Devastating poll results in The Sun:
… for the first time, Insights West has measured anger directed at B.C. politicians over housing costs. All three levels of government got scathing reviews in the poll. The provincial government was hit hardest, with 76 per cent of British Columbians expressing dissatisfaction with Victoria’s inaction. …
Support for the absentee tax peaks with millennials, aged 18 to 34, at 89 per cent. Voters aged 55 and over show 75-per-cent support for the tax. The cross-generational agreement also applies to views of politicians. …
Anger is widespread, voters are upset with all levels, and most of all Victoria,” Canseco said. “It is inaction that is leading to more cynicism against the provincial government, which is understandable given the cosy nature they have with developers, including their chief fundraiser, (condo marketer) Bob Rennie.”
A few further questions:
- What would be the poll numbers if the question was asked about provincial government inaction on transit. (Well, more than inaction; they stand in the way.)
- In short, do voters make a connection between housing and transportation – and the provincial government’s explicit lack of support?
- What would be the figures of discontent if residents of the City of Vancouver were asked about their MLAs: Anton, Stilwell, Sullivan and Wilkinson. They have had nothing of consequence to say about those issues. Is this noticed?
- Why haven’t the NDP, with the exception of David Eby, really made political hay on this? The NDP has no real urban policy or platform. Are they too concerned about being perceived as the party of urban dwellers?
- Will Bob Rennie ever make a speech before the next provincial election, except at a Liberal fundraiser?
In a widely reported speech this week, Rennie said that Vancouver should “get out of the affordable ownership business” — and that investment from Mainland China should not be tampered with, and foreign investors should not be taxed.
The poll results are no surprise. But what could be a surprise is how little the effect of a speculation / absentee tax may possibly have. It could be that the downward movement of percentage points on housing prices would be counted on only one hand. Add stricter immigration and foreign investor rules, then maybe two hands, possibly three or four, if you’re lucky. You’re still left with a legislated land supply shortage in all Metro cities, thus a shortage in new ground-oriented family housing using less land per home, added to the true higher market value of living in a desirable city.
But reactionary policies that come late are better than doing nothing. The provincial government and opposition both need to be hammered repeatedly to produce comprehensive affordable policies by the next election. It would be great to see both parties competing on this file. But I see the Libs willing to lose a few urban seats than to slow the property tax revenue gravy train. The bulk of their support remains outside of the dense Burrard Peninsula.
Gary Mason implied in his Globe column last weekend that doing nothing on the affordable housing crisis may be an option for the Libs. But that begs the question on greatly expanding the transit system to allow more people to take on cross-region commuting from the less expensive housing at the periphery to their jobs in the core or town centres. As Gordon iterated, we know where they stand on that.
But expecting prices to cascade down to 1990 levels after a few strokes of a BC Leg pen is in my view completely unrealistic. Looking forward, doing more with less will be paramount to at least stabilize prices if not bring them down much.
The so called study is difficult to take seriously when only 802 people across the province were canvassed and they were paid!
Insights West implores people to poll and get paid:
“Join our panel.
Have your say and start earning cash and rewards at YourInsights.ca”
I wonder what the demographic breakdown is of the small group that voted. This is no more than a few people in a couple of coffee shops on a reasonably busy day. In a province of nearly 5 million people it’s very difficult to get excited about a paid sample of a few hundred souls looking to earn a couple of dollars.
Why are racial profiles determined and tabulated? Is it right that in 2016 pollsters are attempting to sort out ethnicity as part of an opinion poll? Why are there only three categories: European, East Asian, South Asian. What about Latinos, South Americans, Africans, Middle Easterners and Antipodeans? What does and Iranian or a South African or a Brazilian click on? How about mixed race? How about Native Americans, aren’t Insights West interested in their opinion? Do they click on East Asian? Don’t they ask for religion and sexual orientation lately either?
Who commissioned the poll and needed these distinctions?
The whole process used here is distasteful, divisive and tiny yet it becomes news.