Article content continued

By itself, his figure of 700,000 new homeowners and a home ownership rate of 72.5 per cent is an aspiration not a policy. But arbitrary objectives often conjure bad policy. If cutting taxes, simplifying regulations and leaving Canadians to create wealth led to increased home ownership, all to the good. That is miles away from flooding the market with a raft of distortionary interventions in order to hit a politically mandated target.

Harper called home ownership “one of the most unmistakable marks of economic success.” And indeed it can be, if it results from free choice in competitive markets that allocate resources efficiently. But when governments start distorting incentives, you get Potemkin prosperity, with higher-cost options becoming deceptively cheap to the actual buyer at the expense of everyone else. Favouring buyers hurts renters, who are often poorer. And it risks artificially inflating house prices — which hardly helps, if the goal is increased home ownership.

“More than anything,” Harper went on, buying a home is “a statement of optimism, a sign of commitment to your community, of faith in your country, of hope for our future.” Well yes — but as a personal decision, not a political gesture. The distinction, however obscure it may be to most politicians, matters a great deal. A society in which people earn, save, start families and proudly give them a home from the sweat of their own brows is indeed economically successful, optimistic and well-grounded. A society that gives people subsidized houses to hit made-up planning targets is not.