All housing policy should be viewed through a reconciliation lens.

That is:

• Do the housing policies or strategies in question exacerbate or help redress the colonization of indigenous peoples in Canada? For example, do they seek to flow real estate-derived wealth back to indigenous communities on whose traditional and/or unceded lands that wealth was created?
• Do they seek to identify and redress housing-related infringements of rights?
• Do they include dedicated and well-resourced urban indigenous housing strategies and cultural housing options?
• Do they include the necessary resources and/or desired self-governing powers to help indigenous governments solve housing issues in long-lasting and locally-tailored ways?

All housing policy should be viewed through an economic lens.

That is:

• Do the housing policies or strategies in question help strengthen or weaken Canada’s economy?

This lens immediately triggers different views on what is or isn’t healthy economic activity when it comes to housing.

For example, this framework’s second guiding principle of “Homes First, Investments Second”, the “Basic Plan” that focuses on reining in costs, and the third policy pillar of “Break the addiction to high home values” contains an embedded critique of Canada’s current degree of economic reliance on rising home and land values.

Housing should be central to any government’s economic strategy. Rather than focus on spurring ever- higher values, the focus should be on the productivity gains and the avoided social costs created by ensuring everyone has an affordable home that meets their needs. It is time to imagine an economy that is stimulated by a housing system which reconnects the cost of living to local earnings in order to support employment and growth in other industries.

This is especially true as Canada seeks to recover from the Covid-19 pandemic, which has disproportionately impacted those least likely to have stable housing at the outset.

All housing policy should be viewed through an inequality lens.

That is:

• Do the policies or strategies in question exacerbate or reduce housing-related inequalities, both in terms of access and wealth?
• When it comes to access, do they seek to increase the number and quality of available and affordable housing options for a diversity of residents?
• Do they seek to eliminate barriers related to discrimination based on race, class, age, gender, sexuality, physical abilities, tenure type and other factors?
• When it comes to wealth, do they seek to decrease the massive wealth inequalities – between renters and owners, between and within age groups, etc. – that have been driven by housing in Canada and around the world?

All housing policy should be viewed through a health lens.

That is:

• Do the policies or strategies in question improve or harm individual, family and community health and well being?
• Do they acknowledge the critical importance of good, stable housing to health? Conversely, do they acknowledge the significant health-related costs of inadequate or unaffordable housing and displacement?
• Do they support the use of healthy building materials and/or remediation and upgrades?
• Do they acknowledge that for some people, housing services are only as good as the wrap-around services that are there to support them including mental health and addictions support, language and cultural supports, protection against violence, etc.?

All housing policy should be viewed through a livability lens.

That is:

• Do the policies or strategies in question promote not only an affordable, suitable physical dwelling, but a livable and vibrant neighbourhood, community and lifestyle?
• Do they encourage and enable people to live in walkable neighbourhoods close to jobs and amenities, or do they push people further and further out?
• Do they integrate active and public transportation infrastructure and local economic development?
• Do they foster relationships between neighbours and welcome a diversity of people and families, or do they promote homogeneity and isolation?