Why was the residential tenancies enforcement unit scrapped?

SUSAN LEBLANC « » : In January of last year, the Department of Service Nova Scotia responded to an inquiry from the Investment Property Owners Association of Nova Scotia about how a potential compliance and enforcement unit would impact landlords. This spurred internal communication, with one department representative recognizing that the unit would predominantly be landlord-based, meaning it would have predominantly protected tenants against such things as unlawful convictions. My question to the minister is: Why was the enforcement unit scrapped when it would have clearly met the needs of tenants?

HON. JILL BALSER « » : I know my predecessor in his time as minister did bring forward some changes to the Residential Tenancies Program. I know that a report was commissioned to look at what a compliance and enforcement unit could look like here in the province. At that time, the government made the decision not to move forward, knowing that we have a Residential Tenancies Program in place that provides equity, respect, and balance to the needs of both tenants and landlords. We want to make sure that all Nova Scotians know that that Residential Tenancies Program is there to help them in their time of need. We're going to continue to utilize that program and make positive changes to it as needed.

SUSAN LEBLANC « » : When it came down to the creation of a residential tenancies enforcement unit, the former Minister of Service Nova Scotia concluded that it would not meet the needs of tenants and landlords. My question to the current minister is: Can the minister explain which specific needs would not have been met by a compliance and enforcement unit? When will she table a new program that will meet the needs of both tenants and landlords?

JILL BALSER « » : I want to recognize that we do have a Residential Tenancies Program in place to support the needs of both tenants and landlords. We know that Nova Scotians need to be able to reach out to a program in their time of need and one that is efficient and is going to find a resolution in their time of need quickly. Recognizing that the report was commissioned to look at a compliance and enforcement unit, we made the decision not to move forward, knowing that there is an opportunity to improve the existing program, which we are doing. We want to make sure that Nova Scotians know that that program is there in their time of need. We want to make sure we are improving communication and tenants know they can use that program when they need it.

The Need for Real Rent Control

On September 20 - the last day of the Fall 2024 legislative session - I said the following about the Houston government’s legislation that: failed to implement real rent control, made it easier for landlords to evict renters, left the fixed-term lease loophole, and extended a rent cap higher than any other in Canada, and more than double the rate of inflation. Here is what I said:

The situation for renters in Dartmouth North, in HRM, and across the province is getting more and more dire. Rents are incredibly high. We're hearing about studio apartments going for $1,700, and one-bedrooms are over $2,000. These are not luxury apartments.

The fact is that most incomes are nowhere near adequate to pay these prices, and it results in people being evicted for non-payment, defaulting on their power bills or other loans, not taking the medications they need, not eating enough and getting sick, or experiencing crippling anxiety and fear about all or any of the above.

People contact me every single day for help with housing. They can't afford where they're living. They're living with an abuser, and there's nowhere to escape to. Their landlord is moving into their unit, and they have to get out. Their power has been cut off. The list goes on and on.

Let me be clear: These are not calls that I get once a month, every couple of weeks, or even every couple of days. These calls come in every day, and most days there are more than one. People need help, and they need it now.

Yes, supply will help a little, but supply is coming in years and not days or months, and there is no guarantee of what the rents of all these buildings will be. People need housing that is adequate and that they can afford. There are some solutions to this that the government is at best ignoring and at worst working against.

We need a system of rent control where the rent is tied to the unit and not the tenant. This Bill does not do this. We need a system where there is no financial incentive for the use of fixed-term leases so they would be used for the intended purpose instead of for landlords to skirt the rent cap, as we heard about in Law Amendments Committee. This Bill does not have that.

Instead, it provides a pathway to homelessness, which, by the way, quadrupled in HRM since this government came to office. We need a system where there would be no financial incentive to make buildings pet-free when they were always pet-friendly; no need to charge for storage lockers when they always had been included in the rent; and no need to renovict tenants when there is nothing more than a cosmetic improvement needed to do to a unit or building. This Bill does not have this.

If not fair or affordable, the rent cap will give some predictability to renters for the next couple of years, but what happens then? This government is determined to return our rental market to a scenario where there is no control at all. We need this Bill to legislate permanent rental control tied to the unit and not the tenant.

The opportunity to bring this Bill forward could have done so much good, but it actually does the opposite. It will not help the housing and homelessness crisis, and in fact, it will probably make it worse for all these reasons I have laid out. For the tens of thousands of renters I represent in Dartmouth North, I cannot support this Bill.