Thanks for your comment and the article. The link didn’t resolve for me but I’d guess that was a globe and mail article.
Was the affordability benchmark not the same as the affordable housing definition (from 2003 or whenever) until this reports and the decisions behind it at the CMHC this year decoupled them?
No, these have always been different things. They were similar numbers, one was and still is 30% and the other was close to 30% nationally in 2004 (but for BC the benchmark was already >40% for example) but these numbers were not “linked”, they were close to each other - which was a good thing, hence why it was a good benchmark at the time.
Thanks for your comment and the article. The link didn’t resolve for me but I’d guess that was a globe and mail article.
Was the affordability benchmark not the same as the affordable housing definition (from 2003 or whenever) until this reports and the decisions behind it at the CMHC this year decoupled them?
No, these have always been different things. They were similar numbers, one was and still is 30% and the other was close to 30% nationally in 2004 (but for BC the benchmark was already >40% for example) but these numbers were not “linked”, they were close to each other - which was a good thing, hence why it was a good benchmark at the time.
Thanks for the info!