There are many reasons that housing has become unaffordable across Canada, and financialization is one of them. Most housing stock in Canada has always been a commodity that is bought and sold and has market value. However, until relatively recently, governments routinely intervened in the housing market to maintain some measure of affordability for Canadians.
Government retreat from housing oversight and regulation in the 1970s, 80s, and 90s has opened the door to financialization, laying the groundwork for the skyrocketing cost of housing that Canada has witnessed particularly over the past decade.
These days, financialization is widely pointed to as a key driver of Canada’s housing affordability crisis. In this article, we aim to demystify financialization by outlining some of its key characteristics, how it has developed over the past several decades, and its impact on housing affordability in Canada.
Financialization is a complex and abstract concept, and in order to understand it, it’s helpful to explore what it looks like. Three of its key characteristics are:
More housing stock is owned by investment and trading companies such as real estate investment trusts (REITs), private equity funds, asset management companies, and pension funds. An example of this is international corporations whose business models rely on buying “distressed assets” (often older apartment buildings built in the 1970s and 80s), and renovating them. Their explicit goal is to increase revenue by upgrading buildings and then raising rents, allowing them to provide higher financial returns to their shareholders. Canada’s largest financial firms alone now own 20% to 30% of Canada’s purpose-built rental housing stock.
Housing is understood by the public to be a smart investment vehicle (a way to extract profit from the market as rapidly as possible) and a way to grow wealth. It is favoured over many other forms of investment because of its high returns on investment. Large financial actors like REITs and corporations, but also small businesses and individual homeowners, are increasingly purchasing homes to rent out at the highest price possible. An example of this is increased speculation in the housing market by both large actors and individual “house flippers.”
Many investment portfolios widely offered to the public include residential real estate as an investment option.
The above are expressions of the financialization of housing within the Canadian economy. The conditions that allowed for an increasingly financialized housing market in Canada have been made possible by government policies introduced over roughly the past forty years.
Towards a financialized housing market in the 1970s, 80s and 90s
Opening up new opportunities for investors
In the 1970s and 80s, governments introduced new regulatory systems which allowed investors to invest in areas that had previously been considered non-financial sectors, including housing. Investment and trading companies were allowed to access more capital (wealth used for investment), take on more investment risk and mortgage debt, and create new financial products. In the 1990s, REITs were created to allow investors to jointly purchase shares in real estate.
The weakening of rent regulation
In the late 1970s, many provinces introduced laws regulating the rents that landlords could charge, to prevent rent gouging and keep rents at reasonable levels. These laws generally allowed landlords to increase rents to account for inflation and operating cost increases, but not to excessively inflate their profits.
However, these laws were significantly weakened during the 1980s and 90s. Provinces introduced more and more exceptions to the rules, for example by allowing certain types of rental units – like high-end rental units, newer rental units, and units experiencing turnover – to be exempt from laws that place limits on rent increases.
Rent regulation is an important way that housing remains affordable over time. Inadequate rent regulation allows widespread rent gouging, which happens when landlords charge rents that are far higher than what is necessary to run a profitable business. Charging high rents and finding ways to increase them perpetually is how financialized landlords extract the high profits that their shareholders and business partners are expecting.
Renters often earn lower incomes than homeowners, and the practice of rent gouging forces lower-income households to pay higher percentages of their incomes to investors and corporations. This leads to a transfer of wealth upwards which increases income inequality.
Government retreat from investment and oversight of housing
Historically, governments in Canada acknowledged that the private market would not and could not produce housing that would be affordable to Canadians of all income levels. Acknowledging their obligation to ensure housing for everyone, for many years the federal and provincial governments were active in supporting and regulating housing systems in Canada to ensure everyone could afford a home.
Up until the 1980s, the federal and many provincial governments funded a variety programs and projects that supported the development of affordable housing. Government interventions included subsidies and tax breaks for companies that developed and managed affordable housing such as co-operatives, non-profit and social housing providers. From the 1940s to 70s, governments invested directly in the development of publicly owned (or social) housing and routinely provided tax incentives and exemptions to developers who created purpose-built rental housing. However, beginning in the 1980s, both orders of government progressively retreated from these important interventions in housing, and since then, Canadian governments have relied almost exclusively on the private market to meet Canadians’ diverse housing needs. This retreat from supporting Canada’s housing systems has directly contributed to the current affordability crisis and growing homelessness since the 1980s.
Consequences of the financialization of housing in the 2000s, 10s and 20s
Loss of affordable housing stock
The number of housing units that are affordable to Canadian households is rapidly dwindling. Homes that used to have affordable rents have been subject to excessive rent increases in recent years due to rent gouging, which has been permitted by lack of rent regulation and competition due to a low stock of affordable housing. At the same time, existing affordable units are being systematically demolished and redeveloped by investors who see an opportunity to profit from charging higher rents in new developments. Still other former homes are being converted to even more lucrative businesses, such as AirBNB short-term rentals. Some formerly affordable rental units are even allowed to sit empty by investors speculating on the market.
Lack of new affordable housing
In recent years, various governments have introduced policies and funds they hope will encourage private developers to build more housing. While efforts to increase Canada’s housing supply are very important, new housing built by private developers tends to be built for investors; it is often not large enough to accommodate families, and more importantly, it is simply not affordable for most Canadian households. And research indicates that for every new affordable unit created, 15 existing affordable homes are lost to redevelopment and rent gouging.
Importantly, the long-standing lack of government support and investment has led to a very stark shortage of deeply affordable housing that is affordable to Canada’s lowest income households who are the most vulnerable to homelessness. It is important for governments to acknowledge that this housing will never be produced by the private market.
Increased rates of displacement, eviction and homelessness
In today’s housing landscape, where rents and the cost of living have skyrocketed, more and more families and individuals are losing their homes due to rent increases that they simply cannot afford. Many households are struggling to get by, which is reflected in increased use of services like food banks since the pandemic.
Others are losing their homes to investors whose business plans rely on regular rent increases facilitated by unit turnovers. Investors can evict tenants in a variety of ways, including by renovating a unit or claiming to need it for their or their family’s own use. These types of evictions have become so common in recent years that the term “renoviction” has come into common usage. Some investor landlords refer to these strategic unit turnovers explicitly in their business plans.
When rents increase in certain communities, those communities become inaccessible for lower income households. This process is sometimes called “gentrification.” As housing prices increase, communities that had previously lived in certain neighbourhoods are gradually pushed out, often into areas that are far away and have lower quality services and opportunities. As a result, a type of income-based segregation is perpetuated.
Poorly maintained housing
In addition to rent gouging, investors can also realize excessive profits by reducing services in buildings. Renters often report that buildings are not being adequately maintained, leading to substandard living conditions. Poor maintenance is particularly prominent in buildings that investors intend to redevelop, and deteriorating conditions can be used as an incentive to force renters to give up and leave, and to make the case that the building requires such substantial repairs that current residents must move out, or the building must be demolished.
Disproportionate impact on historically marginalized groups
Members of historically marginalized and equity-deserving groups are disproportionately lower-income than the general population, and more likely to live in inadequate and unaffordable housing. By relying on the private market to solve a problem that it is not designed to solve, governments are not respecting the right to housing of historically marginalized groups including Black, Indigenous and racialized communities, people with disabilities, seniors and youth among other groups.
The path forward
With the passage of the National Housing Strategy Act (NHSA) in 2019, for the first time in nearly half a century, the federal government re-acknowledged the important role it must play in housing. Crucially, the NHSA affirmed the federal government’s commitment to advancing the right to housing for everyone in Canada. The NHSA acknowledged that Canadians’ right to secure housing must be prioritized over other concerns, including those of real estate investors. This was a significant step in the right direction, but there is a lot of work that needs to be done to ensure this commitment translates into effective actions, programs and policies that will address housing affordability and mitigate the impacts of financialization in Canada. Federal, provincial, and municipal governments all have important roles to play to restore housing affordability and ensure everyone in Canada has a secure home.
Can eviction be treated as a last resort in Manitoba?
Eviction has a devastating impact on renter households and should only ever be used as a last resort. Proportionality in eviction is a legal framework, required under international law, for ensuring that eviction will only be carried out when it is absolutely necessary and there is no reasonable alternative. Unfortunately, Canada has not fully implemented a proportionality framework, and renter households continue to be evicted unnecessarily in every province and territory.
Some provinces and territories have partially implemented a proportionality framework, by giving courts and tribunals the authority to choose alternatives to eviction. In Manitoba, when a landlord has a complaint about a problem in a tenancy, such as unpaid rent or allegations about a tenant’s behaviour, they can apply to a tribunal called the Residential Tenancies Branch (RTB). A Residential Tenancies Officer hears from the landlord and the tenant and makes a decision about how to resolve the complaint. If the complaint is upheld, the law gives the Officer broad powers to make various orders to resolve the issue.
The role of conditional orders as an alternative to eviction
One of the resolutions available to the RTB is an order to evict a tenant, but other resolutions are also available. In particular, the RTB can make a “conditional order” requiring the tenant to resolve an issue. In this case, the tenant will only be evicted if they do not do what they were ordered to do. For example, a tenant who owes rent can be ordered to pay it back on a repayment plan. A tenant who has been the subject of noise complaints can be ordered to make less noise. These are conditional orders to resolve an issue.
Conditional orders are an essential part of the proportionality framework because they prevent unnecessary evictions where problems can be solved by other means. It is a strength of Manitoba law that RTB Officers are allowed to make these orders as an alternative to eviction.
Is eviction being treated as a last resort in Manitoba?
The Canadian Centre for Housing Rights (CCHR) analyzed the RTB’s decisions and tabulated conditional orders by year. Up until 2007, the Manitoba RTB routinely considered conditional orders as alternatives to eviction. For example, if a renter owed rent, the RTB would consider whether to give them an opportunity to avoid eviction through a repayment plan, by considering factors including:
The reasons the renter had fallen behind, such as illness, reduction in work hours, or administrative errors.
Whether the renter’s repayment plan was realistic based on their income.
Whether the renter had made some payments when they were able to do so.
The amount of rent they owed.
Whether the landlord’s conduct had contributed to the problem.
The hardship that eviction would cause the renter and their family.
Although the RTB did not allow conditional orders in every case, it routinely considered doing so and gave written reasons for its decision. It often found conditional orders to be fair resolutions.
In some cases, landlords agreed to conditional orders. However, when landlords did not agree, the RTB was still willing to make conditional orders when, after considering the landlord’s and tenant’s arguments, it concluded that it would be fair to do so. These are sometimes called “contested conditional orders.”
However, the RTB’s use of conditional orders dropped dramatically between 2007 to 2010. From 2010 to the present, the RTB has made almost no conditional orders. This has severe implications for housing security and human rights. It means that renters are being evicted unnecessarily, when their housing could have been saved through conditional orders.
Graph 1: A record of conditional orders made by the Residential Tenancies Branch in Manitoba, from 1999 to 2022. Source: CCHR, 2023.
Furthermore, the RTB no longer appears to even consider making conditional orders. The written reasons given for most of its decisions no longer consider whether a conditional order would be appropriate, or even acknowledge the possibility of one. In other words, eviction in Manitoba is not being treated as a last resort.
The solution – how to treat eviction as a last resort in Manitoba
Everyone has a role to play in ensuring that eviction is a last resort:
The RTB can train its Officers to consider conditional orders as an alternative to eviction in every case, and to only order eviction as a last resort if they conclude that a conditional order would not be reasonable.
The Manitoba government can amend Manitoba’s Residential Tenancies Act to explicitly direct Officers to treat eviction as a last resort in every case.
The federal government can work with the provinces to insist that Canada meet its commitments to treat housing as a human right under international law.
All levels of government can implement programs and funding to support renters in paying rent and resolving problems to stabilize tenancies.
Landlords can explore solutions with renters and agree to reasonable solutions.
Renters can work to resolve tenancy issues and share with their landlord and the RTB Officer assigned to their case what they are doing to make their tenancies work.
The Office of the Federal Housing Advocate released their annual report to the federal Housing Minister, outlining findings from submissions they received from 2022 to 2023 through their online public submission process that allows people from across Canada to report directly to the Advocate about systemic issues related to inadequate housing and homelessness. The report outlines systemic housing issues related to affordability, rising rents, the difficulty people face in securing housing, the lack of suitable housing options and the long waitlists to access deeply affordable housing. Submissions were made by people living on lower incomes, people with disabilities, women and gender-diverse people, many of whom shared their experiences with facing increasing barriers and discrimination. The Federal Housing Advocate provides recommendations for governments to urgently address these systemic housing issues and work towards solutions that implement the right to housing for all.
The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) released a study that found there is a significant gap between rental prices and what minimum wage workers can afford across Canada. Even in the provinces with the highest minimum wage such as British Columbia, Ontario and Alberta, there is a significant gap between what minimum-wage workers earn and how much they have to pay for rent on average. The report shows that the gap is even greater for people in receipt of social assistance, many of whom are forced to live in the private market rentals due to the limited social housing options available and long waitlists. The report recommends immediate solutions such as raising the minimum wage while also financing, building and acquiring purpose-built and social housing. The report also urges governments to regulate the rental market with stronger tenant protections and rent control.
Premiers from across Canada gathered in mid-July for a three-day meeting in Winnipeg where affordability was one of the main topics of discussion. The Premier of British Columbia spoke about the need for affordable housing while the Premiers of Nunavut and Ontario called for more federal support for the construction of housing and addressing the housing crisis.
One of the most pressing issues at the premiers’ meeting in Winnipeg was the long waiting lists for subsidized housing across the country. Reports show that as of 2021, more than 227,000 households were on the waiting list for social housing across the provinces. The length of time people must wait depends on where they live, with households having to wait for up to fourteen years for a one-bedroom unit in Toronto. The limited availability of deeply affordable housing options requires urgent response by our federal and provincial governments to repair and build more social housing across Canada.
Dozens of refugees were forced to camp out on the sidewalk outside a shelter intake office in Toronto after they were told that the shelters were at capacity, and that they should seek help from federal programs. The group spent weeks sleeping outside the office and being shuttled to a church north of the city to spend some nights. Following community mobilization and advocacy that resulted in public outcry, the federal government has announced that it will be providing an additional $210 million to fund interim housing for asylum seekers. About $97 million will be going to the City of Toronto. Toronto’s newly elected Mayor Olivia Chow welcomed the new federal funding but urged all levels of government to come together to find sustainable long-term funding solutions for cities in Canada that are welcoming refugees and asylum seekers who are in need of urgent housing supports.
The Government of New Brunswick is proposing a new inclusionary zoning (IZ) regulation that would allow local governments to adopt a bylaw that requires developers to provide a certain percentage of new multi-unit developments as affordable housing. The proposed regulation is a response to the challenges people are facing in finding affordable and adequate housing. The proposed regulation will establish the frameworks for municipal governments choosing to adopt an IZ bylaw. Submissions are open and encouraged on the draft regulation.
According to several experts, the homelessness rates in Newfoundland and Labrador are not being accurately tracked. Given the lack of a central intake and tracking system used by organizations serving the unhoused population, only a snapshot of the experiences of homelessness is being captured in the province. Only some service providers capture data and share this information while point-in-time counts do not account for people experiencing hidden homelessness who may stay with friends and couch surf. Experts point out that these limitations are creating an urban bias in the province that discount those experiencing homelessness in rural areas who may not have the same access to shelters or services as those living in large urban centers. By establishing coordinated access and data sharing, and expanding the ways in which the experiences of homelessness are captured, governments are able to better allocate resources and funding to adequately address and end homelessness.
A recent change to a program that helps low-income Nova Scotians pay for rental housing has many housing advocates concerned. The Canada-Nova Scotia Target Housing Benefit is a joint provincial-federal program that provides monthly funding to qualifying low-income renters or homeowners. It has been used to provide a two-month subsidy that people experiencing homelessness could apply to while in search of a rental unit. The subsidy helped applicants to assess what rent they could afford, pay for a damage deposit or cover the cost of moving. But the province recently changed the rules which require rental applicants to secure a lease first before being eligible to receive the subsidy. Housing advocates are worried that the change will greatly impact those it is meant to support, who will now have a more difficult time securing rental units in a tight rental market.
Toronto’s first Deputy Ombudsman for Housing, Reema Patel, was announced this month, a new role established to investigate systemic housing issues and monitor the planning and delivery of Toronto’s housing services and programs. They will also engage with individuals and communities facing housing precarity and other adequacy challenges to advance fairness in housing access and program delivery.
The mayors of 14 Quebec municipalities have published an open letter demanding that the government establish a mandatory public rent registry to help ease the affordable housing crisis. They also denounced part of the Quebec government’s recently tabled housing legislation, Bill 31, which would prevent tenants from transferring their leases, which is one of the few tools that tenants could use to preserve affordable housing and rents. The open letter identifies the importance of a public rent registry which would allow all parties to learn about current rent prices, what a tenant paid before, and support dispute resolutions around excessive rent increases.
The federal government has committed to investing $300 million to build affordable housing in Quebec as the province deals with a housing shortage. As part of the Rapid Housing Initiative, the federal and provincial governments have agreed to build 1,600 social and affordable units with the new investment being dedicated to vulnerable groups, like women and children fleeing domestic violence, people with disabilities, and those experiencing homelessness. After moving day on July 1, many families are still looking for a place to live in the province. Housing group FRAPRU said that 500 families across Quebec did not have a lease after July 1, and that this number is likely much higher. Although FRAPRU welcomes the investment, they are calling for 10,000 units to be built for five consecutive years in Quebec to address the housing shortage.
The province has approved an investment of $25 million into five initiatives to modernize the government’s emergency response and shelter system, and provide more supportive and affordable housing. The funds will be used to allow better access to shelters, increase co-ordination within provincial departments and improve co-operation among all levels of government and community organizations. The funding will be divided between operating shelters, developing new community-based social housing units through rent supplement agreements, expanding existing supports and developing new Housing First teams, developing 212 new units, and supplementing interest free loans to 13 non-profit and co-operative organizations.
The problem
Evictions are an unfortunate reality in Canada. Nearly one out of 10 Canadian households (7%) report that they have been evicted at some point in their lives. Provincial laws use evictions to address a wide range of issues, such as financial difficulties leading to unpaid rent, disputes between neighbours, safety concerns, owners’ changing plans, and more. Undeniably, these issues need to be addressed. However, eviction is a blunt instrument which has devasting impacts on renter households. It should only ever be used as a last resort.
In Canada, evictions are not always a last resort. Eviction laws in Canada do not adequately address alternatives to eviction. Instead, laws frequently treat eviction as the only solution available to address tenancy issues. To take just a few real-life examples of how alternatives to evictions are not systematically pursued:
In Manitoba, a tenant is evicted because she owes $450 in rent – even though she can pay the full amount by the next day.1
In Newfoundland, a tenant is evicted even though he can afford his rent because, during the COVID-19 pandemic, he paid half of his rent at the start of each month and half in the middle of the month.
In Prince Edward Island, a tenant asks for a chance to pay her rent arrears to avoid eviction. The Director of Residential Rental Property refuses to even consider the request before ordering the eviction.
In Yukon, a landlord is unable to prove that their tenant has done anything to warrant eviction – but eviction is ordered anyway.
In Quebec, a tenant is evicted because they owe $2.
In each of these cases, and countless others, a renter lost their home unnecessarily because the law did not require that the adjudicator consider any alternative to eviction.
In order to pursue eviction as a last resort, proportionality can be used as an assessment tool.
Defining proportionality
Proportionality is a legal framework for deciding whether an eviction is necessary. Under a proportionality framework, a household can only be evicted if all of the following are true:
The eviction must have a legitimate objective.
Eviction must be necessary to achieve the objective, and there must be no reasonable alternative.
The consequences of eviction must be proportionate to the objective.
The proportionality framework requires that an adjudicator consider all the circumstances of the case, and only order eviction if they are satisfied that all three of the above conditions have been met. The adjudicator must consider the interests of both the tenant and the landlord, but must come to their own objective conclusion as to whether eviction is really necessary.
The proportionality framework was originally developed by the European Court of Human Rights.2 Council of Europe member states are required to incorporate the framework into their eviction laws. A household facing eviction in Europe can appeal to the Court of Human Rights if the proportionality of the eviction is not properly considered.
The proportionality framework has also been adopted by the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which uses it to determine whether evictions around the world are compliant with the right to housing under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).3 Almost every country in the world, including Canada, has ratified the ICESCR. Hence, countries which carry out evictions without a proportionality assessment are in contravention of their obligations under the ICESCR. Unfortunately, there is no legal mechanism to force Canada and other non-compliant countries to meet their obligations.
Proportionality in Canadian law
Eviction laws are different in every province and territory. In Ontario, Saskatchewan,4 Quebec,5 and Northwest Territories, legislation explicitly allows adjudicators the discretion to consider alternatives to eviction. Court and tribunal decisions have confirmed that adjudicators also have that discretion in Alberta,6 New Brunswick,7 and Manitoba,8 and in some cases in Yukon.9 The law gives adjudicators little to no discretion in British Columbia. The law is unclear in Nova Scotia, Newfoundland,10 Nunavut,11 and Prince Edward Island.12
This means that in some parts of Canada, but not others, adjudicators have the authority to avoid unnecessary evictions by considering reasonable alternatives. This is an important policy which makes a real difference in the lives of countless renter households.
However, no Canadian law requires that adjudicators follow a proportionality framework in eviction decisions. Hence, while adjudicators are often allowed to choose alternatives to eviction, they are not required to refuse eviction in cases where reasonable alternatives are available. In every part of Canada, renter households continue to be evicted unnecessarily.
The solution – how to implement proportionality in Canada
Proportionality in eviction is an important legal framework to ensure that eviction is always treated as a last resort. Provinces and territories can implement the framework by:
Amending their residential tenancies laws to ensure that adjudicators have the authority to choose alternatives to eviction.
Amending their residential tenancies laws to direct that adjudicators must choose alternatives to eviction, except in cases where eviction is the only reasonable solution.
Training adjudicators to treat eviction as a last resort.
Ensuring that tenants have full, fair access to legal advice and to tribunal proceedings so that they can participate in eviction decisions.
Proportionality as a tool to respond to Canada’s affordability crisis
The proportionality framework is an important tool for preventing unnecessary evictions. However, it cannot solve the housing crisis or fully protect households from eviction by itself. That is because it does not address the underlying causes of problems that lead to eviction.
For example, if a household falls behind on their rent, the proportionality framework can protect them from eviction by giving them the opportunity to pay back the rent on a repayment plan. However, this will not be enough if the rent is no longer affordable because of inadequate rent regulation that leads to unaffordable rent increases.
Governments must ensure that renters not only have access to affordable homes but are also able to maintain their tenancy. It is important that our governments implement eviction prevention policies like the proportionality framework to stabilize housing and reduce housing precarity. However, proportionality is not a silver bullet and the road to housing security for renters across Canada will also require governments to implement policies that address the root causes of our housing affordability crisis.
1 Manitoba Residential Tenancies Branch (RTB), ORDER NO: 2002W3538 & 2002W3539 (2002) (Unpublished decision available from the RTB through a subscription service).
10 The Newfoundland Residential Tenancies Office does not appear to have ever considered that it could have the discretion to make an order other than eviction.
11 The Nunavut Residential Tenancies Office does not publish its decisions, and the Nunavut courts have not considered the question of discretion in eviction decisions.
12 A new Residential Tenancy Act was proclaimed in PEI in April, 2023. It has not yet been interpreted by the courts and tribunals.
The Canadian Housing Statistics Program has analyzed new data which shows that a majority of condominiums used for investment purposes in British Columbia and Ontario are owned by businesses or individuals who hold at least three properties. This trend is concentrated in smaller cities where properties remain cheaper. For example, in Ontario, over 80 percent of investment properties in Windsor, London and Belleville are owned by larger investors. The findings help fill a significant data gap in understanding the role of investors and the extent to which they are driving up demand and influencing escalating house prices in the country.
Re/Max, a major real estate brokerage released a report advocating for 15-minute neighbourhoods, a concept that has traditionally been championed by planners where housing is made available close to work, amenities and other daily necessities. The report focuses on solutions for smaller municipalities where populations are growing rapidly, calling for a greater mix of market and non-market housing options to cater to diverse housing needs.
The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) has added two new indicators to better understand Canada’s rental housing market. The first indicator measures the share of units that are affordable for the lowest income group of renters. It shows that with the exception of Quebec City and Montreal, less than five percent of rental housing options are affordable for the bottom 20 percent of Canada’s income earners. In Vancouver and cities across Ontario, almost no lower-income households have access to affordable housing.
The second indicator distinguishes between average rents for units that were rented in the last 12 months and the average rent of those units that have been occupied for more than a year. This measure helps paint a picture of the kind of rental market that renters are entering when looking for a new place. The difference between the two measures is especially large in major population centres, cities with low vacancy rates as well as those jurisdictions with rent increases subject to guidelines. For example, Toronto and Vancouver, where all the above conditions apply, the difference is about $500. Notably, Calgary and Edmonton, where no rent regulations exist, the difference between the average rents of newer and older units is $50.
Housing advocates are calling for more attention and action around rental housing ahead of the Council of the Federation’s meeting in July. CCHR’s Bahar Shadpour commented on the need for better rental protections and that all levels of government have to work collaboratively to solve the crisis. She also advocated for basic legal protections for tenants across the country. Other recommendations include developing rental registries to offer a degree of transparency in the housing market, and potentially giving prospective tenants a better picture of previous rents before they decide to move into a new place. Council chair and Manitoba premier, Heather Stefanson, noted that premiers are working to address housing affordability challenges, but she did not say whether rental prices will be a focus of discussion during the upcoming meeting.
After decades of disinvestment in public housing, calls are growing for the provincial government in Nova Scotia to once again play a more proactive role in creating affordable housing options for lower income households as the number of people experiencing homelessness and those living in core housing need is increasing while the wait for a public housing unit grows. However, the provincial government notes that Nova Scotia still has some of the highest concentrations of public housing options in the country and that it is focused on improving the quality and living conditions of its existing public housing stock. This focus follows an audit that found many of the public housing buildings are poorly managed.
Barrie’s City Council unanimously voted to refer back to staff a pair of bylaws that were intended to prohibit charitable organizations from distributing food and water to unhoused people on public properties. After receiving significant community pushback, including over 20,000 emails sent to Councillors, the Council backtracked on its proposed bylaw as many argued that it would violate unhoused people’s individual rights and liberties.
On June 26, Toronto elected Olivia Chow as its new mayor in a by-election. The new mayor will have to lead the city in solving its housing affordability crisis and address the growing issue of homelessness and housing precarity. As part of her goal of addressing homelessness and housing affordability, Chow has promised several notable commitments including opening up more 24/7 respite sites for people experiencing homelessness, creating 3,000 rental supplements with the help of the federal and provincial governments, and raising the Municipal Land Transfer Tax on luxury homes as part of some of the enhanced revenue tools to fund affordable housing initiatives.
The Quebec government tabled Bill 31, which would make it easier for landlords to refuse a tenant’s request to assign his or her lease amongst many other proposed changes. In an environment where rents have been escalating, lease assignments have given some tenants a way to limit rent increases. The change has provoked protests amongst tenant advocates. Other changes in the Bill include a new provision where landlords have to indicate the maximum rent in a lease for the next five years and increasing compensation requirements for landlords who want to evict tenants.
The Ross Ellen Housing Complex – a new supportive housing project – was opened in Winnipeg’s Centennial neighbourhood to house people living with mental health challenges and addictions who are at risk of becoming homeless. The 3-storey, 47-unit complex was once a boarded-up warehouse that lay vacant for 24 years. With funding from all levels of government as well as private philanthropy, the building is expected to be managed under a housing first, recovery-oriented model. Some units are designed to be accessible for people with disabilities while support staff will also be available 24/7.
Calgary City Council voted in favour of recommendations made by its housing and affordability task force after first voting against it, an outcome that provoked significant criticism along with the subsequent reversal in decision. As the affordability crisis impacts Calgarians living on low- to moderate-incomes, the recommendations consist of actions to increase and diversify the housing options in the city, strengthen ties within the housing sector, and improve living conditions for renters. Specific proposals ranged from eliminating conditions around parking minimums to studying the impact of rent control which does not currently exist.
The British Columbia government has identified 47 municipalities that need to focus on expediting housing development through measures such as streamlining approvals processes and updating zoning bylaws. Municipalities such as Surrey and Nanaimo have been identified as those that will have to meet higher housing targets.
New data from the Canadian Rental Housing Index shows that British Columbia has the highest share of renters paying more than 50 percent of their income on shelter. Nearly four out of 10 renter households are paying over 30 percent of their income on shelter, while racialized and/or women-led households are disproportionately paying unaffordable rents. The Canadian Rental Housing Index is a database of rental housing statistics developed by the BC Non-Profit Housing Association (BCNPHA), in partnership with Vancity.
The latest developments in housing policy from across Canada:
Speaking to Canada’s mayors at the Federation of Canadian Municipalities’ Big City Mayors’ Caucus on May 25, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced the federal government’s intentions to introduce an infrastructure plan which aims to incentivize the creation of affordable housing across the country. The new plan will launch in the fall and follows an approach similar to Trudeau’s $15 billion transportation plan announced two years ago, by tying federal investments in municipal infrastructure projects with municipalities’ commitments to create affordable housing. The announcement was positively received by housing advocates, with some advising to put safeguards in place to encourage public investments in non-profit housing developments. The Canadian Centre for Housing Rights’ (CCHR) Director of Policy and Communications, Bahar Shadpour, told CBC that while we are in support of the plan, municipal and provincial regulations are needed to protect the existing affordable stock from “investors piggybacking on government investments”.
The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) released its Annual Report for the year 2022 in early May, highlighting results on its portfolio of investments as well as its housing policy, research, and innovation programs. While CMHC’s net loss was higher compared to the previous year, progress has been made on two of the agency’s flagship initiatives. The Rapid Housing Initiative was renewed for a third round, putting Canada on track to build over 14,500 secure and affordable homes for people experiencing homelessness, while also working on the design of the new Housing Accelerator Fund to help municipalities fast-track housing development approval processes. For 2023, CMHC will be focusing on a strategy to improve housing for Indigenous peoples.
At the beginning of June, the province held a summit in Saint John to discuss ways to tackle the housing crisis with over 160 housing stakeholders, ranging from community groups and non-profit organizations to builders, developers, homeowners, educators, and students. The province’s Minister responsible for Housing, Jill Green, said she will use the information shared during the discussions to develop a housing strategy within six weeks. Outside the Convention Centre where the summit was held, ACORN advocates called on the Minister for stronger rent regulations and renoviction policies, in light of the New Brunswick Coalition for Tenants’ Rights report on affordable housing loss, released prior to the summit. The report shows that the number of units priced at or below $750 per month has decreased by 25% over a five-year period, while at the same time the number of units on the higher end of the market doubled, if not tripled. Advocates are calling for stronger rent protections for the existing affordable stock, such as reinstating rent caps. While the Minister remained vague about plans to include rent controls in the design of the new provincial housing strategy, stronger renovictions protections were introduced shortly after the summit.
The Dalhousie Legal Aid Service (DLAS) and other housing advocates are calling for more funding for legal services for low-income tenants who are at risk of homelessness. The number of renters seeking out free legal help to deal with evictions has reached the point where DLAS was forced to halt its walk-in service during the month of May. While there is a 2% cap on rents, landlords can increase the rent at their discretion between tenants, and many are trying to get around the rent cap by offering fixed-term leases and carrying out evictions for renovations. These tactics are leaving low-income tenants struggling to keep their homes and in need of legal supports.
At a Council meeting on May 10, the City of Toronto approved a new policy to allow for mid-rise residential housing in neighborhoods traditionally dominated by detached and semi-detached homes. This move could transform up to 70% of the city’s residential land known as the “yellow belt”. The new framework allows new multiplexes to be built up to three storeys high in low-density areas, and up to four storeys high in areas where taller buildings are already present, under the condition that the design of the new development is integrated to the surrounding environment’s physical features. The City should report back to Council with a review of the impacts after the delivery of the first 200 multiplex building permits. Council also requested that staff report back at a later date on the feasibility of deploying an incentive program to subsidize one affordable unit for each multiplex.
Bill 25 was introduced on May 9 by Caroline Proulx, Minister of Tourism, following the deaths of seven people in March due to a fire in an Old Montreal heritage building that had been operating illegal short-term rentals on Airbnb. Bill 25 will amend Bill 100, which mandated the registration of homes for short-term rentals, but lacked compliance and enforcement methods. It will require a certificate for registration and puts the onus on Airbnb to ensure that its listings comply with property maintenance and safety regulations, with the threat of a hefty fine for unlicensed rentals. It has not yet been determined when the bill would come into effect, but its introduction has been well-received from numerous organizations, including Fairbnb Canada which stated that the province-wide approach is exemplary because it unifies legislation for the whole province and provides the means to create a registry and enforce the regulations.
On May 29, over 100 government officials, advocates and lived experts convened in Winnipeg for the first-ever Homelessness and Poverty Symposium, held at the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. Attendees discussed supports for mental health and addictions, and the need for deeply affordable housing options for low-income households.
The United Conservative Party (UCP) won the Alberta general election on May 29, taking 49 seats at the legislature, while the New Democratic Party (NDP) took 38 seats. The UCP remains confident in the 2021 provincial housing strategy “Stronger Foundations” and has not provided any new measure to address the issue of rent increases that has been felt across all urban centres in the province.
Calgary’s Housing and Affordability Task Force released a report with six key recommendations to address housing affordability. The Task Force is composed of senior City staff, researchers and housing providers from diverse sectors, and it held a series of closed meetings to review existing housing programs and provide direction to Council on housing matters. To increase affordable housing supply in the city, the Task Force recommended enabling faster development of housing across the city, increasing available land for non-market housing, and ensuring that the supply of affordable housing meets the needs of Indigenous peoples and equity-deserving populations. The Task Force will present the set of recommendations to Council on June 6, and the report recommendations should inform the City’s Corporate Affordable Housing Strategy, set to be reviewed at the end of the summer.
The province’s Housing Supply Act, which passed in November 2022, sets housing targets for municipalities to increase housing supply through densification. Under the Homes for People action plan launched in April, the government has committed an initial $4 billion investment to create density incentives, with an additional $12 billion pledged for the next 10 years. Incentives for municipalities include provincial funding for public amenities, upzoning, supportive housing and financial supports for renters. At the end of May, B.C.’s Housing Minister, Ravi Kahlon, shared the list of the 10 municipalities selected to test out the new housing targets. These municipalities will work with the provincial government over the summer to define the targets.
The Premier of the Northwest Territories, Caroline Cochran, tabled an interdivisional plan to support people experiencing homelessness and improve housing stability, saying a “whole-of-government approach is needed to adequately address homelessness in the territory.” The new strategy, “A Way Home”, includes the establishment of a dedicated unit to coordinate the work across departments, collaborating with community partners to improve access to services and increasing housing options, amongst other measures. The strategy aims to bring homelessness levels to a “functional zero” through a better distribution of shelter services across regions to keep people who are experiencing homelessness close to their communities and the social supports they need. The Premier hopes to establish the homelessness unit within the Department of Executive and Indigenous Affairs by October 2023.
The latest developments in housing policy from across Canada:
The National Housing Council (NHC) published a report on the federal National Housing Strategy (NHS) where it found that Canada is losing affordable housing faster and in greater quantities than the amount that the NHS program is producing. To address the housing crisis, the NHC recommended that: 1) the NHS be better aligned with the rights-based goals articulated in the National Housing Strategy Act; 2) the Government of Canada focus more funding to increase the share of non-market housing; 3) the Canada Housing Benefit be enhanced; 4) a separate funding stream be established for Indigenous housing programs and; 5) the Government of Canada strengthen accountability and coordination within its government and with other levels of government to improve socio-economic, health and environmental outcomes for all.
Canada’s first Review Panel has been launched to examine the financialization of purpose-built rental housing. Through this process, the Review Panel will look at the impact of the financialization of purpose-built rental housing on the housing system and the right to adequate housing as well as the federal government’s role in addressing this growing issue. Written submissions can be made to the Review Panel from people affected by the financialization of housing, civil society organizations, experts in housing and human rights, and representatives from the purpose-built rental housing sector in Canada.
The Government of Nova Scotia, Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission and Disability Rights Coalition have reached an interim settlement “towards a systemic human rights remedy to end the discriminatory treatment of people with disabilities.” After a court ruling that found the province’s treatment of persons with disabilities in need of supports and services amounted to systemic discrimination, the subsequent deliberations have resulted in a legally binding and enforceable arrangement that will create a system of social assistance that fully recognizes and respects the different needs of persons with disabilities. The government must now implement a five-year plan that will close all institutional settings for persons with disabilities and eliminate the waitlist for social assistance in five years.
A judge ruled that people living in encampments under the Ville-Marie Expressway can continue to do so until mid-June. This is the third ruling that protects the encampment residents from an eviction notice that Transports Québec first issued last November. However, Mobile Legal Clinic filed for injunctions with the hope that the government would come up with more sustainable and permanent housing options for the encampment residents to ensure that they are not left in a precarious housing situation. The case will return to court at the end of May when lawyers could request an extension if no alternative is found.
The Ontario government introduced Bill 97, the Helping Homebuyers, Protecting Tenants Act, making this the fourth housing bill that the province is working to pass under the Housing Supply Action Plan since last year. If passed, some key planning amendments are intended to increase housing construction. For example, some more room is created to convert lands zoned for employment into residential uses by updating the definition of employment areas. Municipalities also stand to gain more flexibility in expanding their boundaries to accommodate future growth. Critics have noted the risk of this proposed change in perpetuating more sprawl. The province’s own Housing Affordability Taskforce earlier found that enough land was available to build more housing without having to increase municipal boundaries. The proposed legislation also includes more protections for renters from potential renovictions. Notably, landlords would now be required to provide tenants with a written notification about the status of renovations along with a report from a qualified person to verify whether the repair needs are so extensive that the unit has to be vacated. Tenants would also be given a 60 day grace period to move back in after a renovated rental unit is available. Bill 97 has been referred to the Standing Committee on Heritage, Infrastructure and Cultural Policy. Public hearings will be held by the committee on May 10th and 11th, 2023. Specific comments related to proposed changes to help tenants from bad faith renovation evictions can be made here by May 21, 2023.
The Ontario government also opened up regulations related to Rental Replacement by-laws for consultation. Earlier, Bill 23, More Homes Built Faster Act, empowered the province to regulate and prohibit municipal requirements for developers to replace redeveloped buildings with the same number of rental units as the older buildings that it converted at similar rents for a period of time. The regulatory changes that have since been proposed consist of a set of minimum requirements, limits and common rules such as the type of compensation that ought to be provided to tenants whose units are being converted. Feedback can be provided on the proposed changes by May 21, 2023 here.
The Manitoba government announced $3 million in new funding for seniors’ housing programs to help seniors safely age in place. From that amount, $1.5 million will be used to provide financial assistance to seniors over the age of 65 with household incomes of $60,000 with home modifications to enhance safety and accessibility and enable participation in daily activities. The remaining funds will be used to help strengthen and stabilize the province’s supportive housing programs by increasing the per diem rate to $50 per resident.
The Manitoba Government announced $3 million in new funding for seniors’ housing programs to help seniors safely age in place. $1.5 million will be used to provide financial assistance to seniors over the age of 65 with household incomes of $60,000 with home modifications to enhance safety and accessibility and enable participation in daily activities. The remaining funds will be used to help strengthen and stabilize the province’s supportive housing programs by increasing the per diem rate to $50 per resident.
ALBERTA
The Alberta government increases housing funding and the NDP release a housing plan as election season kicks off
As election season kicks off in Alberta, the NDP has released a housing plan that aspires to house 40,000 people over the next five years. The plan consists of several commitments including building 8,500 more social housing units with $1.5 billion in provincial investments, increased rental assistance for 20,000 Albertans from the 9,000 that currently receive it, and provision of predictable, consistent funding for shelter spaces. The United Conservative Party has not yet articulated its housing plans although it earlier increased its capital spending for affordable housing over the next three years by $200 million. At the same time, there are broader concerns about whether the province’s affordable housing strategy will benefit those most in need given its reliance on private entities to implement the strategy. Among voters, some point to housing affordability challenges that are making it difficult for them to find adequate housing options even as the province tries to promote affordability to attract more workers from other provinces such as Ontario.
The British Columbia government announced the “Homes for People” action plan, as part of ongoing efforts to tackle the province’s chronic housing problems. Key measures include allowing and incentivizing the construction of secondary suites, enabling more density across the province, further streamlining of local permitting systems to expedite housing development, using public lands to deliver affordable homes and introducing an anti-flipping tax to tackle speculation in housing. The measures are backed up by $4 billion in investments over the next 3 years with a 10 year commitment of $12 billion. The government is also implementing Belonging in BC, a plan that adds 3,900 supportive housing units and 240 complex-care spaces to prevent and reduce homelessness. For 2023, $1.18 billion has been budgeted for the initiative.
The latest developments in housing policy from across Canada:
The federal government released its 2023 budget, which included $4 billion over seven years, beginning in 2024-2025, to implement an Urban, Rural and Northern Indigenous Housing Strategy, co-developed with Indigenous partners. The long-awaited strategy is welcome news, although it is not sufficient to meet the need recommended by Indigenous communities. The federal budget lacked any other housing affordability measures for renters to solve the housing affordability and adequacy issues faced by many across Canada. The budget includes a reallocation of funding from the affordable housing repair stream of the National Housing Co-Investment Fund to a new construction stream but does not boost funding for new social and affordable housing, nor does it increase funding for rental supports. Advocates had called for the introduction of a Canada Homelessness Prevention and Housing Benefit to expand the existing Canada Housing Benefit and prevent people from losing their homes. The Federal Housing Advocate noted that the budget fails to address the major systemic issues that are preventing the realization of the human right to housing in Canada, including action on homelessness and the financialization of housing.
The Nova Scotia government introduced a budget which provides $21.6 million for rent subsidies for 1,000 low-income tenants and $8.2 million for shelters. Local housing advocates pointed out that rent supplements are a useful tool but the lack of provincial investment in social housing will compound the lack of housing which tenants can afford. The budget included funding to repair existing social housing but not to construct or fund any new rent-geared-to-income housing in the province.
On April 11, the Nova Scotia government’s legislation to extend the current interim rent cap to the end of 2025 passed into law. The rent cap will also be increased from 2% to 5% annually, beginning in January 2024.The government stated that this amount was chosen to allow landlords to catch up to inflation, while avoiding any large rent increases for tenants. The provincial government first introduced the interim rent cap as a temporary measure in November 2020, in response to a housing affordability crisis that has escalated in recent years due to rising housing costs, the lack of affordable housing options for low-income households, and the lack of construction of rental housing which has not kept up with population growth. The rent cap was extended once before in February 2022. While advocates are relieved to hear that the rent cap will be extended again, they are concerned that the cap was increased to 5%, with some, like ACORN, calling for a permanent rent cap of 2%. Advocates are also concerned that the new legislation does not address a remaining loophole that allows landlords to misuse fixed term leases to get around the rent cap. Specifically, landlords can decide not to renew a fixed-term lease in order to rent a unit to a new tenant at an increased rent that is above the cap. Advocates are calling for provisions around fixed-term leases to be changed to close this loophole. Both the NDP and Liberal Parties have also proposed bills to address the issue of fixed-term leases.
Charlottetown City Council passed a licensing by-law for short-term rentals, which reflects the calls of housing advocates to curb the conversion of rental housing into units for short-term stays through platforms such as Airbnb. Advocates noted that allowing investors to buy rental units and convert them to short-term rentals severely reduced the availability of housing in the city. The by-law will restrict short-term rentals to the owner’s primary residence, in most cases disallowing multiple properties to be rented out by one owner. The by-law came into effect at the end of March 2023.
The Ontario government released its 2023 budget in March, which included several housing-related measures. The budget promised a $202 million annual investment in homelessness prevention and Indigenous supportive housing, as well as a three-year $24 million commitment to fund the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) to address the backlog of cases before the Board. The homelessness prevention investment was welcome news but advocates were concerned that rather than represent an improvement, the funding would merely offset losses caused by development charge changes under the More Homes Built Faster Act. Tenant advocates were also concerned that funding for the LTB would only hasten economic evictions. In our budget submission, we had called for enhanced funding for affordable housing construction and preservation of existing affordable housing, as well as housing benefits to help renters struggling to make ends meet. The budget failed to include such measures.
Ottawa City Council unanimously passed their first budget under Mayor Mark Sutcliffe at the beginning of March. Housing advocates, including the Right to Housing Coalition Ottawa, had called for the City to double the funding set aside for affordable housing to $30 million to address inflation-driven construction costs and increased need in the community. While City Council did not increase the housing budget, a successful motion by Councillor Laine Johnson increased the budget amount of surplus city land to be sold from $1 million to $2.5 million, with the extra revenue to be directed to affordable housing.
Following years of advocacy from groups like Right to Housing Toronto (R2HTO), Toronto City Council supported the creation of a Housing Rights Advisory Committee, and authorized Ombudsman Toronto to set up a Deputy Ombudsman, Housing that would look into systemic housing issues. The new independent Deputy Housing Commissioner would be able to investigate systemic housing issues in the City’s housing policies and services with an equity and rights-based focus. The Commissioner’s office is fully funded and will engage in education and outreach, acting as a resource for City staff and officials in addition to evaluating City housing and homelessness plans. The Housing Rights Advisory Committee will be composed of 11 members of the public (plus one City Councillor) with policy and lived expertise in housing and human rights and should reflect the diversity of Torontonians.
The Manitoba government announced its long-awaited homelessness strategy, A Place for Everyone, which aims to improve services, increase coordination between departments and with other levels of government, and help people transition out of homelessness by finding and retaining housing. The strategy includes $58 million in new funding which will go towards shelters and programs for people experiencing homelessness, 300 new housing units and funding for another 400 units of rent-geared-to-income rent supplements, repair and maintenance of existing social housing, and programs to prevent youth leaving care from experiencing homelessness. While the new funding was welcomed by local advocates, they noted that a short-term commitment to new housing is unable to adequately address the severe loss of affordable units in Manitoba that has occurred in recent years, including the loss of hundreds of social housing units.
Saskatchewan introduced increases to assistance programs in the provincial budget, including a $17 million increase to the Saskatchewan Assured Income Disability (SAID) program, $6.4 million in living income benefits, $14.3 million for the Saskatchewan Income Support program – which includes the Adult Basic Benefit, Shelter Benefit, and Alternative Heating Benefit – and the Senior’s Income Plan. These increases amount to only $30 more for most recipients. Saskatchewan anti-poverty and disability rights advocates criticized the increase, pointing out that the original rates were already insufficient to cover basic needs, which is a problem that has only become more pronounced with the rising cost of living.
Nine of the 19 Northwest Territories Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs) voted in favour of a motion by Great Slave MLA Katrina Nokleby to amend the Territory’s Residential Tenancies Act to limit rent increases to no more than the five-year average of the Canada Consumer Price Index. Cabinet MLAs abstained from the vote. The government has 120 days to respond to the motion, but the upcoming territorial election will likely prevent any action on the motion. If the next government introduces a rent increase cap, it will join a small number of provinces in Canada that have a rent guideline. The majority of provinces and territories limit how often landlords can raise the rent but do not set limits on the amount of rent increases, putting the stability of tenants’ housing at risk.
Canada is experiencing an affordable housing crisis. Rents have skyrocketed and renters are increasingly struggling to secure an adequate home that they can afford. In many instances, current provincial laws and policies have incentivized landlords to find ways to evict renters so they can charge higher rents for the next tenant. As a result, evictions are on the rise in many communities across the country.
Renters across Canada need access to secure homes that they can live in for the long term. It is the responsibility of our decision-makers to ensure that renters have protections to stay in their homes. In doing so, the human right to housing is an important framework that decision-makers can adopt to protect tenants’ security of tenure – the ability to keep their homes and be confident that their homes are secure. In fact, under Canada’s National Housing Strategy Act (NHSA) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), Canada is obligated to respect, protect, and fulfill the right to housing. The obligation to protect the right to housing requires that our governments create laws and enforcement mechanisms to protect renters from interference with their homes.
Specifically, eviction is only permitted under international human rights law if all the following are true:
The eviction must have a legitimate objective.
Eviction must be necessary to achieve the objective, and there must be no reasonable alternative.
The consequences of eviction must be proportionate to the objective.
This is because international law recognizes that, like other human rights, adequate housing is fundamental to human dignity. It can only be restricted in circumstances where the restriction is justified in a free and democratic society.
Provincial and territorial Residential Tenancies Acts partially protect renters’ right to housing. For example:
Landlords are prohibited from evicting tenants without following a legal process.
Landlords can only evict tenants for specific reasons, such as rent arrears or bad behaviour.
Landlords are required to meet basic maintenance standards and comply with other rules.
However, there are large gaps in the protections afforded by residential tenancies legislation, where Canada has failed to protect the human right to housing. To give just a few examples:
Some renters, especially some of the most vulnerable who live in shared rooms or transitional housing, are denied any legal protections.
Residential Tenancies Acts often allow landlords to evict tenants for their own convenience, such as to do renovations more easily.
Many provinces and territories have inadequate rent regulations, so landlords can effectively evict tenants simply by raising their rent to unaffordable levels.
Even where the law is intended to protect tenants, legal processes are often inaccessible or unfair, and consequences for delinquent landlords are not serious enough to deter illegal conduct.
Because of these and other failures, Canada is falling short of its obligation under international law to protect renters’ human right to housing.
How do we solve this issue?
To make housing security a reality in Canada, residential tenancies laws need to be updated and strengthened. To meet Canada’s obligation to protect the right to housing, we recommend that each province and territory amend its residential tenancies laws to:
Limit the reasons a landlord can evict a tenant only to issues that cannot be resolved by other means.
Strengthen rent regulations to protect tenants from economic evictions resulting from unexpected or excessive rent increases.
Strengthen the remedies available to tenants, and the consequences for landlords, when a tenant is illegally evicted.
Improve the accessibility, fairness, and expertise of residential tenancies tribunals.
Conduct a full review of residential tenancies laws to identify and close other gaps in tenant protections.
Everyone deserves to live securely in their home, whether they are a homeowner or rent their home. A secure home is necessary for living with dignity and for individuals to fully participate in their communities and the economy. It is our duty as a democratic society to ensure that everyone is protected from illegal, unnecessary, and unfair interference with their home.
Learn more about Canada’s obligation to the right to housing
This International Women’s Day, we are called to reflect on the barriers and biases that impede women from fully realizing their human rights; and importantly, to reflect on what we can do to break down these barriers and biases.
The right to adequate housing is a human right. However, women in Canada are often impeded from fully realizing this right due to policies and programs that do not consider their specific needs and circumstances. Last June, the National Indigenous Housing Network and Women’s National Housing & Homelessness Network filed two Human Rights Claims to review the systemic denial of the equal right to housing of women and gender-diverse people, which spotlight the inherently systemic violations of the right to housing.
Critically, the Canadian government has relied on a narrow definition of homelessness, which excludes women’s experiences of gender-based violence and hidden homelessness. Definitions of “homelessness” and “chronic homelessness” used in government policy do not reflect the distinct ways women, girls, women-led families, Two-Spirit, and gender-diverse people experience homelessness. Definitions tend to be Eurocentric and fail to account for Indigenous ways of understanding and experiencing homelessness.
To fully realize the right to adequate housing, a broader definition of homelessness must be adopted.
That is why the Canadian Centre for Housing Rights (CCHR), the Women’s National Housing and Homelessness Network (WNHHN) and the National Indigenous Housing Network (NIHN) are calling on the federal government to expand its definition of homelessness to include the experiences of women and gender-diverse people, centering ways in which Indigenous women, girls, Two-Spirit, and gender-diverse people define their homelessness. Our collective efforts to end homelessness must be inclusive of all experiences across Canada.
Support this call by sending a letter to the federal government.
Despite common perceptions that it is primarily men who experience homelessness, almost half of the people experiencing homelessness in Canada are women, girls and gender diverse people.
However, while housing and homelessness supports are generally framed in gender-neutral terms, women have unique needs and experiences in housing instability and homelessness. Women experience homelessness differently for two main reasons: (1) they frequently have different reasons for becoming homeless; and (2) they navigate homelessness differently. These experiences are tied to gender, and other group identities like race, ethnicity, disability, immigration status, social and economic status and gender identity etc. Based on these identities, women face multiple forms of marginalization.
In the context of inherent Indigenous rights, colonial policies and mechanisms attempt to displace Indigenous women, girls, Two-Spirit, and gender-diverse people. The lack of action on the Calls to Justice from the Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls Report and Calls to Action from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission Report has created a failure to provide safe, adequate, and culturally appropriate housing. The Final Report of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (MMIWG) mentions the need for safe and secure housing more than 400 times.
Pathways to homelessness for women
Women commonly become vulnerable to homelessness due to poverty, lower wages, intimate partner violence, sexual abuse, addiction issues, mental and physical health challenges, and issues around childcare.
The Pan-Canadian Women’s Housing and Homelessness Survey identifies that women disproportionately experience poverty and financial instability. Women in Ontario on average live on income that is 28% lower than the average income for men, are over-represented in minimum wage and part-time jobs, and assume unequal responsibilities in housework and childcare.
As a result, they face greater challenges finding adequate and affordable housing, leading many women to seek out housing that is unsafe, inadequate or unaffordable, and increasing their vulnerability to homelessness. CCHR has reported that more than a quarter of women-led households in Canada are in core housing need, while 90% of families using emergency shelters are headed by single women. This situation is made worse by the increased discrimination that women – in particular single mothers/parents, those receiving social assistance, those who are racialized, newcomers, Indigenous, or with a disability – face in accessing housing. During the COVID-19 pandemic, women were disproportionately impacted by income and job loss due to their overrepresentation in part-time employment and in the sectors most heavily impacted by the pandemic. The pandemic exacerbated the housing needs of women, who were less likely to have savings, and put them at a higher risk of experiencing homelessness. Racialized women experienced additional impacts as they earn approximately 58 cents for every dollar earned by non-racialized men and are more likely to work in lower-paying occupations.
Indigenous women, in particular, are overrepresented amongst women who are homeless, and are 15 times more likely to use a homeless shelter than non-Indigenous women. The 2019 MMIWG Report highlights that Indigenous women and girls are 12 times more likely to be murdered or missing than any other group of women in Canada and are 16 times more likely to be murdered or missing than white women. A lack of Indigenous-led housing programs leads to unsafe living conditions, inadequate housing, unaffordability, and child apprehension.
Moreover, women account for 79% of people experiencing violence by an intimate partner, while women who are Indigenous, racialized, with a disability, refugees, or identify as LGBTQ2S+ face disproportionately high rates of violence. Research shows that experiencing violence, in particular intimate partner violence, is a key reason that women and their dependents lose access to stable housing or experience homelessness. A report by the Canadian Women’s Foundation found that women who leave their partners and become single parents are five times more likely to live in poverty, while women leaving violence encounter other systemic and structural challenges to accessing stable housing, such as being turned away from emergency shelters due to capacity issues, and discrimination from landlords and property managers who refuse to rent to them based on their gender and other identifying characteristics.
These challenges increase women’s risk of experiencing homelessness. This cycle is illustrated by the Pan-Canadian Women’s Housing and Homelessness Survey, which found that 47% of women surveyed reported a breakup as the reason for losing access to housing, the most commonly reported reason for women losing their housing, and 75.2% reported being survivors of abuse and trauma.
The Canadian Observatory on Homelessness also found that discriminatory practices around social assistance, housing support and child welfare present additional barriers for low-income women to access housing, and interventions from child services are shown to increase risks of homelessness for both mothers and their children. This is in part due to social assistance systems cutting entitlements for mothers whose children enter the child welfare system, a response that further challenges their ability to retain stable and adequate housing.
Navigating homelessness
Just as women have different pathways to homelessness, they also navigate homelessness differently.
The Pan-Canadian Women’s Housing and Homelessness Survey has found a severe lack of gender-specific supportive, transitional and permanent affordable housing to meet the needs of women who are at risk of losing their housing. Critically, as of 2019, 68% of shelter beds were co-ed or dedicated to men, compared to 13% dedicated to women, while many women avoid co-ed shelters due to the increased potential for violence in these spaces. This shortage is especially severe for Indigenous women, with data showing that 70% of northern reserves do not have dedicated spaces for women escaping violence.
Moreover, women are exposed to different risks when experiencing homelessness. Research underscores the cyclical nature of violence and homelessness for women. Just as violence is a pathway to homelessness, women are much more likely than men to experience violence and exploitation due to being homeless. The same survey shows that 37.5 % of young women and 41.3% of trans and non-binary people who are homeless experience sexual assault, compared to just 8.2% of men.
With fewer formal housing and homelessness supports available, women more frequently rely on informal, precarious, and at times dangerous supports to stabilize their housing. These can include strategies like couch-surfing with friends and family, staying in substandard or unsafe accommodation, staying in violent or exploitative relationships, and exchanging sex for shelter. These situations represent forms of “hidden homelessness” that exist on the margins of the formal homelessness support and shelter system.
Why do definitions matter?
In 2017, the Canadian government introduced the National Housing Strategy (NHS) to address Canada’s affordable housing and homelessness crisis. The NHS introduced several programs to prevent and respond to homelessness but did not adopt the broad definition of homelessness recognized by the United Nations (UN). The UN definition of homelessness recognizes that homelessness is interrelated with poverty and includes people living in temporary accommodation and inadequate housing without access to security of tenure or basic services. This broad definition encompasses the types of hidden homelessness often experienced by women, including those who are couch surfing, incarcerated, hospitalized, being sexually exploited, exiting foster care, or those living in unsafe or unstable housing.
Most definitions fail to account for the unique structural and systemic oppressions that shape homelessness for Indigenous women, girls, gender-diverse peoples including: genocidal violence, intergenerational trauma, institutional betrayal, racism and discrimination, sexual violence and homicide, and criminalization.
Concerningly, these experiences are not captured under the NHS’s narrow definition of homelessness, which focuses on more visible forms of chronic homelessness. The NHS defines homelessness as a “situation in which someone does not have a permanent address, or stable, permanent or appropriate housing, or the means to acquire it.” As a result, research and data gathering approaches, as well as program design and funding under the NHS, have focused on chronic or visible homelessness. For example, one of the ways that the Canadian government has determined homelessness statistics is by focusing on shelter capacity and occupancy. However, it is estimated that 7% of women in Canada experience hidden homelessness at some point in their lives. Therefore, using shelter occupancy to measure the rates of homelessness excludes large numbers of women experiencing hidden homelessness, for whom both unsheltered homelessness and shelter use pose threats to their safety and an increased risk of child apprehension for women who have children in their care. This systemic undercounting makes it challenging to estimate the number of women experiencing homelessness in Canada.
Homelessness, chronic homelessness, housing need, and affordability definitions in current federal policy do not reflect the experiences of housing precarity or homelessness, nor the depth of poverty women and gender-diverse people live in, which means it cannot possibly hope to address these issues at a foundational level.
The lack of national data on hidden homelessness has led to the exclusion of key populations of women to receive support from homelessness programs and has produced inadequate policy responses to address their needs. These gaps in responses to women’s emergency housing needs have contributed to the significant shortage in shelters for women, as mentioned above. In addition, programs under the NHS, such as Reaching Home, which is considered one of the main funding streams dedicated to ending homelessness, have also failed to account for the specific factors that make women vulnerable to homelessness, such as lower wages, lack of affordable childcare and being the primary caretakers in the family, as well as gender-based violence.
The Canadian government must change its definition of homelessness to include the experiences of women and gender-diverse people, and center Indigenous ways of understanding and experiencing homelessness, to effectively address their needs and advance the right to housing.
Tell the federal government: Canada’s homelessness definition must be inclusive of women and gender-diverse people.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Get the latest updates about the right to housing in Canada
