National
Housing and Homelessness Network
For immediate release
May 14, 2002
Province-by-province update:
Nine
of ten fail to make the grade
All ten provinces signed the
Affordable Housing Framework Agreement in Quebec City in November of 2001.
The federal government agreed to provide $680 million over five years for
new affordable housing. The provinces agreed to match the federal funds,
although the Quebec City deal gives them “wiggle room” to get credit
for spending by third parties.
ONLY QUEBEC HAS FULLY MATCHED
FEDERAL FUNDS: All ten provinces agreed to
provide matching funding, but only Quebec has met this commitment. B.C.
said it would match federal funds, but provincial housing cuts means there
will be little or no net gain of new units.
ONLY QUEBEC AND B.C. HAVE
SIGNED AGREEMENTS: All ten provinces agreed
that there was an urgent need to act quickly. Six months later, only two
have signed bilateral deals.
FIVE OF TEN PROVINCES HAVE CUT
HOUSING SPENDING: All ten provinces agreed
that new affordable housing is an urgent priority, but Alberta,
Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia have all made
cuts to provincial housing spending, according to Estimates tabled by the
provinces along with their most recent provincial budgets. British
Columbia and New Brunswick are maintaining current spending, while only
Quebec and Newfoundland are increasing spending. Ontario hasn’t released
its 2002-2003 budget, but since the province downloaded the entire cost of
housing programs to municipalities in 1998, the province spends
practically nothing on new housing. And that is not expected to change.
THE BOTTOM LINE:
All the provinces said there was an urgent need to take action, but only
two have signed bilateral deals six months after the Quebec City housing
summit. All the provinces agreed to commit substantial funds to new
affordable housing for low and moderate-income households, but every
province – except for Quebec – has failed to commit substantial new
funds. Five provinces are planning major housing spending cuts, which
means that there will be a net loss of housing funding in those provinces,
despite the commitments made in the Affordable Housing Framework Agreement
in November of 2002.
For more information, contact
the National Housing and Homelessness Network at 416-599-8372.
|
Province
|
Matching
funds
|
Signed
deal
|
Comments
|
|
Quebec
|
Yes.
The Quebec government is committing $105 million and Quebec
municipalities will contribute another $57 million. In addition,
Quebec has extended its provincially-funded Access Logis program for
another five years.
Quebec has set the lead by
immediately committing a matching share of federal funding, and
adding its own.
|
Yes |
Despite this strong
commitment, hundreds of families will be homeless this summer as the
Quebec housing crisis outpaces the funding for new housing.
Rapid drop in rental vacancy
rates in Montreal, Quebec City, Hull, Sherbrooke signals a serious
crisis.
|
|
British Columbia
|
Yes,
but. . . the province is only adding $4 million to existing housing
spending of $136.5 million, despite its promise in Quebec City to
provide an additional $17.75 million annually. B.C. will have to cut
even more existing spending to come up with its matching share.
B.C. is closing
provincially-funded care facilities and moving residents into an
already critical rental housing market.
While the B.C.-federal
agreement is supposed to fund up to 3,500 new units over five years,
all or most of those units will be taken by people who are losing
their beds in provincial facilities, leading to no net increase in
affordable housing.
Meanwhile, 1,000 units
already approved for development have been shelved by the B.C.
government.
|
Yes |
Victoria has the worst
rental housing market in the country. Vancouver is not far behind.
The B.C. government is using
the old provincial gambit of taking federal funds to replace
provincial spending that it is cutting.
B.C. is using housing dollars to pay for the shortfall in health
care spending, pitting the needs of frail elderly seniors against
poor families, singles, people with disabilities, Aboriginals and
newcomers. |
|
Alberta
|
No matching funds committed.
Alberta cut seniors, family and special purpose housing spending by
$22 million (13%) to $157 million in 2002 Budget, with a further cut
of $10.6 million next year. Alberta cut $50 million in lottery funds
that helped, among others, housing and homelessness initiatives.
The latest cuts come on top
of $93.2 million in previous cuts. From 1993 to 1999, Alberta cut
housing spending by 67% - the biggest drop by any province.
|
No
|
Alberta has one of the worst
rental markets in the country, with vacancy rates at the crisis
level in Calgary, Edmonton and other centers, and annual rent
increases running at close to 9% in Edmonton. |
|
Saskatchewan
|
No matching funds committed.
The province has cut $2.7 million from housing spending, down to
$33.5 million in 2002-2003.
|
No |
|
|
Manitoba
|
No matching funds committed.
The province is making an 18% cut in housing spending, down to $35.6
million in 2002-2003.
|
No |
|
|
Ontario
|
Limited matching funds
committed.
Ontario has only offered $20
million to date - about 8% of its matching share of $245 million.
No new housing funds are
expected in 2002 provincial budget, which will be delivered in May
or June.
Ontario cut $304 million
from provincial housing spending from 1993 to 1999.
|
No |
Ontario wants housing
developers to provide significant equity, which could block co-ops
and non-profits from participating. The province may raise other
barriers to prevent non-profits and co-ops from accessing the
housing funds. |
|
New Brunswick
|
No matching funds committed.
The 2002-2003 budget sets housing services increase at less than 1%.
The budget did deliver $110
million in personal tax cuts and $31 million in corporate cuts and a
surplus of $21.3 million.
|
No |
The four Atlantic provinces
want a common deal with Ottawa that would flow most of the funds
into rehab of existing units, rather than new construction.
|
|
Prince Edward Island
|
No matching funds committed.
The 2002-2003 budget calls for a slight decrease in housing
spending.
|
No |
See note on New Brunswick.
|
|
Nova Scotia
|
No matching funds committed.
The 2002-2003 budget calls for a huge 25% cut in the housing
spending from $18.2 million in 2001 to $13.7 million in 2002.
|
No |
See note on New Brunswick.
Halifax vacancy rate fell
from 7.7% in 1997 to 2.8% in 2001, signalling a crisis in new
supply.
|
|
Newfoundland
|
No matching funds committed.
The 2002-2003 provincial budget sets a 10% increase in the
Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation budget to $10.1
million. |
No
|
See note on New Brunswick.
St. John’s vacancy rate
fell from 16.6% in 1997 to 2.5% in 2001, signalling a crisis in new
supply.
|
For more information, contact
Toronto Disaster Relief Committee -- the secretariat for the National
Housing and Homelessness Network at 416-599-8372 or by email at tdrc@tdrc.net
Back to "Where's
the Housing?" |