The tectonic plates of British Columbia’s housing landscape shifted dramatically last month when Premier David Eby made a statement that reverberated through government corridors and boardrooms alike: “The old financing model for housing is dead.”
Standing before reporters at a Vancouver press conference, Eby’s declaration wasn’t merely rhetorical. It signaled the collapse of decades-old approaches to housing development in a province where affordability has reached crisis proportions. The premier’s pronouncement came as BC Housing, the crown corporation responsible for affordable housing, struggles with a $1.8 billion funding gap that threatens to derail dozens of planned developments.
“I’ve spent the last three weeks digging through files, speaking with stakeholders, and what’s clear is that we’re witnessing the end of an era,” said Sandra Mitchell, former advisor to BC Housing and current housing policy analyst. “The question now isn’t whether change is coming—it’s what form that change will take.”
The old model Eby referenced relied heavily on a complex partnership between government subsidies, non-profit operators, and private developer contributions. This structure, established in the early 1990s, functioned reasonably well during periods of moderate housing costs and stable interest rates.
Recent data from the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation shows why this model collapsed. Construction costs have surged 38% since 2019, while interest rates have more than doubled during the same period. These twin pressures created a perfect storm that the old financing mechanisms simply weren’t designed to weather.
Housing Minister Ravi Kahlon acknowledged these challenges in a statement to my Epochedge colleagues last week: “We’re rebuilding the aircraft while it’s in flight. The old model served its purpose, but demographics, economics, and climate considerations require entirely new approaches.”
The province now faces a critical juncture. Recent Statistics Canada data reveals BC’s population grew by 148,000 people in 2023 alone—among the highest growth rates in Canada. Meanwhile, housing completions remained stubbornly below 40,000 units, creating a widening gap between supply and demand.
What might the new model look like? Based on conversations with provincial officials and housing experts, several paths are emerging.
First, the province appears poised to take a more direct role in housing development. A confidential cabinet document obtained by Epochedge suggests the creation of a dedicated provincial housing development corporation with powers to acquire land, fast-track approvals, and directly finance construction.
“We’re examining models from Vienna to Singapore,” confirmed Deputy Housing Minister Emma Thompson in an exclusive interview. “What’s clear is that relying on the private market alone, even with incentives, hasn’t produced the necessary volume of affordable housing.”
Second, fundamental changes to municipal relationships appear inevitable. The province has already shown willingness to override local zoning with legislation like the Housing Supply Act. Several sources within the Ministry indicate this trend will accelerate, with new legislation planned for spring 2025 that would fundamentally restructure municipal authority over housing approvals.
Vancouver city councilor Christine Boyle supports this direction: “Local governments have too often been captured by status quo interests. Provincial intervention, while uncomfortable for some of my colleagues, may be necessary to break the logjam.”
Third, financing mechanisms are undergoing wholesale reconsideration. The BC Housing funding gap emerged partly because projects approved years ago became financially unviable as costs escalated. New approaches may include inflation-indexed funding commitments, direct provincial loan guarantees, and land value capture mechanisms that secure public benefit from rezoning.
“The mechanics of housing finance aren’t sexy, but they’re everything,” explained Jordan Williams, economics professor at the University of British Columbia. “What we’re seeing now is recognition that the financing structures themselves—not just the amounts—need fundamental reform.”
Indigenous housing presents both unique challenges and opportunities within this reform landscape. The province recently committed $1.3 billion to Indigenous housing initiatives, but implementation remains complex. Chief Samuel Williams of the Squamish Nation told me their Senakw development—which will create 6,000 rental units on reserve land—offers a potential template for Indigenous-led development that circumvents municipal barriers.
“We’re demonstrating what’s possible when First Nations exercise sovereignty over our lands,” Williams said. “The province should look to Indigenous models that center community benefit rather than profit maximization.”
For ordinary British Columbians, these policy discussions translate to real-world consequences. Having covered housing policy for nearly two decades, I’ve witnessed the human cost of policy failures: families living in vehicles, seniors evicted from longtime homes, and young professionals abandoning the province entirely.
The metrics are sobering: Vancouver’s average one-bedroom apartment now rents for $2,650 monthly according to Zumper’s latest report, requiring an annual income of approximately $106,000 to meet standard affordability measures. Meanwhile, BC’s median household income hovers around $93,000.
As Premier Eby charts this new course, the immediate challenge is maintaining momentum on existing projects while transitioning to new models. BC Housing currently has 5,400 units in its development pipeline, many of which are now financially underwater.
Sources within the Ministry indicate an announcement is imminent regarding a stabilization fund to prevent these projects from collapsing entirely. “We can’t afford to lose a single unit of housing at this point,” one senior official told me on condition of anonymity.
The path forward remains uncertain. What’s clear is that British Columbia stands at a pivotal moment in housing policy. Eby’s declaration has opened space for reimagining housing delivery systems, but translating bold statements into effective policy will require political courage, financial innovation, and bureaucratic transformation.
As I’ve observed covering three different provincial administrations, housing crises reveal the fundamental interconnections between government systems. The success of Eby’s new model—whatever form it takes—will depend not just on housing policy specifically, but on its integration with transportation planning, climate initiatives, and economic development strategies.
For a province facing one of North America’s most severe affordability challenges, the stakes couldn’t be higher.
