Business
Costly construction isn’t the culprit behind unaffordable housing
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
By Wendell Cox
Land restriction creates what amount to land cartels. A now smaller number of landowners gain windfall profits, which, of course, encourages speculation
The latest Demographia report on housing affordability in Canada, which I produce for the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, reveals that over half of the 46 Canadian housing markets we assess are severely unaffordable. In fact, Vancouver and Toronto rank as third and 10th least affordable, respectively, among the 94 major global markets included in our latest international housing affordability study.
To evaluate housing costs, we utilize the “median multiple,” which divides the median house price within a given market (census metropolitan area) by its median household income. A multiple equal to or less than 3.0 is categorized as “affordable,” while anything exceeding 5.0 is labelled “severely unaffordable.”
Among the major Canadian housing markets, Vancouver (with a median multiple of 12), Toronto (9.5), Montreal (5.4), and Ottawa-Gatineau (5.2) fall into the severely unaffordable category. Vancouver has maintained a high median multiple for several decades, while Toronto has been in this range for approximately two decades. The increased prevalence of telecommuting has recently contributed to Montreal and Ottawa-Gatineau’s affordability challenges, leading to a surge in demand for larger homes and properties in more distant suburbs. In contrast, housing in Edmonton (4.0) and Calgary (4.3) remains comparatively affordable.
In Toronto and Vancouver, the implementation of international urban planning principles, particularly those promoting anti-sprawl measures like greenbelts and agricultural preserves, has led to unprecedented price hikes. This “urban containment” approach has consistently driven up land values where it has been adopted. And high land values rather than increased construction costs are what explain the substantial disparity between severely unaffordable and more budget-friendly markets.
Land restriction creates what amount to land cartels. A now smaller number of landowners gain windfall profits, which, of course, encourages speculation. Maintaining or restoring affordability requires eliminating windfall profits by ensuring a competitive market for land.
Another issue arises from urban planners’ preference for higher-density housing, such as high-rise condos. Some households may prefer high-rise living, but families with children typically seek housing with more land, whether detached or semi-detached. When they’re priced out of good housing markets, their quality of life suffers and they may even fall into poverty.
The troubling paradox is that unaffordable housing is far more common in markets like Vancouver and Toronto, which have embraced the planning orthodoxy — which is supposed to produce affordable housing. The same applies to international markets like Sydney, Auckland, London and San Francisco, where urban containment and unaffordable housing have gone hand in hand.
What’s the solution? Give up on urban containment and make more land available for housing. But wouldn’t that threaten the natural environment, as critics of Ontario’s recent attempt to allow development of a sliver of its greenbelt argued?
Not at all. It’s true that land under cultivation in Canada has been declining steadily over the years. But the culprit is improved agricultural productivity, not urban expansion. According to Statistics Canada, between 2001 and 2021, agricultural land shrank 53,000 square kilometres. That’s about equal to the land area of Nova Scotia. And it’s about triple all the area urbanized since European settlement began. Even in Ontario and B.C. where most of the severely unaffordable markets are concentrated, urban expansion from 2016 to 2021 took up less than one-quarter of the agricultural loss over that period. Urban expansion is not squeezing out agricultural land.
Given all this, what should we do about affordability? In my view, three things:
First, it’s essential to acknowledge that Canadians are already addressing the issue by relocating from pricier to more affordable regions. Housing is more affordable in the Atlantic and Prairie provinces and areas in Quebec east of Montreal. So it’s not surprising there is now a net influx of people to smaller, typically more affordable, locations. In the past five years, markets with populations exceeding 100,000 have collectively witnessed over 250,000 people moving to smaller markets.
Second, make more land available for development in increasingly unaffordable markets like B.C., southern Ontario, and the Montreal-Ottawa corridor. One way is with “housing opportunity enclaves” (HOEs), in which traditional, i.e., not high-density, housing regulations would apply, but essential environmental and safety regulations would. The aim would be to provide middle-income housing at the price-to-income ratios that were typical before urban containment came along and housing across the country was largely affordable.
Market-driven development would be ensured by relying on the private sector to provide housing, land, and infrastructure, a model that has been successful in Colorado and Texas. Current residents would maintain their property rights but could sell to private parties and First Nations for development.
HOEs would be situated far enough outside major centres to take advantage of low-priced land, prioritizing areas with the largest recent agricultural land reductions. Communities likely would resemble Waverly West in Winnipeg or The Woodlands in Houston, with ample housing space and yards for families with children.
These new communities would attract people working at least partly from home. Jobs would naturally follow, creating self-contained communities where most commutes occurred within the HOE. To ensure a competitive market and prevent land cost escalation, HOEs must have ample land available.
Third, public authorities should allocate an ample amount of suburban land to safeguard reasonable land values in the Prairie and Atlantic provinces, as well as in Quebec east of Montreal. This would allow currently more affordable markets such as Quebec City, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Moncton and Halifax to accommodate interprovincial migrants without jeopardizing their affordability.
Provincial and local governments would need to monitor housing affordability multiples on at least a five-year cycle, and legislatures, land use authorities and city councils would have to allow enough low-cost land development to maintain price-to-income stability.
It’s not enough just to provide enough building lots to meet projected demand. The goal should be to enable builders to provide housing at prices middle-income households can afford. The key to that is affordable land.
Wendell Cox is a Senior Fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. He is the author of 2023 Edition Of Demographia Housing Affordability In Canada and has been featured on Leaders on the Frontier – Cost of Living Under Crisis With Charles Blain.
This article supplied by Troy Media.
Canadians must consider how closer EU ties could erode national control and economic sovereignty
As Prime Minister Mark Carney attempts to deepen Canada’s relationship with the European Union and other supranational institutions, Canadians should be asking a hard question: how much of our national independence are we prepared to give away? If you want a glimpse of what happens when a country loses control over its currency, trade and democratic accountability, you need only look to Bulgaria.
On June 8, 2025, thousands of Bulgarians took to the streets in front of the country’s National Bank. Their message was clear: they want to keep the lev and stop the forced adoption of the euro, scheduled for Jan. 1, 2026.
Bulgaria, a southeastern European country and EU member since 2007, is preparing to join the eurozone—a bloc of 20 countries that share the euro as a common currency. The move would bind Bulgaria to the economic decisions of the European Central Bank, replacing its national currency with one managed from Brussels and Frankfurt.
The protest movement is a vivid example of the tensions that arise when national identity collides with centralized policy-making. It was organized by Vazrazdane, a nationalist, eurosceptic political party that has gained support by opposing what it sees as the erosion of Bulgarian sovereignty through European integration. Similar demonstrations took place in cities across the country.
At the heart of the unrest is a call for democratic accountability. Vazrazdane leader Konstantin Kostadinov appealed directly to EU leaders, arguing that Bulgarians should not be forced into the eurozone without a public vote. He noted that in Italy, referendums on the euro were allowed with support from less than one per cent of citizens, while in Bulgaria, more than 10 per cent calling for a referendum have been ignored.
Protesters warned that abandoning the lev without a public vote would amount to a betrayal of democracy. “If there is no lev, there is no Bulgaria,” some chanted. For them, the lev is not just a currency: it is a symbol of national independence.
Their fears are not unfounded. Across the eurozone, several countries have experienced higher prices and reduced purchasing power after adopting the euro. The loss of domestic control over monetary policy has led to economic decisions being dictated from afar. Inflation, declining living standards and external dependency are real concerns.
Canada is not Bulgaria. But it is not immune to the same dynamics. Through trade agreements, regulatory convergence and global commitments, Canada has already surrendered meaningful control over its economy and borders. Canadians rarely debate these trade-offs publicly, and almost never vote on them directly.
Carney, a former central banker with deep ties to global finance, has made clear his intention to align more closely with the European Union on economic and security matters. While partnership is not inherently wrong, it must come with strong democratic oversight. Canadians should not allow fundamental shifts in sovereignty to be handed off quietly to international bodies or technocratic elites.
What’s happening in Bulgaria is not just about the euro—it’s about a people demanding the right to chart their own course. Canadians should take note. Sovereignty is not lost in one dramatic act. It erodes incrementally: through treaties we don’t read, agreements we don’t question, and decisions made without our consent.
If democracy and national control still matter to Canadians, they would do well to pay attention.
Isidoros Karderinis was born in Athens, Greece. He is a journalist, foreign press correspondent, economist, novelist and poet. He is accredited by the Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs as a foreign press correspondent and has built a distinguished career in journalism and literature.
Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.
From LifeSiteNews
Pornhub has taken down 91% of its images and videos and a huge portion of the last 9% will be gone by June 30 because it never verified the age or consent of those in the videos.
Despite an aggressive PR operation to persuade lawmakers that they have reformed, Pornhub is having a very bad year.
On May 29, it was reported that the European Commission is investigating the pornography giant and three other sites for failing to verify the ages of users.
The investigation, which comes after a letter sent to the companies last June asking what measures they have taken to protect minors, is being carried out under the Digital Services Act. The DSA came into effect in November 2022 and directs platforms to ensure “appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure a high level of privacy, safety, and security of minors, on their service” and implement “targeted measures to protect the rights of the child, including age verification and parental control tools, tools aimed at helping minors signal abuse or obtain support, as appropriate.”
According to France24: “The commission, the EU’s tech regulator, accused the platforms of not having ‘appropriate; age verification tools to prevent children from being exposed to pornography. An AFP correspondent only had to click a button on Tuesday stating they were older than 18 without any further checks to gain access to each of the four platforms.”
Indeed, Pornhub’s alleged safety mechanisms are a sick joke, and Pornhub executives have often revealed the real reason behind their opposition to safeguards: It limits their traffic.
Meanwhile, Pornhub — and other sites owned by parent company Aylo — are blocking their content in France in response to a new age verification law that came into effect on June 7. Solomon Friedman, Aylo’s point man in the Pornhub propaganda war, stated that the French law was “potentially privacy infringing” and “dangerous,” earning a scathing rebuke from France’s deputy minister for digital technology Clara Chappaz.
“We’re not stigmatizing adults who want to consume this content, but we mustn’t do so at the expense of protecting our children,” she said, adding later, “Lying when one does not want to comply with the law and holding others hostage is unacceptable. If Aylo would rather leave France than apply our law, they are free to do so.” According to the French media regulator Arcom, 2.3 million French minors visit pornographic sites every month.
Incidentally, anti-Pornhub activist Laila Mickelwait reported another major breakthrough on June 7. “P*rnhub is deleting much of what’s left of the of the site by June 30,” she wrote on X. “Together we have collectively forced this sex trafficking and rape crime scene to take down 91% of the entire site, totaling 50+ million videos and images. Now a significant portion of the remaining 9% will be GONE this month in what will be the second biggest takedown of P*rnhub content since December 2020.”
“The reason for the mass deletion is that they never verified the age or consent of the individuals depicted in the images and videos, and therefore the site is still awash with real sexual crime,” she added. “Since the fight began in 2020, 91% of P*rnhub has been taken down — over 50 million images and videos. Now a huge portion of the last 9% will be gone by June 30 because P*rnhub never verified the age or consent of those in the videos and the site is a crime scene.”
Mickelwait has long called for the shutdown of Pornhub and the prosecution of those involved in its operation. This second mass deletion of content, as welcome as it is, reeks of a desperate attempt to eliminate the evidence of Pornhub’s crimes.
How Chinese State-Linked Networks Replaced the Medellín Model with Global Logistics and Political Protection
New RCMP program steering opioid addicted towards treatment and recovery
We need an immigration policy that will serve all Canadians
Natural gas pipeline ownership spreads across 36 First Nations in B.C.
-
Business1 day ago
EU investigates major pornographic site over failure to protect children
-
Health2 days agoRFK Jr. purges CDC vaccine panel, citing decades of ‘skewed science’
-
Immigration2 days agoMass immigration can cause enormous shifts in local culture, national identity, and community cohesion
-
Canadian Energy Centre1 day agoCross-Canada economic benefits of the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline project
-
Economy1 day agoCarney’s Promise of Expediting Resource Projects Feels Like a Modern Version of the Wicked Stepmother from Disney’s Cinderella
-
Alberta1 day agoAlbertans need clarity on prime minister’s incoherent energy policy
-
Crime1 day agoManhunt on for suspect in shooting deaths of Minnesota House speaker, husband
-
Business19 hours ago
Carney’s European pivot could quietly reshape Canada’s sovereignty