Housing requires rights-based approach
Provincial and municipal politicians in Nova Scotia are initiating the dismantling of encampments throughout Halifax. This action is based on a problematic interpretation of human rights. They argue that since there is now adequate shelter space, the legal precedents established in British Columbia and Ontario no longer apply. These precedents considered the removal of camps without providing substantial shelter alternatives as a breach of charter and human rights.
Let's talk about what human rights mean. They are not just theoretical concepts to be casually tossed around in political discourse. They are the embodiment of societal values that governments are mandated to uphold and should actualize. Yet, our politicians continue to turn a blind eye to the true essence of these rights.
In their skewed view, landlords’ right to profit — a non-existent entitlement — is given precedence. The market-dictated ideology fuels the belief that landlords deserve substantial returns because they took a risk. However, when these risks result in losses, cries of unfairness echo through the halls of power.
If we were genuinely committed to actualizing the right to shelter in Nova Scotia, the provincial government would regulate the private market in a way that protects renters’ interests. We managed to do this until 1990, before the doctrine of deregulation and market supremacy was adopted, promising to provide for us all.
Rather than the eviction of encampment residents, a straightforward application of an actual rights-based framework would be limiting the use of fixed-term leases,
as the government of British Columbia has done. If rights truly matter, then it’s crucial that governments utilize all available tools to actualize them.
CLASS CONFLICT
Forcing people out of camps into shelters doesn’t constitute applying a rights framework. It’s simply perpetuating class conflict between corporate interests and the rest of us. Our municipal and provincial governments have the opportunity — and obligation — to actualize rights and uphold public interest. Recognizing and utilizing the tools at their disposal is critical.
It’s important to correct a misconception promoted by the Investment Property Owners Association of Nova Scotia that the majority of landlords in our area are small-scale, “mom and pop” operations. Instead, they are primarily corporate owners and investors who operate through real estate investment trusts. These entities use property to accumulate wealth, often at the expense of low-income and workingclass workers.
The argument that regulating the rental market will endanger these corporations’ investments is misguided. If the government truly wants to safeguard the investments of smaller operators, they could facilitate the purchase of their income properties and transfer these assets to non-profit or co-operative operators.
The provincial government continues to propagate a false narrative of balance in its housing policies. They attempt to present the interests of landlords and tenants as equally important. But let’s be clear: in a rights-based conversation, there is no such balance, especially when one side focuses on profit and the other emphasizes dignity and health.
The right to dignity and health is paramount, and the right to profits is not. Each time the government uses balance as a reason for its decisions, it chooses to overlook the actualization of citizens’ rights, thereby preserving the
status quo in housing.
HEALTH CARE
This government consistently talks about affordability but passes responsibility to the federal government, ignoring the policy levers within its authority. Moreover, it remains fixated on its mandate to remedy health care by increasing supply, without addressing the demand side of the equation.
If the premier truly aims to fix health care, as well as address the affordability crisis in Nova Scotia, housing must be central to his strategy. The stress from housing insecurity significantly affects physical, mental and social health, leading to premature death, chronic illness and social exclusion.
Ensuring everyone has a secure housing future is critical for individual health and our community’s well-being. By neglecting fixed-term leases, the premier undermines the impact of the rent cap. His government continues to rely on the same housing strategy that created this crisis.
There is an ongoing dialog about the generational shifts that once paved the way for previous generations to earn wages that empowered them to own homes. Indeed, past generations were able to do so because the government played a more significant role in shaping society. It regulated the rental market effectively, minimum wages were closer to livable wages and it provided robust social programs through income transfers and employment insurance. Public utility corporations prioritized public interest over shareholders, and a vibrant labour movement served as a check on corporate power.
However, yearning for the past is not the solution. The prosperity of the middle class from the ’40s to the ’80s excluded many, including women, racialized Canadians and people with disabilities. But the policy frameworks that allowed the middle class to thrive offer valuable insights into the policies needed today to address our major challenges.
Nova Scotians must hold elected officials accountable for actualizing our rights, rather than enriching a select few. The regulation of the rental market is one such policy piece that has proven effective in the past and can work now. Such a policy would be far more dignified than forcibly removing our encampment neighbours.
We stand at the cusp of a new era, an era where we can learn from the past while forging a future that is inclusive, equitable, and prosperous for all. Let’s seize this moment and shape a Nova Scotia that truly serves its people.