Below the Radar Transcript
Episode 102: Housing Affordability in BC — with David Eby
Speakers: Paige Smith, Am Johal, David Eby
[music]
Paige Smith 0:01
Hello listeners. I'm Paige Smith with Below the Radar, a knowledge democracy podcast. Below the Radar is recorded on the territories of the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh peoples. On this episode of Below the Radar our host Am Johal is joined by David Eby, BC's Attorney General and Minister of Housing and the MLA for Vancouver Point Grey. They discuss protecting and upholding housing rights in Vancouver and a way forward for BC housing policy. I hope you enjoy this episode.
[music]
Am Johal 0:29
Hi there, welcome to Below the Radar. Really excited you could join us again today. We're very lucky to be joined by the Attorney General for BC but also the new minister responsible for housing in BC. Welcome David Eby.
David Eby 0:48
Thank you, Am Johal. Hi. Nice to see you Am. It's been a long time.
Am Johal 0:51
Yeah, it's been a long time. Dave, I'm wondering if you can maybe just introduce yourself a little bit.
David Eby 0:55
Sure. I'm the Attorney General and the Minister for housing and the MLA for Vancouver Point Grey. I'm a father to my kids. [both laugh] Two kids. I'm a yoga guy. What else can I tell you, Am? The family usually lives in the UBC area. But temporarily, we're in Port McNeil because my wife is finishing her residency. So she's at the hospital and health care center out here for eight weeks. So the whole crew moved, because we could. So I'm doing a lot of zooming these days.
Am Johal 1:23
Yeah, that's where you catch the ferry to Alert Bay isn't it? It's a beautiful, beautiful part of the province.
David Eby 1:28
It's gorgeous. I love it. I love rural life. It's really treating me right.
Am Johal 1:31
Yeah.
Am Johal 1:31
Dave, it's really amazing that somebody with your background has been appointed as the Minister responsible for housing. You can't go very far in Vancouver without a conversation about affordability, be it homeownership or rental in the province. So I think what's particularly interesting is that you come from prior to elected life, you did a lot of housing work in your time at Pivot LegalSociety and also to some degree at the BC Civil Liberties Association. I'm wondering if you can speak a little bit to the housing advocacy that you did before you came to work in government and how that informs a bit of your perspective on your position now?
David Eby 2:08
Yeah, sure. I mean, full disclosure, Am. This is how we know each other. So we go way back, we go back a decade or more don't we now? Which is astounding to me. But so yeah, when I was a baby lawyer, I went to my first job after the Federal Department of Justice where I Articled with Pivot Legal Society. I was hired on as the housing campaigner by then executive director, John Richardson. And my job was to go out into the Downtown Eastside, meet with people, hear what their housing concerns were, swear statutory declaration with them and about, you know, so that to give them a little extra weight to their stories, and then they were all compiled, and we issued reports about what the systemic issues were that people are facing about housing in the neighborhood. Part of that involved test cases as well, we took a few test cases forward within the residential tenancy branch system within the court system in British Columbia, trying to keep people in their homes, trying to keep homes open, an issue that is still ongoing the closure and the poor quality of single room occupancy hotels in the Downtown Eastside, leading to there being condemned and closed and people being evicted, rents going up, the conditions in housing. So that was incredibly good training for me, in terms of working with folks who are marginalized in various ways. And because I showed up quite certain that people would be very excited to see a lawyer, you know, kind of like, you're pretty sure that if you're liked, if you might think like people I'm from the government, I'm here to help. So, you know, I remember my first file being in the parking lot, one of my first big files in the parking lot of the Pender hotel and saying, hey, you know, I'm a lawyer, you're all sitting in this parking lot, because the police are holding you here while they kick in your doors at the hotel. Who wants a lawyer? Who needs help here? And everyone just stared at me like that was from the moon. And I was very fortunate that someone stepped forward and said, "Oh, you know what, I'll take a chance on you." And it was the beginning of my introduction to the fact that obviously, I was coming from a world of massive privilege, and that the court system, lawyers, government, were all part of the same thing of a system that people were very familiar with, and not particularly fond of, nor was it recognized as a way to ensure their rights were protected. So I learned a lot there. I remain incredibly grateful to this day for the lessons I learned in partnership with the people in that neighborhood. And then I moved from the Downtown Eastside and Pivot to BC Civil Liberties Association, where I did some similar work, but on a more provincial basis, so it introduced me to a lot of remote and rural communities where the issues were different, but some were very similar and got me out of that neighborhood. But a lot of the lessons I learned in the Downtown Eastside I was able to deploy in Terris and Smithers and Prince Rupert and Fort St. John, it was a very interesting time for me to upgrade education for me as well and and we had some effective policy wins both at Pivot and BCCLA while I was there around protecting housing and protecting rights. So including ending the system of police self investigation in the province, something that a bunch of people have worked on for a long time and that I was proud to be a part of as well.
Am Johal 4:57
Now in terms of the housing situation in Vancouver and the province broadly, this has been here for a very long time. There's Facebook groups focused on it, everybody's an expert. And you know, one of the frustrations that has been here for a long time is sort of the delinking of housing costs from incomes in the province, both in terms of rental, but also in terms of ownership, and certainly in the urban areas of Vancouver, and Victoria, probably more magnified than other parts of the province, but certainly is across the province. And I'm wondering how coming from the background that you do, and at the big picture level of how to think through policy interventions to have a fairer system in place across the continuum of housing, what your sort of broad thoughts are in terms of where the problems are? And where from a provincial government point of view, the intervention points might be?
David Eby 5:51
Yeah, big question. So there are sort of three layers as I see it have urgent response for the provincial government. So the first is the immediate visible manifestation of the housing crisis of people literally living in tents, and parks, or doorways, and so on. So people are chronically homeless, have been outside for a long time, and need supports and need housing. More importantly, and so that I feel a huge amount of urgency around the encampment in Strathcona. And Vancouver around the encampments in the parks in Victoria, where there was a fire last night, the encampments in Nanaimo where there was a fire and explosion, the encampments up in the valley. And so that's, that's really priority one is triage and the people who are in that immediate danger and distress of living outside this winter. And so that's part one. And our solution around that is quite straightforward. It's to open up spaces, train up staff to support people to get inside and to get them inside. And so that it's not complicated. It just involves money and commitment, and a lot of people working together and happily in both Vancouver and Victoria, and other municipalities. There's a strong alignment between the local government, provincial government, federal government, and everybody to work together to make that happen in a hurry, and a hurry for government is end of March for Victoria, and the end of April for Vancouver. And then the, what I would describe as more of a middle tranche is people living in rental housing, struggling with things like renovictions, hanging on to their rental housing, but watching rents go up feeling a lot of anxiety about redevelopment of their building, purchase and sale of their building by real estate investment trusts, and just generally anxious renters that have been given a bit of a breath a chance to breathe by the fact that Airbnbs have not been full of people in Vancouver, for example, because COVID restrictions are keeping tourists and students at home. So there's a bit more space in the rental housing market, but the underlying concerns will come roaring back post COVID And, and the tightness in the market that reduces their ability to have any kind of negotiating position with a landlord is a huge concern. And the policy response to this is twofold. One is controlling the excesses that come with that through laws and regulations, reforms around renovictions, and so on. And the other piece is building a lot more rental housing and supporting the construction of a lot more rental housing, to help give tenants some bargaining power. So there's actually spaces they can threaten to move to if the landlord treats them the way that the landlord is. And so, and I would be remiss if I didn't also mention the situation that small landlords face, family owned buildings for example, where their costs are going up quite dramatically. They have quite an aging building. And you know, their options start to dwindle to the point of sale. And how do we support them to continue to maintain buildings and ensure they're of decent standard so that people aren't evicted for a sale or redevelopment? Or how do we, if it is for sale, facilitate preserving that low income rental housing in the stock? How do we support nonprofit organizations, for example, to buy those buildings when there's an opportunity to do so, maybe not so practical and Vancouver, given the cost of things, but across many parts of the province, something that's very possible to do. And there may be different methods of ownership for tenants to give them some control over their buildings. So there's some really interesting things there as well. And the last piece, Am. I'm sorry I'm going on so long. It's just so big. I mean, there's so many things, but I'm trying to simplify it. You know, people who imagine this, have a dream about someday potentially owning their place, and how do we support people to have some control over their home and to have some certainty and security of tenure because they actually own the place they live in. And this is an area that is still significantly under explored because governments have just been in this triage of the first two levels for a long time. But it's my intention to push us forward and to talk about things like affordable homeownership in a more aggressive way and to do what we can there. So here again a mixture of law and policy to restrain some of the excesses around speculation, the investors, the REITs, the all these forces that are putting pouring money into the housing market as an investment, and identifying ways to preserve affordability and the transfer of ownership between people that when someone who owns an affordable place sells it, that it could be affordable potentially for the next person, but the person who's selling could also see some return, as well. So these are challenging issues. There's no easy solution, but we are moving on these things.
Am Johal 10:21
Yeah, there was a talk last night related to the Vancouver plan and there were some interesting speakers. Evan Siddall, with the CMHC soon to be outgoing from CMHC, but very outspoken around the critique of ownership. But he talked about sort of the glorification of homeownership. But interestingly, in an economic environment like this, there are federal government policies like lower interest rates, or quantitative easing that can actually amp up housing markets in urban centers. Leilani Farha, the former UN Special Rapporteur on housing talked a lot about real estate income trusts, as you mentioned, they've moved in quite an aggressive way into the Vancouver market, a number of companies from Ontario. They also had Barbara Steenbergen on the panel, she's with the International Union of tenants in the EU, and comes out of doing this work in Berlin. And she talked a lot about the culture of being tenants in Europe, where people rent or are tenants their entire life, but the security of tenure is built in. And there's a lot of protections in place that are far more magnified than what we might have here. And I'm just wondering if you can talk a little bit further about the possibility for security of tenure for tenants. I'm someone who's been renovated before when housing prices went up by 30%, the buying and selling during particular moments, there's a number of economic drivers there, but is there a way of enhanced tenancy right or support for tenancy advocacy that the provincial government could be doing in a more aggressive way?
David Eby 11:51
Yes, is the short answer. The number one recommendation from the Rental Housing Task Force in BC was to end renovictions. And so I take that as a significant priority. I know a lot of people are frustrated about the interim steps that were taken, that it's not enough. And I agree, it's not enough, we have more to do. And we're doing that work now for reforms to be introduced and passed into law to protect tenants around renovictions. And I also want to note, sort of the challenge that we face, in that the vast majority of our rental housing stock still, unfortunately, was built in the 70s and 80s. At the multi unit residential building tax credit, the MURBs are sometimes called, and this housing stock is not in great shape. And so there is a need to do improvements to preserve them. And so we need to find ways that that building stock can be improved, so that people live in high quality housing, while also and some people might suggest that this is impossible, but also keeping rents affordable, and providing tenants with that security of tenure. So we're gonna have to find that balance, it will be a challenge. And we may not get it right the first time. But it is vital that we do that. We need the rental housing stock to be renewed. And we need to find a way to give people security in their place. And so that is our challenge that's in front of us. And that's the work that we're doing now.
Am Johal 13:13
Now, the province has stepped in over the last number of years to put in some regulatory pieces, some taxation pieces to cool the market here in BC. And in the present context, in the pandemic context where there's been really uneven economic effects. In some cases, people are working from home getting paid bi weekly, don't have anywhere to spend their money, the interest rates are low, and you have a shortage of houses on sale. So it seems to be in the current moment amping up prices as well in the short term, but in a broad sense, when you look at additional regulatory policies that can be put in place, and also possibly taxation measures, what are the kinds of things that the province will be looking at in terms of its policy toolbox to have a fair, more transparent system?
David Eby 14:05
So I think it's important to recognize some of the work that's been done, that is still the subject of flagrantly misrepresented tax by the real estate industry. I just read this appalling piece where an economist from the Real Estate Association completely misrepresented the impact of the speculation tax, suggesting it had no impact on affordability. So this is a tax where if you're not paying income tax in British Columbia, you have to pay tax if you've bought a home here. It's a pretty straightforward proposal. And the revenue from that in part is paying for the development of new affordable housing. It's had the impact of increasing the availability of rental housing, where previously vacant homes have been rented out, about 11,000. And it's generated revenue for government to build more affordable housing. So it was difficult and I have to frankly restrain myself when I read the real estate agents economist say that this was It's an ineffective policy and that the federal government shouldn't be looking at policies like this, I think we need to recognize that Vancouver is a global city, that post COVID, we're going to go back to that status, that this is a place where we have a very attractive standard of life that is paid for through public funding through taxes. So good schools, good hospitals, clean air, nice roads, places to ride your bike, and that it requires people to be pitching in for that. And if you just buy a home, and you earn your income in a low tax jurisdiction, and you buy a home in Vancouver, you need to pitch in for the services, in my opinion. And so that is part of the underlying basis of that tax. It has the effect of encouraging people who are using homes as investments to either rent them out, or to pay significantly more tax to incent them to make the right choice to either sell or rent. And so this is a really important mechanism. And the reason why I'm spending time on it and is because, you know, we saw the BC Liberals in the election fight this initiative. We're seeing some organizing of real estate agent organizations, and I don't even believe it's real estate agents. I think it's real estate agent organizations fighting this, to try to roll it back to try to prevent the Feds from looking at things like this. And they are the models of the future in how we recognize people move all over the place as a globalized, increasingly globalized world, and Vancouver is an increasingly global city. How do we make sure that we're accountable for the people who live and work here and provide housing for them. So I don't think it would be appropriate at this stage, given the fact that I'm just a couple months into the job to be speculating about what we're going to do on the ownership side, or other types of approaches to increase the availability of rental housing. But what I will do is say there are a number of different categories of response that we're looking at, which include land use reform, allowing the construction of affordable housing, which include different measures of incentive for investing in and supporting the development of affordable housing, and which include different forms of ownership, Co Op, affordable land trusts, and so on. And you know, people will try to read into that very brief set of sentences, a whole array of policy choices that they prefer, don't prefer and create great anxiety. Rest assured that when we choose a direction you know there will be transparency around that, because I do want people to be part of that debate and discussion about where we're thinking about going and to participate. I'll note, one of the most exciting to me rental housing developments in Vancouver, is this anok rental housing development on the Burrard Inlet it's going to create hundreds of units of rental housing, and, you know, not a traditional model of development. I mean, this is Indigenous controlled development, and done under Indigenous governance authority and outside of city processes, and is a very bold experiment. And I'm very keen to see how it goes. And, and the thing that's been fascinating to me is how it's been received by Vancouverites and people in the region as being a positive development, despite the fact that it's taking place apart from these traditional processes. So it's a very interesting time. It's an exciting time. I feel that I've been elected and the premier has given me and my colleagues in cabinet and government have given me the mandate to go and kick the tires on different approaches, to get things done, to get housing built, and to get affordable housing built to address this crisis. And I'm very grateful and it's a dream job to be doing this.
Am Johal 18:38
Call Salem was on the panel last night, and it really is one of the most interesting urban developments in North America right now. I'm wondering in terms of regulation that's either been put in place or contemplated some things like the property transfer tax, for example, for first time homebuyers, it can possibly be seen as an impediment, although there might be dollar amount in which it kicks in for a city like Vancouver is very rare instance where you wouldn't be paying it as a first time homeowner. On the other hand, there are some people who own 15/16 properties. And could there be a way of seeing taxation that as you increase the numbers of property, or you have it as a business, that it could be taxed at a different rate? And I guess the other sort of question I'd put out there as well, in terms of conversations you have with your Cabinet colleagues, there's a real you know, with the cost of housing, eating up the larger amount of the income of people in BC be it tenancy or ownership, that there's a real challenge to social mobility, or that it takes up a big part of the economy where people are spending so much money on housing, they're not able to spend their money in different ways in the economy. Have you looked at some of the social implications of that? Or is government looking at other ways of looking at that issue?
David Eby 19:51
Yeah, I think I'm gonna take this from a couple different angles. So I think what you're seeing from our government is shift away from the previous BC liberal model of economic development in the GVRD, which was very dependent on the financial insurance, real estate sectors to drive economic growth, and a shift towards tech, clean tech and related industries, in terms of economic development in the region. And when you shift like that, it means you have to recognize that you're going to need workforce housing, the people who are going to be working in these jobs need a place to live. And that is at odds with the previous government's approach, the rent led to these runaway real estate prices in our market. So when you have a firm that's thinking, should we locate in Vancouver? Or should we locate somewhere else, when you have a leader in research who’s thinking, Should I go to UBC or SFU? Or should I go to a different university to do that research or, you know, those decisions that those companies make that those thought leaders, those people who bring intellectual property development that results in the of opening companies and so on. Part of their formula is you know, could I live there? What kind of place can I get? Can our workforce live there? What does that look like? And, you know, I think that it's critical to recognize housing as the vital infrastructure for the future of our province that we cannot grow, we cannot succeed in the kind of economy we want. That's based around real people doing things that create value, not just artificial value, but actually, like making our lives better, in different ways. We can't do that without housing. And so there's a real effort on the part of our government to recognize that vital connection. And if we chase people out, if there's not a place for them, if they don't feel welcome. If we tell them, they can stay, but they have to live in this really substandard place and be abused by someone who owns it, and that there's no real accountability because there's nowhere else for them to live. I mean, that's not you can't develop in that way. And so maybe straying a bit from the original premise of your question, but I just wanted to sort of underline some of that, thinking about where we're going economically and what the province is doing. And so in terms of your specific question about an escalating property transfer tax, you're right that first time homebuyers don't pay it. And certainly, I mean, that is something that theoretically government could look at. It's not something we're looking at right now. There are a number of different policies that we could look at to discourage people from buying multiple homes. I'm pretty satisfied and happy with the outcome of the speculation tax. What I'm not happy with currently, is a corrosive impact of the short term rental market on the long term rental market. And I think that COVID has really exposed some of the extent to which the short term rental market ate up long term rental housing, and amplified some of the problems that we've seen. So I think there's an opportunity for us to do some work there. I've got staff that are doing research on the connection between this so we can get a sense about how big this influence has been. Because you don't often get a chance to say, "Okay, well, let's shut off all the tourists and see what happens to the rental housing market for a year." You know, that doesn't, doesn't happen, but because COVID, we're able to actually look at that and get some really remarkable insights into what's been happening. And there are areas where they haven't seen that decline in tourists and the Airbnb's have still been full like Tofino example, that we can compare communities and see what's been happening and draw policy conclusions and make reforms related to that. So I think there are a lot of opportunities for us. The main filter that I'm applying to any proposal, whether yours or anybody else's is, will this make it easier for someone to find a high quality appropriate place to live? And if it doesn't, then we're not going to do it. But if it does, then that is something that's on the table, and that's what we're looking at.
Am Johal 23:45
A couple of questions on regulatory pieces. One thing that's been in the news has been the escalating costs over time with Strata insurance. I know some things are being looked at, but it'd be great to get your perspective on it. And the second piece is sort of the sort of self regulation of professions and the buying and selling of real estate. Are there areas and practices and oversight mechanisms that I know some work has already been done and certain legislation passed over the past number of years. But are there other areas of the market in terms of the transactional process of the business of real estate, from a regulatory transparency, fairness point of view that you either have concerns about or are looking at?
David Eby 24:24
Yeah, I think with the realtors and the oversight reforms that were initiated under the BC Liberal government and continued by our government, I think there's been some broad dissatisfaction with how that's played out. From the consumer perspective, there's still concern about accountability for problematic conduct by some realtors. And from the realtor perspective, there's still some concern about how that process works and, and the timeliness of it and so on. So, the former finance minister Carol James was engaging in some significant reform of that and it'll be carried on by Selina Robinson that work continues. You know, I get emails from people who are like, I don't understand why I'm paying a realtor X commission when my house was for sale for one day and sold immediately. You know, what am I getting for that kind of thing? And, you know, government needs to regulate realtor commissions, you know, fair comment. Not a priority for us currently. You know, there are opportunities for improvements and accountability. And it's not exclusive to realtors, you know, we have the professional governance office now for engineers, geo technicians, and other technical professional bodies because of things like not Polly, when the dam collapsed, and some of the exposure of the weaknesses in those systems. And it's something that we're wrestling with in a number of different professions, including my own profession, which is law. There's a lot of discussion about the role of lawyers and the questions about lawyers' trust accounts related to money laundering, and what is the appropriate response to government? It's very much on the table on the public inquiry, there are several legal groups that are beating. And so these are challenging questions that government isn't shying away from. We're actively working on the reform and discussion, public discussion through the public inquiry. Some of these areas.
Am Johal 26:09
Yeah, I won't ask this as a question. But I've heard people in my circles talk about the need for a public option to buy and sell real estate, but you've only been in the job for two months, too soon.
[David laughs]
David Eby 26:21
Oh, you had strata insurance in there, too Am. I don't know if you want me to address that. But I, it's a really hard one. I mean, coming through the ICBC experience with car insurance. You know, I think it's, you know, not a lot of people have a lot of love for ICBC. But I think they'll feel a lot better about it after our reforms kick in in March. And having a public option, having a public insurer can make a really big difference, because we are really grappling with a small number, and oligopoly of strata and rental building insurance providers that are essentially writing their own rates without any sort of competition and, or very limited competition. And I worry that we're subsidizing massive losses in the United States related to wildfires and flooding, through escalating rates here in British Columbia. I don't have a lot of love for the private insurance industry after my experience with ICBC. And I'm a big believer in public insurance. And so, you know, I think that, while it's not currently on the table, there's a lot of work being done by Selina Robinson around reforms related to strata insurance to help bring costs down. There's got to be a way and we will find a way, but it is a challenging thing to do without a public option.
Am Johal 27:25
I know you're not able to speak too much to the public inquiry that's currently underway. But the work that was done with the Peter German report, Marie Maloney, there were a number of recommendations but also, some of this falls into the jurisdiction of the federal government. Even Austin Cullen has said that many federal agencies have been slow to comply with these obligations. The lists that have been produced often appear incomplete in terms of information and their examples where the Mounties told the national institutions that investigation had found almost 3000 anonymously purchased bank graphs that were negotiated through BC casinos worth 150 million. A big portion of them are from the Big Six chartered bank. So there's a big federal government piece to this. And I'm wondering if you can speak just a little bit to your conversation with federal counterparts? Because I think it's great that there's an inquiry happening. There's been reports with recommendations, but clearly this takes a multi governmental approach to get at the root of the problems.
David Eby 28:25
Yeah, thanks for understanding. You know, it's hard for me to talk about the public inquiry as Attorney General. So I'll keep my comments to your specific question. I am regularly in contact with Bill Blair, who's my federal counterpart. Mike Farnworth's federal counterpart is Minister of Public Safety in the Government of Canada. And I have expressed to him on a number of occasions, my deep unhappiness and my continual unhappiness that we have not seen an increase in policing in our province federal policing, around money laundering. And the reason why it's important that it's federal policing, is federal jurisdiction enables them to follow money outside of Canada, and to really dig into international relationships, Five Eyes relationships, about money coming into British Columbia, and where it's coming from, for what purpose and how to chase it down. We will do everything that we can within our provincial authority, and that's part of the public inquiries mandate is to look at those kinds of questions. How can we do better? How could we use policing? How can we structure policing dollars to do that at the provincial level, but we really need the federal partner. So I was really heartened, recently, Minister Blair announced $98 million for new policing. I wrote to him immediately to say fantastic, here's what we're doing in BC, we have a beneficial ownership registry for property so we know who actually owns it. We have a beneficial ownership registry for companies, which paired with your beneficial ownership requirements for companies means police can figure out who owns the companies that are operating our province. We have a provincial government that is on all fours with Revenue Canada to share information. We have new information sharing agreements, we are the province to work with on this. If you want to do models, if you want to see how things work, if you want to experiment with this and see success with your policing funding, put it in British Columbia, and I've not had a response yet, but I hope to. The disappointing thing is, I cannot believe that there's been a single additional federal police officer added to investigate money laundering, since Peter German revealed that there was nobody dedicated to money laundering in the province in his report that he released several years ago. At the federal level. And so, you know, I think we've got some distance to go. Happily, I think we're turning the corner. But I'll really believe it when we start to see those boots on the ground. They don't have to be police officers, they could be accountants, they could be other civilians, but people working on money laundering for the Federal Police would be a great improvement. We have the joint integrated team at the provincial level that investigates these things. And they're working with banks and with other entities to try to information share and do investigations. But we really need the Feds on side.
Am Johal 30:54
Right. Dave, is there anything you'd like to add?
David Eby 30:56
Not really Am. I really appreciate being on the show. Oh, I do know. If you have listeners that like listening to podcasts, they should listen to my podcast as well. It's called the dash and we're weekly and check it out. Otherwise, I've made a commitment this year to be better on social media. I used to be quite active on social media till my job requirements ramped up dramatically. So it's a very contrary New Year's commitment to spend more time on social media. But that is my commitment this year.
Am Johal 31:21
Great. We're going to link to your podcast and I'll retweet it from our page as well. Thank you so much for taking the time to join us. You have a huge amount of work ahead of you. But definitely people are going to be watching this file really closely. It's great to have somebody in this position that comes from a long history of working on this. So thank you again, Dave.
David Eby 31:38
Thanks, Am. Look at us now right? See ya.
[music]
Paige Smith 31:43
Below the Radar is a knowledge democracy podcast created by SFU's Vancity Office of Community Engagement. Thanks for listening to our conversation with David Eby. Subscribe to Below the Radar wherever you listen to your podcasts and follow along on twitter at BTR_pod for news and updates from our production team. We'll see you next time on Below the Radar.
[music]