East York Tenants Group

 By I. Aagaard, Guest Contributor

In my previous piece (MISSING: National Housing policy in Federal Elections!) I focused on affordable housing, whether or not this should be viewed as a fundamental human right, and the fact that we in Canada do not have a national housing strategy.

In this piece I’d like to pose some questions regarding “sustainable affordability” to affordable housing. By definition, “sustainable affordability” means the affordability to a decent place to live must be sustainable. To help accomplish that, one must have a greater degree of control over one’s housing costs – i.e. the profitability factor must be decreased. More Not-for-Profit and Co-Op housing would help on that front, as would home ownership. Another factor to consider is the whole business of banks lending practices when it comes to mortgages. Just look to the US and what’s happened there, largely due to the over extension of debt by home owners. All of this, of course, ties in to our whole philosophy on affordable housing and home ownership. Do we view it as a privilege for those fortunate enough to have steady, decent incomes and/or inheritances, or do we view it as a fundamental human right that should be a realistic goal for all, regardless of income?

I’d like to raise a few questions regarding affordable housing and the increasing shift in the job market, away from well paid full time jobs, e.g. in the manufacturing sector, to much lower paid (minimum wage or slightly above) part time jobs in e.g. the service industry sector.

I’d like to focus on “affordable housing” within the context of other changes happening in our society; specifically the job shift. This is an ongoing and troubling phenomenon with unknown, long-term effects on various aspects of society. I have first hand experience, as I moved from a relatively well-paid job in the financial sector to a part-time job as Customer Service Representative with the LCBO. With this change in ‘career’ my income initially dropped by more than 50%. My rent did not!

Whereas my rent before had not been an issue, it now became somewhat of a challenge to the point where I at times seriously considered moving. However, moving also costs money, is disruptive and can bring with it other challenges. Instead of being able to walk or bicycle to work, one might suddenly have to depend upon public transit or even need a vehicle for commuting. It begs the question: At what point is it reasonable to expect someone to uproot the whole family and move the children from their friends, school and familiar environment to new surroundings? So the view that “If you can’t afford your rent, just move to something cheaper” isn’t as simple as that. There are both social and economical factors to consider.

Which takes me back to affordable housing and the question of whether or not it should be a basic right for all.  We are currently seeing turmoil on the markets, largely due to the sub-prime mortgage crisis and an under-regulated credit system in the US.

This raises many questions, including how financial institutions view home ownership. Has too much speculation and greed taken over, I wonder? I can highly recommend you have a look at J. David Hulchanski’s excellent article on housing “Canada’s Dual Housing Policy” …

http://www.urbancentre.utoronto.ca/pdfs/researchbulletins/CUCSRB38Hulchanski.pdf.

We are also experiencing a shift in the job market and I wonder what might be the long term effects of so many low and lower paid part- time jobs on e.g. our social fabric, family dynamics, and ability to find and pay for decent housing?

I am intrigued whenever I hear on the news that our employment rate went up, despite loss of e.g. manufacturing jobs, because we gained more jobs in other sectors, primarily the service industry.

I wonder how Stats Can measures a part-time job at e.g. the LCBO or your local supermarket where people can be “employed” but have zero hours some weeks.

Zero hours equates to zero income. Zero income severely hampers one’s ability to pay the rent or mortgage on time and in full! Yet I expect we are counted statistically as ‘working’. And since we are ‘working’ we are expected to be fully contributing members of society, with an income and the ability to afford a place to live.

In some more enlightened countries the tax laws are much more supportive of home ownership. For example, Danish homeowners can deduct the interest on their mortgage from their taxable income, significantly reducing the taxes they pay while struggling with a new large mortgage. The effect: It’s much more realistic for both young and lower income people to afford a home.

It would serve us well at this point to remember that owning a home provides a nice investment for the later years in life, thus reducing the risk of someone becoming a financial burden to society in their senior years by having to rely on subsidized or social housing. Provided, of course, the whole financial emphasis and philosophical view on housing shifts from being profit and speculative driven to instead focus on it as a  ‘social’ and ‘human’ right.

For what it’s worth, that’s my opinion on the matter. We have an election only weeks away. Now is the time to ask your political candidates just where they and their respective parties stand on the issue of affordable housing. And, very important, how they view housing as a whole: As a right or as a privilege?