It’s election season here in the CRD and true to form, political rhetoric is escalating. In the City of Victoria, for example, there is an ongoing divisive debate over the so-called Missing Middle Housing Initiative. Younger generations affected by the rental crisis and the lack of affordable housing are being pitted against homeowners (often assumed to be from an older generation).

In my view, the debate is not actually focused on the key questions that need to be answered:

1.  Will the proposed initiative address the issue of affordability? In other words, is the proposed solution meeting a desired outcome?
2.  Is the initiative being advanced in a way that brings people with you in the process?
3.  What is the role of council and why is this new initiative required?

Compelling arguments are being advanced in support of both sides of the first question and some believe that this is where the public controversy arises. In my view, it isn’t.

The term “missing middle housing”, was first coined by Daniel Parolek in 2010 and expanded upon in his book Missing middle housing : Thinking big and building small to respond to today’s housing crisis, published in 2020. It’s defined as “house-scale buildings with multiple units in walkable neighbourhoods”, and it was designed to address sprawling US car-dependent communities.

Many I have spoken with have long supported the notion of missing middle housing, without knowing the slogan. In fact, successive Victoria councils have a longstanding track record of allowing for, and even promoting, such developments. One only need drive along Shelbourne Street to find myriad townhouse developments built in recent years, or travel along Rockland Avenue to witness stately mansions from the early 1900s that have been preserved and transformed into multi-family units.

Moving to question 2, I believe the answer is demonstrably no. In general, any policy consultation process that ends up pitting one group against another is destined to divide rather than unite our community. And that is what we are seeing in the missing middle debate in my view.

Such societal polarization is often reinforced by some in the so-called progressive movement who ironically don’t realize that their communication/activism tactics are  quite similar to those employed by elements of the alt right. These include being intolerant of opposing views, making assertions – not grounded in evidence – to justify a cause, attacking people who disagree with them on social media, and civil disobedience to hopefully increase public awareness to their cause. Groups that are intolerant of the views of others, whether they be on the left or the right, ultimately just reinforce British Columbia’s longstanding reputation for societal polarization and pendulum politics.

Pendulum politics occurs when an angry electorate mobilizes, often egged on by an opposition party/individual or parties/individuals, to unseat those holding elected positions. Consequently, local, provincial and federal governments get summarily turfed out in elections and the party or individual(s) on the other side of the political spectrum form government or the majority on council. More often than not, the so-called baby is thrown out with the bathwater as the new government or council begins to undo the work of the previous government or council to fulfill their election campaign promises.

One solution to ongoing pendulum politics is to put in place a form of proportional representation like what already exists in more than 90 countries, and the majority of western democracies, worldwide. At the council level, this translates to a ward system that ensures unique neighbourhoods within a municipality are properly represented at the council table. Regional District electoral systems already operate on a ward system. For example, the Cowichan Valley Regional District has representation from 9 different electoral areas; the Nanaimo Regional District has representation from 7 different electoral areas.

But we have neither of these systems in place, and so we must work within the system that we have. And this brings me to question 3.

Local governments are created under British Columbia’s Local Government Act and municipalities, such as Victoria or Saanich, are empowered by British Columbia’s Community Charter which provides:

1. “a legal framework for the powers, duties and functions that are necessary to fulfill their purposes,
2. the authority and discretion to address existing and future community needs, and
3. the flexibility to determine the public interest of their communities and to respond to the different needs and changing circumstances of their communities.”

Obviously, zoning is one of the most important functions of an elected council. The biggest issue with the missing middle initiative is that council are proposing to pass a highly divisive, one-time, city-wide zoning change a few days before the next civic election. Associated with the initiative is the delegation of development approval to staff. In essence, Mayor and Council would be able to deflect any political accountability to their staff.

Mayors and their councils are elected to represent and meet the needs of those residing within each of our unique and diverse neighbourhoods. They are elected to listen to all residents, not just their political supporters, as they propose and approve policies that unite, rather than divide, our communities.

In my view council have chosen to abdicate their public, and hopefully transparent, decision-making process to staff who are not accountable to the electorate. In addition, it makes little sense for Victoria, with a population of only 85,792 (2016 census), the seventh most densely populated (4,406 people per square kilometre — 2016 census) municipality in Canada, to pretend they can go it alone to solve the affordability issue in our region. What is needed is a coordinated regional housing strategy.

It strikes me that what we are witnessing is divisive politics instead of good governance, especially since such an important issue is being debated just over a month before the next local government elections with virtually all the present council having declared that they are not seeking re-election. Who will be held accountable for a decision on the Missing Middle Initiative? Nobody. The truth is, council have already been implementing and could further expand upon, the issue of missing middle housing if good governance was placed ahead of divisive political posturing.

Another example, which serves to illustrate just how dysfunctional the recent decision-making process on Victoria council is concerns the recent pronouncement that all new construction from 2025 must be “zero carbon” producers by 2025. This means that the era of oil, gas or propane heating is over in new construction in Victoria. As someone who has been speaking out publicly on the need to reduce GHG emissions since the early 1990s, obviously I support this policy. In fact, CleanBC, British Columbia’s climate action plan, already requires the same throughout BC by 2030. But once more, the way Victoria council brought this forward is almost a textbook example of what not to do to advance climate policy. While other jurisdictions are exploring similar proposals for early adoption, Victoria decided to go it alone amid rising affordability, inflation concerns and a divisive debate on the Missing Middle Housing Initiative.

How processes like this play out is predictable. A new Mayor and Council recognize that the previous Mayor and Council had lost the confidence of the electorate. As evidence for this one only need read the results of the recent governance survey where 81% of respondents stated that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with Victoria’s governance. Despite losing the confidence of the electorate, council still decided to debate or pass controversial motions at the 11^th hour thereby blindsiding many in our community because the important groundwork to bring people with you was not done in advance.  And so pendulum politics kicks in and a new Mayor and Council start to undo the work of the previous Mayor and Council in order to repair the divides within our community.

We’ve seen this happen before in British Columbia. When Premier Campbell brought in the HST without bringing the electorate along with him it spelled the end of his leadership. Now even uttering the words HST is political suicide. This, despite when coupled with a low-income HST rebate program (as was proposed), this form of consumption taxation many would argue represents good fiscal policy.

Earlier in the mid 2000s, on the other hand, Premier Gordon Campbell, his Finance Minister Carole Taylor, and his Environment Minister Barry Penner introduced some of the most innovative climate action policies anywhere. Their flagship policy was British Columbia’s much celebrated revenue neutral carbon pricing. Not only did the general public support Premier Campbell’s climate policies, but they also punished the BC NDP in the 2009 provincial election for not formulating their own climate plan and cynically campaigning behind an “Axe the [carbon] tax” slogan.

As someone was who was born and grew up in the City of Victoria, I am saddened by what I perceive to be the emergence of divisive sociopolitical discourse, activism, and politicking at the expense of inclusive governance. Good governance means governing for all, not just your supporters; it means bringing people together, not pitting one generation against another; and it means listening to the views of all, even people you may not agree with, and doing what you can to address (not dismiss) those concerns.

For those who may have wondered, I will not be seeking a council, mayoral or school board seat in the forthcoming civic election. Admittedly, I very seriously considered seeking a council seat in the District of Saanich, the community in which I have lived since 1992, and a community that exemplifies the notion of good governance.

In my next post I hope to expand upon what I have written here but with a specific focus on climate policy. I’ll build upon my personal experience as someone who has been actively engaged in the areas since the late 1980’s/early 1990’s.

On Wednesday June 17 we held a virtual town hall to discuss BC’s post COVID-19 future and answer any related questions. It was a very successful event and I grateful to the myriad participants for their thoughtful questions and comments. We’ve had a lot of requests for a copy of the video of the event and so I’ve reproduced it below for those interested.

I wish to offer sincere thanks to the panelists Katya Rhodes, Rob Gillezeau, Colin Plant, Emilie de Rosenroll and special guests Merran Smith and the Honourable George Heyman for their insightful contributions to the town hall.

Video of Panel Presentation

Join us on June 17 for a virtual town hall hosted by Dr. Andrew Weaver, MLA for Oak Bay-Gordon Head. Dr. Weaver will be joined by distinguished panellists Dr. Rob Gillezeau, Dr. Katya Rhodes, Colin Plant, and Emilie de Rosenroll to discuss BC’s post COVID-19 future and answer any related questions you may have.

Please confirm your attendance in advance by registering using the link below.

Panellist Bios:

Dr. Katya Rhodes is an Assistant Professor in the School of Public Administration and member of the Institute for Integrated Energy Systems at the University of Victoria. She investigates the topics of low-carbon economy transitions and climate policy design using survey tools, energy-economy models, media and content analysis. Prior to joining the academia, Dr. Rhodes worked in the British Columbia (BC) Climate Action Secretariat where she led greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions modelling and economic analyses for the provincial CleanBC plan.

Dr. Rob Gillezeau joined the Department of Economics at the start of 2016. Prior to joining the department, he served as the Chief Economist in the Office of the Leader of the Official Opposition in Ottawa. Dr. Gillezeau’s research applies causal methodology from labour economics to answer questions in modern American and Canadian economic history. His work has examined questions related to the interaction of the War on Poverty and the 1960s race riots, the growth of the North American trade union movement, and the role that the Transatlantic slave trade played in the development of ethnicity on the African continent.

In 2016, Emilie de Rosenroll became the inaugural CEO of the South Island Prosperity Partnership (SIPP). She spearheaded a number of economic development initiatives, including the regional Smart Cities strategy, involving over 50 organizations and including 15 local Governments. Drawing on her extensive governance and Public-Private expertise, the first phase of the strategy focuses on transportation and mobility followed by a focus on building common data platforms along with measurement of Mobility Wellbeing.

Colin Plant is a Saanich councillor where he serves as chair of the arts, culture and heritage committee and as chair of the of the Saanich LGBTQ sub-committee. He is also drama teacher at Claremont Secondary school and is chair of the Capital Regional District Board. Originally from Salmon Arm BC, Mr. Plant graduated from Stelly’s secondary in 1990 as the class valedictorian and has lived in Saanich for 15 years.

Today the Vancouver Sun published an opinion piece that I recently wrote.

Undoubtedly, the COVID-19 pandemic has introduced uncertainty into all echelons of daily life. But uncertainty need not inspire fear. Uncertainty is the precursor to innovation and innovation is the precursor to change. We are offered two choices today. To fear uncertainty and to fear change, or to see this generational challenge as a generational opportunity.

Below I reproduce the text of the opinion piece. The original is available on the Vancouver Sun website.

Text of Article

It’s been just over two months since BC declared a state of emergency in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and only a few days since relaxed restrictions were introduced in stage 2 of our provincial response. Yet judging from the myriad communications my office receives, British Columbians are still very nervous about the future.

While various commentators are suggesting we are heading into a “new normal” for business and, more generally, society as a whole, it’s far from clear what that “new normal’ looks like. Therein lies an incredible opportunity for the creation of long-term socially, environmentally and fiscally resilient and sustainable policies for British Columbia. For right now “uncertainty” seems to be the only thing “normal” in our daily lives.

Every challenge, whether it be global climate change, poverty reduction, the opioid crisis, the changing nature of work or even the COVID-19 pandemic, presents us with an opportunity for creativity & innovation; in other words, an opportunity to do things differently moving forward. For often the single biggest impediment to change is fear of the uncertainty that it will bring.  Many entrench and defend themselves in the comfort of the status quo.

Jurisdictions that emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic stronger than before the deadly virus took hold will be those that adapt and respond in a timely fashion. Standing by and waiting for the holy grail of a vaccine or herd immunity, which may or may not ever occur, is simply not an option.

We are incredibly fortunate to live in British Columbia. Our provincial response to the pandemic to-date has been nothing short of exceptional. We’ve had calm, collected, evidence-based leadership by provincial Health Officer Bonnie Henry and Health Minister Adrian Dix. And most individuals and business have responded quickly to their requests, suggestions and orders.

As a direct consequence, British Columbia is now in a position to capitalize on the opportunities for change that the COVID-19 pandemic has created. But this will require an ongoing commitment to focus on the sage advice offered in a number of reports that were recently presented to the province.

On January 30, B.C.’s Food Security Task Force report was publicly released. “The Future of B.C.’s Food Systems” issued four recommendations designed to situate BC on an innovation pathway to capitalize on our strategic advantages in this sector. The report notes that the Netherlands ranks 131^st in the world in terms of land area but is the world’s second largest exporter of agricultural goods. This is only possible because of the country’s focus on high value products, investments in innovation ecosystems, support for supply chain development, and strong land use policies. That’s what we should be doing in BC.

On May 11^th the Emerging Economy Task Force final report was publicly released with 25 recommendations to assist British Columbia capitalize on global trends and technological advancements in the years ahead. That same day the final report from BC’s inaugural Innovation Commissioner, Dr. Alan Winter, was also publicly released. Dr. Winter provided five recommendations to government to encourage and assist the transformation of our economy to one that is resilient, based on our strategic strengths, and ready to lead in the 21^st century.

And we will soon learn more from three distinguished scholars who are putting the finishing touches on their report exploring the role that basic income might play in reducing poverty and preparing for the emerging economy. A sneak peak of what we might expect from them appeared in an article entitled “Considerations for Basic Income as a COVID-19 Response” that was published Thursday by the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy.

A common theme in all these reports emerges. In light of the threat of pandemics, growing income inequality, and climate change, as well as the changing nature of work, modern economies need to quickly prepare. What has worked in the past will not work in the future.

As British Columbia emerges from the COVID-19 pandemic over the next year or so, we must learn from our mistakes and capitalize on opportunities that have arisen. The global shortage of protective medical equipment highlighted the importance of shoring up local supply chains and ensuring we have diversified manufacturing capacity locally. The complete chaos unfolding in the United States and Brazil as COVID-19 runs rampant there also underpins the importance of evidence-based decision-making in policy formulation.

British Columbia must also rethink its approach to the resource sector. Globalization has meant that we’ll never compete with jurisdictions that don’t internalize the social and environmental costs of resource extraction unless we are smarter, more efficient, cleaner and innovative in our extraction methodologies, and focus on value-added products for export. Sadly, our approach in recent years has been to literally give away our raw natural resources with little focus on the long-term effect this will have on the well-being and sustainability of rural BC.

British Columbia has three strategic advantages that set it aside from other jurisdictions around the world. 1) British Columbia is one of the most beautiful places anywhere to live. As such, we can attract to BC and retain the best and brightest worldwide because of the quality of life and the stable democracy that we can offer. 2) We have one of the best K-12 and postsecondary education systems in the world. They produce a highly skilled and educated workforce ready to meet the challenges of the 21^st century. 3) We have boundless renewable resources in the form of clean energy, wood, water and agricultural land. And we have an economic plan embodied in CleanBC that recognizes these strategic strengths at its very core.

We should be using our strategic advantage as a destination of choice to attract industry to BC in highly mobile sectors that have difficulty retaining employees in a competitive marketplace. We should be using our boundless renewable energy resources to attract industry, including the manufacturing sector, that wants to brand itself as sustainable over its entire business cycle, just like Washington and Oregon have done in attracting a large BMW manufacturing facility and Google data centre to their jurisdictions.

We should be setting up seed funding mechanisms to allow the BC-based creative economy sector to leverage venture capital from other jurisdictions to our province. Too often the only leveraging that is done is the shutting down of BC-based offices and opening of offices in the Silicon Valley.

Undoubtedly, the COVID-19 pandemic has introduced uncertainty into all echelons of daily life. But uncertainty need not inspire fear. Uncertainty is the pretext to innovation and innovation is the pretext to change. We are offered two choices today. To fear uncertainty and to fear change, or to see this generational challenge as a generational opportunity. I prefer the latter and I’m excited to continue working with the BC NDP government in our attempts to capitalize on this opportunity.

Without a doubt, British Columbia has led the way in North America in terms of introducing measures to curb the spread of the COVID-19 virus in our province. We are very fortunate that so many people are following the advice of  Health Minister Adrian Dix and Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry. Thank you to all for staying the course during these difficult times.

Nevertheless, with Canada just over one month into a nationwide lock-down we are beginning to get a better idea of where the gaps are in the existing economic supports and where further relief is needed. Since many of the initial government interventions were broad in scope, needs specific to different industries have been left unaddressed by the existing programs. In BC, a BCC survey found that the current programs were of little use to one third of businesses, with nearly half of businesses with under five employees reporting that they do not find the existing programs to be helpful. Ongoing email exchanges and conversations with British Columbians have also revealed additional gaps in the existing programs. Some of these are highlighted below.

The Tourism Industry is Reeling

Unsurprisingly, sectors dependent on in-person interactions such as the hospitality and tourism industries have been among the hardest hit by the pandemic. For many businesses in the tourism industry, capital expenditures are typically made during the off-season and are offset by revenue generated throughout the summer months. However, the combination of social distancing measures, travel restrictions, and the closure of BC Parks and Natural Reserves has meant that tourism operators have been forced to grapple with hundreds of last-minute cancellations just as their busiest season was about to begin. With many businesses needing to service pre-existing debt loads, the loss of summer revenue has placed them in a precarious position. Exacerbating matters is the fact that many operators have had limited success in negotiations with travel insurance companies around the reimbursement of guests’ travel costs.

Currently, the economic supports introduced by the federal and provincial governments do not adequately address the scale and scope of the challenges that the industry faces, particularly given its seasonality. Assistance offered by the private sector such as deferring loan payments for three months are only stop-gap measures because payments will eventually come due. Additional solutions proposed to address the issues the tourism and hospitality industries are facing have included altering the terms of the existing loan programs to provide longer repayment periods, larger loan guarantees, and determining loan eligibility on a per property basis rather than a per owner basis.

Rent Assistance

One concern common to both individuals and businesses is the ability to pay rent. Even before the current economic crisis began, the high cost of living in urban areas was a pressing issue in federal and provincial politics. Rent prices have been increasing over the last decade and as of November 2019 the average rent in Vancouver was $2,507 per month. In Oak Bay, just under 20% of households fall below the affordability standard, defined as spending 30% or more of income on shelter costs.

Although Ottawa and Victoria have stepped in to provide the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) and the BC Temporary Rental Supplement Program (BC-TRS) respectively, many individuals have indicated that the existing supports will not be enough to get them through the crisis, particularly given the fact that relief from other recurring expenses such as mortgage payments, property taxes, utility bills, and debt payments are only temporary. If people are unable to make rent payments, hundreds of tenants could be facing eviction when the crisis is over. The impact of missed rental payments would also be acutely felt by landlords, many of whom are reliant upon rental income to make mortgage payments or to support their retirement.

On a commercial level, almost 60 percent of Canadian small businesses have said that they will be unable to pay rent come May 1^st. The situation is particularly urgent in the food service industry where three quarters of respondents to a Restaurant Canada survey reported that that rent was a primary source of business debt.

Solutions floated to the issues facing renters and landlords have included increasing the provincial rent supplement, and federal government intervention to support renters by topping up the CERB payment. The recently announced Canada Emergency Rent Assistance program should provide much needed relief to small businesses but will need to be closely monitored to determine if it is ambitious enough. Many small business owners have expressed their reluctance to take on more debt and may require further support in the weeks ahead.

Ongoing Restrictions to the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy

While making the criteria for the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy more flexible has helped more businesses qualify for the program, many firms have indicated that they are still slipping through the cracks. Currently, only one third of businesses in BC are confident that they will qualify for wage subsidy, with 28% of businesses reporting that their revenue has not declined enough to meet the eligibility requirements. This issue is particularly pressing for businesses that have experienced revenue declines but are still trying to stay open to provide services to customers. Without additional support many of these businesses will be forced to close and layoff their employees, making an eventual economic recovery all the more difficult.

Unaffordable Childcare Costs

Both the province and the federal government have taken steps to ensure that essential service workers are able to access child-care throughout the pandemic. At the federal level, the CERB has been extended to those forced to care for their children at home and the Canada Child Care Benefit has been increased by $300 per child. In BC, the provincial government has prioritized spaces in child-care centres for essential service workers and has provided access to child-care services for school aged children through schools themselves. Yet despite these measures, essential service employees with children above the age of five are still struggling to find affordable child-care services. In some school districts, schools no longer have the capacity to offer child-care, forcing parents unable to work from home to resort to private options. For many households, the costs of private child-care are too high to remain a viable long-term solution to the lack of in-school supports.

Throughout the pandemic, essential service employees have been deservingly lauded as heroes for their selfless commitment to others. With some of these workers still struggling to find affordable child-care for their children, Ottawa and Victoria need to address the gaps in the existing support network so that workers in essential industries can continue to provide the services that British Columbians count on. If further support does not come soon, essential services workers may be forced to quit their jobs to care for their children at home.

Possible options here could include extending childcare services to out of district students if there are enough spaces available, distributing additional tax credits to families, or making the criteria for the CERB more flexible to cover a portion of the costs of childcare for essential service workers.

Supporting Individuals and Businesses

At the moment, there is a narrow window of opportunity for governments to act to aid struggling sectors and individuals. Many businesses are dangerously close to being forced to permanently close and cannot wait much longer for further assistance. Going forward, the government might focus on ensuring that as many individuals and businesses as possible can access their programs. Given the consequences of not doing enough, I am of the view that it is is better to do too much than to do too little.