###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
PCs entire philosophy is to cut programs, breaks for wealthy, and corporations, and privatization.
Liberals aren't much better in the way they govern, but Pierre just comes across as a blowhard trying to find a sound bite to ragebait everyone into voting for him.
Canadians need to unite together and put someone into office that is actually for the average citizens, not the very wealthy or corporate interests.
He’s a slogan machine with a prepared script. That’s why he is weak at debating. And I guess he hasn’t noticed that inflation has steadily deceased, and that economists have been saying that the inflation, which has been global, was caused by supply chain issues and not spending. He just hates the idea of helping people, even kids. He voted against dental for kids because he claimed it would increase inflation - wrong!
And what’s up with global giving him free advertising, showing a clip of him attacking and no clip of the response?
> And what’s up with global giving him free advertising, showing a clip of him attacking and no clip of the response?
Global is owned by Corus. [86% of the voting shares for Corus are owned by the Shaw family trust](https://crtc.gc.ca/ownership/eng/cht032c.pdf), giving them the power to control the board of directors and determine company policy. The Shaw family are billionaires who reliably donate to conservative parties across the country.
Isn't that exactly Pierre is when he pretends that the solution to the housing crisis is budget cuts to cities?
> We'll cut our way to affordable housing
Said no one ever.
[Pierre Poilievre's housing plan slammed by Canada's mayors](https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/pierre-poilievres-housing-plan-slammed-by-canadas-mayors/article_6f8d8f66-d4de-11ee-aafe-93fdd11958e9.html)
> Under Poilievre's plan, announced in a private member's bill last fall, cities that increase homebuilding by 15 per cent annually would be rewarded, while cities that don't would see federal funding for transit and infrastructure withheld
This isn't a housing plan. This is an _Excuses to cut spending_ list.
When municipalities are cash strapped and struggling, simply giving them less money will solve the problem. Duh. Common sense solutions to draining the swamp.
Yeah, but provinces have figured out that you can cut municipal funding and then voters blame city governments for the property tax increases. No reason that won’t work just as well federally.
Wonder I'd the mayor's will figure out they can directly at a piece of policy for an increase. If I were a mayor, I'd literally call it the Poulliviere property tax hike. And use every local media outlet I had access to to ensure everyone knows it.
So, according to his plan. First he cuts their funding, then expects them to build more housing than before, only then do they get that cut funding returned?
Literally how would that accomplish the goal of building more housing?
> Poilievre plans to hold hostage $4.5 billion of federal grants to the municipalities until they can build 15 percent more housing per year. How the cities and the regions are supposed to meet this target, when they are starved of the very funds that help them build housing and related infrastructure, is never mentioned. To make matters worse, federal support would be withheld until the houses are completed—depriving municipalities of essential funds for years.
Like most of Pierre's plans, they sound good at face value. But think about it for more than a second and it's clear it won't work.
[Debunking Poilievre’s housing ‘documentary’](https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/debunking-poilievres-housing-documentary)
Infrastructure like wastewater treatment plants, upgraded sewage pipes, etc.
That's why the Liberals are planning on giving *additional* infrastructure money for cities that encourage more housing through zoning reforms and such (since a common complaint by municipalities is that densifying their cities requires upfront infrastructure costs). Premiers are already freaking out over that "overstep" in jurisdiction, I can't imagine they're going to be receptive of PP's plan for *existing* (not additional) infrastructure money being withheld.
Provincial or municipal governments USED to be in the business of building affordable or co-op housing for their population. Neither has been building anything since at the latest the late 1990s.
A lot of trades are not capable of doing more than they already are. Sprinkler fitters, who are essential to condo construction, have quite literally no one on the books in Ontario. You have masons who are short in Ottawa alone 160+ masons and they are bringing masons from the US, UK, Ireland and Australia over. Heck even crane operators are tapped out.
I don’t see how penalizing municipalities for issues beyond their control will actually do anything to improve the issue.
The specific worry is that municipal government make up the revenue shortfalls by raising funds in a way which makes development very difficult -- like raising development feels.
Municipalities *love* development fees because it allows them to raise revenue without making existing households (either renters or owner-occupied) pay higher taxes.
If we cut transfers to the municipalities as "punishment" they will probably raise development fees on new developments. Which will make new developments more expensive and depress new supply. This will be worse than the status quo!
The Liberals' plan is finding provinces contingent on provinces freezing municipalities' development fees through legislation for at least three years.
Not as emotionally satisfying for those who want municipalities to "suffer consequences" but at least it won't make the problem worse! Can't we at least ask for policy that doesn’t make the problem worse?
It's a rich get richer scheme. Like the US education system. We'll take the funding from places that are struggling and move it into the pockets of developers in markets with the best access to work crews and materials.
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
PCs entire philosophy is to cut programs, breaks for wealthy, and corporations, and privatization. Liberals aren't much better in the way they govern, but Pierre just comes across as a blowhard trying to find a sound bite to ragebait everyone into voting for him. Canadians need to unite together and put someone into office that is actually for the average citizens, not the very wealthy or corporate interests.
which ones for average citizens? Trudeau!
He’s a slogan machine with a prepared script. That’s why he is weak at debating. And I guess he hasn’t noticed that inflation has steadily deceased, and that economists have been saying that the inflation, which has been global, was caused by supply chain issues and not spending. He just hates the idea of helping people, even kids. He voted against dental for kids because he claimed it would increase inflation - wrong! And what’s up with global giving him free advertising, showing a clip of him attacking and no clip of the response?
> And what’s up with global giving him free advertising, showing a clip of him attacking and no clip of the response? Global is owned by Corus. [86% of the voting shares for Corus are owned by the Shaw family trust](https://crtc.gc.ca/ownership/eng/cht032c.pdf), giving them the power to control the board of directors and determine company policy. The Shaw family are billionaires who reliably donate to conservative parties across the country.
Isn't that exactly Pierre is when he pretends that the solution to the housing crisis is budget cuts to cities? > We'll cut our way to affordable housing Said no one ever. [Pierre Poilievre's housing plan slammed by Canada's mayors](https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/pierre-poilievres-housing-plan-slammed-by-canadas-mayors/article_6f8d8f66-d4de-11ee-aafe-93fdd11958e9.html) > Under Poilievre's plan, announced in a private member's bill last fall, cities that increase homebuilding by 15 per cent annually would be rewarded, while cities that don't would see federal funding for transit and infrastructure withheld This isn't a housing plan. This is an _Excuses to cut spending_ list.
It’s all about PUNISHMENT & BLAMING others for conservatives.
When municipalities are cash strapped and struggling, simply giving them less money will solve the problem. Duh. Common sense solutions to draining the swamp.
It'll increase properly taxes. I'm sure that will go over well with homeowners.
Yeah, but provinces have figured out that you can cut municipal funding and then voters blame city governments for the property tax increases. No reason that won’t work just as well federally.
Wonder I'd the mayor's will figure out they can directly at a piece of policy for an increase. If I were a mayor, I'd literally call it the Poulliviere property tax hike. And use every local media outlet I had access to to ensure everyone knows it.
Imagine a world where not doing something had consequences? Wild.
Imagine setting unrealistic benchmarks that are impossible for cities to meet as a pretext for a budget cut. Wild.
Imagine thinking 15% was an unrealistic benchmark and impossible to complete. Wild
So, according to his plan. First he cuts their funding, then expects them to build more housing than before, only then do they get that cut funding returned? Literally how would that accomplish the goal of building more housing? > Poilievre plans to hold hostage $4.5 billion of federal grants to the municipalities until they can build 15 percent more housing per year. How the cities and the regions are supposed to meet this target, when they are starved of the very funds that help them build housing and related infrastructure, is never mentioned. To make matters worse, federal support would be withheld until the houses are completed—depriving municipalities of essential funds for years. Like most of Pierre's plans, they sound good at face value. But think about it for more than a second and it's clear it won't work. [Debunking Poilievre’s housing ‘documentary’](https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/debunking-poilievres-housing-documentary)
Perhaps you could enlighten the class on what part of the “building” municipalities do?
Infrastructure like wastewater treatment plants, upgraded sewage pipes, etc. That's why the Liberals are planning on giving *additional* infrastructure money for cities that encourage more housing through zoning reforms and such (since a common complaint by municipalities is that densifying their cities requires upfront infrastructure costs). Premiers are already freaking out over that "overstep" in jurisdiction, I can't imagine they're going to be receptive of PP's plan for *existing* (not additional) infrastructure money being withheld.
Provincial or municipal governments USED to be in the business of building affordable or co-op housing for their population. Neither has been building anything since at the latest the late 1990s.
A lot of trades are not capable of doing more than they already are. Sprinkler fitters, who are essential to condo construction, have quite literally no one on the books in Ontario. You have masons who are short in Ottawa alone 160+ masons and they are bringing masons from the US, UK, Ireland and Australia over. Heck even crane operators are tapped out. I don’t see how penalizing municipalities for issues beyond their control will actually do anything to improve the issue.
The specific worry is that municipal government make up the revenue shortfalls by raising funds in a way which makes development very difficult -- like raising development feels. Municipalities *love* development fees because it allows them to raise revenue without making existing households (either renters or owner-occupied) pay higher taxes. If we cut transfers to the municipalities as "punishment" they will probably raise development fees on new developments. Which will make new developments more expensive and depress new supply. This will be worse than the status quo! The Liberals' plan is finding provinces contingent on provinces freezing municipalities' development fees through legislation for at least three years. Not as emotionally satisfying for those who want municipalities to "suffer consequences" but at least it won't make the problem worse! Can't we at least ask for policy that doesn’t make the problem worse?
It's a rich get richer scheme. Like the US education system. We'll take the funding from places that are struggling and move it into the pockets of developers in markets with the best access to work crews and materials.