According to explanatory documents provided to reporters, potential changes could give landlords more “flexibility” to control who occupies their units and for how long, allowing them to “adjust tenancy arrangements based on market conditions, personal needs, or business strategies.”

[…]

Other, more concrete changes proposed in Thursday’s bill include ending the requirement for landlords to compensate tenants if they or an immediate family member move back into their own property, as long as the tenant is given 120 days notice.

[…]

If passed, Bill 60 would also amend more than a dozen other existing major laws. Other marquee changes would affect how municipalities collect development charges, how the provincial government builds transit-oriented communities, and how Queen’s Park restricts bike lanes and encourages road-building.

  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    13 days ago

    give landlords more “flexibility” to control who occupies their units and for how long, allowing them to “adjust tenancy arrangements based on market conditions, personal needs, or business strategies.”

    This reads like some sarcastic Beaverton shit.

  • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    13 days ago

    All the super smart people who voted for this tool can get fucked when their landlord evicts them for strategic business reasons and such and they have to use a shelter that doesn’t exist anymore and are forced in the streets and into an encampment which will be violently destroyed by thugs in uniform and eventually forced into ‘rehabilitation’.

    Etc.

    For the people.

      • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        13 days ago

        My buddy who extensively relies on free health care, mental health services, education assistance services, disability pay, and identifies with the queer community votes blue in every level of government. I don’t get it. Half their platform always involves stripping away the services he has relied on for over a decade.

  • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    13 days ago

    He just had to include bike lanes, restricting transit, and promoting car dependancy in a bill about landlords and rentals. Its like we are intentionally trying to make cost of living worse, prevent building long overdue density and transit in our cities, and put even more power into the ownership class. Ontario needs to get rid of this guy ASAP. His only saving grace was threatening trump with shutting off the power but that doesn’t seem to have any backbone to it.

  • SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    13 days ago

    We can prioritize housing as a place to live, which is done through making it less accessible as an investment.

    Or we can prioritize housing as an investment, which is done through making it less accessible for people who need a place to live.

    There is no fair balance between making homes for people to live in and making houses to speculate on.

    The same goes for food, privacy, and anything that people need or care about.

  • 1985MustangCobra@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    13 days ago

    what a horrible bill, other than the collection of development charges the rest i know for sure are absolute junk for the growth of Ontario. He thinks packed TTC buses and Trains that don’t have stops where they need them is the best way to move forward.