Should the government subsidize the building of 1.4 million new homes over the next four years?

Yes, if they are affordable.

Yes, but there should be limits to how many properties a person can own to avoid people buying houses for the sake of investing.

Yes, but only by freeing up unused government land, providing affordable financing and slashing development fees. The government should not subsidize the homes themselves, but make it as easy as possible to increase supply.

Yes, but only if they are sold as primary residences and investors are banned from purchasing for 15 years.

Depends what you mean by homes. There are at least that many vacant dwellings in Canada already and half as many unhoused people. This is a way bigger mess than giving money to corporate developers is going to be able to solve.

The government should reliminate red tape and fees to allow building to be quicker and less expensive

Yes, but not at the expense of farmland or greenspace. We should house the homeless who are willing to work, and help the homeless who are struggling.

No. The government should speed up permit approvals and reduce some of the associated taxes of building to incentivize faster production of new homes. Subsidizing doesn't solve the core problem.

We need a mass deportation before we need to build new housing to accommodate all these illegal immigrants.

Yes and No, focus on rebuilding old homes and filling up empty homes as to not destroy green space but fill up those houses with homeless

Build homes that actually look nice and not just condominiums. Don't build on the expense of farmland or green spce.

Government should not be subsidizing the building of new homes. They should be removing or modifying regulations that inhibit the building of commercial and residential structures on the outside edges of urban areas to allow faster and more expansion.

Affordable housing should not include rentals and condos. Affordable homes should be such as townhomes/semis/detached without maintenance and/or potl fees.

Instead of spending billions for new homes, deport all the newcomers that are here either illegally or who abused the international student program. This create less demand and more supply of homes in general and cost a fraction of what it would cost to build new homes.

Stop mass immigration and the housing crisis will reduce. Also reduce interest rates and mortgage rates to make it affordable for people to buy and rent.

Hell yeah, younger people need places to have babies or we will be facing demographic crisis as well. Maybe subsidize young families specifically.

Homes? Or condos that take up majority of our free space? And what are the “affordable prices” ? That everyone keeps mentioning… I’ve never seen them.

If we can afford it and does not do a large amount of damage to the environment, then yes. Otherwise, no.

No. They should be looking at building far more than that, and do whatever they can to pop the bubble.

this is just a political spewing by the Liberal party to appease the voters. It will never happen and the political parties are so good at throwing around Our money

Yes, but only if it somehow can prioritize people who already live in their region. As in, someone from Toronto shouldn't be snatching up an affordable home from someone who needs it more. Also, rebuilds and repairs to existing houses are also important.

if we make more homes then we take more Forrest's the less the Forrest,s the less air less air death death sadness sadness+death=depression=suicide=death=repeat

Yes, but not at the expense of green space and farmland and only to house the needy homeless; not for the people who already have many homes.

Yes but focus on building RGI housing as opposed to affordable and market rent housing. There are more people in Canada who reside in apartments and cannot afford to buy a home than there are people who can.

No, allow first time home buyers to "write-off" the interest on their mortage for a period of time (i.e. 10 years).

Yes but only to house homeless and require them to work on house building to help pay for renting the home

For first time home buyers or single income, there is not benefits for this class of people right now. The homeless do not need more benefits.

Large commie blocks and the forced relocation of new immigrant populations to interior Canada as to prevent large demographic concentrations.

Yes, but we should also be helping regulate the purchase of these homes to prevent them being purchased as rental properties.

It all depends on what types of homes at to be build - I would not be in favour of this if they were to be single family dwellings, but duplexes and smaller (non-luxury) apartments, yes 100%.

No, we should encourage private corporations by making it easier and less expensive to build homes rather then having to constantly spend tax-payer money.

Not if they are for profit builds. Geared to income, Habitat for humanity, non-profit affordable units

If the bulding is intended to host homeless people, then both the private and public sectors should reach an agreement

I think once immigration practise are under control, the housing market will be more available for Canadian Citizens and we won’t have to build more houses. Also, we need to protect farmland.

We don’t need new houses as much as we need incentives for existing structures, mortgage affordability, etc.

No, the government should not subsidize but invest instead. Taking the profit from the sales to spend on healthcare and education for the area.

No. Government should expedite, streamline, and modernize approval processes so new homes can be built more quickly and less expensively.

If the homes are decent sized that could de decently priced then sure. We shouldn't be building mansions by any means with the housing crisis going on.

Yes, but the houses need to be spaced out more and need to be bigger, we have a lot of open space so it is possible.

The only kind of Unaffordable housing shloud be castles in the most populated cities. People need spaces to live, same as with food, water, electricity, and healthcare. It shouldn't be impossible to afford some and not the others on a minimum wage.

just add apartment buildings in areas where not many people live instead of 1.4 million single family homes

No, I feel us as a country cannot financially support this currently. But I do feel that if the government was to subsidize the building of any homes it should be for Canadian veterans.

The house ownership should be under the government to provide people who have difficulty with housing, and after they finish their usage the house should return to the government to pass to other people that have this kind of issue. Public rental housing, like Singapore.

We need heavier regulation on developers and real estate. It doesn't matter how many houses you build if housing is not affordable. Building new housing is necessary but it's not the answer to the bigger issue.

No, the government should incentivize the cooperation of businesses and governments to achieve affordable housing!

In decades past governments made developers set aside so much housing for geared to income and now they don't

I'm all for it. Only for housing families with low income and the homeless. Where and when is their choice. But I'm not for buying existing houses. Let architects and home designers collaborate to build them custom homes. This operation should take place at a suitable time when the country shouldn't have to worry about money.

If we can afford it, but regardless, BUILD MORE HOMES and pause immigration for a little bit. Balance the supply and demand

We need more housing but it shouldn’t be paid for by taxpayers. Tax incentives and other government initiatives to build more work better.

The government should promote and subsidize or pay for the building of low rent, simple accommodations, for immigrants, foreign students and the homeless. If fully government funded, these accommodations would have to be monitored for compliance to health and safety and the residents would have to have a plan to move out to private residences in an agreed to timeline dependent on their individual situations.

yes, but they should also rebuild or repair existing houses and not at the expense of farmland and green space.

Rebuild and repair existing houses first and the move to make new houses if necessary but not at the expense of green spaces.

We can't just keep building more houses to combat the housing crisis because eventually, we will run out of space to build. There needs to be a more long-term solution.

Yes, but jot at the expense of farmland and green space. Also deporting any non permanent citizens to subsidize actual Canadians

Direct subsidy No; Remove zoning restrictions, and greenlight projects outside traditional areas, Yes

we should reduce the costs of living instead, because there's already plenty of places to live. but the cost of living has greatly increased to unsustainable levels.

The government needs to come up with a universal housing program that provides extremely basic fully subsidized private bedrooms to anyone who wants one (think university dorm rooms with a common kitchen and bathrooms) if you want better you can rent/buy a house or apartment.

Yes, because houses are just becoming more expensive for the people creating them, and also the people buying them so there wouldn't be many advantages to this opportunity, and there are also a lot of houses being displayed on the market making it just more abundance in the community being introduced than is needed right now. The only homes that should be built are those that cater to the homeless.

they should make housing but only to the people that truly need it like the homeless and people could also get roomates or have a place like and apartment to their own

No, we should set housing targets for each municipality that they need to hit. If they surpass this target, they will receive a bonus. If they fail to hit the target, they will not receive funding and they will have to pay a penalty.

It is defenitely something to check on but the government can just get random bank loans out of it *** so it doesn't matter.

There is no government, there is no taxes, there is no debts, Tories and amerimutts will be beheaded.

I think that this is a great idea, but at the cost that they spread out the homes and build up north

yes, as long as it's used to house the homeless while not affecting farmland and green space too much.

Yes, including housing the homeless, not at the expense of farmland and greenspace and ALSO within reasonable prices that allow younger people and single income families to be able to afford housing.

yes but only to house individuals getting out of rehab, homeless (but mainly teenagers, and minors 16 - 22) and elderly veterans

The only justification I can see for this is immigration. Internally the system should be consistent enough to sustain itself without subsidy. If it's necessary to subsidize housing in this manner the issue is systemic and should be addressed further up the chain.

Yes and no, regardless it is at the expense of farmland and green space, which I do not support but We need to focus on spreading out the population throughout Canada instead of individuals migrating in cities and increasing the housing markets in places like Vancouver and Toronto. There also shouldn’t be money spent on this when there’s bigger issues.

Continue building to match the amount of immigrants coming into the country but no longer ad on to large cities to avoid taking over the little green space that still exists in that area

Yes, not at the expense of farmland & lower the amount of funding put towards these projects as we cannot afford it

we should use the money to help house indigenous who are living in reserves that are similar to third world countries even though canada is a first world country

the government should instead focus on developing current areas into housing which can hold more families and people to help create a more sustainable country

No, we have plenty of empty homes available. The issue does not lie in quantity but in treating homes like financial assets

Rebuild and repair existing houses and build houses not at the expense of farmland and green space to house the homeless

Yes, but to reduce final house prices and not to give more profit to the builders.

No, 1.4 million is not enough

No, no one is going to be able to afford them in this economy, deal with inflation and interest rates first

Yes, but only for Canadian citizens

Affordable housing

No, government should reduce bureaucracy and approve permits within 6 months max, the government should provide favourable financing for nonprofits to build affordable rental housing.

If it can reduce housing costs within reason, yes. But it could also do more harm than good if prices don't decrease enough.

No, homes should be decommodified as a majority of homes are owned by companies whose sole purpose is to turn a profit via renting units at exorbitant prices

Yes, although the government should also consider using its powers to create mixed-zoning areas (e.g., blending commercial spaces into residential zones) and reducing the ability of civilians to unfairly interfere with construction designs

Yes, but prioritize the homeless and not at the expense of green space so maybe decrease the number of houses from 1.4 million to 1 million.

There should be subsidies, however, there should be strict regulations on who gets these subsidies such as Canadian citizens or pr holders who are married and or with children. As time time goes by, more homes should be built and as time goes on these subsidy should be closed, if data suggest over 60% of eligible persons have received this subsidies and more homes are being built on a large scale.

No, but offer incentives for towns and cities to build new homes. If they reach a certain target, they will receive bonuses. If they fail to receive targets, they will receive less funding.

Focus on the mess you've already created. Stop messing with our farmland and green space. Have somewhere for people to go. Empty schools in my town, exist. Turn it into a shelter. Empty buildings that aren't housed by stores any more. Turn those into shelters.

yes if it is to house the homeless but it can not at the expense of farmland and green space and the government should rebuild or repair existing houses before making new ones

Yes but we have to keep in mine of the green space and farmland. We also need to start building homes for the homeless.

not at the expense of farms and green space but also maybe build a few less and more apartments due to prices and overall space use

Yes, however, we should create 1 million homes outside metropolitan areas and repair 400,000 existing houses that are currently not vacated.

Rebuild and repair existing houses, impose rules for expansion based on availability of existing property available, incorporate expansion of needed services to support community growth, while supporting homelessness through a holistic understanding of their needs.

both we should not ruin greenland and any forests and no because canada cant afford it we are strugginling with money

for me its difficult to answer this but my thinking is that is important to have more houses but at the same time we need others needs for example education and that, but its important to know how you are going to spend in other things,+.

Government should develop laws that protects Landlords. This would naturally incentivize wealthy people to look to investing in real estate

yes, but builders should not be profiting what they are if they are subsidized. the subsidizing should go to individual people building personal homes not subdivisions.

Builders who make a fortune off of new home sales should be included in this equation and not just tax payer dollars.

Yes, but do not allow them to be sold to foreign investors and sit empty

There should be more apartment buildings than houses with more greenery and plants.