Surrey backed away from regional water restrictions, sparking anger. Fans splurged huge sums on tickets for Canada’s historic win. The luxury real estate market is shifting from big cities to the suburbs.
Surrey defies Metro Vancouver water limits: what’s behind the decision?
The city of Surrey has found itself at the center of a controversy: it is the only municipality within the Metro Vancouver water district that refused to move to the third level of restrictions, staying on the second. As CBC reports, this is the first time in many years that a district member has gone against the overall regional plan. At a special meeting of the water district council convened on November 19, 2025, local politicians voiced outrage at what they called the “perceived unfairness” of having Surrey effectively outside the regional rules.
Metro Vancouver’s chief administrative officer, Jerry Dobrovolny, cited data from the past weekend: “Our two largest cities use about half of all the water. Vancouver uses less, and Surrey uses more — and that is the concern.” Surrey had indeed amended its drinking-water bylaws before the third level of restrictions came into effect in other cities. The third level is the penultimate stage; the fourth is introduced during emergencies, when water can be used only for the most essential needs.
Surrey councillor Pardip Kooner defended the decision: she said the city restricted lawn watering except for new homes or homes under construction with permits, and only for a limited time. Private pools may also be filled, and some cooling systems are allowed to operate — for example, sprinkler parks. Landscaping and car-washing businesses may use handheld equipment. “We don’t want to risk someone’s livelihood,” Kooner said. But other politicians weren’t persuaded: the council voted by a decisive majority to send a letter to Surrey city council demanding that the rules be brought in line with the regional plan.
Dobrovolny explained that Metro Vancouver cannot force a municipality to comply with the restrictions unless an emergency has been declared. Port Moody mayor Megan Lahti said it cannot be taken that far: “We don’t want to end up in a state of emergency and not be able to put out fires. That is unacceptable.” Some councillors suggested charging municipalities that break the restrictions higher fees; Metro Vancouver staff promised to look into the possibility.
Surrey’s director of utilities, David Matsubara, noted that in May water consumption in the city fell “in many areas.” He said the city remains on the second level according to its bylaw and monitors the situation daily. He called “threatening and punitive measures” unhelpful for good behaviour. In a May report by Surrey staff, it was stated that after the introduction of the second level “months earlier than expected,” the city received about 500 calls and letters from residents concerned about their investments in lawns, new grass, and the inability to prepare pools for summer.
Linda Parkinson, director of political planning for the water department at Metro Vancouver, emphasized that different rules create confusion and “an uneven playing field” for business. She outlined three reasons for the third level: an unusually low snowpack, a hot and dry summer forecast, and the decommissioning of a 100-year-old water main, which increases pressure on the rest of the system as summer demand grows. Parkinson reminded people that Metro Vancouver’s water system is fully interconnected, so reducing consumption together is crucial.
Metro Vancouver chair and Burnaby mayor Mike Hurley warned: “Remember, any actions we take can have serious consequences later in the summer. And I don’t think any of us wants to move to Stage 4 — which is where we can be heading.” The situation highlights tension between regional solidarity and local economic interests: Surrey is trying to protect residents and business from sudden restrictions, but risks undermining shared efforts to conserve water amid an approaching shortage. If other municipalities follow Surrey’s example, the region could face far more serious problems — even a state of emergency.
Tickets for Canada’s triumph: how much fans paid for the historic World Cup win?
In Vancouver after the Canada–Qatar match at BC Place, there was real euphoria: Canada’s national team recorded its first-ever World Cup victory in soccer, and thousands of fans leaving the stadium couldn’t hide their excitement. But for many, those emotions came at a hefty price. As Vancouver Is Awesome reports, ticket prices for home games skyrocketed: at the start of the tournament, tickets could be bought for a few hundred dollars, but for the final match in Vancouver prices reached as high as one million dollars. Still, those who came to support the team on June 18 say they don’t regret the money spent.
A reporter for the outlet spoke with dozens of fans right after the game, and none expressed regret. Some got lucky: they won tickets or received them as gifts. Others managed to buy them last minute for prices starting at $265, and sometimes even for $150 through friends or sellers on Facebook. Those who bought tickets in advance paid about $500. The amounts fans cited ranged from $600 to $1,000 on average. Some interviewees preferred not to name an exact figure, only hinting that they paid a lot.
For those not willing to spend that kind of money, free fan zones with live broadcasts are set up in the Lower Mainland. But those who watched the historic success from the stands are convinced — the game was worth every cent. The ticket frenzy underlines not only the commercial potential of the World Cup, but also the incredible surge of interest in soccer in Canada: the win over Qatar became a symbol that the country can compete on the world stage, and fans are ready to pay to be part of that story.
Decentralizing the luxury real estate market: buyers move beyond Canada’s big cities
Canada’s high-end housing market is undergoing notable changes: more and more affluent buyers are turning away from purchasing homes in traditional pricey hubs such as Vancouver and Toronto, and are looking to the suburbs and smaller cities instead. As Business in Vancouver writes, experts are pointing to a trend of “decentralization” in the luxury segment, when the very idea of “luxury” no longer ties strictly to central urban locations. According to a report from Re/Max Canada published June 17, in the period from January 1 to April 30 this year, the number of real estate transactions priced at $3 million and up in the Vancouver region fell by 19.8% compared with the same period last year — from 334 to 268 sales. In the Greater Toronto Area, the drop was 16.9%, while in Edmonton, Saskatoon and Ottawa — where the luxury threshold starts at a much lower amount — there was a significant increase in activity.
Elizabeth McQuinn, a broker with Re/Max Select Properties, explains that “luxury is no longer defined by being located in a particular large city centre.” This is also reflected locally: this year, the international brokerage franchise Engel & Völkers opened an office for the first time in the Fraser Valley, in Langley, betting on growing demand for properties outside the city with agricultural land, equestrian features, or simply larger homes. “One-acre lots don’t produce anymore. There are limited of them,” notes Braden Rhymer, licensed partner of Engel & Völkers. He explains that growth is inevitably shifting toward the Fraser Valley because Vancouver is squeezed between the ocean, the U.S. border, and the mountains. In the valley, buyers can find room for more spacious housing or build what they need — and more and more families are teaming up to purchase together. According to Rhymer, “that’s something you can’t do in Vancouver because of the lack of space.”
Although homes priced above $3 million are now sold “extremely rarely,” the expert emphasizes that premium buyers are generally less sensitive to market fluctuations, because they buy housing for living, not as an investment. They’re not trying to guess the right moment — they simply act according to life circumstances, buying in both a hot and a cool market. However, Rhymer warns of headwinds: reduced immigration and an oversupplied market reduce demand for agricultural properties; high interest rates weigh on people who are already overburdened by mortgages; and the economic sensitivity of the chain of “moving” buyers (those who sell a smaller home to buy a bigger one) intensifies. What’s more, he predicts that over the next 12 months the number of mortgage foreclosures on high-end property could rise. In Vancouver itself, according to McQuinn, some luxury condominiums in the downtown area are selling for 2013 prices.
In the future, the expert expects a selective improvement in Vancouver, especially in the detached-home segment, driven by deferred demand. However, she believes a serious brake remains high taxes and a federal ban on foreigners buying property. McQuinn highlights a lost opportunity for the public purse: “I don’t know how many people understand that a foreigner buying real estate for $3 million pays $652,000 in taxes at closing (foreign buyer tax and property transfer tax). We’ve taken that out of the system.” If half of the 268 sales from the first quarter had involved foreigners, then in just one quarter the public purse would have lost at least $87 million — more than the tax on speculation and empty homes in British Columbia collects in a year. “Who is covering these costs now?” the expert asks.
