This bill, submitted by PQ MP Carole Poirier, provokes astonishment on the part of the APQ which had the opportunity to give her its personal opinion on the matter of low-income people and the construction of social housing. The APQ is greatly disappointed by the lack of consideration of the MNA who has decided to move forward with this bill.
The bill which was introduced recently envisages to assign authority to municipalities to provide by its regulations that the issuance of a building permit for housing becomes subject to an agreement in order to improve the supply of social or affordable housing or to replace this provision of social housing by paying a sum of money or by the sale of a building for the benefit of the municipality.
The APQ is dismayed by the announcement of such a bill. By providing for the transfer of property from private owners to the municipality the Government usurps, once again, the prerogative of the owner, whereas its role should be, according to the APQ, to help all of the taxpayers and to contribute to a smoothly running economy.
All the same, it will now be impossible for a private owner to build new units, unless their rent is low and unless they are now reserved for the poorest. Let us remind that the owners must already juggle with criteria for setting the rent that are obsolete. This abnormally high level of protection granted to tenants results in discouraging some owners and investors and ultimately harms the tenants themselves. Besides high rents the tenants will complain about the decrepit state of their housing if the owner no longer has the funds to maintain it. Soon, if it is not already the case, one will be better accommodated in social housing. Is this normal? The APQ believes that the Quebec real-estate park is in danger if we do not give owners the ability to maintain their buildings.
Quebec housing remains the cheapest in Canada. Indeed, with an average rent of $699 in Quebec, according to data from the CMHC, against average rents of $1,059 in Ontario, $1,087 in British Columbia and $1,158 in Alberta, this means a rent which costs only half as much in Quebec!
The Association is not against the fact of investing in the quality of life of the citizens or against helping lower-income clientele. Where it disagrees, it’s about how to do it. Private owners would be happy to serve such customers if government or city assistance was given to the person rather than the building: we must help tenants who are in need by giving financial aid to the individual rather than to subsidize the stone. It is not the price of rents that must be reduced or kept under normal inflation, it is the financial aid to people that must be adjusted!
Tenants’ claims for money must aim at the amount they receive from the State and not at the price of housing, otherwise one should restrict the price of heating oil, electricity, food and clothes according to the ability to pay receivers of income security.
The Association of Quebec Landlords reminds its members that it will be present to defend them against this bill!
Projet de loi no 194, Loi favorisant l’inclusion de logements sociaux ou abordables pour les nouveaux projets de construction
