Election 2025: Liberal Vs. Conservative Housing Policies

[00:00:00] Welcome to the Canadian Real Estate Investor, where host Daniel Foch and Nick Hill navigate the market and provide the tools and insights to build your real estate portfolio. You know they say never talk about politics on the first date? Well, consider this podcast your third date with Canadian housing policy because we are ready to head in for a kiss.

[00:00:29] As long as you don't start any arguments at the dinner table tonight, Dan. That's exactly what we're trying to avoid today. We're going to do our best to present an objective analysis of each party's housing proposals so far leading up to the 2025 election. That's exactly right. Look, no partisan hot takes, just facts and expert perspectives on what's being proposed and how it might affect the overall economy.

[00:00:57] But of course, specifically the real estate market. Exactly. We will be looking at official policy proposals from the candidates, stuff from their websites, expert analysis and past voting records to understand what each party is actually proposing, not just what Twitter thinks they're proposing.

[00:01:15] Yeah, or Instagram or Instagram or any media for that matter. And look, we encourage you, our amazing listeners to fact check everything we discussed today and form your own conclusion. Our goal here is to inform, not to influence. Okay, so Nick, are we ready to dive in and cut our audience in half then? Can we please not do that? That would suck.

[00:01:43] Unfortunately, as much as some folks might want to avoid the topic, policy and politics play a absolutely massive role in real estate markets. Whether we are talking about municipal zoning bylaws, interest rates, foreign buyer bans, immigrations, tax policies, the government building housing, these decisions shape the entire housing landscape.

[00:02:38] You're right. By breaking these policies down into their practical effects. Hopefully, we can help our listeners make more informed decision about not only their real estate investments, but also maybe their way that they're going to vote or what's important to them in the election just by giving information, not opinion. And again, it's voting, it's understanding the impacts and also your investments and your housing choices even, right? Yeah, 100%, man.

[00:03:07] Okay, so before we start to get into the bulk of this episode, and this is just jam-packed full of information here, I just want to set the record straight. We are not here to tell you how to vote or which party to vote for or support. That is not our role so far from our role. And frankly, it would be irresponsible for us as real estate professionals or podcasters to push any sort of particular political agenda. So we are not doing that.

[00:03:34] Honestly, I actually personally like hate it and I hate it, but I find it like weird or like it's a really high risk maneuver when, you know, some of my favorite artists or platforms do that, like when they endorse someone or whatever. I've always just found it to be like, well, what if they do a really bad job for the next four years, you know, or like, so we're going to try and avoid that. Not because we're afraid of it per se, but because it would limit the value that we can provide to you as listeners.

[00:04:01] And we want to give you the most value that we can give you as our listeners. Our focus is solely on analyzing how different policy proposals might affect the housing market, impact property values and other investment opportunities. And we want our audience, you, whether you're a homeowner, an investor or an industry professional to understand the potential impacts of these policies on your financial decisions. So when we discuss these policies, we're looking at them through a practical nonpartisan lens.

[00:04:29] How might it affect housing supply? How might you get more demand? What could it mean for property values? How could they impact your financing options? As an example, these are the questions that matter to our audience. And that would matter regardless of what their political affiliations would be. Exactly, man.

[00:04:47] Look, this elections outcome without question will fundamentally shape Canada's economic landscape for the next four years, which explains why we're seeing a notable slowdown in general market activity, specifically in the real estate sector, in the mortgage sector. Buyers and sellers are essentially hitting that pause button again until after the votes are counted.

[00:05:10] And, you know, it makes sense why people might be pausing because each party's housing platform could create pretty distinctly different market conditions after the election. And so, you know, it's only 28 days you got to wait now from today. And when you're investing, what you want to do is you want to like model for the most likely outcome to take place.

[00:05:30] Right. And so, under, you know, a conservative government, we might see aggressive deregulation and municipal reform potentially opening up supply, but uncertain effects on prices because we haven't really seen something like that take place. Whereas a liberal victory under Carney could mean maybe a more balanced approach with both market and social housing initiatives as he proposed today, March 31st.

[00:05:54] While an NDP, you know, minority with the liberals could mean, you know, stronger market intervention and maybe even some regulations around corporate landlords as an example. Yeah, this uncertainty is causing many investors to kind of adopt or even re-adopt because this has been a common theme over the last few years, that wait and see approach. Where essentially you just sit back on the sidelines, wait to see how things play out and then make your move. Property listings are sitting longer.

[00:06:21] Buyers are more hesitant to make offers and even developers are holding off on launching new projects until they have the clarity on the regulatory environment that they'll be operating in. And from our perspective, Dan, I think that's probably the right move for a lot of these people, especially with major projects. The stakes are simply too high to make a major investment without knowing which housing policies will actually impact said possible investment. Yeah, and I would say it's not just academic.

[00:06:50] It is also, you know, understanding these policies is crucial for making those informed decisions about when and how to position yourselves and model for, again, what path we could go down. Because your investment depends on what's the market going to do for the next four years. And so how to position yourselves for the market over the coming months and years. So, okay, do you think that was enough of like, we're bipartisan, we can get into the stuff now? Well, it's funny because like, there's probably still more of it. Like, it almost just reads like an apology, right?

[00:07:18] It's like, we're sorry that we have to discuss this, but like, hopefully you can understand this is important to our audience. And we're really just trying to take a step back from party politics to give you the, you know, the meat of it. 100%. And look, this is, as you said, this is, this is super important. No matter what side of the fence you want, no matter what perspective, matter who you vote for, we are all Canadians at the end of the day. So, with all that being said, why does this matter? Well, 36% of voters are still undecided.

[00:07:45] They said that they're going to vote based on policy and responses to key issues as their primary decision-making factor rather than party loyalty or leadership. So, might have some outliers that might have voted one way for a long time. They're now saying, okay, maybe I look at all my options here. So, how these politicians position themselves between now and then, Dan, as you said, that 28 days is very important.

[00:08:13] And so, then, you know, compounding on what you just mentioned, which was a report posted by the Globe and Mail, what are those key issues that voters are thinking about? 67% was cost of living. Wow. And we know housing costs are a huge part of that. Surprisingly, that was more than 53%, which was the U.S. trade war and tariffs. Because a lot of people are saying, you know, that basically Donald Trump is the big thing in this election. People are going to be voting who's going to be the best person to deal with Donald Trump. And that's – so, those are cost of living, one.

[00:08:42] Number two, U.S. trade war and tariffs. Number three is healthcare. And then number four, 30% improving the economy. 28% housing affordability. 13% climate change and protecting the environment, which important to note is down from 33% in the prior election, which is crazy how quickly something like that kind of falls out of favor when people are dealing with different economic hardships or trade hardships. Yeah, for sure. Wow, 20% drop there. Yeah, crazy.

[00:09:08] 9% jobs, 6% income support and poverty alleviation and foreign policy. Those are three separate categories. 5% oil pipelines, 4% treatment of senior citizens, 3% gun control, 2% long-term care, 1% reconciliation with indigenous Canadians. I will say I'm glad we don't have to talk about any of those other things because those sound like far more contentious topics than housing policy.

[00:09:33] Even though this is hard, we've still managed to make our jobs easy, Dan, which we've gotten decent at. Okay, so you have set the stage sufficiently. Thank you for that.

[00:10:12] The let's get ready to rumble thing, which now are we going to get sued enough for saying that on the show? I think that's in quotes. We acknowledge that it's copyrighted.

[00:10:48] Yes, yes.

[00:10:50] We'll be right back.

[00:11:20] oversaw significant real estate holdings. The company manages over $750 billion in assets with a substantial portion of that in global real estate investing through their subsidiary Brookfield properties. Now, you mentioned his Bank of Canada tenure. I'm not going to touch on the Bank of England stuff because I know nothing about England. And I've heard positive and negative comments about it, obviously, because that's politics. But his tenure at the Bank of Canada

[00:11:48] obviously demonstrated his exceptional crisis management skills with the 08 financial crisis, which helped shield Canada's banking system from the worst of a global meltdown. But critics might argue that – and critics have, which is why I'm mentioning it. Critics will argue, guaranteed. It also marked the beginning of what would be a very problematic trend in Canadian household debt. So while the rest of the G7 kind of saw a deleveraging take place, so their household debt to GDP

[00:12:17] actually decreased, Canada's kind of stayed the same and increased through that period when he was – you know, and that was because of maintaining ultra low interest rates, which was very effective in stabilizing the Canadian economy during crisis. Obviously, we were probably among the most unscathed in the world in the GFC. It would – you know, there has been argued that it also contributed to Canada's growing credit addiction. Under this leadership, the Bank of Canada's accommodative

[00:12:45] monetary policy allowed Canadians to maintain higher debt levels than other countries during that period, which didn't force a deleveraging. And by 2013, Canada's household debt to GDP ratio reached 93% compared to like 77% of the UK and 80% in the US. And now we have the leading household debt to GDP in the world. Other than like, you know, Australia, New Zealand, and Switzerland, I think we kind of all – and maybe Netherlands, we all kind of jockey for that

[00:13:10] first place. But it's usually – usually Canada's like top two. It's a race we don't want to win. Yeah. And so, you know, again, I'm trying to see it from both sides here of like – and explain both sides of how people argue why it was good and why it was bad. Yeah. 100%. Okay. So let's talk about that dual legacy, if you will. Okay. Both of masterful crisis management and at the same time enabling increased credit dependency. It raises an important question about how Carney would approach

[00:13:40] housing policy as the potential liberal leader and prime minister of Canada, particularly given the current interest rate environment and its impact on heavily indebted borrowers. All that being said, he obviously gets the central banking and the delicate balance between monetary and fiscal policy, given his, you know, two different central banks appearing on his resume. Yeah, for sure. And fortunately, Carney talked a lot about housing policy today, so we don't have to

[00:14:09] guess as much. Now, we can jump to the blue team, the blue corner. The blue corner. Conservative Party of Canada leader Pierre Polyev, elected as Conservative Party leader in 2022, has been a member of parliament since 2004. So during that same period, Harper government when Carney was Bank of Canada. And he represents an Ottawa area riding and known for his economic focus

[00:14:34] and critique of government monetary policy. Polyev has openly discussed his own real estate investments. We, you know, we mentioned Carney with the Brookfield real estate side, so we have to mention Pierre's as well. Both real estate guys. To humanize them a little bit as fellow real estate investors.

[00:14:51] He's faced criticism about owning rental properties while advocating for housing affordability. And he argued that responsible landlords providing quality rental housing are part of a solution, not a problem, which would, you know, it would be a very conservative party response. Free market and capitalism. He stated that his experience as a landlord helps him understand both sides of the housing market, the challenges faced by renters, and the importance of maintaining rental supply through private ownership.

[00:15:18] So Polyev also has addressed questions about his ownership of rental properties, particularly in the context of his criticisms of Canada's housing affordability crisis. In a 2022 interview with CTV News, when asked how he reconciles his advocacy for housing affordability with the fact that he and his wife own rental properties, Polyev stated, and I quote, we're helping solve the problem by providing affordable rental accommodations to deserving families.

[00:15:48] He further elaborated that his wife, Aneda Polyev started off with humble beginnings and she invested in a rental property to protect herself and ideally achieve financial independence, framing their property ownership as a means of personal financial security, rather than the speculative profiteering that it's kind of made out to be in mainstream media.

[00:16:09] Now, this stance has drawn scrutiny with critics pointing out the potential conflict of interest, given his policy focus on housing and previous role as housing minister for former Prime Minister Stephen Harper. But Polyev maintains that his investments align with addressing housing needs rather than contradicting his public positions.

[00:16:31] So now, I'm going to just kind of, in fairness to both candidates here, I'm going to kind of give a concise version of the more common criticisms of Polyev. And I'll note that, you know, we kind of talked a little bit about Carney as the Bank of Canada side, but I think people, you know, kind of have the thought that there's a risk of conflict of interest with Brookfield and potential for sort of like, you know, I don't know what you call it, crony capitalism or something like that.

[00:16:57] And, you know, people kind of celebrate him for being qualified, but accept the risk for that. I think with Pierre, there's some – oh, and I'd say the one other thing, and I think we mentioned this later in the episode, but with Carney is, you know, the LPC, the Liberal Party of Canada has had a pretty bad track record of like delivering on certain things. And so – and we've talked about that even with housing minister Sean Frazier on this show when we did that episode. You know, it's like, how do you battle the trust issue, right?

[00:17:24] I guess that's what Drake would call it, the trust issues that the LPC has with, you know, it's like, yeah, I can come up with a bunch of great ideas, but whereas, you know, the execution is really the killer piece. Yeah, I mean actions always speak louder than words, right? I mean I think that's the harsh thing about politics right now is that there's a lot of great things being said. What's going to get done, right? Yeah, for sure. So, okay, so let me just get concise on this. Number one issue that people mention is populism. He's accused of using kind of simplistic slogans over detailed policies.

[00:17:53] I would say almost all politicians are guilty of that right now and just kind of attaching themselves to kind of what the popular issue is. Economic policy is kind of criticized for fiscal conservatism, you know, is pledged to cut taxes, shrink the government and reduce government spending, which would, you know, people argue would disproportionately benefit corpse or the wealthy or whatever.

[00:18:11] I feel like, you know, I'm surprised people don't kind of like assume that that comparable risk exists for someone who runs a huge corp and is a rich person as well, you know, like I'm, but I guess, I guess kind of it has been argued the same way from both sides. And he's obviously opposed the carbon tax, you know, which kind of got taken off the table when Carney got rid of the consumer carbon tax. But I think Pierre one-upped it by saying he would do it, get rid of it on the other side, the industrial side as well.

[00:18:39] Limited experience, people would say outside of politician. He's basically a career politician elected at the age of 25, which is wild, often criticized for lacking real world experience outside of the political sphere. And that might insulate him from the everyday struggles of Canadians, you know, do with that one what you will, I guess. And then this is the interesting one, I think, is the confrontational piece, right? Everybody knows him as being like this attack dog. I mean, he's always characterized that way, right?

[00:19:06] And, you know, he'll come up with these kind of like funny words or accusing opponents of being certain things. And this is, you know, I think it has really led people to compare him with other figures who are, you know, more contentious in politics globally. That is probably made it difficult for to keep the messaging straight heading into a Canadian election. Yeah, essentially, he's been compared to certain people that certain other people might want to be compared to.

[00:19:34] And I don't think that's that that may have done both some favors. It's really hard to be diplomatic. I'm like dancing around these words here. Yeah, look, one notable aspect of Paulieff's tenure as opposition leader has been his effectiveness, perhaps almost too effective in some cases, in holding the government to account, his relentless questioning and pointed critiques contributed to significant changes in liberal leadership,

[00:20:01] including the departure of Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, Housing Minister Sean Fraser, and ultimately the Prime Minister himself, Justin Trudeau, the former Prime Minister, I should say. Well, he aggressively, well, well, his aggressive style obviously drew criticism from both his own party members as well as opposition parties. It's undeniably served as a catalyst for change, pushing the liberal party towards a substantial policy reset, which, Dan, we're watching in like real time right now. It is crazy, eh?

[00:20:30] Like if you really think about it, like the guy did his job literally too well, made everybody leave, and now he's running against a completely different party. Think about how different this was a few months ago. It's crazy, even a few weeks. The only other thing worth mentioning there is that Jagmeet Singh obviously would have played a really big role in delaying that election a long time, which is even more interesting because they were literally pulling ahead of the LPC when he could have called an election, and they would have been like,

[00:20:57] they would have had a solid chance at being the official opposition. Like would have been, you know, that would have been like superstar status for an NDP leader to take them from being, and now they've kind of like been pulled into obscurity as a result. So like really, I mean, just kind of poetic. You couldn't even write this for an ending. Like usually Canadian politics are really boring, but I feel like this whole thing has been very exciting. Certainly has. Yeah. So, I mean, Pierre, like let's bring this back to the liberal party. The transformation of the liberal party under Mark Carney,

[00:21:27] moving away from a lot of those more contentious and divisive policies of the Trudeau area, kind of this would demonstrate the effectiveness of Pierre's opposition, right? That he, and it kind of probably shot himself in the foot because he's running a much more difficult election now, but it can also drive positive change in Canadian politics. The evolution, while potentially uncomfortable for some, has ultimately resulted in more focused and policy-driven discourse.

[00:21:53] And what I would say is a really solid election that we're seeing in Canada right now. And with that, I will say, at the risk of offending everyone equally, we're equal opportunity troublemakers here on this show. Canada has found itself in a very good and enviable position, I would say. We have two highly qualified candidates with extensive economic and political backgrounds running for election in Canada,

[00:22:17] which is more than I can say for most democratic elections that you see in the rest of the world, right? Like, I mean, really think about it. And I think that's a very fortunate position. It gives me, kind of like, makes me feel hopeful for Canada. And what's even more is they're engaging in substantive policy battles, right? Back and forth, one-upping each other, borrowing ideas. Some people call it stealing ideas, but it's like, if you think the policy is a good idea, wouldn't you want them to steal it, right? Like, because then you get it anyway.

[00:22:46] That's how democracy works, right? So, I mean, Canadians, I would say, are pretty lucky in this election that we have two good candidates running two good campaigns with policies focused on results for Canadians. And I think ultimately Canadians will vote for whoever they feel is going to, who has come up with the best policy and who is, and this is the key piece, the most likely to actually deliver on these promises and the things that Canadians need. And so, I mean, it's kind of hard, right?

[00:23:14] Because the thing with democracy, I think a lot of people choose a side, right? Or pretty early and whatever. But you kind of, you have to accept the election. This is what your fellow citizens came up with, right? And if you really hate the outcome that much, then you probably shouldn't, you know, should like just leave that society completely if you don't trust your citizens to make elections, which sounds like that's kind of the, you know, what a lot of people talk about if they don't get their way, right? You hear that in the U.S.

[00:23:41] People go and move into Canada and hear that Canada will move into the U.S. It's like, okay, we'll do it, I guess, right? Yeah. Hey, I'm not going to stop you. I mean, it's interesting to think because like the level of discourse has evolved significantly from, I mean, we've been covering very, in a very gentle, careful way. We've been covering politics for a long time in the show because we can't help it, right? As we opened up with it, policy and economics and housing are so related to this, right? So, you know, rather than getting caught up in personality politics

[00:24:10] or the diverse rhetoric that we've seen, we're seeing detailed policy proposals, economic analysis, and substantiative debates about policy proposals and solutions to Canada's housing crisis. Both of these leaders are now bringing their considerable expertise, Carney with the central banking experience, and Paulie over this longstanding focus on economic policy, they're bringing all they have to address the real issues that are affecting Canadians.

[00:24:39] And honestly, thank God, about time. The shift from ideological posturing to practical problem-solving here resents a maturity in Canadian political dialogue that I haven't seen in a while. While there are still clear philosophical differences between the parties, of course, the competition has centered around those who can provide the most effective solutions, rather than those who can score the most political points

[00:25:07] in, you know, in the popularity contest that some people believe this to be. Yeah, and, you know, we're seeing people talking about this, like, borrowing of ideas that I mentioned. Oh, you know, they stole it from so-and-so, or like, oh, you know, we just... It's like, isn't that like a healthy political competition that can drive better outcomes for Canadians? Like, it's the kind of policy one-upmanship that actually benefits voters, even if it occasionally bruises our political egos, right? Like, everybody knew that Pierre was going to announce a tax cut,

[00:25:37] and Carney did it, like he front-ran it, and then Pierre kind of one-upped it. Nobody said he stole it from Carney, but then if Carney does the GST thing, it's like, oh, he stole it. It's like, if they're good ideas, it's like, there are no such thing as an original thought, right? Kind of thing. And it's funny, because, you know, the big outcome that I've seen is that, you know, it has people in my Instagram comments basically just typing in all caps at one another back and forth, which is... I've become this kind of political catch-all, which is...

[00:26:05] Anyway, regardless of how I feel about it, it's interesting. Front row seats. The front row seats to the show, I guess. Yeah, look, I mean, the political competition hasn't been without its challenges, and of course, its criticism. The Liberal Party has faced significant credibility issues around the execution of their housing promises, right? It's all about the execution. Anyone can say things, let's see it, right? Particularly following years of missed targets and implementation delays under the previous leadership, the introduction of various programs that failed to meet their stated goals

[00:26:35] has left many potential voters skeptical of their party's ability to deliver on those new housing commitments, regardless of how well-crafted they appear on paper or how good they sound. Yeah, I think the question is... I mean, the polls would suggest that the new coach, same team kind of thing, it seems to be faring well, but then you get people who are skeptical of the polls, and I think there is a historically documented thing

[00:27:03] called a Liberal Response Bias, I think, with that party, where basically, they're more likely to respond when faced with... I don't know what it's called. It's a pollster thing. Hmm. To jump over to kind of the same kind of execution criticisms on Polyev's side, despite his sharp critique of government inefficiency, a lot of people claim that he hasn't successfully passed any bills in parliament as the opposition leader, which you can't really as the opposition leader because they're always going to block your bills, but he's been in politics a long time,

[00:27:33] and people say there's limited concrete achievements. I think he got one... He's gotten one bill passed in his entire tenure, but he's obviously built a huge brand, and again, achieved some notable things. Trudeau stepping down, the Liberal Party rebranding, those are all outcomes of his work, right? And I would say probably, people on any side would argue they're progressive, positive outcomes for Canadian politics and democracy, but the question is, what's his track record of actually implementing solutions?

[00:28:01] I mean, it's remained untested at a national scale other than his job as housing minister in Harper's government. For sure. And look, both of these leaders are working, hopefully tirelessly, to address these major concerns from Canadians. Carney's emphasized that bringing his central banking executive experience to government operations would be a huge thing. While Paulie has outlined specific implementation strategies for his housing proposals, excuse me, including clear timelines

[00:28:31] and even accountability measures. Now, the other piece that you're hearing like some criticism with Carney is the Century Initiative thing because he just appointed Mark Wiseman, former BlackRock executive. Yeah, no one ever likes that. If you worked at BlackRock, it's like... Yeah. Well, and it's like that and like what, you know, so I guess he founded the Century Initiative. I don't know, man. I mean, people hate like, what is it, BlackRock? Like, you know, Blackstone, all these, you know, like any, I don't know,

[00:29:00] it's like any like PE fund, corp, whatever. It's like, which I want to talk about my theory on this at another point, but it's like, it's kind of like, it's funny, right? Because it's like, these people manage money for like your teacher's pension plan or like, you know, it's like your union's pension or, you know what I mean? It's like, I don't know, I think people think it's like some evil cabal, like... It's much bigger and more complicated than it's usually made out to be. Well, the truth is, it's probably like, it's like, hey guys, this is actually literally just a bunch of nerds who manage your money.

[00:29:30] Like, you know, it's like, let's just, it's not, I think they're probably too busy to then try to start a cult or something, right? So, I don't know. I mean, people act like it's like the secret thing, like the WEF and like whatever, you know? It's like, it's not secret, like it's literally a conference. Like people go to conferences, you know? It's like this conference that happens every year. I don't know. I'm still not sold on a lot of this stuff, right? So, anyway, so the Century Initiative thing is basically the idea that Canada's population

[00:30:00] could hit 100 million. We've talked about this on the show before and previously mentioned that I think basically both Polyev and at the time, Trudeau had kind of been supportive of this kind of concept and entertained the idea. Pierre's kind of taken a step back from it and I think kind of gone more towards like the people who aren't supportive of this idea. But, you know, like what that would work out to is like a population growth of approximately one to two percent in population growth for the next 75 years, which honestly, it doesn't really sound that bad to me

[00:30:30] as long as we can get the infrastructure done to support it. And that being said, like, you know, we've historically, we've grown at roughly eight percent annually from 1999 to 2022. And so it would be more than a doubling of this, which would be, you know, it could be a big, pretty big demographic shift. And we saw the pushback that we got from the population from Canadians as a result of the last couple of years of population growth policy. So, you know, I think Carney's already said he would keep it below. I think it was like 0.75 or something like that.

[00:30:59] So I think he's kind of tried to deal with that and said that. Anyway, I think you're going to mention some of this. Yeah, yeah. So sorry, just to clarify one thing there. So approximately one to two percent in growth to hit that century initiative. Dan, you said eight percent. It's 0.8 percent. I know you just misread that. Right. But huge difference for the listeners out there. So the annual population growth that we've been at since about 1990 to 2020. So that last 30 years, essentially 0.8 percent. So yes, we would be, if we hit that two percent,

[00:31:29] we'd be more than doubling. Now, the impact of population growth on Canadian housing is particularly significant given that Canada's birth rate hit a record low of 1.33 children per women in 2022. This means the population growth is predominantly driven by immigration rather than, of course, the good old fashioned way. The Bank of Canada's January 2024 monetary policy report

[00:31:58] highlighted a clear positive correlation between population growth and rental inflation, suggesting that the rapid population expansion put upward pressure on housing costs, especially the rental market. Who would have thought that? Crazy concept. The relationship between population growth and housing costs presents both opportunities and challenges. Dan, if you and I have been speaking about some of those opportunities and challenges for almost three years now on this show, now while it creates favorable conditions for real estate investment and investors

[00:32:27] and development, it also intensifies affordability concerns for existing residents and newcomers alike. Yeah, and so, you know, the whole idea around this, basically, Carney appointed Wiseman as one of his council's advisors and people were thinking, oh, it's going to be all about this population growth thing, but I think he's kind of walked it back and basically said, you know, he won't be a part of that. And it was kind of, I think immigration was slated to kind of become a big focal point in Canada's

[00:32:57] ongoing election discourse, but it seems that both politicians kind of agree on where the level is going to end up. It's below where we're at right now, whether, and again, I think it's up to voters to decide whether or not they trust either to actually follow through with that because, you know, yeah, I'll leave it there. And, well, it's hard to, it's hard to, you know, like to explain other people's criticisms without making it sound like your own. And it's funny, like, you know, it's wild. Every day,

[00:33:26] I get messages from both sides accusing me of being biased against them. One day I'm apparently, yeah, so I made a pie chart. It's like, I don't know, do you see my pie chart? It's like, number of times, total number of times that a member or a voter for this party has accused me of shilling for the other party and it's 50-50. It's red and blue on either side. This is, you heard it here first, folks. Dan Foch loves charts so much that even, he creates his charts to represent

[00:33:56] conflict in his own life. And I guess it's not even conflict, Dan, because this isn't you doing anything other than presenting information bipartisan. But again, people just get really fired up in those comments these days. Well, I think a lot of people are projecting their own negativity, right? Like, I think people, like, so some people are, like, they might be, they might be a liberal voter, LPC member, whatever, or CPC member and they'll be positive and so they'll assume that I'm agreeing with them. But then you get the people who are, you know, same thing, either LPC or CPC,

[00:34:25] they've chosen their side kind of thing, but they're negative and so they assume, they project that you're their enemy, you know what I mean? And I think, like, winners, like, I don't know, not winners, let's say the wrong word, but like, you know, nice people, people who aren't, don't have some, like, kind of conflict are combative or contentious, they project you as their friend, right? And then the other people who are negative energy people project you as their enemy. So, I mean, one day I'm a liberal shill and the next day I'm a conservative puppet and whatever, this is what I'm hearing from people, right? So, it can be real, dude,

[00:34:55] I know you're laughing, but it's really draining to be honest. I would imagine it is. Yeah. Like, I really do try my absolute best to present information objectively to break down these, these complex policies into digestible pieces and to, give credit where it's due regardless of party lines because that's important to Canadians and to me and there's always someone ready to rip into you because you're not, you know, completely dismissing the other side and I have to keep reminding myself that these reactions say more about the people sending them

[00:35:24] than about our work that we do on the show and on social media and whatever. They're projecting their own biases and in their world view, you know, if you're not explicitly against your opponents, you must be their enemy. So, at the end of the day, I've come to realize that if both extremes are mad at me, I'm probably doing something right and it means that walking that middle of the line of honest objective analysis and frankly, if someone's so deeply entrenched in their partisan position that they can't handle balanced coverage

[00:35:53] then I would honestly say we're probably better off not having them in our audience anyways. So, if that's you, you know, farewell. You know, we still love you and I hope that you can heal. Yeah, look man, I mean, I think it's exactly right and I think you've gotten a lot of great respect for what you're doing and I know you and I have had tons of conversations about doing this in how do we do this in the correct way, right? Because, yes, we've got a podcast, yes, it's got a large listenership but we talk about real estate. We're not here to all of a sudden

[00:36:23] become political commentators and we're not here to feed into the echo chambers either, right? We're here to help people understand the actual policies and their potential impacts. So, let's start to get into that. As of today, timestamping this episode is March 31st, 2025, the Canadian federal election campaign is well underway with voting. Some polls are actually open. Early polls, I believe, are open already. Voting scheduled for April 28th, both Liberal leader Mark Carney

[00:36:53] and Conservative leader Pierre Piaf Poliev have introduced policies that could impact real estate investors like you. So, below is a summary of their relevant proposals based on available information up to this point in the campaign. So, let's start with the Liberal Party and Mark Carney who just became the Liberal leader and Prime Minister in early 2025, of course, following Justin Trudeau's resignation. He's outlined policies aimed at addressing housing affordability

[00:37:22] while appealing to a broader electorate. For real estate investors, Dan, tell me what is notable. So, number one, GST removal for first-time homebuyers eliminated up to $1 million which kind of creates a bit of a challenge for builders on pricing over under $1 million if you get more demand. And this could potentially, it's argued it could potentially stimulate demand but look, we have the Liberal Party proposing removing taxes.

[00:37:51] These are very wild kind of new things, right? It would limit the tax relief's direct benefit if we see that demand increase and there's obviously no direct benefit to investors and we're not going to see a lot of policy aimed at investors here but it does not and it does not apply to purchasers of non-first-time buyers, investors, etc. Number two, scrapping the carbon tax, eliminate federal carbon pricing could obviously reduce some operating costs for properties, heating, energy expenses, gas, etc.

[00:38:20] Potentially improving profit margins or reducing burn rate especially in like carbon sensitive regions like if you're using oil, an oil furnace, huge, right? That's a meaningful difference. We've seen huge differences on some of our proformas on deals that we own. Fiscal discipline and economic management, former central banker obviously he's promised kind of this effective economic stewardship which I think is a big criticism that people had of the past LPC. You know like I don't need to list all of the bills that people have said that money, or not bills

[00:38:50] but like just random things that people felt what money was wasted on and it seems like people kind of feel like he's legitimately credible on being able to kind of ensure those checks and balances and also trade tensions with the US obviously. Not a direct real estate policy but stable economy, controlled inflation could you know help the economic environment. Why don't you move on to Pierre here? Okay so Pierre, the conservative leader has campaigned on affordability and housing supply with policies that could broadly

[00:39:18] appeal to real estate investors and we have several things to go over here Dan. GST removal on all new homes, Paul Yev's plan is to remove the GST on homes under a million dollars regardless of the buyer type. This is a broader policy than the one you mentioned for Carney because it directly benefits real estate investors by reducing their upfront costs of purchasing new properties for investment purposes whether for rental income or for resale so this could enhance investor returns and stimulate the market

[00:39:48] activity that has been very lackluster as of late. Income tax reductions Paul Yev has teased lowering personal income taxes though specifics remain limited for real estate. I think he I think it did come out Yeah, it was like 2.25% and Carney came out with on his wall that was 1% I started writing this episode before that so Carney was a 1% reduction Pears was a 2.25% reduction so it ends up being like I think at the max Carney's was like 8.25 a year that would save the average Canadian household

[00:40:18] and Pears was 2,000 that would save the average Canadian household so increased disposable income etc. Okay, thank you for that next one and Dan you know for everyone listening this isn't a very evolving story so if any of this stuff sounds incorrect or old we are literally doing this as up to date as possible and I'm sure we'll have to do another one in the coming weeks Okay, so the next one here tying federal funding to housing targets a cornerstone of building homes not bureaucracy

[00:40:47] plan is linked to federal infrastructure funding for municipal housing starts municipalities would need to increase home construction by 15% annually to receive full funding we've covered this on the show before where we've seen certain municipalities jump at this opportunity and others fall way short cities exceeding this target would receive building bonuses previously cited as much as $10,000 per extra home so there's a little incentive while those falling short would face clawbacks

[00:41:17] of potential funds now linking housing to immigration is another one well not exclusively a housing policy per se polyev has suggested tying immigration levels to housing construction rates not a horrible idea he argues that the population growth should align with available housing to reduce pressures on the market potentially lowering annual immigration to around 250,000 if construction continues to lag now the last one of the ones I'm most excited

[00:41:47] about here Dan is and I know this is brand new is the and we've been talking about this for years I'm sure this is a welcome idea for a lot of Canadians the Canadian version of the 1031 exchange polyev has proposed implementing something like you know our version of the infamous famous US 1031 exchange program a 1031 exchange named after section 1031 of the US internal revenue code

[00:42:16] allows investors to defer capital gains taxes when they sell an investment property and reinvest those proceeds into a similar property within a specific time frame this like kind exchange enables investors to maintain their investment position while deferring tax liability to a future date so super simply put you sell all your rental properties you don't get that tax if you buy a bigger better rental property

[00:42:46] yeah no you know I would say because you mentioned that this was kind of exciting he also proposed a TFSA thing that was kind of confusing in the implementation was like that might be really difficult to execute but this one obviously is a clear comp in the US where basically people if you sell a property you can take the money roll it you know

[00:43:16] John Pesalis is a friend of mine and he argued this primarily benefits larger investors and could potentially drive up property prices in certain markets but you know some proponents countered that it would stimulate real estate investment and development ultimately increasing housing supply I do think it could get more housing supply created if boomers now can sell no offense to boomers but like the 55 plus age category just owns over 50% of investment real estate in Canada so it's not an offense thing it's just like you know that you kind of

[00:43:46] do need to create policy to incentivize some liquidation for them and I think Pierre kind of you know wants to obviously he's pulling the lowest among that category so he probably wants to try and you know impress some of the voters in that 55 plus so I don't know if you want to compare some of these implications here we may as well right we've we've kind of gone through the list so that kind of rounds out the major list for both Carney and Polia but let's look at the tax relief scope so Polia GST removal applies to all

[00:44:16] buyers making it more advantageous for investors compared to Carney first time buyer restriction investors buying properties for rental or for flipping would see immediate cost savings under Polia plan let's look at the supply and demand dynamics as well Dan Carney's focus on first time buyers could increase demand in the entry level market potentially driving up prices in that specific market segment that kind of first rung on the property ladder and Polia broader tax

[00:44:45] cut would and supply focus agenda could benefit investors across more market segments but also lead to greater competition if supply potentially ramps up significantly I won't mention the trade threats because I feel like that's out of scope for us but they both seem to be addressing

[00:45:17] it in the prices are very high relative to their incomes right has that ever worked more debt solving for debt I

[00:45:56] from their website it's time to build super charged canada's housing plan because carney literally did a full housing thing in vaughn today I

[00:46:26] kind of like down to the wartime housing stuff I mean it worked in Canada last time and it worked in the US with a lot of the persones

[00:46:56] and the electrification hasn't proven to be that much cheaper so far and also announced that they were actually going to build themselves anyway I also read this tweet because he

[00:47:26] summarized a couple of them so far you can get rid you can maybe carve out his like excited like rhetoric so we don't get in trouble for for quoting it but um yeah so this is from yeah this is from eric lombardi a friend of the show a commentator in the space super sharp individual he says i've been watching this announcement i just have to say that mark carney is making commitments on housing more substantial than i would have expected build canada homes a new public agency devoted to building housing directly 25 billion in

[00:47:56] financing and loan guarantees for prefab and modular builders having the development charges and taxes for the next five years and uh take talking about the municipal red tape and restrictions on housing and addressing in languages that focus on generational fairness so not much to say other than uh eric is used to being disappointed on housing announcements but he is not disappointed today so

[00:48:22] and and i i feel like that's been a general theme for the election sorry what were you gonna say that before right no no no finish off i'll keep mine for the end here yeah okay so my only thing that i will say there is that i don't love the idea of the government building homes like i think that um a lot of people romanticize this like we'd be able to do it like scandinavia or australia or singa or sorry austria or singapore singapore singapore like the majority of people i think 80 percent of the country's housing stock was built by this thing called like the hdb housing and development board but i feel

[00:48:51] like our um housing environment is just so like broken uh that i don't know if the government could do that exceptionally well and there are a lot of examples of the government doing a bad job in canada like every time they do something it gets more expensive etc and so that's going to be a really tough one to sell plus i mean if you go look at um most communist countries they like that's that's where like a lot of people do associate the government creating housing for people to live in with communism or like authoritarian government so always a kind of hard sell and you see a lot of pushback

[00:49:19] so that seems to be one of the primary criticisms all of that being said carney ran uh or was you know a leader at brookfield which is like a literal infrastructure company so if anyone is going to do it not to say that they're going to do a good job or whatever but like you know his ability to create infrastructure which housing is at scale is is probably relatively well tested in in the kind of global capital markets so you know we'll leave it there i think that's like probably the only opinion

[00:49:47] that i'll that i'll put in is that i don't i don't generally love the idea um i'm a free market guy i like i like the idea of the private market being able to create housing um and i think with more that we can can enable the private market to do that the better but and and i'm also of the opinion i will say the last part that i don't necessarily think that we actually do have a huge supply problem in canada if anything we're kind of actually creating too much supply right now in certain markets and i think we got to wait to see and and especially if we're going to be scaling back that demand growth which it sounds like all politicians have sort of committed to

[00:50:17] the you know the the cutting back of demand plus the huge addition of supply almost creates a little bit of like a hey is anybody observing that you're actually also going to drop housing prices substantially maybe they both do think like are aware of that and also just don't nobody wants to say that per se like you'll never hear a politician say hey one way to make housing more affordable is for prices to come down a lot that's the campaign i'm running on vote for me in 2050

[00:50:44] my one last brave of you dan to share your opinions and and uh i'm kidding that was just one on that was just on that one policy but yeah the one thing i will say and this this is important this is from the heart and this this is very very serious okay we just went through this whole episode i thought we did a really great job all i care about really i don't care who you vote for i care that you vote

[00:51:09] okay i you know dan i just sat down with with uh counselor bradford a few weeks ago for for a quick interview with him and which is going to become which is which is an episode out in the next week or two yes man the stuff he was telling me about like voter turnout especially in that like 18 to 34 year old wasn't toronto like uh 17 yeah i was like oh like half people don't show up he's like man half because i try like most try the vast majority of people don't show up so for anyone listening i know

[00:51:37] we have 15 year olds to 55 year olds and and everything in between 70 year olds 30 year olds i don't care who you are how old you are where you are in the country go and exercise your right to vote and and you know whatever happens i think that all of this is a good thing for canada there there's major change and within major change we see we see opportunity but i will finish it off by

[00:52:02] saying please please go out and vote whoever you plan on voting for yeah i i think i honestly that's like why we did this episode is like we wanted to make it so you only have to spend an hour of your time to try and get all of the information on housing policies if you're going to vote if how if you're one of those people who who said housing is a priority for me in this election or you know whatever it is my my future as a real estate investor or in the real estate market in canada we want you to have all of the information that you need to go and make an informed decision on april 28th

[00:52:32] please go and actually do that it's not to say like right now it's interesting like right now young people actually have the ability to decide the outcome of the election totally man and and and the crazy part is that his you know historically they have proven that they won't but and like not even close like that's the crazy part and and so you know i look i see so many people that are obviously very impassioned on social media and it and like there was there was literally like all of

[00:52:59] these you know folks there's interviews from the u.s where they're like oh you know you obviously have a lot to say about this thing like you know who did you vote for or whatever and like oh i didn't vote it's like are you like what i'm like so i don't like you know democracy dies from apathy right from people who think that they're that that their check of the box doesn't make a difference but it does it always does i agree with you man and such an important and can't overstate the importance if you are one of those people that that dared to leave a uh caps lock message on any one of dan's um

[00:53:28] instagram or social media posts in the last few weeks and you don't go out and vote shame on you and that's where we'll leave it thank you so much for listening i hope you got a ton of value out of this very informative bipartisan episode here uh final words please go vote we'll see you soon thank you non-partisan not bipartisan non-partisan jeez not even the final word thank you thanks dan the content of this podcast is for educational and informational purposes only it is not intended

[00:53:57] as financial legal or investment advice always consult a qualified professional for advice tailored to your unique circumstances the views expressed are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of affiliated organizations daniel foch is a real estate broker licensed with valerie real estate inc website is valerie.ca v-a-l-e-r-y.ca and a member of the

[00:54:21] canadian real estate association the ontario real estate association and the toronto real estate board nick hill is a mortgage agent and partner at owl mortgage license number one zero three one seven agent license m two one zero zero four zero three seven you