Every time there is an article like this in the papers, the social media comments are full of both supporters and detractors. The fact that there are still folks who argue that this isn't a problem in Vancouver makes me scratch my head.

I don't think we can. I think at this point all we can now do is try to slow it down just enough to keep the majority of people quiet. As long as we're loving and willing to invite ANYONE into Canada with open arms we're only digging ourselves a hole we can't get out of. If anyone brings up banning foreigners or their RE purchases it's politic suicide for them and they're slapped with racist labels. Here's a great idea - for a 10 year plan lets build 100,000 new houses. Here's and even better idea - let's open our arms and bring in 300,000 people a year and have a large portion of them come to the major cities where they'll easily price people out. Building those houses is useless when you're bringing in a million+ people in that same time frame. Half of the people can't afford to buy a place any more and those who rent have a fear of a demoviction at any time or increased prices every year.

Foreign investors program - Apply through P.E.I? Limit their purchases to that province and make it so they're only allowed to work there as well unless they've been approved elsewhere or else they'll just jump ship and flock to one of Canada's major cities within a few months. Apparently we depend on foreigners money so let them dump their in provinces that need it.

Won't work / doesn't work because the Canadian Charter of Rights specifically allows for freedom of mobility. As part of the Constitution, it is the highest law that supercedes everything else. As such, we can't attach any constraints or conditions that limit where they live / work / buy etc.

Simple anyone who got their Canadian citizenship can purchase property that's 7m+ until 10 years later. Anyone buying a property with money out of Canada banking system even if it a penny is subject to this as well. Make it very even if any lawyer, real estate agent, developers knows the money is not from Canada and they did not report it they will be sent to jail and lost their liscense. This will solve a lot of the issue.
For the money to be consider from Canada again it have to be in a canada financial institute for at least 10 years.

This way the lower end of the market will drop in price and more locals can purchase and if anyone wants to park their money here they still can but the price will be a lot higher. It will also help eliminate those who use Quebec investment program since in order to purchase property you have to be within in Canada for 10 years at least and the money you use have to be in Canada for 10 years at least. Or they can bit the bullet and purchase something that's over 7 million.

I'm a bit confused then. What's the point of having a P.E.I investors program? Is it just an excuse to lend some money and go elsewhere? Just a way to track how many investors are going to which province. If so that's a failure of a program. 90% that apply through P.E.I wont be there for very long lol

Of course we have different view points but I just think that if someone is here as an investor that's part of a program for a certain province they should be staying in that province until the program is finished - citizenship..if they make it that far. While part of the program they can buy and work anywhere in that province.


This is apples to oranges but hopefully you can get the picture I'm trying to word out and relate it to what I wrote above. If I invite you to my house for dinner and you choose to come in, great. Just because I let you in doesn't mean I wan't you walking around with your shoes on, going into my bedroom and laying on my bed to watch tv. People may say 'my house is your house' when a guest comes over but they don't mean it. My house is your house...to an extent.

Does that come off making me sound like a d-bag?

Stewie, I know exactly where you are coming from / what you are asying, and I agree with you because we share a similar level of respect to contractual agreements -- or at least, honour our words and committments. But if I know a common / common enough pattern with certain "foreign investors", it is exactly as what Justice Susan Griffin says in the Vancouver Sun article:

- certain scumbags will assert false facts in legal proceedings when they believe it suits their interests
- these same scumbags have no internal moral guideline to tell the truth, and absolutely no hesitation in lying when they thought it might help them further their causes

In other words, they have no interest to honour their end of the bargain to stay in PEI, Quebec, Manitoba, or wheverwhere it is that a certain investor / immigration program asks of them. To expect them to do so is a westernized belief / value system -- a value system that I was raise on and believe in as well. And yet from experience, I also know it is highly unlikely for these certain "investors" to respect and abide by "our rules", so to speak.

The point of contention is what you have written below:
I know as part of the (immigration) agreement, the investor should stay and invest in the province where they have applied to. But the problem is, this agreement is actually unlawful / unconstitutional because Canadian citizens, PR, and even visitors are protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights to guarantee their freedom of mobility. The investors have to land in their targeted investment province to get in, but once they are in, they are free to roam anywhere. We cannot supercede the Charter of Rights because it is part of the highest statue in the country.

^^ I guess that's why certain country won't give out work permits to certain cities even for their citizens.

Sounds like the Trump thread..

^
But the Trump gov't doesn't affect us as much as the local real estate market. I don't know why Canadians have such a strong opinion about what our neighbours to the south are doing with their govt's.



More info on the local market.
http://theprovince.com/news/local-ne...a-1568811431e3

Bill C-6
I don't think that portion of the bill (removing citizenship) would ever have passed a Charter challenge, as it would imply that one type of Canadian citizen (immigrated) is different than another type of Canadian citizen (born here). Kind of goes against all of Section 15 of the Charter.

^^ Yes, which is why I did not and still do not support the bill. On the other hand, if lies and deceit were used to obtain citizenship, I think it is reasonable to at least have a discussion on whether the naturalized citizenship should be revoked or not.

But that's another topic for another thread.

Gregor isn't seeking re-election.

What will it mean for real estate in the City of Vancouver? My prediction is that an NPA candidate will be elected and single family homeowners will get to keep their houses while the homeless, and all of the young people who want to live and work in Vancouver will continue to suffer on the streets and in subpar rental accommodation.

Shaaa-weeet!

Does this mean the War on Cars is over? The Viaducts will stay up now? Bulldoze some bike lanes? yeehaw!

Revocation is still possible in those cases. The conservative version of the bill just said that the Minister of Immigration was the decision maker in most cases. The liberals amended that section so the Supreme Court was the decision maker for revocation in all cases unless the individual requests the minister to make the decision.

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration...alassent0.html

As much as I hate Moonbeam's idiotic bike lanes and his ruthless approach to public consultation, at least I understand the reasons for him to densify the city the way he did. I do not agree with it, but at the end of the day, I think the housing affordability and traffic congestion problems are bigger than what a single mayor can handle within the confines of his municipality. At a minimum, it needs to be a coordinated regional effort, if not one that requires provincial and federal involvements.

moonbeam did an awesome job at getting rid of homelessness..

watch him go sit on the board of Bosa or Beedie now

ftfy

They changed the IIP in 2014. It's only Quebec now. 1400 allowed annually, I believe.
Of course that doesn't matter. They still jet 2/3rds to Vancouver West end and 1/3rd to Toronto anyways.
Works out 'great'. Quebec gets the 800$k interest free loan, and Vancouver gets the inflated housing market. With pennies of revenue through income tax.
It's almost like the government is turning a blind eye to the real cause...
Build more. Raise interest rates. Increase density. Foreign tax.
Does nothing for affordability. Just increases revenue.


That 5% of non residential owners works out to at least 30% of the capital in the greater Vancouver market. And that's a modest assumption.
No shit it's effecting it.

The whole immigration problem (rich asses getting on programs by other provinces just to move to some other provinces when PR is obtained) can be largely mitigated if we adopt conditional PR card a la USA and by-pass the charter rights altogether.

US usually has a 2yr limitation in which the holder of this "conditional" green card needs to prove that he/she has satisfied the requirement to have the condition removed from the card.

To bypass the whole charter right issue, the program would simply issue a long-term resident visa (say 2-5yrs). When the individual fulfills certain requirements (physical presence in the province that granted the visa, as an example), CIC would then issue the proper PR card.

Sure, nothing is keeping them from moving to other provinces once PR is granted since that's the right given by the charters, at least we can make it less attractive from people who are just looking a quick way to obtain residency.

We already have a long term visa program called the super visa.

And Charter mobility rights apply to all residents of Canada, even those on visas. The courts have said that the Charter applies to all those who have legal status in Canada, even those on tourist visas or who are refugees.

Yes, they are free to move wherever they are... but they aren't gonna satisfy the requirement for them to be granted PR.

They can't challenge the charter based on this because it's a condition to be granted something... just the same as our requirement for someone to be granted our citizenship... One is free to go wherever the heck one wants, but if one is not satisfying the conditions, one ain't getting the citizenship (or even just the renewal of PR).

I see it as a fair middle ground for those who are genuinely looking to settle in PEI/QC... while discouraging those who aren't.

So much wishful thinking in this thread.

Canadian politicians are so trapped in their political correctness that it would be career suicide for any politician to address the "problem" of foreign investment, so much so that nobody calls it a problem even though an entire generation of skilled professionals have been completely priced out of the housing market. Not to mention that the developers in Vancouver have had their hands in City Hall for years now.... good riddance that Moonbeam is finally leaving but at the same time, I don't think the next guy/girl in power is going to change the status quo.

This weakness (at least I believe it is a weakness) is one that many foreign investors of Asian descent are too eager to exploit. The fact that nobody in power is doing anything about the problem of foreign investment is most definitely seen as a weakness by those people; to see it as not so is due to our misplaced understanding that Asian values are similar to Western values, as Traum already pointed to above. I am Asian and I grew up around lots of other Asian people, and unfortunately the mentality is that of "climb over others to get to the top" is very much alive and well.

What Australia and New Zealand are considering (not sure if it's been passed into law yet) is a complete ban on foreigners buying homes. Imagine the outcry from all of the bleeding hearts if anyone were to suggest that in Canada. Not to mention that a law of that nature should have been passed a decade ago to stop the shitstorm that is occurring now. Instead we get Christy Clark going over to China to get more people to come and buy and invest in BC.

Can you really blame foreign investors for coming here, when we have A) a lax immigration system, B) ineffective politicians who value their own careers over doing right by Canadians, a C) people like Christy Clark who have their head so far up their asses that they invite more problems? If you are a foreign investor, all you see is loophole, loophole, loophole, all ready to go and exploit.

As far as a "crash" is concerned, don't hold your breath. Not when there is a seemingly endless supply of wealthy foreigners with cash in hand and the demand to match.

You know, a few years back I would have agreed with you. But I've been thinking about this more in terms of our local politics lately. I often wonder if the "Trump effect" could apply to a local politician who ran on a campaign agenda of banning foreign ownership, with some nationalist rhetoric, and if that person would be successful. I think the level of rancor in the city at this point would certainly make it possible for such politician to be successful, but who knows.

Not if China stops money form leaving the country then a crash might happen.

China can -- and will -- continue to tighten controls on its money exodus crisis, but as the recent news article that was posted in this thread has shown, its citizens will continue to come up with new and creative ways to sidestep the new measures that are put in place. What I'm saying is, the money flow can (and probably will) slow, but it won't slow to a trickle at all.