t s were g i v e n t h e o p t i o n t o buy out t h e i r l a n d l e a s e s . The A s s i s t e d Home Ownership Program (AHOP). The o b j e c t i v e s o f AHOP were t o e x t e n d t h e range o f f a m i l i e s a b l e t o e n t e r t h e homeownership market, t o pr e s e n t low-income f a m i l i e s with an a l t e r n a t i v e t o r e n t a l or p u b l i c housing, and t o encourage the b u i l d i n g i n d u s t r y t o produce modestly p r i c e d h ousing f o r low income f a m i l i e s by the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f a c o n t i n u i n g program. (Runge, 1975, 103) The p r o v i n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e t o AHOP c o n s i s t e d o f a subsi d y stacked on the f e d e r a l a s s i s t a n c e . A s s i s t a n c e was a v a i l a b l e f o r th e p u r c h a s e o f new homes t h a t were a p p p r o v e d by CMHC t o be b u i l t under AHOP. AHOP a s s i s t a n c e c o n s i s t e d o f three p a r t s . F i r s t , CMHC p r o v i d e d an i n t e r e s t r e d u c t i o n l o a n which a c t e d t o reduce the mortgage i n t e r e s t r a t e t o 8% and was i n t e r e s t f r e e f o r the support p e r i o d . The method f o r r e p a y i n g o f the l o a n was designed so t h a t t o t a l payments d i d n ot exceed 25% o f t h e t o t a l f a m i l y income. Second, a subsidy from CMHC was a p p l i e d i f t h e r e was a dependent c h i l d and the payments s t i l l exceeded 25% of the f a m i l y income a f t e r the a p p l i c a t i o n o f the i n t e r e s t r e d u c t i o n l o a n . The maximum f e d e r a l subsidy i n the f i r s t year was $750. F i n a l l y , a p r o v i n c i a l s u b s i d y was a p p l i e d i f the monthly payments s t i l l exceeded 25% of the f a m i l y income a f t e r the a p p l i c a t i o n of the i n t e r e s t r e d u c t i o n l o a n and the $750 CMHC subsidy. The maximum 105 p r o v i n c i a l subsidy i n the f i r s t year was $750. The f e d e r a l government a b o l i s h e d /AHOP i n May 1978 as p a r t of t h e i r s t r a t e g y of l i m i t i n g d i r e c t f e d e r a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f p r o v i n c i a l h o u s i n g program, known o f f i c i a l l y as disentanglement. T a b l e VI i n d i c a t e s the number of AHOP u n i t s t h a t r e c e i v e d p r o v i n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e . Table VI Assisted Home Ownership Program—B.C. Summary Year Units Created % of To t a l Single Detached ( P r o v i n c i a l A s s i s t a n c e ) and Semi-Detached 1976 28 .13% 1977 635 3.70% 1978 515 2.60% 1979 438 2.36% Source: M i n i s t r y o f Lands Parks and Housing, 1979 Annual Report, 68. CMHC, 1983, Canadian Housing S t a t i s t i c s , Table 10. P r o v i n c i a l Home Purchase Assistance Program. In 1976, the government a l s o amended the P r o v i n c i a l Home A c q u i s i t i o n Program by dropping the grant f o r p u r c h a s i n g an o l d home and i n c r e a s i n g the maximum amount f o r a second mortgage t o $5,000. The name o f the program was changed t o Home Purchase A s s i s t a n c e and f e a t u r e d a $1,000 grant f o r purchasers o f new homes. The program was e v i d e n t l y designed t o s t i m u l a t e the c o n s t r u c t i o n i n d u s t r y s i n c e e x i s t i n g homes were not e l i g i b l e f o r grants. AHOP p a r t i c i p a n t s 106 were not e l i g i b l e f o r the Home Purchase A s s i s t a n c e Program. In 1978, f o l l o w i n g the d i s c o n t i n u a n c e o f AHOP an a d d i t i o n a l form o f a s s i s t a n c e was made a v a i l a b l e f o r a short p e r i o d o f time i f the a p p l i c a n t ' s t o t a l payments on the f i r s t and second mortgage p l u s taxes exceed 25% of the f a m i l y income. The a s s i s t a n c e was i n the form o f an i n t e r e s t f r e e l o a n t h a t a c t e d t o r e d u c e t h e m o n t h l y payments on the government's second mortgage down t o an a m o r t i z a t i o n r a t e of 8%. The i n t e r e s t f r e e l o a n was rep a y a b l e when the p r o p e r t y was s o l d or r e f i n a n c e d upward. In 1978, mobile homes became e l i g i b l e f o r b e n e f i t s o f the program. The Family F i r s t Home and F i r s t Home Grants. The F a m i l y F i r s t Home Grant i n t r o d u c e d i n 1978 c o n s i s t e d of a $2,500 grant f o r f i r s t time home buyers wi t h a dependent c h i l d . The grant was a p p l i c a b l e t o new o r o l d h o u s e s , as l o n g as t h e c o s t o f the home was w i t h i n maximum p r i c e l e v e l s . In 1979 the Home Purchase A s s i s t a n c e program was s i m p l i f i e d w i t h a l l home purchase a s s i s t a n c e grants and second mortgages i n c l u d e d under the program t i t l e . The major s u b s t a n t i v e change was t h a t the $1,000 grant, c a l l e d the F i r s t Home Grant, was made a v a i l a b l e t o purchasers of new or o l d homes. However, the grants were o n l y a v a i l a b l e t o the f i r s t time home purchasers. In 1981 the maximum second mortgage was doubled t o $10,000. In 1983 the F i r s t Home and F a m i l y F i r s t Home g r a n t p o r t i o n o f the Home Purchase A s s i s t a n c e Program were a b o l i s h e d . The Second Mortgage Loan Program, however, remains i n e f f e c t . T a b l e V I I summarizes a c t i v i t y under the Home Purchase A s s i s t a n c e Program from 1980 t o 107 1984 p r o v i d e s an i n d i c a t i o n o f the number of p a r t i c i p a n t s and program c o s t s . Table VII A c t i v i t y Under the Home Purchase Assistance Program 1980 - 1984 Number of P a r t i c i p a n t s and V a l u e of Grants and Mortgages ($ X 1,000) Year F i r s t Home Grant F a m i l y F i r s t Home Grant Second Mortgages Number $ Number $ Number $ 1983-84 7,198 7,198 6, 342 15,855 5,380 52,562 1982-83 5,485 5,485 5,691 14,226 8,269 82, 270 1981-82 7,894 7,894 6,411 15,808 1,926 11,147 1980-81 4,922 4, 922 6,182 15,455 2, 190 14,550 Source: M i n i s t r y Report. Lands, Parks and Housing, 1984, 1983-84 Annual Housing I n i t i a t i v e Program. In 1980 the Housing I n t i a t i v e Program was c r e a t e d t o p r o v i d e $200 m i l l i o n i n mortgage funds a t 9 3/4% f o r e l i g i b l e homebuyers and apartment d e v e l o p e r s . Only 2,227 households c o u l d take advantage o f the $125 m i l l i o n d o l l a r s a l l o c a t e d t o ownership housing. The remaining $75 m i l l i o n was a l l o c a t e d t o r e n t a l housing. Mortgage i n t e r e s t r a t e s were a p p r o a c h i n g 16% a t t h e ti m e , and t h e money was v e r y q u i c k l y t a k e n up. The program was c r i t i c i z e d f o r b e i n g a h a s t i l y prepared e x e r c i s e t o a s s i s t the sagging lumber i n d u s t r y and f o r not 108 p r o v i d i n g a s s i s t a n c e t o those who r e a l l y needed i t s i n c e p a r t i c i p a n t s had t o be a b l e t o a f f o r d i n t e r i m f i n a n c i n g a t the v e r y h i g h i n t e r e s t r a t e s . (Sun, Jan 17, 1980) Mortgage i n t e r e s t r a t e s i n 1980 r anged from a low of 12.92% t o a h i g h of 15.60%. (CMHC, 1983, Canadian Housing S t a t i s t i c s , T a b l e 79) T h e B . C . Home P r o g r a m . In 1982, the t h r e e year B.C. Home Program was i n t r o d u c e d i n response t o r e c o r d h i g h i n t e r e s t r a t e s . The program p r o v i d e d monthly payments t o reduce i n t e r e s t r a t e s by a maximum of 6 percentage p o i n t s , f o r a maximum o f $60,000 i n t o t a l mortgage p r i n c i p a l . The b e n e f i t s were i n the form of an i n t e r e s t f r e e l o a n repayable i n three y e a r s . By 1982 however, mortgage i n t e r e s t r a t e s had peaked and were b e g i n n i n g t o f a l l l i m i t i n g the impact of the program. (Ibid.) A p p r o x i m a t e l y 54,000 households r e c e i v e d b e n e f i t s under the program, with a t o t a l l o a n v a l u e of $84,418,000. T h e Homeowner G r a n t . The p r o v i n c e continued t o r a i s e the homeowner grant between 1976 and 1983. The c u r r e n t maximum grant i s $380 with an a d d i t i o n a l $250 f o r s e n i o r s and war v e t e r a n s . The e l i m i n a t i o n of p r o p e r t y taxes was seen as the g o a l f o r e l d e r l y homeowners who "had made t h e i r c o n t r i b u t i o n t o our country and now deserve the b e n e f i t which a l l o w s them t o l i v e out t h e i r l i v e s i n t h e i r own homes". (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Finance, 1978, 33) The minimum p r o p e r t y tax payable f o r homeowners was i n c r e a s e d t o $125 i n 1982, with the e x c e p t i o n of s e n i o r s and the handicapped, where i t remained a t $1. The c o s t of the homeowner grant i n 1982-83 was $257.7 m i l l i o n . 109 Mobile Home and Remote Housing. The p r o v i n c i a l government viewed the purchase o f mobile homes as one method t o encourage a f f o r d a b l e homeownership. Th e r e f o r e , i n 1978, the M o b i l e Home R e g i s t r y was e s t a b l i s h e d . The purpose o f the r e g i s t r y was t o p r o v i d e p r o t e c t i o n f o r owners and purchasers of mobile homes, and t o improve the s e c u r i t y of l e n d e r s f i n a n c i n g m o b i l e homes, i n a s i m i l i a r way t o t h e Land T i t l e A c t . The program was a l s o designed t o encourge a l l p a r t i e s i n v o l v e d i n i n d u s t r y and l o c a l government t o t r e a t moble home owners i n the same f a s h i o n as owners of c o n v e n t i o n a l housing. In 1982 the A c c e l e r a t e d M o b i l e Home Development program was i n t i a t e d i n response t o a shortage o f m o b i l e home s i t e s . The program p r o v i d e d a g r a n t and a l o a n with a 15% i n t e r e s t r a t e t o l o c a l governments t o a c q u i r e l a n d and s e r v i c e mobile home s i t e s . Homeownership o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r low-income f a m i l i e s i n remote areas was made a v a i l a b l e through the Remote Housing Program. The program p r o v i d e d a f f o r d a b l e h ousing where such housing was not a v a i l a b l e through the p r i v a t e market. The program was f i n a n c e d through the S e c t i o n 40 f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l p a r t n e r s h i p , where the f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l government share the f i n a n c i n g c o s t s on a 75-25 b a s i s r e s p e c t i v e l y . The mortgage c o s t s of the purchasers were s u b s i d i z e d so t h a t they pay a maximum of 25% of t h e i r income i n monthly payments. The ongoing subsidy c o s t t o the p r o v i n c e was about $500,000 a n n u a l l y between 1975 t o 1980. Some u n i t s were a l s o f i n a n c e d under AHOP. The program a s s i s t e d o n l y about 250 u n i t s per year between 110 1975 t o 1977, then demand f o r the program dropped t o 65 i n 1979, and 58 i n 1980 due to r e s i s t a n c e among l o c a l governments and r e s i d e n t s t o p u b l i c - h o u s i n g type a c t i v i t y . 5.5 Land Supply and Servicing Programs An important s t r a t e g y of the government was t o i n c r e a s e the s u p p l y o f d e v e l o p a b l e l a n d i n order to lower the c o s t of r e s i d e n t i a l land. The programs g e n e r a l l y i n v o l v e d the d i s p o s i t i o n o f Crown l a n d t o p r i v a t e d e v e l o p e r s and a s s i s t a n c e t o m u n i c i p a l i t i e s i n p r o v i d i n g i n f r a s t r u c t u r e t o p r i v a t e and m u n i c i p a l l y owned land. U n l i k e i t s predecessor, the S o c i a l C r e d i t government was not i n t e r e s t e d i n development of Crown l a n d by the government. The J o i n t Committee on Housing was e s t a b l i s h e d by the Honourable Hugh C u r t i s , M i n i s t e r o f M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s and Housing i n 1976 f o r the purpose of e n q u i r i n g i n t o the problems a f f e c t i n g the d e l i v e r y o f h o u s i n g i n the p r o v i n c e . The committee c o n s i s t e d of members of the l e g i s l a t u r e , m u n i c i p a l o f f i c i a l s , and p r o v i n c i a l government housing o f f i c i a l s . The r e p o r t , o f t e n c a l l e d the Bawlf r e p o r t , a f t e r the chairman Sam Bawlf, c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e r e were a number o f f a c t o r s i n t h e system o f government c o n t r o l s over p l a n n i n g , s e r v i c i n g and development of housing which had unduly c o n s t r a i n e d the p r o d u c t i o n process. The c o n c l u s i o n s of the r e p o r t d e a l t w i t h s t r e a m l i n i n g and r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of the r o l e o f government, but most i m p o r t a n t l y , with the d i s p o s a l of Crown and m u n i c i p a l l y owned l a n d f o r housing and the need f o r p r o v i n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e t o m u n i c i p a l i t i e s f o r l a n d 111 s e r v i c i n g . In 1976, the government continued the Land S e r v i c i n g programme which p r o v i d e d s h o r t - t e r m f i n a n c i n g to m u n i c i p a l i t i e s f o r s e r v i c i n g of l a n d f o r housing purposes under the M u n i c i p a l Act. The program was expanded t o i n c l u d e communities throughout B r i t i s h Columbia. The 1978 Annual Report of the M i n i s t r y o f Lands Parks and Housing d e s c r i b e d the r o l e o f the program: In t h i s way, i n d i v i d u a l l a n d h o l d e r s have access t o these trunk s e r v i c e l i n e s which encourages the s u b d i v i s i o n and s e r v i c i n g of i n d i v i d u a l p a r c e l s of land. Thus, land with development p o t e n t i a l i s a v a i l a b l e without n e c e s s i t a t i n g d i r e c t purchase and r e s a l e by the crown. (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing, Annual Report, 76) Further, the R e p l o t t i n g A s s i s t a n c e Program was announced i n 1976 which p r o v i d e d t e c h n i c a l e x p e r t i s e t o M u n i c i p a l i t i e s who wished t o undergo a r e p l o t t i n g program. R e p l o t t i n g o f e x i s t i n g r e g i s t e r e d s u b d i v i s i o n p l a n s was a f t e n necessary i n s i t u a t i o n s where the l e g a l s u b d i v i s i o n boundaries i g n o r e d topography or contemporary b u i d i n g p r a c t i s e s or d e n s i t i e s , and t h e r e f o r e development was not p o s s i b l e or i n f e a s i b l e . Moreover, i n 1976, the government i n i t i a t e d an i n v e n t o r y o f Crown Land s u i t a b l e f o r h o u s i n g purposes. The p r o v i n c i a l government decided t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n the M u n i c i p a l I n c e n t i v e Grant Program i n 1976 t h a t was designed t o encourage m u n i c i p a l i t i e s t o promote housing c o n s t r u c t i o n on a l r e a d y - s e r v i c e d land, t o d e v e l o p more l a n d f o r medium d e n s i t y , modest s i z e d a f f o r d a b l e housing, and t o speed up the development a p p r o v a l process. Grants o f $1500 per e l i g i b l e u n i t were made a v a i l a b l e t o d e s i g n a t e d m u n i c i p a l governments and r e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t s . The program was p a r t o f the AHOP/ARP package. The p o r t i o n of the grant p ayable from the p r o v i n c i a l government was $500. Between 1976 and 1979, payments were made f o r approximately 16,000 u n i t s . A Crown Land Program which made Crown Land a v a i l a b l e t o M u n i c i p a l i t i e s f o r development and s a l e t o i n d i v i d u a l s who wished t o b u i l d a home was i n t r o d u c e d i n 1977. Int e r i m f i n a n c i n g was a l s o g i v e n f o r s u b d i v i s i o n development p r o j e c t s t o those m u n i c i p a l i t i e s who c o u l d demonstrate a need and demand f o r s e r v i c e d b u i l d i n g l o t s . The r u r a l c o u n t e r p a r t t o t h i s urban program was the R u r a l S u b d i v i s i o n Program which promoted s u b d i v i s i o n o f Crown Land i n u n i n c o r p o r a t e d areas. In 1979 the M i n i s t r y of Lands Parks and Housing r e s t r u c t u r e d the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f programs d e a l i n g with the i s s u e of s h e l t e r i n t o the Housing Programs Branch, d e a l i n g with the development and f o r m u l a t i o n o f p r o v i n c i a l h o u s i n g p o l i c y , and the Land Programs Branch p r o v i d i n g a common program management r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a l l crown Land Programs i n the M i n i s t r y . The 1982 statement o f p r o v i n c i a l housing p o l i c y d e s c r i b e d t h e o b j e c t i v e o f t h e l a n d s u p p l y programs as e n s u r i n g a 3 t o 5 year s u p p l y of zoned and s e r v i c e d l a n d i n e v e r y community. The elements o f the l a n d s u p p l y program were: -more i n t e n s i v e use of e x i s t i n g l a n d , i n c l u d i n g r e v i e w of zoning and d e n s i t y r e g u l a t i o n s as r e q u i r e d i n the proposed (never adopted) Land Use Act. -use of s u i t a b l e Crown Land f o r r e s i d e n t i a l development by making Crown l a n d a v a i l a b l e t o m u n i c i p a l i t i e s and p r i v a t e d e v e l o p e r s , and making development f i n a n c i n g a v a i l a b l e t o l o c a l governments where r e q u i r e d . -use of p r o v i n c i a l funds t o f i n a n c e l a n d s e r v i c i n g by l o c a l governments which are r e q u i r e d f o r s u b d i v i s i o n development. -use of p r o v i n c i a l funds t o a s s i s t i n major l a n d assembly and redevelopment p r o j e c t s . Examples i n c l u d e the Songhees Development i n V i c t o r a , the Westwood P l a t e a u Development i n the North-east s e c t o r of Greater Vancouver and B.C. P l a c e i n Vancouver. - D i r e c t s a l e s of Crown l a n d to the p u b l i c i n r u r a l a r e a s t o e n s u r e t h a t a s t e a d y s u p p l y o f l o t s i s a v a i l a b l e . (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing, 1982a, not paged) The p o l i c y statement of 1984 r e i t e r a t e d the above elements, but a l s o emphasized the p r i n c i p l e o f government non-competition with the p r i v a t e s e c t o r . The d e s c r i p t i o n of each approach t o expanding r e s i d e n t i a l l a n d supply emphasized how the program would a s s i s t , or a t l e a s t not d i s t o r t , the p r i v a t e market. No mention i s made o f how the programs woud d i r e c t l y a s s i s t the consumer. -Make s u i t a b l e Crown l a n d a v a i l a b l e when and where needed, a t market v a l u e t o p r o v i d e a f a i r r e t u r n t o the crown and a v o i d d i s t o r t i n g the p r i v a t e l a n d market; -Where Crown l a n d i s t o be d e v e l o p e d f o r r e s i d e n t i a l use, the l a n d w i l l be made a v a i l a b l e i n l a r g e p a r c e l s t o the p r i v a t e s e c t o r f o r o n - s i t e development. -Two major p r o j e c t s which w i l l p r o v i d e s u b s t a n t i a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r p r i v a t e s e c t o r development are: 1200 h e c t a r e s o f l a n d i n C o q u i t l a m and P o r t Moody..., Songhees P e n i n s u l a on the i n n e r harbour of V i c t o r i a . (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands Parks and Housing, 1984b, not paged) Between 1981 and 1984, a p p r o ximately 14,000 r e s i d e n t i a l l o t s were s e r v i c e d through the p r o v i n c e s s e r v i c i n g and s u p p l y programs. The summary i n T a b l e V I I I i n d i c a t e s the number of p r o j e c t s and the amount of expenditures a s s o c i a t e d with the province's crown l a n d 114 s a l e p r o j e c t s . The l a n d s u p p l y program can be c r i t i c i z e d f o r not h e l p i n g those most i n need o f h o u s i n g a s s i s t a n c e . Since the government a s s i s t e d l a n d t h a t was developed by the p r i v a t e s e c t o r , or was s o l d a t market v a l u e , o n l y those who c o u l d a f f o r d market lan d p r i c e s c o u l d b e n e f i t from the i n i t i a t i v e . Moreover, v e r y l i t t l e or none of the l a n d was earmarked f o r s o c i a l h o u s i n g purposes which c o u l d have p r o v i d e d h o u s i n g t o i n d i v i d u a l s and f a m i l i e s with low- and moderate-incomes. (Sun, Dec. 9,1980) The government's u n w i l l i n g e s s t o p r o v i d e l a n d f o r s o c i a l housing, based on i t s b e l i e f t h a t s o c i a l h o u s i n g a c t i v i t y was not p a r t of the proper r o l e of government, i s a l o s t o p p o r t u n i t y . On one hand, the government missed an o p p o r t u n i t y t o generate revenue from l e a s e s or l a n d s a l e s t o n o n - p r o f i t or c o o p e r a t i v e h o u s i n g on l a n d t h a t would otherwise remain vacant u n t i l the h ousing market improved. On the other hand, low- and moderate income households l o s t an o p p o r t u n i t y t o l i v e i n decent, a f f o r d a b l e housing. 115 TABLE VIII MAJOR LAND SALES PROJECTS COMMUNITY Single-Family Multi-Family Lots Lots Songhees (Victoria) 0 2,500 Harold Winch Park 0 1,378 (Burnaby) Riverview Heights 770 280 (Coguitlam) Westwood Plateau 750 0 (Coquitlam) Nordic Estates 41 134 (Whistler) TOTAL: 1,561 4,292 Source: B.C. Ministry of Lands,Parks and Housing, Annual Report, 1983-84. 116 5.6 Rental Housing and Renter Assistance Programs The A s s i s t e d Rental Program (ARP). In 1976, the newly e l e c t e d S o c i a l C r e d i t government emphasized the d e l i v e r y o f r e n t a l h o u s i n g through the p r i v a t e s e c t o r . Thus, the p r o p o s a l c a l l program was r e p l a c e d with p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the f e d e r a l A s s i s t e d R e n t a l Program. ARP was based on the premise t h a t the p r i v a t e s e c t o r w i l l respond i n the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t , t h a t i s , i t w i l l b u i l d r e n t a l u n i t s i f g i v e n a re a s o n a b l e f i n a n c i a l i n c e n t i v e . The amount of a s s i s t a n c e was based on the number of u n i t s i n the p r o j e c t , the l a n d a c q u i s i t i o n and c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t s , mortgage i n t e r e s t r a t e , a t t a i n a b l e r e n t s and o p e r a t i n g c o s t s . The guaranteed r a t e of r e t u r n v a r i e d between 5% and 10%. I f the maximum P r o v i n c i a l grant (an average sub s i d y o f $595.00 p e r u n i t f o r f i r s t y e a r ) was n o t s u f f i c i e n t t o a l l o w the owner t o ma i n t a i n an agreed upon r a t e o f r e t u r n on eq u i t y , a f u r t h e r s u b s i d i z e d l o a n was a v a i l a b l e from CMHC. T h i s i n t e r e s t f r e e l o a n was re p a y a b l e one year a f t e r the end of the t e n year disbursement p e r i o d . The t o t a l o f the combined a s s i s t a n c e was decreased by one-tenth o f the f i r s t year a s s i s t a n c e f o r each subsequent year. The r e d u c t i o n was a c c e l e r a t e d i f the pwner's r e t u r n on e q u i t y i s h i g h e r than the guaranteed r a t e . I f the r e t u r n on e q u i t y l e s s than the guaranteed r a t e , the a s s i s t a n c e was maintained a t the p r e v i o u s years l e v e l . O r i g i n a l l y 25% of the u n i t s were earmarked f o r r e n t supplement under S e c t i o n 44.1(b). The ARP program was a b o l i s h e d i n 1978 as p a r t as the move t o program disentanglement by the f e d e r a l government. T a b l e IX p r o v i d e s a summary of the number of u n i t s t h a t r e c e i v e d a s s i s t a n c e and the c a p i t a l expended by the p r o v i n c e . Table IX Assisted Rental Prograim-B.C. Summary* Year Number of U n i t s C a p i t a l Expended ($) % of T o t a l Apt. S t a r t s 1977 3,606 679,401 * 1978 12,806 5,002,275 * 1979 15,103 7,840495 * # P r o v i n c i a l committments under the program ceased i n 1978, so t h a t the s t a t i s t i c s i n d i c a t e number of ARP u n i t s b e i n g a s s i s t e d , r a t h e r than number approved, or under c o n s t r u c t i o n . U n i t s a s s i s t e d between 1977-1979 re p r e s e n t s s t a r t s t h a t were made i n 1976-1978. * there were 31,515 u n i t s a s s i s t e d between 1977-1979, and 31,054 apartment u n i t s c o n s t r u c t e d from 1976 t o 1978, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t most apartment s t a r t s were ARP A s s i s t e d . Source: M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing, 1979 Annual Report. CMHC, Canadian Housing S t a t i s t i c s , 1981, Tabl e 4. The Home Conversion Loan Program. The new government c o n t i n u e d the Home Co n v e r s i o n Loan Programme which o f f e r e d loans o f $15,000 f o r t h e f i r s t u n i t c r e a t e d i n an e x i s t i n g d w e l l i n g and $9,000 f o r each a d d i t i o n a l u n i t . In 1981 the maximum l o a n amount was i n c r e a s e d t o $25,000 per u n i t and the program was made a p p l i c a b l e t o commercial and i n d u s t r i a l p r o p e r t y c o n v e r t e d t o r e s i d e n t i a l r e n t a l u n i t s . The purpose of the program was t o i n c r e a s e the housing s u p p l y and encourage more i n t e n s i v e use of 118 m u n i c i p a l s e r v i c e s i n b u i l t up areas. However, due t o zoning and b u i l d i n g by-law r e g u l a t i o n s which r e s t r i c t e d the c r e a t i o n of a d d i t i o n a l u n i t s , the program was not s u c c e s s f u l . Approximately 800 l o a n s f o r r e s i d e n t i a l c o n v e r s i o n were approved from the programs i n c e p t i o n i n 1974 t o 1984, r e p r e s e n t i n g a minor a d d i t i o n t o the r e n t a l h o u s i n g stock. The Housing I n i t i a t i v e Program. In 1980, $75,000,000 of the the $200 m i l l i o n a l l o c a t e d f o r Housing I n i t i a t i v e Program was earmarked f o r r e n t a l p r o j e c t s . The r e n t a l p o r t i o n o f the program was i n i t i a t e d i n response t o decreases i n apartment s t a r t s i n 1978 and 1979. Mortgages were approved f o r 98 p r o j e c t s designed t o produce 2,851 r e n t a l u n i t s . The f i r s t mortgages p r o v i d e d a t h r e e y e a r term on a s l i d i n g s c a l e o f 9 3/4% t h e f i r s t y e a r , 10 3/4% the second year, and 11 3/4% the t h i r d year. The Renter's Tax C r e d i t . In 1979 the maximum rente r ' s tax c r e d i t i n c r e a s e d $50 t o $150. The grant r e d u c t i o n f u n c t i o n was i n c r e a s e d from 1% t o 1.5% which maintained the grant f o r r e n t e r s with incomes below $10,000. The i n c r e a s e i n the c r e d i t r e d u c t i o n f u n c t i o n a l s o i n c r e a s e d the p r o g r e s s i v i t y of the b e n e f i t s so t h a t those with l i t t l e or no income r e c e i v e d the g r e a t e s t b e n e f i t . The i n c r e a s e i n the r e n t e r ' s tax c r e d i t was p a r t of a package t h a t a l s o i n c r e a s e d the Homeowner Grant by $100. In the 1979 Budget Speech the Finance M i n i s t e r concluded: Through t h i s i n c r e a s e i n the renter's tax c r e d i t and the p r e v i o u s l y announced i n c r e a s e i n the homeowner's grant, every homeowner and most tenants s h o u l d see t h e i r h o using c o s t s reduced. (B.C., M i n i s t r y o f F i n a n c e , 1979, 42) 119 Once again, the d i f f e r e n c e i n treatment between homeowners and tenants i s apparent. The i n c r e a s e i n the grant g i v e n t o homeowners was double t h a t g i v e n t o r e n t e r s . By the time the renter ' s tax c r e d i t was c a n c e l l e d i n 1983, the Homeowners Grant was $380 w h i l e the Renters Tax C r e d i t was a maximum o f $150. Moreover, w h i l e a l l homeowners were e l i g i b l e f o r the maximum amount o f t h e g r a n t as l o n g as t h e i r p r o p e r t y t a x e s were o v e r $380, o n l y those tenants with v e r y low incomes r e c e i v e d the maximum renter's grant, s i n c e the grant was i n v e r s e l y r e l a t e d t o income. Post 1980 Rental Housing P o l i c y . In 1982, as p a r t of a statement of p r o v i n c i a l h o u s i n g p o l i c y , the government a r t i c u l a t e d a r e n t a l housing p o l i c y t h a t focussed on the r o l e o f the p r i v a t e s e c t o r i n produc i n g r e n t a l accommodation and the r o l e of the f e d e r a l government i n p r o v i d i n g a s s i s t a n c e t o the r e n t a l market through tax i n c e n t i v e s . The o b j e c t i v e o f the p o l i c y was to e s t a b l i s h a p r i v a t e r e n t a l market with a 2-3% vacancy r a t e and the annual c o n s t r u c t i o n of 10,000 r e n t a l u n i t s . (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing, 1982a, 6) As shown i n F i g u r e 2 the number o f apartment u n i t s s t a r t e d per year has f a l l e n s h o r t o f t h a t g o a l . Moreover, the vacancy r a t e i n Vancouver has o n l y exceeded 2% i n one s i x month p e r i o d i n 1983. (Figure 1) The s t r a t e g i e s chosen t o a c h i e v e the o b j e c t i v e i n c l u d e the p r o v i s i o n of a s t a b l e investment c l i m a t e through r e n t d e c o n t r o l , encouragement of f a v o u r a b l e f e d e r a l tax p o l i c i e s f o r r e n t a l c o n s t r u c t i o n and encouragement of the c r e a t i o n of r e n t a l u n i t s 120 FIGURE 2 B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a A p a r t m e n t S t a r t s 1 9 5 5 - 1 9 E A i • i -A / \ / \ ' \ \ \ l \ \ \ \_ A — i — i — i — • — 1 9 5 5 1 9 S O 1 9 B S 1 9 7 0 1 9 7 5 1 9 8 0 A p a r t m e n t S t a r t s Canada Mortgage and Housing C o r p o r a t i o n , Canadian Housing S t a t i s t i c s , S t a t i s t i c a l S e r v i c e s D i v i s i o n , Ottawa, V a r i o u s y e a r s . 1 2 1 through c o n v e r s i o n of e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s . The government saw i t necessary t o monitor the need f o r s p e c i a l programs f o r r e n t a l c o n s t r u c t i o n such as the 1980 Housing I n i t i a t i v e Fund which p r o v i d e d low i n t e r e s t mortgages t o r e n t a l housing d e v e l o p e r s . I t i s apparent t h a t , with regards t o r e n t a l housing, the government saw as i t s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y the c r e a t i o n of c o n d i t i o n s f a v o u r a b l e f o r the p r o v i s i o n of r e n t a l u n i t s by the p r i v a t e market. Moreover, the p r o v i n c i a l government p e r c e i v e d t h a t the f e d e r a l government had a p a r t i c u l a r l y important r o l e t o p l a y by p r o v i d i n g the r e n t a l h o u s i n g i n d u s t r y with tax i n c e n t i v e s . A statement of housing p o l i c y i s s u e d i n 1984 i n d i c a t e d a y e t s t r o n g e r r e l i a n c e on the p r i v a t e s e c t o r t o p r o v i d e r e n t a l housing. The government d i d not see i t s e l f even h a v i n g a r o l e i n m o n i t o r i n g the r e n t a l s i t u a t i o n i n case a s h o r t term government s t i m u l u s was r e q u i r e d . The o b j e c t i v e of the new r e n t a l h o using p o l i c y was t o ensure "an adequate s u p p l y of w e l l m aintained and sound r e n t a l housing i n urban cen t r e s " . (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing, 1984b, not paged) T h i s o b j e c t i v e does not s p e c i f y a t a r g e t t e d vacancy r a t e nor a t a r g e t t e d annual c o n s t r u c t i o n r a t e . S i m i l i a r t o the p r e v i o u s statement o f p o l i c y , the approach taken t o a c h i e v e the o b j e c t i v e i n c l u d e d the p r o v i s i o n of an economic c l i m a t e s u i t a b l e t o the encouragement of long-term p r i v a t e investment i n r e n t a l housing, and the encourgement of the f e d e r a l government to ensure t h a t tax p o l i c y a s s i s t s c a p i t a l investment i n r e n t a l u n i t c o s t r u c t i o n , t h a t i s , encouragement of the r e i n s t a t e m e n t of the MURB tax p r o v i s i o n . Further, the government saw the removal of r e n t c o n t r o l s and r e n t 122 r e v i e w as a s t r a t e g y t h a t would permit r e n t s t o r i s e over time t o c o v e r c o s t s , so t h a t new r e n t a l c o n s t r u c t i o n would be f e a s i b l e . (Ibid.) Rent R e g u l a t i o n . The system of p r o v i n c i a l r e n t c o n t r o l s was d i s c o n t i n u e d i n 1983. P r i o r t o t h a t time, however, the number of r e n t a l u n i t s p r o t e c t e d under r e n t c o n t r o l had been c o n t i n u o u s l y reduced. Rent c o n t r o l s were o n l y a p p l i c a b l e t o u n i t s with a r e n t not exceeding a s t a t e d amount, which had not been i n c r e a s e d f o r some time. For example, i n 1983, one bedroom r e n t a l u n i t s r e n t i n g f o r l e s s than $300.00 per month were i n c l u d e d i n r e n t c o n t r o l l e g i s l a t i o n . S ince average money r e n t s f o r u n i t s i n the Vancouver CMA were $419.00 (Table IV) i t i s e v i d e n t t h a t the m a j o r i t y of u n i t s were not r e n t c o n t r o l l e d . R e n t a l u n i t s t h a t were not s u b j e c t t o r e n t c o n t r o l t h a t r e n t e d f o r l e s s than a s t a t e d amount ($750 i n 1984) were p r o t e c t e d by rent review. The l a n d l o r d c o u l d i n c r e a s e the r e n t by any amount, but the tenant had the r i g h t t o appeal the r e n t i n c r e a s e t o the Rentalsman i f the tenant f e l t the i n c r e a s e was e x c e s s i v e . Rent review was a b o l i s h e d i n J u l y 1984 when the R e s i d e n t i a l Tenancy A c t was r e p e a l e d . The same l e g i s l a t i o n a b o l i s h e d the o f f i c e of the Rentalsman. 5.7 S o c i a l Housing Assistance Programs Senior C i t i z e n Housing. The government continued the p o l i c y of a s s i s t i n g s e n i o r c i t i z e n h o u s i n g under the E l d e r l y C i t i z e n ' s Housing Aid Act, the f e d e r a l government's n o n - p r o f i t h o u s i n g 123 p r o v i s i o n s and S e c t i o n 40 and 43 of the N a t i o n a l Housing Act. In 1979, the p r o v i n c i a l and f e d e r a l government signed a G l o b a l Funding and Low Income Housing Operating (Senior C i t i z e n s ) Agreement as a move towards d i s e n t a n g l i n g f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of s e n i o r c i t i z e n r e n t a l housing a s s i s t a n c e . The p r o v i n c i a l a i d i n c l u d e d p r o v i s i o n of a s u i t a b l e s i t e f o r s e n i o r c i t i z e n s ' housing i f the s p o n s o r i n g n o n - p r o f i t o r g a n i z a t i o n d i d not h a v e one, and p r o v i s i o n o f a c a p i t a l g r a n t f o r up t o one-t h i r d of the c o s t of c o n s t r u c t i o n . A l s o , the m i n i s t r y would fund any r e n t supplement payments t h a t would be r e q u i r e d t o ensure t h a t r e n t s d i d not exceed a reasonable p o r t i o n of income. Between 1979 and 1984, 1,837 s e n i o r s h ousing u n i t s were completed at a c o s t of $24,113,714. The number of s e n i o r c i t i z e n h o u s i n g u n i t s c o n s t r u c t e d i n the 1979-1984 p e r i o d was s u b s t a n t i a l l y reduced from p e r v i o u s years. F u r t h e r , p r i o r i t y i n a l l o c a t i o n o f s e n i o r c i t i z e n s u n i t s was g i v e n t o s m a l l communities which d i d not have a c t i v e r e n t a l markets. S e n i o r s i n areas with l a r g e r e n t a l h ousing markets, such as the major urban c e n t r e s , were expected t o r e l y on the new s h e l t e r a l l o w a n c e f o r h o u s i n g a s s i s t a n c e . The S h e l t e r A i d f o r E l d e r l y Renters (SAFER) program, i n t r o d u c e d i n 1977, p r o v i d e s d i r e c t cash a s s i s t a n c e t o s e n i o r c i t i z e n r e n t e r s of low and moderate income whose r e n t exceeded 30% of t h e i r income. A c c o r d i n g t o the 1978 Annual Report of the M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing, SAFER was i n i t i a t e d because: I t was r e c o g n i z e d t h a t the c o s t s of c o n s t r u c t i n g s e n i o r 124 c i t i z e n h o using has become i n c r e a s i n g l y expensive, so t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e t o r e a c h o n l y a f r a c t i o n o f t h o s e s e n i o r c i t i z e n s i n need. SAFER p r o v i d e s immediate r e l i e f wherever s u i t a b l e r e n t a l accommodation i s a v a i l a b l e i n the marketplace, and a l l o w s r e c i p i e n t s freedom of c h o i c e i n s e l e c t i n g t h e i r accommodation. (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing, 1978, Annual Report, 74) For the purposes of c a l c u l a t i n g SAFER b e n e f i t s , r e n t maximums are used, which were o c c a s i o n a l l y reviewed. In 1978, a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the program was t r a n s f e r r e d t o the M i n i s t r y o f Human Resources. T a b l e X p r o v i d e s a summary of the SAFER program i n 1982: Table X Summary of SAFER Program i n B.C: 1982 Formula: .75 X ( e l i g i b l e rent - 30% of income) S i n g l e s Couples Sharers Maximum $134 $ 65.35 $ 23.08 allowance Maximum $330 $365 $365 e l i g i b l e r e n t Average $259 $312 $194 c l i e n t ' s r e n t Average $ 62.83 $ 25.22 $ 6.81 payment Number of 10,047 969 246 c l i e n t s Source: F a l k , K., 1982, "Housing Allowances i n Theory and P r a c t i c e , " H a b i t a t , V o l . 25, No. 4, p. 12) The c o s t o f the SAFER program was $7.9 m i l l i o n per year i n 1979-1980 and 1981-1982, r i s i n g t o $9.1 m i l l i o n i n 1983-84. The number 125 of r e c i p i e n t s has decreased from 13,500 i n 1979-80 t o 10,200 i n 1983-84. Co-operative Housing. The government co n t i n u e d a s s i s t i n g co-o p e r a t i v e h o u s i n g u n t i l 1978 through i n t e r i m f i n a n c i n g and the High Impact Grant, i n i t i a t e d under the NDP a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Since the f e d e r a l government i n t r o d u c e d an I n t e r e s t Reduction Grant program f o r c o - o p e r a t i v e s i n 1978, the p r o v i n c i a l High Impact Grant Program was c a n c e l l e d as i t was p e r c e i v e d as no l o n g e r necessary. A change t o the f i n a n c i n g mechanism o f the co-o p e r a t i v e h o u s i n g program i n i t i a t e d by the f e d e r a l government i n 1978 a l l o w e d the p r o v i n c e s t o "drop out" of j o i n t l y funding the program. The 1979 G l o b a l Funding Agreement signed by the f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l government gave r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r f a m i l y housing programs t o the f e d e r a l government. Housing Assistance for the Disabled. The F e d e r a l - P r o v i n c i a l G l o b a l agreement gave r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a s s i s t a n c e t o h o u s i n g f o r the d i s a b l e d t o the p r o v i n c i a l government. The r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a pproximately f i f t e e n group homes f o r the d i s a b l e d was t r a n s f e r r e d from the M i n i s t r y of Human Resources t o the M i n i s t r y of H e a l t h i n 1979. The M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing p r o v i d e d r e n t subsidy a s s i s t a n c e t o a p p r o ximately 70% of the r e s i d e n t s . In 1980 an i n t e r g o v e r n m e n t a l committee was formed by f e d e r a l , p r o v i n c i a l and C i t y of Vancouver o f f i c i a l s t o co-o r d i n a t e and expedite p r o v i s i o n of f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l h o using a s s i s t a n c e f o r the handicapped. The r e s u l t of the c o n s u l t a t i o n 126 was the c r e a t i o n of the R e n t a l Housing A s s i s t a n c e f o r D i s a b l e d Persons program which i n c l u d e s f i n a n c i a l a i d t o the n o n - p r o f i t s e c t o r f o r the c o n s t r u c t i o n of u n i t s . N o n - p r o f i t s o c i e t i e s b u i l d i n g or r e n o v a t i n g housing f o r the d i s a b l e d were e l i g i b l e f o r c a p i t a l g r a n t s o f a t l e a s t 25% of c o s t s as w e l l as o n g o i n g o p e r a t i n g s u b s i d i e s . The p r o v i n c e a l s o p r o v i d e d r e n t supplements t o d i s a b l e d tenants i n v a r i o u s community housing p r o j e c t s and l i v e - i n a s s i s t a n t s where necessary. The o b j e c t i v e of the programs were t o rehouse i n t h e i r own communities those d i s a b l e d persons t h a t l i v e d i n i n s t i t u t i o n s and t o p r o v i d e s p e c i a l l y designed h o u s i n g u n i t s not p r o v i d e d by the p r i v a t e s e c t o r . (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing, 1984d, not paged) P u b l i c Housing. P u b l i c h o u s i n g u n i t s were not b u i l t a f t e r 1976. Under the F e d e r a l - P r o v i n c i a l agreement i n 1979, the f e d e r a l government assumed r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r f a m i l y housing. Thus, the B.C. Housing Management Commission e s s e n t i a l l y became a p r o p e r t y management s e r v i c e f o r government owned s o c i a l housing. 5.8 Conclusion P h i l o s o p h i c a l Basis f o r Housing P o l i c y : 1976-1985. L i k e t h e i r p r e decessors who governed between 1952-1972, the S o c i a l C r e d i t government e l e c t e d i n 1976 f u l l y s u b s c r i b e t o and implement h o u s i n g p o l i c y on the b a s i s of a f r e e e n t e r p r i s e p h i l o s o p h y . The S o c i a l C r e d i t government has demonstrated an even st r o n g e r r e l i a n c e on the p r i v a t e s e c t o r i n r e c e n t years, r e s u l t i n g i n a s u b s t a n t i a l l y decreased r o l e f o r the p r o v i n c i a l government i n housing. T h i s r e l i a n c e on the market i s the r e s u l t of i n c r e a s i n g d e f i c i t s , economic r e c e s s i o n and g e n e r a l d i s i l l u s i o n m e n t with the w e l f a r e s t a t e . In l i g h t o f changing economic circumstances, supporters of the f r e e market approach have questioned v i r t u a l l y a l l forms of s o c i a l expenditure programs t h a t comprise the w e l f a r e s t a t e . Moreover, taxes and r e g u l a t i o n s a s s o c i a t e d with the w e l f a r e s t a t e are seen as d i s i n c e n t i v e s t o work and t o i n v e s t . These d i s i n c e n t i v e s are seen t o c o n t r i b u t e t o the d e c l i n e i n economic growth and the u n r e a l i s t i c e x p e c t a t i o n s o f labour. Thus, the key t o economic growth i s seen t o be t h e r e m o v a l o f t h e b u r d e n o f t h e w e l f a r e s t a t e from p r i v a t e e n t e r p r i s e through d e r e g u l a t i o n and decreased government spending on s o c i a l programs. Implementation of t h i s g e n e r a l p h i l o s o p h y has c l e a r l y o c c u r r e d i n p r o v i n c i a l housing p o l i c y . However, the S o c i a l C r e d i t government s t i l l r e c o g n i z e s t h a t some degree of i n t e r v e n t i o n i s needed i n areas where the market i s p e r c e i v e d t o be i n e f f e c t u a l i n overcoming gross i n e q u a l i t i e s and i n j u s t i c e s . The p o l i c i e s o f f r e e e n t e r p r i s e o r i e n t e d governments may advocate c u t t i n g of s o c i a l programs, but a minimal r e s i d u a l w e l f a r e s t r u c t u r e i s maintained. A s s i s t a n c e becomes a v a i l a b l e o n l y t o the " t r u l y needy", c o n s i s t i n g of those who due t o age, h a n d i c a p o r i l l n e s s a r e u n a b l e t o c o n t r i b u t e t o or f i n d a p l a c e i n the market economy. Government i n t e r v e n t i o n i s a l s o sometimes c o n s i d e r e d a c c e p t a b l e i n cases where i n t e r v e n t i o n improves c o n d i t i o n s f o r 128 the o p e r a t i o n of the p r i v a t e market. For example, the c r e a t i o n of the town of Tumbler Ridge i n the north east s e c t o r of B.C. was supposed t o p r o v i d e the necessary i n f r a s t r u c t u r e t o permit p r i v a t e m ining companies t o e x p l o i t the area's c o a l mines. S i m i l i a r l y , the v a r i o u s l a n d s e r v i c i n g programs of the S o c i a l C r e d i t government are seen t o p r o v i d e the necessary i n f r a s t r u c t u r e t o permit the p r i v a t e housing market t o c o n s t r u c t h ousing. Trends i n Housing P o l i c y ; 1976-1985. Housing p o l i c y under the contemporary S o c i a l C r e d i t government f u l l y r e f l e c t s t h e i r p h i l o s o p h i c a l p o s i t i o n . F o l l o w i n g t h e i r e l e c t i o n i n 1976 the government f o l l o w e d a much narrower housing p o l i c y focus than the NDP government. The parameters of h ousing p o l i c y under the S o c i a l C r e d i t government i n c l u d e r e l i a n c e on the p r i v a t e s e c t o r t o p r o v i d e housing, with government a s s i s t a n c e o n l y p r o v i d e d i n those s i t u a t i o n s where the p r i v a t e s e c t o r i s unable t o p r o v i d e h o u s i n g and t o a group of " t r u l y needy". Thus, s e n i o r c i t i z e n s h o u s i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n i s o n l y undertaken i n those communities without a s i g n i f i c a n t r e n t a l market. Low-income s e n i o r c i t i z e n s who l i v e i n urban areas are a s s i s t e d by a very narrowly t a r g e t t e d form o f s h e l t e r allowance. The m a j o r i t y o f programs t h a t were implemented i n the 1972-1976 p e r i o d t o i n c r e a s e the s upply of government owned ho u s i n g or a s s i s t r e n t e r s were a b o l i s h e d by the S o c i a l C r e d i t government. The government has continued support of homeownership a l t h o u g h the grant programs have been c a n c e l l e d . However, as the h i g h mortgage r a t e problem of the e a r l y 1980's i n d i c a t e , the 129 government was w i l l i n g t o h e l p a l l e v i a t e s p e c i f i c problems i n the homeownership market. The encouragement of homeownership has o c c u r r e d a t the expense of the r e n t a l market. S o c i a l C r e d i t r e n t a l h o u s i n g p o l i c y aims t o c r e a t e c o n d i t i o n s s u i t a b l e f o r the encouragement of the p r i v a t e r e n t a l h o using market. These c o n d i t i o n s are seen t o be c r e a t e d by the removal of r e g u l a t i o n , so t h a t r e n t s can r i s e t o make p r i v a t e development e c o n o m i c a l l y f e a s i b l e and d e s i r a b l e . I t i s apparent t h a t the government has not c o n s i d e r e d a c t i o n s t o d e a l w i t h the a n t i c i p a t e d shortages i n urban r e n t a l housing. The p r e v i o u s f i v e chapters have p r o v i d e d an o v e r v i e w of B.C. h o u sing p o l i c y and programs s i n c e World World War I I on a p e r i o d -b y - p e r i o d b a s i s . The f o l l o w i n g chapter a n a l y s e s l o n g term themes and t r e n d s i d e n t i f y i n g the elements of housing p o l i c y t h a t have changed, as w e l l as those t h a t have remained constant through the y e ars. 130 Chapter Six Continuity and Change i n B.C. Housing P o l i c y : An Overview The p r e c e e d i n g review o f B r i t i s h Columbia housing p o l i c y d u r i n g the l a s t f o r t y years cannot p r o v i d e a f u l l e x p l o r a t i o n and a n a l y s i s of any one p e r i o d or program. However, the review does permit an i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of what the p e r i o d s are, what the major p o l i c i e s and programs have been and what has changed or remained cons t a n t through the years. T h i s chapter p l a c e s the three p e r i o d s , 1945-1972, 1972-1976, and 1976-1985, i n t o a l a r g e r context so t h a t broad themes can be i d e n t i f i e d and examined. Those elements of B.C. housing p o l i c y t h a t have remained constant are examined f i r s t , f o l l o w e d by an d i s c u s s i o n of those elements t h a t have changed. 6.1 Continuity i n P r o v i n c i a l Housing P o l i c y A. No Challenge to Urban Housing and Land Markets. The most s i g n i f i c a n t continuous element of B.C. housing p o l i c y o v e r the l a s t f o u r decades i s the l a c k of any c h a l l a n g e t o urban housing and l a n d markets as the s o l e b a s i s f o r the p r o v i s i o n of h ousing. The l a c k of such a c h a l l e n g e from the f r e e e n t e r p r i s e o r i e n t e d governments of 1945 t o 1972 and 1976 t o t h e p r e s e n t i s understandable. To these governments, as Chapters Three and F i v e p o i n t out, the p r i v a t e ownership of land, and p r i v a t e l a n d and 131 h o u s i n g markets are b a s i c t e n e t s o f the f r e e e n t e r p r i s e p h i l o s o p h y . Housing i s v a l u e d not o n l y f o r i t s use as s h e l t e r b u t f o r i t s exchange v a l u e as a market commodity. S p e c u l a t i o n i n h o u s i n g and r e s i d e n t i a l l a n d i s accepted as a f u l l y l e g i t i m a t e means f o r investment a c t i v i t y . The maintenance and enhancement o f h o u s i n g and l a n d as market commodities and t h e use o f government p o l i c i e s and programs t o t h i s end, i s a b a s i c element i n the u n d e r l y i n g p h i l o s o p h y o f the 1945-1972 and the pr e s e n t p r o v i n c i a l governments. The New Democratic Party government a l s o never c h a l l e n g e d the p r i v a t e urban h o u s i n g and l a n d markets. A l t h o u g h the p o l i c y statements o f t h i s s o c i a l democratic p a r t y emphasized the r o l e o f hou s i n g as s h e l t e r , as one of the b a s i c human needs r a t h e r than a s p e c u l a t i v e commodity, t h e r e i s no r e c o r d o f any s e r i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f p o l i c i e s which would even begin t o t a c k l e the commodity nature of housing. Many NDP members d i d , however, c o n s i d e r t h i s t o be a major cause o f housing problems. A l t e r n a t i v e s t o the treatment of housing as a market commodity are now i n c r e a s i n g l y being d i s c u s s e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e . (see, i n p a r t i c u l a r , Achtenberg and Marcuse, 1983; Hartman, 1980; Hartman and Stone, 1983; and D a v i d o f f , 1983) There were s e v e r a l NDP programs which a t l e a s t p a r t i a l l y removed some aspects or forms of housing from the p r i v a t e market. For example, d u r i n g t h e i r term o f o f f i c e a p p r o x i m a t e l y 10,000 u n i t s o f s e n i o r c i t i z e n , p u b l i c h o u s i n g and c o - o p e r a t i v e h o u s i n g were c o n s t r u c t e d . These housing forms are a l l removed from the p r i v a t e h o u s i n g market i n t h a t they cannot be r e s o l d f o r p r o f i t . These non-market u n i t s r e p r e s e n t approximately 10% of the t o t a l number of h o u s i n g s t a r t s f o r the years 1973-1975. Such programs were based on a need t o p r o v i d e a f f o r d a b l e h o u s i n g t o low- and moderate-income f a m i l i e s r a t h e r than t o as a p a r t o f any b r o a d program t h a t would l e a d t o a more t h o r o u g h decommodification of housing. The NDP's expanded a s s i s t a n c e t o low- and moderate-income f a m i l i e s was based on a view t h a t inadequate h o u s i n g i s an i n h e r e n t s i d e - e f f e c t of the c a p i t a l i s t system and a b e l i e f t h a t the s t a t e has a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o m i t i g a t e such n e g a t i v e impacts. T h i s i s common t o a l l s o c i a l democratic p a r t i e s i n the advanced western n a t i o n s . ( O f f e , 1984, 147) The o n l y program aimed a t r e t a i n i n g s o c i a l ownership of l a n d was the L e a s e h o l d Mortgage program which, due t o the NDP's s h o r t term i n o f f i c e , had o n l y about 700 p a r t i c i p a n t s . The m a j o r i t y of these l e a s e h o l d e r s had opted f o r 99 year l e a s e s , which i s v i r t u a l l y e q u i v a l e n t t o f e e - s i m p l e ownership, meaning t h a t the government had l i t t l e c o n t r o l o v e r the market exchange of the the l e a s e d land. In comparison, a p p r o x i m a t e l y 60,000 home purchase a s s i s t a n c e grants were i s s u e d t o home buyers d u r i n g the same p e r i o d . In terms of the p r o d u c t i o n of s o c i a l h o using i n the r e n t a l s e c t o r , the government d i d permit the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a p p r o x i m a t e l y 500 u n i t s through the P r o p o s a l C a l l Program. However, t h i s s m a l l number of u n i t s was b u i l t by p r i v a t e d e v e l o p e r s , w i t h the completed p r o j e c t s bought by the government a t a n e g o t i a t e d p r i c e . 133 Rather than p u r s u i n g a program of decommodification, the programs of the NDP r e p r e s e n t e d the use of resources of the p u b l i c s e c t o r t o enable the p r o v i n c i a l government t o a c t as a b i g r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p e r i n the p r i v a t e market, p r o v i d i n g housing u n i t s t o those unable t o f u l l y p a r t i c i p a t e i n the housing market. Fo r t h e most p a r t , the NDP programs were v i r t u a l l y t h e same as any c o n s e r v a t i v e government has implemented, o n l y the NDP p u t a gre a t d e a l more f i n a n c i a l r e s o u r c e s i n t o them. Since the NDP government had t o operate w i t h i n the l o g i c o f the market-dominated h o u s i n g system the c o s t of t h e i r programs were extremely high. In the year 1973-1974, the NDP government spent approximately 4.7% of i t s budget on expenditures r e l a t e d t o housing, compared t o 0.9% i n 1978-79 by the S o c i a l C r e d i t government. ( S t a t i s t i c s Canada, Catalogue 68-207, v a r i o u s years) B. The Emphasis on Encouraging Homeownership Throughout the l a s t t h i r t y years, the encouragement of-homeownership f o r as many B r i t i s h Columbians as p o s s i b l e has remained the focus o f h o u s i n g p o l i c y . Figure 3 g r a p h i c a l l y summarizes B.C.'s programs aimed a t the encouragement of homeownership s i n c e 1950. I t i s obvious t h a t the encouragement of homeownership i s i n accordance w i t h the p h i l o s o p h y of the f r e e market o r i e n t e d governments. The NDP government a l s o continued t o support homeownership a s s i s t a n c e programs. Both the homeowner grant and home a c q u i s i t i o n grant program f i r s t i n t r o d u c e d by the S o c i a l C r e d i t government were con t i n u e d under the NDP a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . 134 SUMMARY OF B.C. HOMEOWNERSHIP ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS FIGURE 3 PROPERTY TAX GRANT SECOND MORTGAGE HOME BUYER GRANT B.C. HOME PROGRAM (Mortgage A s s i s t a n c e ) LEASEHOLD MORTGAGE & RESIDENTIAL LAND LEASE PROVINCIAL AHOP HOUSING INITIATIVE PROGRAM 1950 1960 1970 1980 135 Moreover, because the m a j o r i t y o f l a n d l e a s e s i s s u e d under the R e s i d e n t i a l Land Lease Program were f o r 99 years, the l e a s e h o l d program c l o s e l y resembled f r e e h o l d tenure. The R e s i d e n t i a l Land Lease Program and the L e a s e h o l d Mortgage Program d i d manage t o o f f e r l o n g term l e a s e h o l d tenure t o f a m i l i e s with lower incomes than t h a t of other homeownership programs. However, u n l i k e S o c i a l C r e d i t , the NDP a d m i n i s t r a t i o n d i d not focus e x c l u s i v e l y on ownership housing. The NDP's support f o r homeownership was p r o b a b l y a pragmatic p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n based on the r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t i n 1971, 63.3% of households i n B.C. owned t h e i r own home. Since the i n c e p t i o n of the home buyer a s s i s t a n c e program i n 1967, 181,360 grants were approved and 105,580 Second Mortgages were i s s u e d . T h e r e f o r e , a s i g n i f i c a n t number of households took advantage of the program. The homebuyer a s s i s t a n c e program was a l s o expensive. Between 1980 and 1984 a p p r o x i m a t e l y $86.4 m i l l i o n d o l l a r s was spent on the F i r s t Home and F a m i l y F i r s t Home grant programs. (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks, and Housing, 1983-84, Annual Report, 36) Therefore, i t i s important t o examine the extent t o which the homeownership a s s i s t a n c e programs a c h i e v e d the o b j e c t i v e o f p e r m i t t i n g as many households as p o s s i b l e i n B.C. t o own t h e i r homes. F i g u r e 4 compares r a t e s of homeownership of households i n Canada and B r i t i s h Columbia from 1921 t o 1981. A lthough i t i s i m p o s s i b l e t o draw c a u s a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the e f f e c t of homeownership a s s i s t a n c e programs and the r a t e s of homeownership, i t i s p o s s i b l e t o examine tre n d s . 136 7B 74. 72 70 ea p V c sa * 64. -•J c 0 82 2 u SO a sa ss 54. 52 50 FIGURE 4 Homeownership Rate* Canada & British Columbia, 1921—1981 1921 Source: Harris, R. 1985. "Homeownership and Class i n Modern Canada", I.J.U.R.R., forthcoming. 137 A c c o r d i n g t o F i g u r e 4, between 1921 and World War II the r a t e o f homeownership i n B.C., which i n i t i a l l y was much lower than the r e s t of Canada, i n c r e a s e d g r a d u a l l y w h i l e the Canadian r a t e f e l l s h a r p l y . By 1941, the homeownership r a t e i n Canada was s l i g h t l y lower than B r i t i s h Columbia and has remained i n t h a t p o s i t i o n ever s i n c e . Between 1941 and 1951, the r a t e o f homeownership i n B.C. i n c r e a s e d from 49% t o 69.6%. Since t h e r e were no P r o v i n c i a l h o u s i n g programs i n t h i s decade, the i n c r e a s e i n the r a t e o f homeownership must have been r e l a t e d t o the immediate post-war macro-economic c o n d i t i o n s and the e a r l y f e d e r a l government housing and mortgage market programs. Between 1951 and 1961, the r a t e o f homeownership i n c r e a s e d , b u t a t a much s l o w e r r a t e r e a c h i n g a peak o f 71%. P a r a l l e l i n g the r e s t o f the country, the r a t e o f homeownership f e l l s h a r p l y between 1961 and 1971, d e s p i t e the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l homeownership a s s i s t a n c e programs. Between 1971 and 1981, the p e r i o d o f g r e a t e s t homeownership a s s i s t a n c e a c t i v i t y , the r a t e o f homeownership once again i n c r e a s e d s l i g h t l y t o 64.4%, but d i d not i n c r e a s e a t as great a r a t e as i n the r e s t o f Canada. The evidence suggests t h a t the e x t e n s i v e and expensive p r o v i n c i a l homeownership a s s i s t a n c e programs have not by themselves s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n c r e a s e d the r a t e o f homeownership among B.C. households. I t i s prob a b l e t h a t o f f e r i n g demand s u b s i d i e s t h a t comprise approximately 2% of the purchase p r i c e of a house i s not s u f f i c i e n t t o encourage households i n t o homeownership. I t i s l i k e l y t h a t the homeownership a s s i s t a n c e 133 programs have o n l y p r o v i d e d a s s i s t a n c e a t the margins by encouraging households t o buy a house s l i g h t l y e a r l i e r than they might otherwise have. In r e c e n t years the case has been made t h a t homeownership i s becoming more a f f o r d a b l e . T h i s i s t r u e , but o n l y i n comparison with the h i g h l y i n f l a t e d v a l u e s of the 1981 r e a l e s t a t e boom and the peak i n mortgage i n t e r e s t r a t e s . In t h e i r 1985 Economic Update, f o r example, the B.C. C e n t r a l C r e d i t Union p r o v i d e s the h o u s i n g c o s t comparison i n T a b l e XI. Table XI COMPARATIVE HOUSING COSTS, 1981 AND 1984 - VANCOUVER 1984 1981 Average House P r i c e Down Payment (25%) Mortgage P r i n c i p a l Mortgage Rate (Annual Average) A m o r t i z a t i o n P e r i o d Monthly Payment Q u a l i f y i n g Household Income $116,000 $ 29,000 $ 87,000 12.00% 25 years $ 916 $ 36,600 $165,000 $ 41,250 $123,750 18.10% 25 years $ 1,888 $ 75,500 Source: B.C. C e n t r a l C r e d i t Union, Economic A n a l y s i s o f B r i t i s h  Columbia, V o l . 5 No. 1, February 1985, T a b l e 4. The above c o s t comparison c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e s t h a t a d e c l i n e i n both house p r i c e s and mortgage r a t e s have combined to lower the down payment and monthly payment r e q u i r e d t o purchase an average p r i c e d house i n Vancouver. However, the payments r e q u i r e d t o purchase an average p r i c e d house i n Vancouver i s s t i l l beyond the resources of most households. I t i s important t o note t h a t the monthly payment f i g u r e of $916 does not i n c l u d e the other 139 components of s h e l t e r c o s t s , such as taxes, insurance, heat, u t i l i t i e s and maintenance. The necessary q u a l i f y i n g household income would, t h e r e f o r e , be much h i g h e r . G i v e n t h a t the average weekly earnings i n B.C. i n August 1984 was $425.22 or $22,111 per year, o n l y average income households w i t h two incomes c o u l d a f f o r d an average p r i c e d home i n Vancouver. Average s i n g l e - i n c o m e f a m i l i e s , low income f a m i l i e s and the 16.4% of the l a b o u r f o r c e who are unemployed (January 1985) are unable t o purchase the a v e r a g e - p r i c e d house. In t h e i r a n a l y s i s , the B.C. C e n t r a l C r e d i t Union acknowledges t h a t the down payment and q u a l i f y i n g income requirements s t i l l e xclude many f a m i l i e s from p u r c h a s i n g the more " a f f o r d a b l e " housing. More s i g n i f i c a n t l y , however, they note t h a t t h i s r e l a t i v e l y b e t t e r a f f o r d a b i l i t y s i t u a t i o n w i l l o n l y l a s t as l o n g as house p r i c e s and mortgage i n t e r e s t r a t e s remain a t t h e i r c u r r e n t l e v e l s . A c c o r d i n g t o the economists a t the B.C. C e n t r a l C r e d i t Union: The housing market operates i n the shadow o f the o v e r a l l economic c l i m a t e i n the p r o v i n c e . P r o v i n c i a l growth has f a l l e n t o below one percent, unemployment has c l i m b e d and i n - m i g r a t i o n has become almost non-e x i s t a n t . The e f f e c t of these f a c t o r s on the housing demand has been o n l y p a r t i a l l y o f f s e t by d e c l i n i n g i n t e r e s t r a t e s . U n t i l employment p r o s p e c t s i n c r e a s e and the economy becomes stronger, the B.C. housing market w i l l see l i t t l e upward p r i c e movement. (B.C. C e n t r a l C r e d i t Union, 1985, not paged) When the macro-economic c o n d i t i o n s i n the p r o v i n c e improve, and t h e r a t e o f employment i n c r e a s e s we can e x p e c t t o see upward p r i c e movement i n the housing market. Any i n c r e a s e i n house p r i c e s or i n t e r e s t r a t e s w i l l have an immediate impact on the 140 number of buyers a b l e t o purchase a home because of wage l e v e l s are not expected t o i n c r e a s e s i g n i f i c a n t l y d u r i n g the next s e v e r a l years. T h i s a n a l y s i s a l s o i n d i c a t e s the power t h a t one of the e x t e r n a l f a c t o r s on the housing market, mortgage i n t e r e s t r a t e s , has on the af f o r d a b i l i t y of housing and the a b i l i t y o f government programs t o encourage homeownership. Therefore, any b e n e f i t s c r e a t e d by the decrease i n the p r i c e o f ownership ho u s i n g or the decrease i n mortgage i n t e r e s t r a t e s are t e n t a t i v e a t b e s t . As the above d i s c u s s i o n i n d i c a t e s , the housing p o l i c y a c t i o n s of the p r o v i n c i a l government had l i t t l e t o do with the macro-economic c o n d i t i o n s t h a t combined t o c r e a t e the decrease i n the p r i c e o f p u r c h a s i n g a house. Other than the homeowner grant, the o n l y p r o v i n c i a l program t a r g e t t e d towards the encouragement of homeownership i n the l a s t year i s the Second Mortgage Program. The Second Mortgage program, with i t s l i m i t o f $10,000, tends t o reduce the amount r e q u i r e d f o r a down payment i n t h a t the second mortgage can be a p p l i e d a g a i n s t the down payment, and t h e r e f o r e i n c r e a s e s the a b i l i t y t o purchase. However, the monthly payments are i n c r e a s e d so t h a t a b i l i t y o f the program to a l l o w homeownership o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o become a v a i l a b l e t o those lower down the income s c a l e i s l i m i t e d . Moreover, the c u r r e n t maximum house p r i c e f o r program e l i b i l i t y i s $85,000, which ex c l u d e s most houses i n the Vancouver m e t r o p o l i t a n area. The emphasis on the encouragement o f homeownernship has r e s u l t e d i n the n e g l e c t of r e n t e r s and the r e n t a l housing market. 141 F i g u r e 5 g r a p h i c a l l y i n d i c a t e s p r o v i n c i a l government housing programs t a r g e t t e d t o r e n t e r s , or the r e n t a l market. The renter's r e s ource grant and tax c r e d i t was r e l a t i v e l y i n s i g n i f i c a n t i n i t s impact on a s s i s t i n g r e n t e r s i n t h a t the maximum grant l e v e l was $150 p e r y e a r f o r t h o s e w i t h l i t t l e or no income. The C o n v e r s i o n Loan Program has a s s i s t e d the c o n s t r u c t i o n of an average of 80 u n i t s per year, and t h e r e f o r e , has had v i r t u a l l y no impact on r e n t a l supply. The NDP's " P r o v i n c i a l Rental Housing" program under the p r o v i s i o n s of S e c t i o n 43 of the NHA r e s u l t e d i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2,000 u n i t s of p u b l i c a l l y owned r e n t a l housing, which, a l t h o u g h a s i g n i f i c a n t s u p p l y achievement f o r a three year p e r i o d , was a r e l a t i v e l y minor a d d i t i o n t o the o v e r a l l r e n t a l h o u s i n g stock. I t s h o u l d be noted, however, t h a t p r o d u c t i o n under t h i s program was l i m i t e d by the r e l u c t a n c e of the f e d e r a l government t o i n c r e a s e the number of u n i t s a l l o c a t e d t o B.C. Under the A s s i s t e d Rental Program, the f e d e r a l and p r o v i c i a l government j o i n t l y a s s i s t e d a s i g n i f i c a n t number of r e n t a l s t a r t s , 31,515 u n i t s , which c o n s t i t u t e d the m a j o r i t y of apartment u n i t s produced i n B.C. between 1975-1978. The impact of the ARP program can be seen i n the i n c r e a s e d apartment s t a r t s between 1975 and 1978 i n F i g u r e 2. At the t e r m i n a t i o n of ARP, apartment s t a r t s f e l l d r a m a t i c a l l y u n t i l the r e i n t r o d u c t i o n of the M u l t i p l e U n i t R e s i d e n t i a l B u i l d i n g (MURB) tax p r o v i s i o n s i n the e a r l y 1980's. Since the removal of the MURB p r o v i s i o n s , apartment s t a r t s have f a l l e n t o extremely low l e v e l s . 142 SUMMARY OF B..C. RENTER & RENTAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS FIGURE 5 RENTERS GRANT & TAX CREDIT CONVERSION LOAN PROGRAM RENT REGULATION SEC. 4 3 RENTAL HOUSING PROVINCIAL ARP D n 1950 1960 1970 1980 143 U n l i k e the ownership s e c t o r , there does appear t o be a d i r e c t and s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p between government programs and investment i n r e n t a l housing. T h i s i s p r o b a b l y due t o the f a c t t h a t i n t h e l a s t f i f t e e n y e a r s r e n t a l h o u s i n g has not been a l u c r a t i v e investment without government s u b s i d i e s . As a r e s u l t , i t appears r e a s o n a b l e t o assume t h a t r e n t a l h o u s i n g problems w i l l worsen i n the immediate f u t u r e . During 1985 t h e r e are expected t o be fewer than 2,000 r e n t a l h o u s i n g s t a r t s i n B.C. ( C l a y t o n , 1984, 3) As a d i r e c t r e s u l t , vacancies i n the e x i s t i n g r e n t a l h o u s i n g stock are expected t o t i g h t e n d u r i n g the next e i g h t e e n t o t h i r t y -s i x months. In i t s 1985 Economic A n a l y s i s , the B.C. C e n t r a l C r e d i t Union s t a t e s t h a t : A crunch i n apartment vacancies i s expected t o h i t s p e c i f i c areas of B r i t i s h Columbia, most n o t a b l y the Lower Mainland, i n 1986. In c o n t r a s t t o Vancouver, V i c t o r i a and Kelowna, many B r i t i s h Columbian communities have h i g h vacancy r a t e s . Because of t h e i r h i g h r a t e s , i t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t the r e n t a l t i g h t e n i n g w i l l a f f e c t communities o u t s i d e the Lower Mainland, the C a p i t a l Regional D i s t r i c t and Kelowna. (B.C. C e n t r a l C r e d i t Union, 1985, not paged)) The B.C. C e n t r a l C r e d i t Union a l s o notes t h a t a t the f i r s t s i g n o f economic r e c o v e r y , i t i s expected t h a t the demand f o r r e n t a l accommodation w i l l i n c r e a s e . In Vancouver, the demand f o r r e n t a l u n i t s w i l l l i k e l y o u t s t r i p s u p p l y i n a r a t h e r short p e r i o d o f time when the economy rebounds. In the absence of r e n t r e g u l a t i o n , i t can be expected t h a t r e n t s w i l l i n c r e a s e i n response t o the i n c r e a s e d demand. 144 C. Emphasis on Assistance to Housing f o r Senior C i t i z e n s . Another element of h ousing p o l i c y t h a t has remained c o n s i s t e n t has been the emphasis on a s s i s t a n c e t o housing f o r s e n i o r c i t i z e n s . F i g u r e 6 g r a p h i c a l l y summarizes the v a r i o u s programs t h a t have t a r g e t t e d a s s i s t a n c e t o the c o n s t r u c t i o n of s e n i o r s ' h o using or p r o v i d e d a i d t o s e n i o r s t o o f f s e t h o u s i n g c o s t s . Up u n t i l the l a t e 1970's the s e n i o r c i t i z e n s housing c o n s t r u c t i o n program was q u i t e s u b s t a n t i a l . As T a b l e II and T a b l e XII i n d i c a t e , between 1970 and 1978 an average of o v e r 1,000 u n i t s per year were c o n s t r u c t e d under the E l d e r l y C i t i z e n s Housing A i d Act and S e c t i o n 40 and 44 of the NHA. A f t e r 1978, a s s i s t a n c e t o s e n i o r s ' h o u s i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n was reduced. Table XII Seniors Citizens' Housing Construction, 1978-1984 Year Units Completed 1979 560 1980 240 1981- 82 403 1982- 83 873 1983- 84 382 Source: M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing, Annual Report, V a r i o u s years. S e n i o r s c i t i z e n h o u s i n g p r o d u c t i o n has decreased d r a m a t i c a l l y over the l a s t f i v e y e a r s . In terms of c a p i t a l expenditure, s i n c e 1979, the p r o v i n c i a l government has spent approximately $24 m i l l i o n on a s s i s t a n c e t o s e n i o r s ' housing c o n s t r u c t i o n . T h i s amount i s o n l y s l i g h t l y more than the amount spent on homebuyer grants i n one year 1983-84 ( i e . $23 m i l l i o n i n 1983-84). 145 SUMMARY OF B.C. SENIOR CITIZEN'S HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS FIGURE 6 HOUSING AID FOR ELDERLY CITIZENS SEC. 15/56.1 SEC. 44 RENT SUPPLEMENT ELDERLY CITIZENS RENTERS GRANT RENTERS TAX CREDIT SAFER SECTION 40 SECTION 4 3 1950 1960 1970 1980 146 The decrease i n emphasis i n s e n i o r s housing c o n s t r u c t i o n was accompanied by an i n c r e a s e i n emphasis on an income support approach t o a s s i s t i n g s e n i o r s with the i n t r o d u c t i o n of the S h e l t e r A i d f o r E l d e r l y Renters (SAFER) Program i n 1977. C o n s t r u c t i o n of s e n i o r s housing i s l i m i t e d t o those areas where the p r i v a t e market has been unable t o c o n s t r u c t adequate r e n t a l accommodation, g e n e r a l l y s m a l l or r u r a l communities. E l d e r l y r e n t e r s i n areas with l a r g e r e n t a l markets, such as Vancouver, are expected to r e l y on the SAFER program f o r h ousing a s s i s t a n c e . Consequently, p r o v i n c i a l government p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a s s i s t i n g the c o n s t r u c t i o n of s e n i o r s h ousing i n Vancouver has been v e r y l i m i t e d with o n l y 297 u n i t s a s s i s t e d s i n c e 1981. ( C i t y of Vancouver, S o c i a l P l a n n i n g Department, p e r s o n a l communication) A c c o r d i n g t o the S o c i a l C r e d i t government's 1984 statement of s o c i a l h o using p o l i c y , the income support approach i s supposed t o be more c o s t - e f f e c t i v e than c o n s t r u c t i o n . To i l l u s t r a t e t h i s p o i n t , the government p r o v i d e d the f o l l o w i n g breakdown of the c o s t of a s e n i o r c i t i z e n h o u s i n g u n i t i n an urban l o c a t i o n . (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing, 1984d, not paged) C a p i t a l cost per u n i t : Land $10,000 C o n s t r u c t i o n 35,000 T o t a l Cost $45,000 Monthly cost per u n i t : Mortgage Op e r a t i n g c o s t s $465 150 Monthly c o s t s $615 Less r e n t (based on income) 170 Government monthly subsidy $445 147 The document notes t h a t the subsidy of $445 a month i s almost s i x times g r e a t e r than the average p a i d out each month t o a person r e c e i v i n g SAFER. O p t i n g f o r an income support approach enabl e s the government t o h e l p a g r e a t e r number of p e o p l e with the same amount of money. However, f u r t h e r examination i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h i s c o n c l u s i o n i s m i s l e a d i n g . T a b l e XIII p r o v i d e s a summary of the b e n e f i t s under the SAFER program f o r an i n d i v i d u a l s i m i l i a r t o t h a t used i n the government's c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t s c e n a r i o , t h a t i s , a s i n g l e e l d e r l y p e r s o n w i t h an income o f $570 a month, which c o n s i s t s o f the Old Age S e c u r i t y Payment and Guaranteed Income Supplement ($533.61) and some s a v i n g s . The two s c e n a r i o s i n T a b l e XIII p r o v i d e a summary of the t y p i c a l SAFER payments p r o v i d e d t o those paying the maximum e l i g i b l e r e n t of $330 f o r s i n g l e s , and payments f o r those paying a more r e a l i s t i c urban area r e n t of $400. 148 Table XIII The SAFER Program i n B . C . : Analysis of Benefits for Singles Example 1: A household paying the maximum e l i g i b l e r e n t o f $330. Monthly income $570 Monthly r e n t $330 30 pe r c e n t of income $171 A f f o r d a b i l i t y gap = $330 - 171 = $159 s h e l t e r a l l o w a n c e = .75 X a f f o r d a b i l i t y gap = $119.25 Rent p a i d - s h e l t e r a l l o w a n c e $210.75 % of income p a i d i n ren t 37% Example 2; A household p a y i n g a t y p i c a l urban r e n t o f $400. Monthly income $570 Monthly r e n t $400 30 pe r c e n t of income $171 A f f o r d a b i l i t y gap = $330 - $171 = $159 s h e l t e r a l l o w a n c e = .75 X a f f o r d a b i l i t y gap = $119.25 Rent - s h e l t e r a l l o w a n c e $280.75 % of income p a i d i n r e n t 49% Source: Adapted from M. S t e e l e . 1985. "Housing Alowances: An Assessment of the P r o p o s a l f o r a N a t i o n a l Program i n Canada", Prepared f o r the Canadian Home B u i l d e r s ' A s s o c i a t i o n , Toronto. 149 I t i s apparent t h a t even with the SAFER allowance, e l d e r l y r e n t e r s pay s u b s t a n t i a l l y more f o r housing, i n terms of r e n t p a i d and percentage of income p a i d f o r s h e l t e r , than t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s i n p u b l i c a l l y owned or p r i v a t e n o n - p r o f i t s e n i o r s housing. Indeed, i n the l a r g e r urban areas such as Vancouver or V i c t o r i a , e l d e r l y r e n t e r s r e c e i v i n g SAFER b e n e f i t s may s t i l l be p a ying more than 50% of t h e i r income f o r housing. Therefore, the comparison of c o s t s between government monthly s u b s i d i e s f o r s e n i o r s housing c o n s t r u c t i o n and average amount p a i d t o SAFER r e c i p i e n t s i s not a p p r o p r i a t e s i n c e e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of a s s i s t a n c e are b e i n g compared. Fu r t h e r , the comparison does not take i n t o account the f a c t t h a t s e n i o r s h o u s i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n adds t o the l o n g term stock of s e n i o r s housing, which w i l l be g r e a t l y r e q u i r e d as the percentage of e l d e r l y households i n c r e a s e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y by the end of t h i s century. A l s o , the monthly subsidy t o government c o n s t r u c t e d u n i t s i s expected t o remain r e l a t i v e l y s t a b l e , w h i l e s h e l t e r a l l o w a n c e payments can be v o l a t i l e due t o changes i n r e n t l e v e l s and vacancy r a t e s . The v o l a t i l i t y i n SAFER b e n e f i t s , or a l t e r n a t i v e l y , i n c r e a s e s i n a f f o r d a b i l i t y problems f o r s e n i o r c i t i z e n r e n t e r s on f i x e d incomes, may become q u i t e s e r i o u s i n Vancouver, which i s e x p e c t e d t o f a c e low v a c a n c y r a t e s i n the n e ar f u t u r e accompanied by r e n t i n c r e a s e s due t o the absence of r e n t r e g u l a t i o n . For the most p a r t , the SAFER program i s a we 1 1 - t a r g e t t e d program t h a t p r o v i d e s some r e l i e f t o e l d e r l y r e n t e r s i n the 150 p r o v i n c e . The program i s j u s t i f i a b l e t o t r a d i t i o n a l economic a n a l y s t s and f r e e market o r i e n t e d governments i n t h a t the t r u l y needy are a s s i s t e d i n a manner which a l l o w s them t o become a c t o r s i n the p r i v a t e market. Further, a s h e l t e r a l l o w a n c e i s c o n s i d e r e d to be a t r a n s f e r of income, which i n theory, g i v e s the r e c i p i e n t freedom of c h o i c e i n the p r i v a t e market, r a t h e r than the supposedly l e s s e f f i c i e n t t r a n s f e r i n k i n d . However, the major drawback of SAFER i s t h a t e l d e r l y r e n t e r s and t h e t a x p a y e r s who pay t h e b i l l s must s t i l l f a c e t h e u n c e r t a i n t i e s of the p r i v a t e r e n t a l market. The SAFER program cannot be c o n s i d e r e d a s u b s t i t u t e f o r a s e n i o r s housing c o n s t r u c t i o n programs. The h o u s i n g s u p p l y programs f o r s e n i o r c i t i z e n s not o n l y p r o v i d e s adequate, s t a b l e and a f f o r d a b l e h o u s i n g f o r today's e l d e r l y i n l o c a t i o n s where i t i s needed, but a l s o c o n t r i b u t e s t o the s t o c k of s e n i o r s h ousing t h a t w i l l be needed i n t o the f u t u r e . 6.2 Major Changes i n B.C. Housing P o l i c y A. The "Terms of Reference" f o r Housing Policy. The p h i l o s o p h i c a l o r i e n t a t i o n of the government i n power determines the "terms of r e f e r e n c e " f o r housing p o l i c y . The "terms of r e f e r e n c e " i s d e f i n e d here as the c o n c e p t u a l framework o r s e t o f p a r a m e t e r s from w h i c h th e r a t i o n a l e f o r and t h e n a t u r e of h ousing p o l i c y i s determined. The "terms of r e f e r e n c e " which a government d e f i n e s f o r i t s e l f p r o v i d e s both o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r and c o n s t r a i n t s on the a b i l i t y of the government t o d e a l with the h o u s i n g problems of the day. The f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n 151 demonstrates how the "terms of r e f e r e n c e " f o r housing p o l i c y has changed i n each of the key p e r i o d s i n B.C.'s post-war housing p o l i c y h i s t o r y . Terms of Reference f o r the 1945-1972 Period. The f r e e market p h i l o s o p h y of the 1945-1972 government d e f i n e d a v e r y narrow terms of r e f e r e n c e f o r housing p o l i c y . A major t e n e t o f t h i s p h i l o s o p h y i s the r e l i a n c e on the p r i v a t e market t o a c h i e v e economic and s o c i a l ends w i t h as l i t t l e d i r e c t government i n t e r v e n t i o n as p o s s i b l e . The p r o v i s i o n o f h o u s i n g i s c o n s i d e r e d t o be s o l e l y w i t h i n the domain of the p r i v a t e s e c t o r , w i t h government i n t e r v e n t i o n o n l y a c c e p t a b l e i n emergency c o n d i t i o n s or where government i n t e r v e n t i o n can a s s i s t the f u n c t i o n i n g of the p r i v a t e market. A c c o r d i n g t o b a s i c h ousing i n d i c a t o r s , such as housing s t a r t s , homeownership r a t e s and vacancy r a t e s , the p r i v a t e s e c t o r i n B.C. d i d , i n g e n e r a l , do a s a t i s f a c t o r y job of p r o v i d i n g h o u s i n g i n the post-war years up t o the e a r l y 1970's. Further, when housing problems d i d a r i s e , f o r example, i n the immediate post-war p e r i o d , the p r o v i n c e p e r m i t t e d and encouraged the f e d e r a l government t o i n t e r v e n e . The p r o v i n c e c o n s i d e r e d the s o l u t i o n o f post-war h o u s i n g problems t o be the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the f e d e r a l government due t o i t s wartime emergency powers. The p r o v i n c e never opposed the c o n t i n u i n g l o n g term f e d e r a l r o l e i n housing p o l i c y f o r m u l a t i o n and program implementation i n the two decades f o l l o w i n g the war. Thus,, w h i l e the f r e e market p h i l o s o p h y of the p r o v i n c i a l government d i d have some e f f e c t , i t appears 152 t h a t the r e l i a n c e on the f e d e r a l government was a more important f a c t o r d e t e r m i n i n g the minimal nature of p r o v i n c i a l h ousing p o l i c y d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d . The second t e n e t of the f r e e market p h i l o s o p h y i s the view t h a t government a i d s h o u l d be p r o v i d e d t o a d e f i n e d group of " t r u l y needy" who, because of age, d i s a b i l i t y or income c o n s t r a i n t s , cannot f i n d accommodation i n the p r i v a t e s e c t o r . The d e c i s i o n t o v e r y narrowly d e f i n e the group of " t r u l y needy" s e v e r e l y l i m i t s the number o f r e c i p i e n t s who can r e c e i v e housing a s s i s t a n c e , thereby r e s t r i c t i n g the scope of housing program op t i o n s . In the 1945-71 p e r i o d s e n i o r c i t i z e n s were d e f i n e d as a group worthy of government a i d . The m a j o r i t y of the a i d was p r o v i d e d t o p r i v a t e n o n - p r o f i t o r g a n i z a t i o n s f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n of s e n i o r s ' p r o j e c t s , though some of the funding was a l l o c a t e d f o r p u b l i c a l l y owned s e n i o r s ' housing. A t h i r d t e n e t of the f r e e market p h i l o s o p h y i s the p r i v a t e ownership o f l a n d and housing. C e r t a i n l y , the most important p o l i c y of the 1952-72 S o c i a l C r e d i t government was the encouragement of homeownership. T h i s p o l i c y was c o n t i n u a l l y a r t i c u l a t e d . A 1972 p o l i c y document s t a t e s t h i s g o a l q u i t e c l e a r l y : People r e q u i r e a home e i t h e r by purchase or by l e a s e — homeownership or r e n t i n g . The province's main t h r u s t i s towards the achievement of homeownership because the Government f e e l s t h i s meets the s o c i a l and p e r s o n a l needs of the m a j o r i t y of the c i t i z e n s . (B.C. L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly, 1972, not paged) A p o s i t i o n t h a t f a v o u r s homeownership so t h o r o u g h l y l i m i t s housing p o l i c y and program o p t i o n s . The r e l u c t a n c e t o support 153 p u b l i c h o using r e f l e c t s the government's b e l i e f t h a t low income p e o p l e are b e t t e r s e r v e d by ownership a s s i s t a n c e programs. The r a t i o n a l e f o r p r o v i n c i a l h o using p o l i c y i n the immediate post-war t o e a r l y 1970 p e r i o d was, t h e r e f o r e , t o widen homeownership o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o as many people as p o s s i b l e , t o a i d p u b l i c and p r i v a t e n o n - p r o f i t o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n p r o v i d i n g s e n i o r c i t i z e n s ' housing, and t o otherwise minimize the p r o v i n c i a l government r o l e i n the housing market. Terms of Reference f o r the 1972-1976 Period In terms of h o u s i n g p o l i c y , s o c i a l democrats such as the NDP see adequate and a f f o r d a b l e h ousing as a r i g h t and a b a s i c s o c i a l need, l i k e m e d i c a l care or education. Housing i s v a l u e d as a s o c i a l u t i l i t y . In a d d i t i o n t o s h e l t e r , housing p r o v i d e s s o c i a l s t a t u s , access t o jobs, e d u c a t i o n and other s e r v i c e s , a framework f o r the conduct of household work, and a way of s t r u c t u r i n g economic, s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . (Achtenburg and Marcuse, 1983, 207) U n l i k e the proponents of the f r e e market, s o c i a l democrats v a l u e housing more f o r i t s u s e - v a l u e as secure, good q u a l i t y s h e l t e r than i t s exchange-value as an investment. S o c i a l democrats support measures t h a t decommodify some of the h o u s i n g stock, such as c o - o p e r a t i v e and n o n - p r o f i t housing. However, i n g e n e r a l , they do not acknowledge t h a t the r o o t cause o f housing problems may be s t r u c t u r a l and l i n k e d t o the treatment of l a n d and housing as t y p i c a l commodities. (Ibid., 207) N e v e r t h e l e s s , the broader terms of r e f e r e n c e of the the NDP government were not c o n s t r a i n e d by a r e l i a n c e s o l e l y on the 154 p r i v a t e s e c t o r o r by t h e n e c e s s i t y t o o n l y d i r e c t a i d t o a narrowly d e f i n e d group of "needy". The wider s e t of NDP p o l i c y parameters a l l o w e d the government t o experiment and t o be i n n o v a t i v e . Examples of programs t h a t were i n n o v a t i v e a t the time and which a t t r a c t e d a t t e n t i o n a c r o s s the country were the Home C o n v e r s i o n Loan Program and the L e a s e h o l d Mortgage Program. The NDP a l s o attempted new methods of government i n i t i a t e d h o u sing p r o d u c t i o n , such as the p r o p o s a l c a l l program and the purchase of a p r i v a t e development company t o pursue l a n d development on b e h a l f of the government. The NDP government d i d not l i m i t a i d t o a n a r r o w l y d e f i n e d group o f needy; programs were t a r g e t t e d t o low- and moderate-income people, homeowners, r e n t e r s and s e n i o r s . In t h i s r e s p e c t , the Renter's Tax C r e d i t r e p r e s e n t e d an i n n o v a t i v e program i n t h a t i t attempted t o d e a l with the i n e q u i t y between owners and r e n t e r s due t o the focus on programs f a v o u r i n g ownership housing o v e r r e n t a l housing. The r a t i o n a l e f o r housing p o l i c y under the NDP was, t h e r e f o r e , to ensure t h a t a l l B r i t i s h Columbians had access t o adequate and a f f o r d a b l e housing, and seek g r e a t e r e q u i t y i n the d i s t r i b u t i o n of housing. T h i s d i d not p r e c l u d e the p a r t i c i p a t i o n of the p r i v a t e s e c t o r i n the housing market. Indeed, the NDP saw the c o n t i n u e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n of the p r i v a t e h o u s i n g s e c t o r as e s s e n t i a l t o the success of t h e i r programs. In e f f e c t , the NDP government a c t e d as l a r g e d e v e l o p e r i n the p r i v a t e h o u s i n g market on b e h a l f of those e x c l u d e d from the market. While the terms of r e f e r e n c e a f f e c t i n g p r o v i n c i a l housing p o l i c y were broad, and p e r m i t t e d a wide range of programs, the 155 p r o v i n c e was l i m i t e d by the terms of r e f e r e n c e o f f e d e r a l h ousing p o l i c y . During the 1972-76 p e r i o d , the f e d e r a l government f o l l o w e d an i n d i r e c t l y i n t e r v e n t i o n i s t s t r a t e g y f o r housing a s s i s t a n c e through sprograms such as AHOP, ARP, and E n t r e p r e n e u r i a l Housing which p r o v i d e d a s s i s t a n c e t o the p r i v a t e s e c t o r t o i n c r e a s e the p r o d u c t i o n o f housing. The f e d e r a l E n t r e p r e n e u r i a l Housing program, f o r example, was i n d i r e c t c o m p e t i t i o n w i t h the NDP's p r o p o s a l c a l l program i n t h a t both programs competed f o r v i r t u a l l y the same r e s o u r c e s . As w e l l , the f e d e r a l government c o s t - s h a r e d many programs with the p r o v i n c i a l government, such as c o - o p e r a t i v e and n o n - p r o f i t housing and p u b l i c housing, g i v i n g the f e d e r a l government u l t i m a t e c o n t r o l over how many o f those u n i t s would be b u i l t . F i n a l l y , c o n f l i c t i n g views on the v i r t u e s of f r e e h o l d v e r s u s l e a s e h o l d tenure p r e v e n t e d c o - o p e r a t i o n between the two l e v e l s of government and pr e v e n t e d the combining o f the B.C. and f e d e r a l ownership programs. I f the two l e v e l s of government were a b l e t o co-operate and j o i n t l y sponsor programs, the e l i g i b l e income l e v e l might have been even f u r t h e r reduced, h e l p i n g more lower income households. Two other c o n s t r a i n t s f a c e d by the p r o v i n c i a l government i n i n i t i a t i n g i n n o v a t i v e h o u s i n g p o l i c y was the l a c k o f p r o v i n c i a l c a p i t a l and c i t i z e n r e s i s t a n c e . The f u l l program of d i r e c t c o n s t r u c t i o n which the NDP wished t o pursue was expensive; i f a l l department requests had been met i n 1975, the amount spent on p r o v i n c i a l or p r o v i c i a l l y c o n t r o l l e d h o u s i n g programs would have 156 been about a h a l f a b i l l i o n d o l l a r s . (Runge, 1975, 77) By-comparison, the t o t a l c a p i t a l budget f o r CMHC was $1,041 b i l l i o n i n 1975. The second major c o n s t r a i n t was p o p u l a r o p p o s i t i o n t o some of the more i n n o v a t i v e programs. In 1971, approximately 63% of households i n B.C. owned t h e i r own home on a f r e e h o l d b a s i s , and, t h e r e f o r e , owners and p o t e n t i a l owners were not v e r y r e s p o n s i v e t o ideas such as l e a s e h o l d tenure or c o n v e r s i o n of s i n g l e f a m i l y d w e l l i n g s t o permit r e n t a l s u i t e s . Further, there continued t o be s u b s t a n t i a l neighbourhood r e s i s t a n c e t o the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f p u b l i c h o u s i n g and r e n t a l h o u s i n g i n g e n e r a l . Terms of Reference f o r the Period Since 1976. The S o c i a l C r e d i t government of 1976 f o l l o w e d the same f r e e market p r i n c i p l e s as t h e i r p redecessors i n the 1950's and 1960's, t h a t i s , r e l i a n c e on the p r i v a t e s e c t o r t o c o n s t r u c t housing, t a r g e t t i n g a s s i s t a n c e t o a n a r r o w l y d e f i n e d group of t r u l y needy, and encourgement o f homeownership. As the d i s c u s s i o n i n the Chapter 5 i n d i c a t e s , the S o c i a l C r e d i t Government, f o r the most pa r t , f o l l o w e d an i n d i r e c t l y i n t e r v e n t i o n i s t s t r a t e g y i n housing p o l i c y whereby programs were designed t o a s s i s t the p r i v a t e s e c t o r . Programs were a l s o designed t o improve c o n d i t i o n s f o r the o p e r a t i o n o f the p r i v a t e h ousing s e c t o r , such as the removal of r e n t c o n t r o l s . As noted i n Chapter F i v e , the evidence i n d i c a t e s t h a t i n the l a s t few years, the p r o v i n c e has become much more dogmatic i n t h e i r r e l i a n c e on the p r i v a t e s e c t o r t o p r o v i d e housing. The government's most recent p o l i c y document r e g a r d i n g h o u s i n g i s e x p l i c i t i n s t a t i n g t h a t " p r o v i n c i a l 157 p o l i c i e s and programs w i l l be t a i l o r e d t o support and motivate the h o u s i n g i n d u s t r y t o meet the h o u s i n g requirements of the p o p u l a t i o n " . (B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing, 1984b, not paged) Government i n t e r v e n t i o n i s o n l y seen as e s s e n t i a l to p r o t e c t an undefined " v i t a l p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . " The premise of the c u r r e n t government i s t h a t the p r i v a t e h o u s i n g market i s capable of b e i n g r e s p o n s i v e t o the needs o f the people. However, i t i s apparent t h a t a h i g h percentage of c o n s t r u c t i o n t h a t i s o c c u r r i n g i s a s s i s t e d by the f e d e r a l and sometimes the p r o v i n c i a l government. For example, of the 3,863 apartment u n i t s s t a r t e d i n Vancouver i n 1983, 1,994 were a s s i s t e d through the NHA., e i t h e r by the s o c i a l housing programs (643 u n i t s ) , or by the market housing programs (1,351 u n i t s ) . Less than h a l f of the u n i t s (1,869) were f i n a n c e d without NHA a s s i s t a n c e . (CMHC, 1983, Canadian Housing S t a t i s t i c s , T a b l e 13) Thus, the p r i v a t e s e c t o r seemed t o r e q u i r e government a s s i s t a n c e t o b u i l d housing d e s p i t e low vacancy r a t e s and r e n t d e c o n t r o l . A dogmatic r e l i a n c e on the p r i v a t e s e c t o r t o p r o v i d e h o u s i n g l i m i t s the government's a b i l i t y t o d e a l w i t h housing problems, e s p e c i a l l y the p r o v i s i o n of low and moderate income housing, which the p r i v a t e s e c t o r seems unable t o produce without l a r g e government s u b s i d i e s . The S o c i a l C r e d i t government has d e f i n e d a v e r y narrow group " i n need", worthy of r e c e i v i n g a i d . T h i s i n c l u d e s s e n i o r s , the m e n t a l l y and p h y s i c a l l y handicapped, and v e r y low-income f a m i l i e s . A i d t o f a m i l i e s , i n the form of p u b l i c housing, has not been i n c r e a s e d or emphasized s i n c e the f e d e r a l government 158 assumed r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r f a m i l y s o c i a l h o using i n 1979 through the G l o b a l Funding Agreement. T h i s d e f i n i t i o n of a narrow t a r g e t group r e s t r i c t s the a b i l i t y of the government t o a c t i n order t o meet the e x i s t i n g or emerging needs of other groups who are not p a r t of the government's " t r u l y needy" category. An example i s the r e f u s a l o f the p r o v i n c i a l government t o take a c t i o n t o p r e v e n t or a m e l i o r a t e the displacement of low-income s i n g l e s i n the Downtown E a s t s i d e caused by the w o r l d e x p o s i t i o n and the B.C. P l a c e development. The S o c i a l C r e d i t government has continued the encouragement of homeownership through the homeowner grant and the B.C. Second Mortgage Program, but has c a n c e l l e d the other home buyer grant programs. A maximum p r i c e l i m i t o f $85,000, a p p l i c a b l e f o r the e n t i r e p r o v i n c e , was s e t f o r the B.C. Second Mortgage Program program i n 198 3 t o ensure t h a t a v a i l a b l e b e n e f i t s go t o those i n the lower income b r a c k e t s . The amount of f i n a n c i a l resources aimed a t homeownership programs, as i n the case of a l l other programs, has t h e r e f o r e been reduced. The r a t i o n a l e f o r h o u s i n g p o l i c y under the S o c i a l C r e d i t government from 1976 t o t h e p r e s e n t i s t o c r e a t e and m a i n t a i n an investment c l i m a t e t h a t w i l l m o t i v a t e the h o u s i n g i n d u s t r y t o meet the housing requirements of the p r o v i n c e , with government a s s i s t a n c e o n l y p r o v i d e d t o a s m a l l number of those d e f i n e d as " t r u l y needy". 159 6.3 Conclusions T h i s r e s e a r c h p r o v i d e s an o v e r v i e w of post World War II hou s i n g p o l i c y i n B r i t i s h Columbia i n order t o permit a n a l y s i s o f g e n e r a l t r e n d s and t o p r o v i d e a broader context f o r f u t u r e p o l i c y f o r m u l a t i o n . Three d i s t i n c t p e r i o d s of p r o v i n c i a l h o using p o l i c y have been i d e n t i f i e d and the program i n i t i a t i v e s undertaken i n each p e r i o d have been examined. From t h i s h i s t o r i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , i t i s p o s s i b l e t o a n a l y s e elements i n housing p o l i c y t h a t have remained continuous and those elements t h a t have changed. F i r s t , i t i s found t h a t d u r i n g the l a s t f o r t y years, there has never been a s e r i o u s c h a l l e n g e t o the r o l e o f urban l a n d and housing markets by housing p o l i c y makers. A l t h o u g h the s o c i a l democratic NDP a d m i n i s t r a t i o n d i d implement some programs t h a t c o n s t r u c t e d h o u s i n g t h a t was removed from the p r i v a t e market, the o b j e c t i v e o f these programs was not t o i n i t i a t e a program of decommodification of the ho u s i n g s t o c k . The emphasis on encouraging homeownership f o r as many households as p o s s i b l e and ho u s i n g a s s i s t a n c e f o r s e n i o r c i t i z e n s a l s o been continuous s i n c e the 1950's. I t i s p r o b a b l e t h a t the homeownership a s s i s t a n c e programs have had, however, o n l y a m a r g i n a l impact on i n c r e a s i n g the r a t e o f homeownership. I t i s obvious t h a t macro-economic f a c t o r s such as i n t e r e s t r a t e s , i n f l a t i o n , h o usehold income and demand f o r ho u s i n g are more s i g n i f i c a n t determinants on the a b i l i t y o f households t o purchase t h e i r own houses. An a c t i v e s e n i o r s housing c o n s t r u c t i o n program was maint a i n e d from 1955 to the l a t e 1970's with the m a j o r i t y of 160 u n i t s sponsored by n o n - p r o f i t groups. In 1977, the focus of a s s i s t a n c e f o r s e n i o r s h o u s i n g changed from a c o n s t r u c t i o n a s s i s t a n c e approach t o an income a s s i s t a n c e approach. Government a s s i s t e d s e n i o r s ' h o u s i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n was t a r g e t t e d to those areas, g e n e r a l l y s m a l l communities, which d i d not have adequate r e n t a l markets. Although the names and d e t a i l s of homeownership and s e n i o r c i t i z e n h o u s i n g a s s i s t a n c e programs c o n t i n u o u s l y changed, the g o a l s and content of the programs remained e s s e n t i a l l y the same. In t h e a n a l y s i s o f h o u s i n g p o l i c y t r e n d s i t i s f o u n d t h a t the p h i l o s o p h i c a l p o s i t i o n of the p r o v i n c i a l government determined i t s "terms of r e f e r e n c e " f o r housing p o l i c y . In the 1946-1972 and 1976-1985 p e r i o d s , the f r e e e n t e r p r i s e o r i e n t a t i o n of the governments determined a v e r y narrow r o l e f o r government housing p o l i c y . In the former case, the narrowness of the parameters f o r h ousing p o l i c y was caused m a i n l y by a b e l i e f t h a t h o u s i n g p o l i c y was the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the f e d e r a l government, w h i l e i n t h e l a t t e r c a s e t h e narrowness was due t o a n e a r l y complete r e l i a n c e on the p r i v a t e s e c t o r t o p r o v i d e housing. While the NDP government of the 1972-1976 p e r i o d had an expanded s o c i a l democratic o r i e n t a t i o n , i t was s t i l l c o n s t r a i n e d i n i t s a b i l i t y t o e f f e c t i v e l y d e a l with housing problems. The NDP government was c o n s t r a i n e d by i t s l i m i t e d term i n o f f i c e , the emergence of d i f f e r e n t f e d e r a l p r i o r i t i e s , the l a c k of f i n a n c i a l r esources and the r e s i s t a n c e w i t h i n the p r o v i n c e t o change. These changes i n the terms of r e f e r e n c e f o r post war B.C. housing 161 p o l i c y have p r e v e n t e d any chance of a comprehensive and sys t e m a t i c approach t o housing problems. In terms of p r o v i n c i a l housing p o l i c y i n the f u t u r e , t h e r e i s no i n d i c a t i o n o f s i g n i f i c a n t change i n the c u r r e n t S o c i a l C r e d i t government's p o l i c y of r e l i a n c e on the p r i v a t e s e c t o r f o r p r o v i s i o n o f h o u s i n g and the l i m i t i a t i o n o f the r o l e o f the p u b l i c s e c t o r t o a r e s i d u a l f u n c t i o n . However, such an i n f l e x i b l e approach may have t o be r e c o n s i d e r e d i f p r e d i c t i o n s of a s e r i o u s r e n t a l housing shortage i n major urban areas come t o pass, or i f macro-economic c o n d i t i o n s n e g a t i v e l y a f f e c t the homeownership market. One source of p o t e n t i a l change i n B.C. hou s i n g p o l i c y may a r i s e from the c u r r e n t f e d e r a l housing p o l i c y c o n s u l t a t i o n process where the r o l e s of the v a r i o u s l e v e l s o f government are being reexamined. I t i s too e a r l y , however, t o s p e c u l a t e on the a c t u a l r e s u l t o f t h i s c o n s u l t a t i o n process. T h i s r e s e a r c h p r o v i d e s a s t a r t i n g framework f o r f u r t h e r , more d e t a i l e d a n a l y s i s o f B r i t i s h Columbia housing p o l i c y and programs. I t has not attempted t o e v a l u a t e , on a program by program b a s i s , the s p e c i f i c impacts o f p r o v i n c i a l housing i n i t i a t i v e s . Indeed, t h i s o v e r v i e w tends t o r a i s e many q u e s t i o n s r e g a r d i n g s p e c i f i c program e f f e c t s . Through t h i s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and a n a l y s i s of broader trends, however, i t s h o u l d now be p o s s i b l e t o move on t o v e r y d e t a i l e d e v a l u a t i o n s of s p e c i f i c programs and t o a n a l y s e proposed f u t u r e programs i n the context of the l a r g e r h o using trend s , i n c l u d i n g the dynamics and outcomes of p a s t h o u s i n g i n i t i a t i v e s . 162 B i b l i o g r a p h y Achtenberg, E. and P. Marcuse. 1983. "Towards the Decommodification of Housing: A P o l i t i c a l Analysis and Progressive Program", i n Chapter 7 of America's Housing  C r i s i s : What i s to be Done?, C. Hartman, ed., Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul, pp. 201-231. Advisory Committee on Reconstruction. 1944. Housing and Community Planning: F i n a l Report to the Subcommittee, Ottawa: Kings Printer. Alberta Housing and Public Works. 1980. Future F i s c a l Arrangements for Housing i n Canada, Draft report. Armitage, A.W. 1981. "Housing i n B r i t i s h Columbia i n the 1980's: A Long Term Perspective", B.C. Housing Conference, November, 1981. Becker, A.D. 1974. Statement to the Select Standing Committee on Municipal A f f a i r s and Housing, V i c t o r i a : September. Bettison, D.G. 1975. The P o l i t i c s of Canadian Urban Development, Edmonton: University of Alberta Press. B.C. 1974. Hansard Debates, Honourable L. Nicholson, Feb. 14, p. 213. B.C. 1975. Hansard Debates, Honourable J. Lorimer, A p r i l 21, pp. 1544-1545, and Hon. L. Nicholson, May 6, p. 2048. B.C., Department of Housing. 1975. F i r s t Annual Report, for the year 1974, V i c t o r i a : Queen's Printer. B.C., Department of Housing. 1976. Second Annual Report, for the year 1975, V i c t o r i a : Queen's Printer. B.C., L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly. 1972. "Housing 72: The Opportunities and the Challange", Government Pamphlet, V i c t o r i a : Queens's Printer. B.C., L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly. Statement of Government Pol icy, anually, 1945-1952, V i c t o r i a : Queen's Printer. 163 B.C., L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly, J o i n t Committe on Housing. 1976. Report o f the Chairman t o the M i n i s t e r of M u n i c i p a l  A f f a i r s and Housing, October, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B.C., M i n i s t r y of Finance. B r i t i s h Columbia Budget, d e l i v e r e d i n the L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly, a n n u a l l y , 1945-1984, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing. Annual Reports, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1980-81, 1981-82, 1982-83, 1983-84, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing. 1982b. "B.C. Home Program", Pamphlet, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing. 1984b. " B r i t i s h Columbia's Housing P o l i c y Over the Next Decade", Pamphlet, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands Parks and Housing. 1984a. "B.C. Second Mortgage", Pamphlet, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing. 1983. "Crown Land f o r Housing", Pamphlet, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing. 1984c. "Housing f o r the Disabled', Pamphlet, Queen's P r i n t e r . B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing. 1982a. "A Housing P o l i c y f o r B r i t i s h Columbia i n the 1980's", Pamphlet, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing, no date. "Land Development f o r Housing i n Greater Vancouver", Pamphlet, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing. 1981. "Senior C i t i z e n H o u s i n g - C o n s t r u c t i o n Program", Pamphlet, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B.C., M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing. 1984d. " S o c i a l Housing i n B r i t i s h Columbia f o r the 1980's", Pamphlet, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B.C., M i n i s t r y of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s and Housing. 1976. A n n u a l Report, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B.C., M i n i s t r y of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s . 1978. Housing Q u a r t e r l y , Volume I, Number I, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . 164 B.C., Post-War R e h a b i l i t a t i o n C o u n c i l . 1943. I n t e r i m Report  of the Post-War R e h a b i 1 i t a t i o n C o u n c i l , V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B.C. C e n t r a l C r e d i t Union. 1985. Economic A n a l y s i s o f B r i t i s h Columbia, V o l . 5, No.l February, Vancouver. Canada. 1941. Census 1941, Volume IV: P o p u l a t i o n , Ottawa: King's P r i n t e r . Canada. 1985. C o n s u l t a t i o n Paper on Housing, January. Canada, Department of J u s t i c e . 1983. The Canada C o n s t i t u t i o n A c t s , 1867-1982, Ottawa. Canada Mortgage and Housing C o r p o r a t i o n . 1983. S e c t i o n 56.1  N o n - P r o f i t and C o o p e r a t i v e Housing Program E v a l u a t i o n , Ottawa: CMHC Program E v a l u a t i o n D i v i s i o n . Canada Mortgage and Housing C o r p o r a t i o n . 1955-198 3. Canadian  Housing S t a t i s t i c s , Ottawa: CMHC, S t a t i s t i c a l S e r v i c e D i v i s i o n . Canadian C o u n c i l on S o c i a l Development. 1977. A Review o f Canadian S o c i a l Housing P o l i c y , Ottawa: CCSD. Canadian Welfare. 1952. Volume XXVIII, # 6, December 15, Canadian Welfare C o u n c i l , e n t i r e i s s u e . Carver, H. 1975. Compassionate Landscape, Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto Press. Carver, H. 1948. Houses f o r Canadians, A Study of Housing Problems i n the Toronto Area, Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y o f Toronto Press. C l a y t o n Research A s s o c i a t e s and Woodbridge, Reed and A s s o c i a t e s . 1984. The Vancouver R e n t a l Housing Market  t o 1991, prepared f o r the B.C. M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing. Cogan, S. and D. Darke. 1983. Canadian S o c i a 1 Housing Managed by_ P r o v i n c i a l Housing C o r p o r a t i o n s : Comparative  C h a r a c t e r i s i c s , B r i t i s h Columbia Housing Management Commission: Unpublished. D a v i d o f f , P. 1983. "Decent Housing f o r A l l : An Agenda," Chapter 6 of America's Housing C r i s i s : What i s to be Done?, C. Hartman, ed. Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul, pp. 186-200. Dennis, M. and S. F i s h . 1972. Programs i n S e a r c h o f a P o l i c y : Low Income Housing i n Canada, Hakkert: Toronto. 165 Employers' C o u n c i l of B.C. 1978. Populism, P a r t i s a n s h i p and  Progress: A review o f the A c t i v i t i e s o f P r o v i n c i a l  Government i n B r i t i s h Columbia 1972 to 1978, Vancouver: Employers'Council of B.C. F a l k , K. 1982. "Housing Allowances i n Theory and P r a c t i c e , " H a b i t a t , V o l . 25, No. 4. F i r e s t o n e , O.J. 1951. R e s i d e n t i a l R e a l E s t a t e i n Canada, Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto Press. F i s h , S. 1971. B.C.: An I n s t i t u t i o n a l A n a l y s i s , Task Force on Low Income Housing, Working Paper No. 6, Ottawa: CMHC. Gau, G.W. and A. P. Wicks. 198 2 Impact o f the ARP and MURB Programs on the Vancouver Housing Market, Vancouver: UBC, F a c u l t y of Commerce, Research i n Urban Land Economics, Paper No. 14. Goldberg, M. 1983. The Housing Problem: A Real C r i s i s ? , Vancouver: UBC Press. Hartman, C. 1983. America's Housing C r i s i s : What i s to be  Done?, Boston: Routledge and Kegan P a u l . Hartman, C. and M.E. Stone. 1980. "A S o c i a l i s t Housing Program f o r the U n i t e d States," i n P. C l a v e l , et a l . , eds., Urban and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g i n an Age of  A u s t e r i t y , New York: Pergamon Press. Howe, CD. 1947. "Meeting Canada's Housing Needs," P u b l i c  A f f a i r s , October. H u l c h a n s k i , J.D. 1984. S h e l t e r Alowances and Canadian  Housing P o l i c y : A Review and E v a l u a t i o n , Toronto: Centre f o r Urban S t u d i e s , U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto. H u l c h a n s k i , J.D. and B. G r i e v e . 1984. Housing Issues and  Canadian F e d e r a l Budgets, 1968 to 1984, UBC P l a n n i n g Papers, Canadian P l a n n i n g Issues, #12, Vancouver: UBC. Heung, R. 1976. The Do's and Don' t s o f H o u s i n g P o l i c y : The Case of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver: The F r a s e r I n s t i t u t e . J a f f a r y , K. Chairman of the Interdepartmental Study Team on Housing and Rents. 1975. Housing and Rent C o n t r o l i n  B r i t i s h Columbia, Study Commissioned by the A t t o r n e y General and M i n i s t e r of Housing, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . 166 Keene, R. and D.C. Humphreys. 1980. C o n v e r s a t i o n s with WAC  Bennett, Toronto: Methuen. Law Reform Commission of B.C. 1973. Report on L a n d l o r d and Tenant R e l a t i o n s h i p s , ( P r o j e c t No.12) R e s i d e n t i a l Tenancies, V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . Marsh, L. 1947. " P r i n c i p l e s of Low Rent Housing," PubljLc A f f a i r s , V o l . X, No.4, Oct. 1947, pp. 234-238. Marsh, L. 1950. R e b u i l d i n g a Neighbourhood: Report on a Demonstration, Slum C l e a r a n c e and Urban R e h a b i 1 i t a t i o n  P r o j e c t i n a Key C e n t r a l Area i n Vancouver, Vancouver: UBC. Morley, J.T. e t a l . 1983. The Reigns o f Power, Vancouver: Douglas and Mclntyre. Neerey, R. 1981. WAC Bennett, Toronto: F i t z b e r g and Whiteside. O f f e , C. 1984. C o n t r a d i c t i o n s of the Wei f a r e State, Cambridge: MIT Press. Ormsby, M. A. 1971. B r i t i s h Columbia: A H i s t o r y , Toronto: M a c m i l l a n Company of Canada. The P r o v i n c e . March 12, 1973 - May 12, 1973. R e p o r t o f t h e F e d e r a l T a sk F o r c e on H o u s i n g and Urban Deve 1 opment. 1969. Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r . Robin, M. 1973. The P i l l a r s o f P r o f i t : The Company P r o v i n c e :  1934-1972, Toronto: M c C l e l l a n d and Stewart Ltd. Rose, A. 1980. Canadian Housing P o l i c i e s , Toronto: Butterworths. Rose, A. 1969. " E s s e n t i a l Elements of a Canadian Housing P o l i c y " , i n M. Wheeler, (ed.) The R i g h t to Housing, M o n t r e a l : H a r v e s t House. Runge, D. Study D i r e c t o r , I n t e r d e p a r t m e n t a l Study Team on Housing and Rents. 1975. A Comprehensive S o c i a l Housing P o l i c y f o r B.C., S t a f f Report, V i c t o r i a . Smiley, D.A. (ed.) 1963. The Rowel 1 - S i r o i s Report, Book I, Toronto: M c C l e l l a n d and Stewart. Soules, G. 1976. The Housing C r i s i s : Causes, E f f e c t s and S o l u t i o n s , Vancouver: Gordon Soules. 167 S t a t i s t i c s Canada. 1980. Household Income F a c i l i t i e s and  Equipment, Micro Data F i l e , Ottawa. S t a t i s t i c s Canada. 1950-1982. P r o v i n c i a l Government Finance;  Revenue and Expenditures, Catalogue 68-207, Ottawa. S t e e l e , M. 1985. Housing Allowances; An Assessment of the P r o p o s a l f o r a N a t i o n a l Program f o r Canada, U n i v e r s i t y of Guelph: Unpublished r e p o r t prepared f o r the Canada Home B u i l d e r ' s A s s o c i a t i o n . S t r e i c h , P. 1975. L e a s e h o l d Mortgage Program; Ana l y s i s of  Programme B e n e f i c i a r i e s , Vancouver: Interdepartmental Study Team on Housing and Rents. Tobin, J. 1970. "On L i m i t i n g the Domain of I n e q u a l i t y , " The  J o u r n a l o f Law and Economics, 13(2), pp. 263-267, 275-277. Urban Land Economics D i v i s i o n , F a c u l t y o f Commerce and Business A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia. 1976. Housing: It's Your Move, Volumes I and I I . Vancouver Sun. A p r i l 1, 1946 - December 12, 1983. Wade, C.J. 1984. Wartime Housing L i m i t e d , 1941-1947: Canadian Housing P o l i c y at the Crossroads, Master of A r t s T h e s i s , Department of H i s t o r y , UBC. Wheeler, M. 1955. E v a l u a t i n g the Need f o r Low R e n t a l Housing: A Review o f C o n d i t i o n s Among F a m i l y A p p l i c a n t s  f o r the L i t t l e Mountain Low-Rental Housing P r o j e c t ,  Vancouver and C o n s i d e r a t i o n o f C r i t e r i a f o r Future Housing P r o j e c t s , - Master, of S o c i a l Work T h e s i s , UBC. Wilson, W.A. 1955. Housing C o n d i t i o n s Among S o c i a l A s s i s t a n c e F a m i l i e s , I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r R e n t a l Allowances  and Low-Rental Housing Needs, Master of S o c i a l Work Th e s i s , UBC. Winters, R.H. 1949. "F e d e r a l Housing P o l i c y : A Statement i n the Canadian House of Commons," September 21, 19 49, Ottawa: Queen's p r i n t e r . 168 Appendix A OUTLINE HISTORY OF CANADIAN HOUSING LEGISLATION AND KEY STUDIES 1940-1984 1940'S 1940 Rent C o n t r o l s i n t r o d u c e d by the Wartime P r i c e s and T r a d e B o a r d . 1941 Wartime H o u s i n g L i m i t e d B u i l t 45,930 h o u s i n g u n i t s i n n i n e y e a r s . 1943 R e p o r t on S o c i a l Secur i t y f o r Canada, by L. M arsh, f o r the A d v i s o r y Committee on R e c o n s t r u c t i o n . 1943 A H o u s i n g and Community P l a n n i n g s ubcommittee of the A d v i s o r y Committee on P o s t - w a r R e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s e s t a b l i s h e d . L. M a r s h a p p o i n t e d as R e s e a r c h A d v i s o r . 1944 N a t i o n a l H o u s i n g A c t (major amendments) "An A c t to Promote the C o n s t r u c t i o n of New Houses, the R e p a i r and M o d e r n i z a t i o n of E x i s t i n g Houses, the Improvement of H o u s i n g and L i v i n g C o n d i t i o n s , and the E x p a n s i o n of Employment i n the Postwar P e r i o d . " 1944 H o u s i n g and Community P 1 a n n i n g , F i n a l R e p o r t of the A d v i s o r y Committee on R e c o n s t r u c t i o n ' s h o u s i n g subcommi t t e e . 1946 C e n t r a l M o r t g a g e and H o u s i n g C o r p o r a t i o n e s t a b l i s h e d . 1947 Regent Park N o r t h , T o r o n t o , Canada's f i r s t p u b l i c h o u s i n g p r o j e c t . 1949 N a t i o n a l H o u s i n g A c t S e c t i o n 35 f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l p u b l i c h o u s i n g a s s i s t a n c e (75/25). About 12,000 p u b l i c h o u s i n g u n i t s b u i l t by the e a r l y 1960's. 1950'S 1954 N a t i o n a l H o u s i n g A c t NHA M o r t g a g e l o a n i n s u r a n c e ; h o u s i n g r e d e v e l o p m e n t . 169 1960'S 1964 N a t i o n a l H o u s i n g A c t (major amendments) Urban Renewal and P u b l i c H o u s i n g expanded (90/10; 50/50) . 1967 " F e d e r a l - P r o v i n c i a l C o n f e r e n c e on H o u s i n g and Urban D e v e l o p m e n t , " Ottawa, s p o n s o r e d by the f e d e r a l g o v e rnment. 19 6 9 R e p o r t o f t h e F e d e r a l T a s k F o r c e on H o u s i n g and U r b a n  Deve1opment, P a u l H e l l y e r , Chairman. 1970'S 1970 U r b a n Canada: P r o b l e m s and P r o s p e c t s , by N.H. L i t h w i c k . 1971 M i n i s t r y of S t a t e f o r Urban A f f a i r s e s t a b l i s h e d . 19 71 Programs i n S e a r c h of a_ P o l i c y : Low Income H o u s i n g i n  C a n a d a , by M. D e n n i s and S. F i s h . 1973 N a t i o n a l H o u s i n g A c t ( m a j o r amendments) A s s i s t e d Homeownership Program; N o n - P r o f i t and Co-op H o u s i n g A s s i s t a n c e ; N e i g h b o u r h o o d Improvement Program; R e s i d e n t i a l R e h a b i l i t a t i o n A s s i s t a n c e Program; Land A s s e m b l y A s s i s t a n c e ; New Commumities Program; N a t i v e Hous i n g . 1978 N a t i o n a l H o u s i n g A c t (major amendments) Program r e v i s e d ; some a b o l i s h e d ; theme: f e d e r a l d i s e n t a n g l e m e n t . 1978 M i n i s t r y of S t a t e f o r Urban A f f a i r s a b o l i s h e d . 1980'S 1981 Canada R e n t a l S u p p l y Program and the Cananda M o r t g a g e Renewal P l a n i n i t i a t e d . 1982 C a n a d i a n Homeownership S t i m u l a t i o n P l a n i n i t i a t e d . 1984 M o r t g a g e R a t e P r o t e c t i o n Program l e g i s l a t i o n a d o p t e d by P a r 1 i a m e n t . 170 Appendix B OUTLINE HISTORY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA HOUSING POLICY 1940-1985 1940's 1941 C o a l i t i o n Government e l e c t e d . 1942 Post-War R e h a b i l i t a t i o n C o u n c i l e s t a b l i s h e d . 1946 Slum C l e a r a n c e A s s i s t a n c e A c t a d o p t e d . 1950's 1952 S o c i a l C r e d i t Government e l e c t e d . 1955 E l d e r l y C i t i z e n s H o u s i n g A i d G r a n t i n t r o d u c e d . F i r s t P u b l i c H o u s i n g P r o j e c t i n V a n c o u v e r f i n i s h e d . 1957 P r o v i n c i a l Homeowner Grant A c t i n t r o d u c e d . 1960's 1967 P r o v i n c i a l Home A c q u i s i t i o n A c t i n t r o d u c e d . B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a H o u s i n g Management Commission (BCHMC) e s t a b l i s h e d t o manage p u b l i c h o u s i n g . 1970's 1970 P r o v i n c i a l Home A c q u i s i t i o n A c t amended t o i n c l u d e g r a n t f o r p u r c h a s e of e x i s t i n g u n i t s . L a n d l o r d and Tenant l e i g i s l a t i o n a d o p t e d . 1972 New D e m o c r a t i c P a r t y e l e c t e d . E l d e r l y C i t i z e n s R e n t e r s G r a n t A c t p r o c l a i m e d . 1973 Department o f H o u s i n g A c t p a s s e d , e s t a b l i s h i n g B.C.'s f i r s t M i n i s t r y of H o u s i n g . H o u s i n g I n c e n t i v e Fund e s t a b l i s h e d t o e n s u r e an o r d e r l y s u p p l y of r e a s o n a b l y p r i c e d l a n d . 171 1 9 7 4 D u n h i l l Development C o r p o r a t i o n p u r c h a s e d O f f i c e of R e n t a l s m a n c r e a t e d and r e n t c o n t r o l l e g i s l a t i o n e n a c t e d . P u b l i c H o u s i n g - S e c t i o n 4 3 NHA use d i n B.C. f o r f i r s t t i m e , program named P r o v i n c i a l R e n t a l H o u s i n g . BCHMC r e c o n s t i t u t e d and g i v e n a f r e s h mandate. H o u s i n g Fund r e p l a c e s H o u s i n g I n c e n t i v e Fund. R e n t e r ' s R e s o u r c e G r a n t r e p l a c e s E l d e r l y C i t i z e n s R e n t e r s G r a n t . Department of H o u s i n g t a k e s o v e r a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of P r o v i n c i a l Homeowner's G r a n t . New f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e programs a d o p t e d and a d m i n i s t e r e d by the Department of H o u s i n g : -Home c o n v e r s i o n mortgage l o a n s - H i g h i m p a c t g r a n t s f o r C o - o p e r a t i v e H o u s i n g - I n t e r i m f i n a n c i n g f o r C o - o p e r a t i v e H o u s i n g - S c h o o l t a x r e m o v a l and r e s o u r c e g r a n t s - R e n t a l i n f o r a m t i o n and s e r v i c e g r a n t s Land A s s e m b l y Program e s t a b l i s h e d . R e s i d e n t i a l Land L e a s e Program announced. P r o p o s a l c a l l method to b u i l d low income r e n t a l h o u s i n g i n t r o d u c e d . Rent S u p p l e m e n t Program ( F e d e r a l ) a p p l i e d to P r o v i n c i a l r e n t a l u n i t s . U n i t e d H o u s i n g F o u n d a t i o n g i v e n g r a n t t o a s s i s t e s t a b l i s h m e n t of c o n t i n u i n g c o o p e r a t i v e h o u s i n g . S t r a t a T i t l e A c t p a s s e d , f i r s t condominium t e n u r e l e g i s l a t i o n . 1 9 7 5 R e s i d e n t i a l Land L e a s e Program i n t r o d u c e d . R e n t - A i d (B.C. R e n t e r ' s Tax C r e d i t ) i n t r o d u c e d to r e p l a c e R e n t e r ' s R e s o u r c e G r a n t . E l d e r l y C i t i z e n s R e n t e r s G r a n t A c t r e i n t r o d u c e d p r o v i d e payment f o r one y e a r . 172 1976 S o c i a l C r e d i t P a r t y e l e c t e d . R e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r h o u s i n g programs moved f r o m Department of H o u s i n g to M i n i s t r y of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s and H o u s i n g . P r o v i n c i a l Home P u r c h a s e A s s i s t a n c e Program i n t r o d u c e d , ( m o d i f i e d v e r s i o n of P r o v i n c i a l Home A c q u i s i t i o n Program f o r new homes o n l y ) . I n t r o d u c t i o n of P r o v i n c i a l ARP/AHOP, i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h the f e d e r a l p r o g r a m . I n t r o d u c t i o n of M u n i c i p a l I n c e n t i v e G r a n t . R e s i d e n t i a l Land L e a s e and L e a s e h o l d M o r t g a g e programs t e r m i n a t e d . J o i n t Committee R e p o r t on H o u s i n g ( B a w l f R e p o r t ) commi s s i o n e d . Land S e r v i c i n g Program no l o n g e r a p p l i c a b l e t o l a n d s a s s e m b l e d by Crown. R e p l o t t i n g A s s i s t a n c e Program announced. Crown Land i n v e n t o r y i n i t i a t e d . D u n h i l l D e v e l o p m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n renamed H o u s i n g C o r p o r a t i o n of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . 1977 S h e l t e r A s s i s t a n c e f o r E l d e r l y R e n t e r s (SAFER) i n t r o d u c e d . Crown Land Program e s t a b l i s h e d to make Crown Land a v a i l a b l e t o M u n i c i p a l i t i e s and p r i v a t e d e v e l o p e r s . 1978 R e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r h o u s i n g programs t r a n s f e r r e d to M i n i s t r y of Lands P a r k s and H o u s i n g . F a m i l y F i r s t Home Grant i n t r o d u c e d as a m o d i f i c a t i o n of P r o v i n c i a l Home P u r c h a s e A s s i s t a n c e Program where f a m i l i e s w i t h c h i l d r e n a r e t a r g e t t e d w i t h a l a r g e r g r a n t . M o b i l e Home R e g i s t r y i n t r o d u c e d . H o u s i n g C o r p o r a t i o n of B.C. d i s b a n d e d . 173 1 9 7 8 ARP/AHOP/MIG d i s c o n t i n u e d , ( c o n t ' d ) H i g h Impact G r a n t s d i s c o n t i n u e d . 1 9 7 9 SAFER t r a n s f e r r e d to M i n i s t r y o f Human R e s o u r c e s . G l o b a l F u n d i n g and Low Income H o u s i n g O p e r a t i n g Agreement s i g n e d w i t h F e d e r a l Government whereby P r o v i n c e w o u l d u n d e r t a k e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r h o u s i n g programs t a r g e t t e d a t s e n i o r s and h a n d i c a p p e d , w h i l e F e d e r a l Governemt w o u l d be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r f a m i l y h o u s i n g , p r o v i n c e c o n t i n u e d n o n - p r o f i t a i d t o s e n i o r s , and i n t r o d u c e d r e n t s u p p l e m e n t s f o r t h e d i s a b l e d . 1980's 1 9 8 0 R e n t a l A s s i s t a n c e t o D i s a b l e d P e r s o n s Program I n t r o d u c e d t o p r o v i d e f i n a n c i a l a i d to the n o n - p r o f i t s e c t o r f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n of u n i t s i n a d d i t i o n t o r e n t s u p p l e m e n t s . H o u s i n g I n i t i a t i v e Program i n t r o d u c e d , where $200 m i l l i o n i n mortgage f u n d s a t f a v o u r a b l e i n t e r e s t r a t e s were o f f e r e d to homebuyers and ap a r t m e n t d e v e l o p e r s . 1 9 8 1 L e a s e t o P u r c h a s e Program f o r f i r s t time home b u y e r s i n t r o d u c e d . 1 9 8 2 B.C. Home Program t o o f f s e t mortgage payment d i f f i c u l t i e s i s i n t r o d u c e d . A c c e l e r a t e d M o b i l e Home D e v e l o p m e n t Program i n t r o d u c e d . 1983 F a m i l y F i r s t Home and F i r s t Home Program r e p l a c e d by the B.C. Second M o r t g a g e Program. B.C. R e n t e r ' s Tax C r e d i t ( R e n t a i d ) d i s c o n t i n u e d . Rent C o n t r o l s removed. 1 9 8 4 R e s i d e n t i a l Tenancy A c t r e p e a l e d : Rent R e v i e w d i s c o n t i n u e d and O f f i c e of R e n t a l s m a n c l o s e d . 174 Appendix C Housing Starts by Type of Unit British Columbia, 1945-1984 Change From Previous Year TOTAL Single Semi- Apartment B.C.; Increase Percent Detached Detached Row and Other STARTS (Decrease) Change 1945 — — ~ „ 7,000 1946 — — — -7,000 0 1947 — •. — — • • 10,000 3,000 1948 - — — — — 11,633 1,633 1949 — — — 9,702 (1,931) -16.6% 1950 — — — — . 7,536 (2,166) -22.3% 1951 - — — — - — 5,696 (1,840) -24.4% 1952 — — — * . — 7,111 1,415 24.8% 1953 — — — — 8,590 1,479 20.8% 1954 — — — • . 9,603 1,013 • 11.8% 1955 12,012 728 271 2,603 15,614 6,011 62.6% 1956 11,189 654 252 2,842 14,937 (677) -4.3% 1957 11,493 566 24 2,037 14,120 (817) 5,179 -5.5% 1958 14,674 910 231 3,484 19,299 36.7% 1959 13,246 637 87 2,721 16,691 (2,608) -13.5% 1960 9,710 206 579 1,509 12,004 (4,687) -28.1% 1961 7,799 240 195 2,936 11.170 (834) -6.9% 1962 8,399 280 363 4,850 13,892 2,722 24.4% 1963 9,533 374 200 7„222 17,329 3,437 24,7% 1954 9,388 563 227 11,487 23,665 25.0% 1955 9,830 689 740 10,139 21 ,'398 (267) -1.2% 1956 9,664 537 175 7,377 17,753 (3,645) -17.0% 1967 13,201 826 689 9,384 24,100 6,347 35.8% 1968 12,487 1,126 562 12,020 26.195 2,095 8.7% 1959 13,035 1,375 1,325 16,084 31,820 5,625 21.5% 1970 13,691 1,169 1,566 10,890 27,316 (4,504) -14.2% 1971 17,707 1,220 1,803 14,035 34.765 7,449 27.3% 1972 18,890 818 2,362 13,247 35.317 552 1.6% 1973 21,313 901 1,501 13,912 37,627 2,310 6.5% 1974 18,254 1,050 1,740 10,376 31,420 (6,207) 2,732 -16.5% 1975 18,616 1,565 3,300 10,671 34,152 8.7% 1976 20,247 1,723 3,263 12,494 37,727 3,575 10.5% 1977 15,501 1,535 3,124 12,198 32,358 (5,369) -14.2% 1978 18,195 1,374 2,687 6,362 28,618 (3,740) -11.6% 1979 17,792 780 1,993 6,780 27,345 (1,273) -4.4% 1980 22,600 989 2,243 11,714 37,546 10,201 37.3% 1981 19,193 1,245 4,741 16,406 41,585 4,039 10.8% 1982 7,350 611 2,978 8,868 19,807 (21,778) -52.4% 1983 15,137 445 1,966 5,059 22,607 2,800 14.1% 1984 9,164 337 1,601 5,067 16,169 (6,438) -28.5% 1950-84 Total 419,310 25,474 42,788 254,774 742,346 Average 13,977 849 1,426 8,492 24,745 SOURCE: CMHC, Canadian Housing Statistics, various years. 175 Br i t ish C o l u m b i a H o u s i n g S t a r t s 1 9 4 5 - 1 9 8 4 4 5 : • — — • " 1 9 4 5 1950 1 9 5 5 1 9 6 0 1965 1970 1 9 7 5 1980 Br i t i sh C o l u m b i a H o u s i n g S t a r t s By Type o f -Unic , 1 9 5 5 - 1 9 8 4 4 5 0 — f - 1 — ' i 1 1 't 1 — i 1 1 i 1 ' 1 " r "• i 1 r '•11 i 1 [—"• I' i • " i "i 1 1 1 1 • | 1955 1 9 6 0 1 9 6 5 1 9 7 0 1 9 7 5 1930 9 • To ta i + S i n g l e o A p a r t m e n t 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0096500/manifest

Comment

Related Items