Source: The Frontier Centre for Public Policy
David Leis of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy argues that Canada’s housing crisis is largely the product of government decisions that have restricted land supply, lengthened approval timelines, and piled regulatory costs onto new construction. The result is that cities like Vancouver and Toronto rank among the least affordable in the developed world, while places such as Edmonton, which have taken steps to speed up approvals and increase supply, remain comparatively more accessible.
The Canadian dream has long included the possibility that ordinary people who work hard and save can own a home, put down roots, and build some financial security. For many younger Canadians, that pathway now feels closed. High prices and limited supply are not simply the result of population growth or interest rates. They reflect decades of policy choices that treated developable land as something to be tightly rationed and new housing as a problem to be managed rather than a necessity to be delivered.
Canada is not short of land. It is short of land that governments allow to be used for housing. Development charges, environmental reviews, zoning restrictions, and multi-year permitting processes all add cost and delay. Those costs are passed on to buyers. When supply is constrained while demand continues to rise, prices climb and ownership becomes less attainable for the next generation.
Edmonton’s experience suggests that better outcomes are possible when cities focus on shortening approval times and removing unnecessary barriers. No single city has solved every problem, but the contrast with more tightly regulated markets shows that policy choices matter. Restoring affordability will require treating housing supply as a priority rather than an afterthought, modernizing regulations, and making more land available for development.
Home ownership has been one of the main ways Canadians turn effort into opportunity. When that ladder becomes too steep for large numbers of people, the consequences extend beyond housing. Families delay major life decisions, skilled workers look elsewhere, and confidence in the system erodes. Making ownership realistic again will not happen by accident. It will require deliberate decisions to reverse the policies that have made building so slow and expensive.
