In the middle of a housing crisis, no one worries about constitutional niceties

Last summer - around the same time public support for the governing Liberals began seriously to erode Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made the mistake of publicly acknowledging Canada's constitutional di‐ vision of powers.

"Housing isn't a primary federal responsibility," he said. "It's not something that we have direct carriage of."

He wasn't wrong. He also said his government was will‐ ing to do its part. But he was quickly mocked and chided for appearing to dodge re‐ sponsibility for a serious and widespread problem.

Trudeau seems to have learned the obvious lesson from that episode: in the cur‐ rent climate, there's nothing to be gained from deferring to other levels of govern‐ ment. Just as there are no atheists in foxholes, there are apparently no constitutional‐ ists in a housing crisis.

Six weeks after his com‐ ments about responsibility, Trudeau was in London, Ont. to announce the first agreement under the Hous‐ ing Accelerator Fund - an idea first sketched out in the government's 2022 budget. In exchange for the city's promise to enact zoning and permitting reforms, the fed‐ eral government would pro‐ vide $74 million in housing funding.

One hundred and seventy eight municipalities and the province of Quebec have since made similar deals, to‐ talling $4.4 billion in federal funds.

WATCH: Trudeau calls on provinces to back 'ambi‐ tious' housing plans

Last week, anticipating this year's federal budget, Trudeau announced the fed‐ eral government would work with the provinces to create a "bill of rights" for renters and fund provincial legal aid pro‐ grams for tenants. This week, he announced a new round of infrastructure funding for provinces and municipalities with significant housing-re‐ lated conditions attached and a loan program that will provide support for rental housing if provinces agree to meet a series of benchmarks.

All these moves may or may not solve the Liberal Party's profound political challenges. But the federal measures do shift some of the pressure onto the levels of government whose laws and bylaws tend to decide what gets built where. The full set of policies also gives the Liberals a response to Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre's own vow to take on "NIMBYism" and "big city gatekeepers."

The federal spending power - now for housing

On one level, what the Liber‐ als are doing is just another example of the federal spending power in action. While the federal govern‐ ment is limited in what it can do directly, it can still use its significant fiscal resources to encourage or compel provin‐ cial governments to take cer‐ tain actions. Any number of national programs - from medicare to child care - owe their existence to the federal government using its finan‐ cial muscle.

In this case, the federal government is using funds promised for housing and in‐ frastructure to encourage municipalities and provinces to embrace policies that, it believes, will lead to the con‐ struction of more homes. In his own way, Poilievre says he would do the same.

Trudeau's announcement on Tuesday leaned into the model created by the Hous‐ ing Accelerator Fund.

In addition to adding $400 million to that program, the prime minister announced $6 billion for housing-related infrastructure, including wastewater and stormwater infrastructure. Of that $6 bil‐ lion, $1 billion will go directly to municipalities. The re‐ mainder would be directed to provincial governments.

But to access their share of that $5 billion, provincial governments will have to agree to pursue a number of reforms, including changes to make it easier to build four-unit housing in residen‐ tial neighbourhoods. And provinces only have until Jan‐ uary 1, 2025 to agree to those terms. If they don't, the federal government will again deal directly with mu‐ nicipalities.

Those terms present an interesting challenge for On‐ tario Premier Doug Ford.

In November, Ford com‐ plained that his government wasn't being included when the federal government an‐ nounced Housing Accelerator Fund agreements with cities in Ontario. But last month, Ford said he was against making it easier to build four‐ plexes provincewide.

With its announcement this week, the federal govern‐ ment is effectively asking the premier to make a choice: if he wants to take part in the photo ops, he's going to have to accept greater housing density.

Asked about the federal proposal on Wednesday, Ford said that zoning deci‐ sions are best left to munici‐ palities.

"I don't believe in forcing municipalities," the premier said. "I believe in working with municipalities."

The City of Toronto might be surprised to learn that Ford believes so strongly in municipal sovereignty. But perhaps Ford would prefer Poilievre's proposed ap‐ proach.

The new bipartisan con‐ sensus on housing

According to the legislation laid out by the federal Con‐ servative leader, under a Poilievre government, munic‐ ipalities would receive more or less federal funding de‐ pending on whether they meet housing targets set by Ottawa. Poilievre's plan does not dictate any specific policy changes - it also would apply to only 14 municipalities across the country.

Poilievre's plan also has its critics. One expert has writ‐ ten that some cities will find Poilievre's targets easy to meet, while others will find it impossible.

Drew Dilkens, the mayor of Windsor, Ont., already has refused to agree to the federal government's terms under the Housing Accelera‐ tor Fund, particularly as they apply to zoning rules for fourplexes. But Dilkens told the National Post earlier this year that Poilievre's approach would unfairly hold him ac‐ countable for things he can't control directly - namely, the housing market and the de‐ velopers who ultimately de‐ cide whether to go forward with construction.

Municipal and provincial politicians likely have more reason to fear that suburban homeowners will blame them when a fourplex goes up next door. But the multilevel tendency to point fin‐ gers and object to solutions also likely helps to explain how Canada's housing market ended up in this state.

It's probably not surpris‐ ing that Poilievre - a populist who is constantly seeking someone or something he can be seen fighting - was quick to focus on how munic‐ ipalities can stand in the way of new construction. Since becoming Conservative leader, he's taken that a step further by directly attacking specific mayors.

But given how much ac‐ countability and media atten‐ tion now disproportionately falls on the federal govern‐ ment, it was likely a matter of time before someone in Ot‐ tawa decided to stop waiting

for other levels of govern‐ ment to fix the problem on their own.

The result is that the Lib‐ erals and Conservatives now have competing plans that aim to use the federal spend‐ ing power to directly or indi‐ rectly steer municipal poli‐ cies.

Strict constitutionalists and fans of "open federal‐ ism" - might grumble. But voters will probably care only about whether it gets easier to find an affordable place to live.