fbpx
Tuesday, June 24, 2025

Home prices easing as sellers look to close deals before rates decrease

Source: Unsplash

Canada’s existing home inventories are now rapidly replenishing due to several new home completions and owners trying to sell before interest rates go back down, according to a new investor report. 

The Bank of Canada’s monetary easing cycle has incentivized homeowners looking to sell to do it sooner rather than later, explained the author of the report, RBC economist Rachel Battaglia. 

Analysts found that while new inventory has been strong, demand has become lackluster, as buyers bide their time to see how the market evolves. 

“We think most buyers will wait for steeper rate cuts before jumping into the market as the lagged impact of high interest rates keeps budgets under pressure,” said Battaglia.

“The influx of supply has shifted more of the bargaining power to buyers, who in some markets are still extracting price concessions from sellers.”   

However, buyers who are taking a step back from the market are contributing to a price slowdown, said Battaglia.

Canada’s largest real estate markets are seeing home sales weaken at a rate much faster than inventory, with Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal and Calgary all facing more of a drop in home sales as new listings pop up.

“More sellers are coming out of the woodwork in Toronto’s housing market with another big influx of new listings in June. There were nearly 18,000 new units put up for sale, representing a 9.3% increase (seasonally adjusted) from May,” reads the report. 

Montreal’s housing market also saw increased action last month, with transactions up an estimated 4% from May, ending three consecutive months of declining activity.

“At the same time, sellers released more listings in the market,” reads the report. “A similar increase in supply preserved Montreal’s supply-demand market dynamic—keeping the sales-to-new listings ratio relatively stagnant. 

“We estimate active listings are now 24% above their year ago level, which is keeping competition between buyers from heating up the market,” it said. 

Vancouver also saw an uptick in June, coming back from a similar slump from previous months. 

“We estimate a 5% monthly  (seasonally adjusted) increase kept sales lingering around their 2024 high. But that still isn’t enough to bring sales above their year-ago level,” reads the report. 

Calgary hit a five month high (seasonally adjusted) for sales in June, offsetting the sharp dip in sales it saw in April. 

Calgary “price appreciations have slowed since the spring, but are still robust by historical standards and continue to outpace all other major markets by a longshot,” reads the report.

“Even though affordability in Calgary has eroded dramatically in recent years, it’s still among the most affordable of the major markets we track—giving buyers an edge compared to other major markets in Ontario and B.C.,” it added.

However, Gabriel Giguère, a senior policy analyst at the Montreal Economic Institute said that while these numbers may appear to show the housing crisis is beginning to ease, that’s not necessarily the case. 

“This increase in the number of homes being sold is not the same as an increase in the total number of homes,” Giguère told True North. 

“This might yield a short-term decrease in home prices, but does nothing to solve the longer term issue of housing affordability. We just need more homes.”

Canada will need to build 1.3 million additional homes by 2030 if it intends to close the nation’s housing gap, according to a report from parliamentary budget officer Yves Giroux released in April. 

The PBO’s report titled Household Formation and the Housing Stock looked at how many additional homes Canada still needs to build to bring Canada’s vacancy rate back to the historical average. 

“At the national level, we define the housing gap as the number of additional units that would be required to return the total vacancy rate to its long-term average by 2030, accounting for suppressed household formation,” reads the report. 

“Estimates suggest that household formation surged above pre-pandemic levels, reaching 460,000 (net) new households in 2023—well in excess of record net housing completions of 242,000 units.” 

Legal bodies shouldn’t accept claims of vaccine safety without evidence, B.C. panel finds

Source: Unsplash

Colleges overseeing physicians can’t expect legal bodies to accept blanket statements about the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines as indisputable fact without providing formal evidence to back up their claims, a B.C. tribunal has found.

In a decision handed down last month, a British Columbia medical disciplinary panel told the province’s medical college that it couldn’t take “judicial notice” of blanket claims about vaccines the college was asserting in its fight with B.C. physician Charles Hoffe.

“Judicial notice” is a legal concept wherein judges accept a general fact as already established without requiring formal evidence to substantiate the claims. The supposed facts were that “vaccines work”, they are “generally safe and have a low risk of harmful effects, especially in children”, that infection and transmission of Covid-19 was “less likely” among the vaccinated and that regulatory approval of vaccines by Health Canada was a strong indicator of safety. 

Hoffe was suspended by the British Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons at the height of the pandemic after reporting adverse reactions from patients to the COVID-19 vaccine. 

The college suspended Hoffe from practicing emergency medicine in a remote community near Lytton, B.C. Hoffe alleged deaths and severe adverse reactions to the Moderna vaccine among patients ranging from 38 to 82 years of age.

As a result of the claims, Hoffe has been involved in a protracted legal battle to clear his name with the college. Supporters of the embattled doctor have set up a legal defence fund to cover the costs of the dispute. 

In a case before the disciplinary panel, the college argued that Hoffe perpetuated “misinformation which harms the public.” In an attempt to shut down Hoffe’s challenge, lawyers representing the regulatory body demanded that the panel take “judicial notice” of eight facts related to vaccine safety and efficacy.

In their ruling, the adjudicators didn’t think it was appropriate to accept these claims at face value.

“In the Panel’s view, these ‘facts’ are too broad and imprecise to be the subject of judicial notice in the context of this case,” reads the ruling. 

“Further, in some instances, they suggest opinion or argument rather than an incontrovertible fact capable of being sufficiently notorious or immediately demonstrable so as to justify judicial notice in the circumstances (for example, the statement that vaccines are ‘generally’ safe and have a ‘low’ risk of harmful effects incorporates two matters of judgment or opinion, rather than specific and objective fact).” 

In a statement, Hoffe’s lawyer, Lee Turner, called the ruling a “clear win” for Hoff and others like him. 

“This is the first decision of its kind in Canada that I am aware of in a disciplinary hearing context that provides such thorough and clear reasons as to why judicial notice should not be taken of these disputed facts,” wrote Turner. 

The panel is a professional adjudicative body and its decision is not binding in a court of law. The disciplinary case involving Hoffe is still ongoing.

Citing a 2023 Saskatchewan Court of Appeal ruling on the issue of vaccines being safe and effective, the panel noted that pharmaceutical products can’t be discussed in such a blunt way given their potential side effects. 

Additionally, the panel stressed that it declined to take judicial notice of another claim made by the college that “regulatory approval is a strong indicator of vaccine effectiveness” as it pertains to Health Canada’s authorization of the COVID-19 vaccines. 

“The Panel declines to take judicial notice of the portion of (the statement) that reads ‘regulatory approval is a strong indicator of safety and effectiveness.’ In the Panel’s view, this is not a fact. It is an inference that could flow from the fact of regulatory approval – subject to evidence and argument to be heard on that question – rather than a fact to be judicially noticed.”

The penal did, however, take notice on the following statements: the COVID virus kills or causes other serious effects, Health Canada has approved COVID vaccines, Health Canada has not approved ivermectin to treat COVID-19, and Health Canada advises that Canadians should not consume the veterinary version of ivermectin. 

Conservatives push to recall public safety committee over homicides by people on bail

Source: Unsplash

The Conservatives are looking to bring the House of Commons public safety committee back early from its summer break over documents the Tories say reveal over 250 individuals were charged with homicide while out on bail in 2022.

Conservative public safety critic Frank Caputo, a former crown prosecutor, spearheaded the motion to recall the committee to have it reexamine the Liberals’ changes to the criminal code.

According to a letter to the chair of the House of Commons, the documents revealed that 256 individuals were charged with homicide while on bail or conditional release in 2022, about five each week, accounting for nearly 30% of murder charges that year.

“The pattern of deadly crimes being committed while on bail is clear, present, and frightening,” said the letter, signed by multiple Conservative MPs. “The deadly crime wave unfolding under Justin Trudeau has made Canada unrecognizable to many, and now criminals are murdering Canadians while out on bail.”

The signatories say the crime wave is a “direct result” of the Trudeau government’s “soft on crime, catch and release policies” brought about by Bill C-75 and Bill C-5, which passed in 2019 and 2022, respectively. The bills repealed mandatory minimum sentences and made bail more accessible to criminals.

“After nine years of these Liberal policies, it has given way to a 39% increase in violent crime, a 43% increase in murders, a 101% increase in violent gun crimes, a 108% increase in gang murders and now nearly 30% of individuals charged with murder in 2022 were out on bail or another form of release,” the Conservatives’ letter said.

A spokesperson for the Department of Justice said the Conservatives are misrepresenting the number.

“That number includes more than just bail and conditional release,” the spokesperson said. “In 2022, 256 people were charged with homicides while under correctional supervision (i.e., in custody (remand or sentenced) or under community supervision (bail or probation)). This represents 33.8% of all 757 people charged with homicides that year.”

This would include people charged with homicide while incarcerated. The Conservatives declined to provide further details about their letter and the numbers cited.

The Tories criticized recent Liberal attempts to fix the bail system, such as Bill C-48, the government’s bail reform act, which they said was “insufficient.”

The act amended the criminal code, requiring that courts “consider if an accused person has any previous convictions involving violence” and prove the safety and security of the community had at least been considered before giving out bail.

It would also create a reverse onus for anyone charged with certain serious offences. This would require accused offenders to prove that they should be released on bail rather than forcing prosecutors to prove that they shouldn’t be, as is the norm in other cases.

“The bill does not go far enough to ensure dangerous, repeat offenders stay behind bars. Liberal changes have caused a problem, and their legislative changes cannot solve them when the government has the necessary tools at its disposal,” the letter said. “Continuing on this course will only make the violent crime and bail problems worse.”

The justice department spokesperson said it was the courts, and not the government, who are responsible for bail decisions.

“If a person is charged with an offence that is subject to a reverse onus, then it is the court, following a bail hearing, that must determine whether to detain them in custody or release them while they await their trial,” the spokesperson said. “Ultimately, it is the court’s decision whether detention or release is appropriate.”

Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc did not respond to True North’s requests for comment.

“This data shows that the Liberals cannot pretend they didn’t know about the devastation and chaos created by their catch-and-release policies,” the party said in a media release. “Despite this, Trudeau’s justice minister has tried to gaslight Canadians, saying that the crime wave only exists in Canadians’ heads.”

Conservatives were referring to Justice Minister Arif Virani, saying it was “empirically unlikely” that Canada was getting less safe in an interview as the minister “gaslighting Canadians.

Virani did not respond to True North’s request for comment before the deadline.

To pass their motion, the Conservatives would need support from another party. The NDP and Bloc Québécois were not immediately available for comment.

Canadians agree that government-funded media erodes trust: poll 

CEO of CBC Catherine Tait visting CBC Vancouver - Source: X

Most Canadians don’t support government funding for media and additional subsidies are failing to restore trust in the industry.

A new poll, conducted by Public Square Research, aimed to gauge the public’s trust in different types of Canadian news media and views on government subsidization of the industry.

It found that 70% of Canadians were not supportive of government subsidies for the salaries of private news organizations.

Government funding measures currently in place consist of payroll subsidies for journalists employed by “qualified” private news media, a tax credit for news subscriptions, and more.

The federal Online News Act has also forced Google to decide which Canadian media companies will receive a portion of its $100 million media bailout.

The Hub estimates that there is up to a 50% subsidy on journalist salaries up to $85,000 a year. 

The research showed that few Canadians were aware of the government funding journalists’ salaries, either directly or indirectly. Only 4% said that they were following funding through the Online News Act closely. Over three-quarters of Canadians were unaware of the legislation. 

Liberal and Green Party supporters were the most likely to support government subsidies for private news organizations, while Conservative supporters were the most likely to oppose them.

One in three Canadians said that most news is biased depending on who pays for it. 23% of Canadians said that a lot of news is just government propaganda.

A 2023 study showed that only 40% of Canadians trust legacy media, a steep decline from 55% in 2016.

“The decline in trust comes at a time when the federal government is increasingly intervening to support major incumbent firms in the Canadian media landscape like the Globe and Mail, the Toronto Star, and Postmedia,” reads the study.

Canadians also don’t trust the government to decide who gets the funding.

Only 34% of Canadians said they trusted the government to decide which news media qualifies for funding. A near-equal 33% of Canadians said they trust the government to decide which media qualifies as journalism.

The Liberals’ 2024 budget announced $42 million in new funding for the CBC.

Speaking on an Alberta talk show in February, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said that “conspiracy theorists” and “social media drivers” were deliberately undermining mainstream media to prevent people from agreeing on a common set of facts.

“The way that the CBC and CTV, when they were our only sources of news, used to, and Global News used to project across the country, at least a common understanding of things,” he said.

However, the recent polling showed that Canadians have lost trust in legacy media because they feel they are not telling the truth. 

Only 12% of Canadians said that they felt they were getting the truth from mainstream news. 20% of Canadians polled believe that news coverage in Canada is fair and transparent.

When asked about specific reasons for funding or not funding the news, Canadians showed more concern than hope.

76% of Canadians worried that paying the salaries of journalists could undermine their objectivity. 73% said that government funding will make it more challenging for the media to challenge the government. 

While Canadians don’t trust the legacy media because they don’t believe they’re telling the truth, they also tend not to trust media that is government-funded.

Only 42% of Canadians said they would trust a news organization that received funding from the Canadian government.

Conversely, 61% of Canadians said that they would trust a news organization that was funded by the readers.

“The federal government should consider the impact of current and future subsidization initiatives on public trust in news media,” concluded the research. “It should also recognize the unintended consequences of the further erosion of public perceptions of legitimacy.”

Rachel and the Republic | Canadian media missed the story on Joe Biden

Source: Facebook

This week on Rachel and the Republic, Rachel Parker explains how Canada’s legacy media missed the story on Joe Biden — and why reporters are only now criticizing the 81 year-old U.S. President.

Rachel also has a campaign update which includes Biden’s latest gaffes and speculation on Donald Trump’s running mate.

Tune into Rachel and the Republic now!

Class-action lawsuit by immigration detainees against feds can proceed

Source: X

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice has approved a class-action lawsuit against the federal government over its use of provincial jails to hold immigration detainees.

The class-action suit represents people detained between 2016 and 2023 by the Canada Border Services Agency and held in 87 provincial and territorial jails. 

The claim is seeking $100 million in damages, to be divided among the 8,360 people in the plaintiff class, should they win at trial.

The court issued its decision Friday after rejecting all 15 objections raised by federal government lawyers, who attempted to stop the proceedings. 

“Immigration detainees were incarcerated in provincial prisons and encountered the same conditions as criminal inmates, including co-mingling with violent offenders, use of restraints such as shackles and handcuffs, strip searches, and severe restrictions on contact and movement,” wrote Justice Benjamin Glustein.

The CBSA detained these foreign nationals under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, however, they had not been accused of a crime.

“According to Canadian and international law, immigration detention is administrative in nature and cannot be punitive,” reads the class action filing.

“Nonetheless, the CBSA has a longstanding practice of detaining thousands of immigration detainees in provincial prisons through arrangements with provinces and territories. This practice violates the Charter rights of the detainees.”

The CBSA told True North that it was “committed to exercising its responsibility for detentions to the highest standards, with the wellbeing of detainees and the safety and security of Canadians as top priorities.” 

“It is important to note that, on average, over 30 million foreign nationals enter Canada each year and 0.02% are subject to detention. The vast majority of foreign nationals are not subject to any restrictions,” said a CBSA spokesperson.  

“As of June 28, 2024, 12,928 individuals were enrolled in alternatives to detention, 160 individuals were detained within our immigration holding centres and 36 others within provincial correctional facilities or local police agency holding cells.”

The spokesperson went on to say that Canada’s immigration detention program was governed by the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which says detention shall be used as a last resort for individuals who may pose a danger to the public, are a flight risk or whose identity has not been established. 

The Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, an independent quasi-judicial tribunal, then reviews whether applicants should be released or further detained. 

Immigration experts have pointed to jail use as an example of buck-passing by the federal government.

“The fundamental problem is that the federal government has no suitable immigration detention facilities segregated from the criminal elements, and has resorted to relying on the provinces to hold individuals who are either a flight risk or others who are deportable because they have been convicted of crimes in Canada,” immigration lawyer Sergio Karas told True North. 

“Some individuals are difficult to deport because their countries of origin will not cooperate or issue passports to them and that contributes to the length of detention.”

Karas said that the slow pace of deportation proceedings also adds to the length of detention, adding that the federal government needs to speed things up  “to avoid people languishing in detention at a high cost to taxpayers.” 

“The bottom line is that there needs to be finality to a deportation proceeding that respects Charter rights but is not a free pass for wrongdoers,” said Karas.

The CBSA claims that it only detains individuals when “there are serious concerns about danger to the public, or to other detainees, or to staff.This often means the person has been convicted of an offence in Canada or abroad, such as sexual offences, violence, weapons, or drug trafficking.”

“For example, when someone is held for being unlikely to appear, they may also have prior convictions and outstanding charges for violent crimes such as assault with a weapon, attempted murder, assaulting an officer with a weapon, and aggravated sexual assault,” said the CBSA spokesperson. 

Previously, the CBSA worked with provinces to have high-risk individuals in provincial jails, but provincial governments have indicated they’re no longer willing to do this.”It is difficult to imagine living in a place where the government can incarcerate people who have been charged with no crime, in maximum security prisons where they are subjected to cruel conditions including solitary confinement and strip searches,” Subodh Bharati, one of the lawyers leading the class action, told CBC News.

Anti-Israel encampments ending at McGill, University of Ottawa 

Source: X

McGill University is dismantling the anti-Israel encampment that has been occupying its campus for weeks, while protesters at the University of Ottawa are ending their encampment voluntarily.

The far-left activists failed to force either university to pursue a boycott and divestment of the Jewish state.

McGill University announced Wednesday that it had hired a private security firm to clear out the encampment, which started Apr. 27, after Montreal police proved unwilling to do so.

In a statement to True North, the university noted that few members of the McGill community are in the demonstration that has caused “significant health and safety risks” and that the encampment has been “a magnet for violence and intimidation.” 

University president and vice-chancellor Deep Saini said “McGill will always support the right to free expression and assembly within the bounds of the laws and policies that keep us all safe,” but that recent events that have taken place at the encampment “go far beyond peaceful protest”

Last weekend, violent pro-Palestinian protesters smashed windows on campus and allegedly assaulted a security guard.

Encampment protesters had also come under fire for running a “revolutionary” summer camp for youth with lessons on “Islamic resistance,” and for staging an occupation of a McGill administration building. 

Encampment organizers are outraged with McGill’s move to evict them.

In a statement to the media, the Divest for Palestine Collective said, “we were told that we were breaking into our own campus to protest the fact that our tuition money is being used to fund companies that kill Palestinians.” 

They added that “as we continue to see bodies pulled from the rubble… students will not end the fight for divestment at this encampment.”

McGill’s campus will be closed today to allow for the encampment to be cleared, with classes being moved online.

Anti-Israel students and activists who had been occupying the University of Ottawa’s Tabaret lawn since Apr. 30 have also opted to vacate the premises.

Encampment organizers cited an “impasse in negotiations” with the university’s “cruel” leadership as their reason for throwing in the towel.

“We reached an impasse in negotiations as the direct result of the university claiming they had zero powers to do anything about the funds they manage and in fact do have full control over,” organizer Sumayya Kheireddine said in a statement to the media.

“At best, this university and president are out of touch with reality. At worst, they are simply cruel, and only guided by greed and immune to the suffering of others,” she added.

Before the dismantlement, University of Ottawa encampment activists had escalated their protest tactics, on Sunday erecting a plywood barricade outside the Tabaret administration building and placing a lock on the main doors of the building. 

CTV also reported that the encampment had attracted Ottawa’s homeless population, who set up their own tents on the university’s lawn.

Anti-Israel encampments at other Canadian universities have also recently been dismantled, including at the University of Waterloo, Western University, University of British Columbia, and the University of Toronto.

The Andrew Lawton Show | Trudeau says cost of living would have been worse without him

Source: Facebook

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said in an interview this week that he likes young people more than older folks because they aren’t set in their ways, while acknowledging that the youth who supported him in 2015 are now in their late 20s and can’t afford homes. But he said it would have been even worse without him. True North’s Andrew Lawton says it doesn’t seem like that, and Canadians definitely aren’t buying it.

Also, Canada is getting dragged for not committing to spending two per cent of its GDP on defence, as is required of NATO allies. What is that figure and why does it matter? Retired vice-admiral Mark Norman joins the show to discuss.

Plus, Canada has become a net importer of electricity for the first time as consumers face increased prices. This is all because of a flawed “decarbonized” energy strategy, researcher Philip Cross says. He joins the show to explain why.

The Daily Brief | More bonuses for CBC execs

Source: Facebook

The CBC quietly approved another round of bonuses for its executives and non-unionized staff, despite recent layoffs and struggling viewership.

Plus, a recent report by the federal budget watchdog revealed that Canada will miss its NATO spending requirement by even more than the Liberals projected in the latest budget.

And Canadians remain proud of the national flag but pride in the economy is at an all time low, according to a new survey.

Tune into The Daily Brief with Cosmin Dzsurdzsa and Lindsay Shepherd!

National Bank warns Canadian unemployment could exceed 7% without interest rate cuts

Source: Unsplash

Canada’s continuously worsening unemployment rate could further cement its position at the bottom of G7 countries, according to a Market View report from the National Bank of Canada.

Canada’s unemployment rose to 6.4% in Jun.

“Already the 1.6% pt increase from the 2022 trough is the largest in the G7 and just off the podium among OECD nations,” said National Bank of Canada’s director of economics and strategy, Taylor Schleich.

Inflation in Canada rose 2.9% between May 2023 and May 2024. The only two provinces to keep their heads above water were Manitoba and Saskatchewan, which saw their consumer price index increase by 1.3% and 1.5%, respectively.

Schleich said that “the labour market is gasping for air.”

He said that should the labour market continue to worsen, an unemployment rate of 7% or higher could be in store for Canada this year. 

The projections from the National Bank of Canada predict that unemployment will surpass 7% and approach 8% by next spring, an outcome that interest rate cuts would theoretically counter.

The economist added that the United States has seen a similar upward path in unemployment, while not to the same extent. Over the last two years, unemployment in the United States has generally hovered between just under 3.5% and 4%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

The United States is projected to cut interest rates faster than Canada this year, said Schleich.

“While BoC easing could help stem labour market weakness, policy lags mean cuts need to come sooner than later. To us, a July cut should be considered a higher probability outcome, as only a disastrous June CPI report should leave the BoC sidelined,” said Schleich.

May’s inflation data were released on June 25.  April’s data were released on May 21. June’s data can be expected to be released similarly around the end of July.

The two provinces that remained below the pack for total inflation in May 2024 were Manitoba and Saskatchewan, which have removed their fuel and carbon tax.

The number of immigrants entering Canada far exceeds the number of jobs being created. In June, Canada lost 1,400 jobs while the working population grew by 98,700. There were officially 42,000 new unemployed Canadians.

Despite adding 27,000 jobs in May, Canada’s working population grew by 97,600 people, causing unemployment to rise by a tenth of a percentage point. 

Related stories