Does the right hand know what the left hand is doing at the BC Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing?
In the high-stakes rental housing poker game, the provincial government is launching a task force whose mandate will be to improve security and fairness for renters and landlords.
That sounds good, but to a certain degree the ministry has already shown its hand well before those deliberations get underway.
It has been suggested in some circles that rental accommodation providers are now doing the heavy lifting to clean up the housing mess created by the current and previous provincial administrations.
Last December, the NDP government enacted an array of new restrictions on how landlords conduct business.
For starters, fixed term tenancy agreements can no longer include a vacate clause requiring a tenant to move out at the end of the term unless a landlord, or landlord’s close family member, plans in good faith to occupy the rental unit.
In addition, the legislation limits rent increases to four per cent annually and landlords cannot apply for a top-up if the rent they are charging is significantly lower than other similar units in the immediate area.
That begs the question: in all fairness to landlords, why was the task force not appointed to weigh those tenancy rules changes before they were enacted?
The new Tenancy Statutes Amendment Act, which came into effect in May, mandates that tenants have a first right-of-refusal to enter into a new tenancy agreement, once renovations to a unit are completed. Property owners have been given some leeway.
According to the public affairs officer for the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, “Rental rates can be set at the discretion of the landlord. These Residential Tenancy Act amendments are intended to strike a balance between a tenant’s right to security and the right of a landlord to maintain their property. We want to make sure that landlords continue making necessary repairs and improvements to their property, while protecting tenants from abuse of this section.”
But critics claim instead of boosting the rental supply, several of the changes to the Tenancy Act will discourage rental accommodation providers from staying in the game. As the cost associated with doing business continues to rise, more than a few landlords will take the Airbnb route and bypass fixed term rentals altogether.
Instead of de-incentivizing rentals, a number of observers have even recommended landlords should be offered municipal tax concessions and significant income tax rebates on rental earnings.
Moving forward, once the members of the task force begin their deliberations they will be faced with the unenviable task of remediating an anemic rental landscape, at the same time as they balance a growing list of tenant grievances with the long established interests of property owners who have been accustomed to operating in a relatively unfettered free enterprise marketplace.
