Vermieter im Repräsentantenhaus: Befürworter sehen im Parlament eine Voreingenommenheit gegenüber Mietern
Landlords in the House: Advocates see a bias in Parliament against renters
Vermieter im Repräsentantenhaus: Befürworter sehen im Parlament eine Voreingenommenheit gegenüber Mietern
Landlords in the House: Advocates see a bias in Parliament against renters
7 Kommentare
The problem of landlords in Parliament not just bias, it’s a direct conflict of interest. We should forbid all MPs from owning commercial property or significant business holdings.
>Not only are none of them renters — except, perhaps, of their secondary residence while in Ottawa — 38 per cent of Carney’s ministers are landlords, earning rental income or as investors in property management businesses or real estate investment trusts.
And how many *commute via transit*?
I ask, because I understand there to be a deep-rooted *classist* vein of bigotry within Canada that regards taking the bus and renting as a disreputable act. This arises in polling where transit is viewed as *unsafe*, even though it’s the safest form of commuting; and in the lobbying to keep rental units *elsewhere*, like when stratas fight to forbid rentals.
>“It shows that there is a bit of an institutional bias to keep the housing system working exactly as it is right now because it is the most profitable business in Canada — unfortunately for the rest of us, the tenants, the people who are trying to access home ownership and most acutely for those living in homelessness or housing precarity.”
To keep rents high, housing prices high, and to continue designing new suburbs that are hostile to efficient transit delivery and connect via fat highways to the city core.
>Sources in the Carney government say current Housing and Infrastructure Minister Gregor Robertson is working on a successor to the Trudeau-era tenants’ bill of rights.
Putting Robertson in charge of housing was akin to letting the fox guard the hen house.
[removed]
The one NDP MP the article mentions, Alexandre Boulerice, is now an independent.
Percentage of current NDP MPs who are landlords is actually 0%
The Canaduan translation of Bill Clinton’s campaign quip is *“It’s real estate stupid.“*
I don’t quite buy the House bias because they need not be biased. A full 1/3rd of economic architecture of Canada is direct real estate expenditures/investment or secondary real-estate expenditures.
Compare that to the entire resource sector including oil & gas. Resources are 1/8th of the Canadian economy. The entire service sector excluding government, real-estate, and resources services only barely surpasses real-estate at 40% but almost certainly does not have comparable tangible assets.
It’s insane and real estate is a drag anchor on the Canadian economy. Seriously, it needs to be taxed much much more.
Aside from immigration policy, which I think was more ideological than self interested, what exactly does the federal government oversee that would allow parliamentarians to exercise their alleged bias?
This would be a much bigger concern in provincial parliament, and generally speaking provincial parliaments have passed legislation that favours tenants, not landlords.
How can Gregor Robertson own 10 million in real estate assets including a penthouse and mansion and fix our housing crisis?