多年来，安省一直在实行加国最偏袒租客的租赁制度之一。保护租客固然重要，尤其是在住房负担能力已显危机的省份，但这租赁制度对租客的保护和偏袒得过头，因而导致了意想不到的严重后果。最近在省议会通过的第60号法案则是期待已久的必要修正。
For years, Ontario has operated one of the most tenant-friendly rental systems in the country. Protecting renters is important—especially in a province where housing affordability has become a crisis—but the system gradually drifted so far in one direction that it created serious unintended consequences. Bill 60, recently passed in the legislature, represents a long-needed correction.
对60号法案批评最激烈者称其为“反租客”政策。但任何了解现行制度运作的人都知道，这种指控具有误导性。问题不在于偏袒哪一方，而要让一个长期失衡、对个体房东及整个租赁市场都造成伤害的制度重建公平和平衡。
The fiercest critics of Bill 60 describe it as “anti-tenant.” But anyone who has spent time observing how the current system works knows this label is misleading. The issue is not about choosing sides; it is about restoring balance and fairness to a process that has been failing both landlords and the broader rental market.
多年来，一个突出的问题始终未得到解决，即一旦租客停止付租，要将其驱逐几乎难上加难。理论上，拖欠租金的租客当然应当享有正当程序，也需要一定时间来筹措资金。但在现实中，制度的效率低下、积案严重，使得拖欠租金的案件往往拖上数月。有些深知系统漏洞的租客会趁火打劫，利用制度的拖延而盘剥房东。
One problem has stood out for years: the extreme difficulty of removing a tenant who has stopped paying rent. In theory, tenants who fall behind deserve due process and time to recover. In practice, the system has been so slow and backlogged that non-payment cases often stretch for months. Some tenants, fully aware of these delays, have learned how to take advantage of them.
我就在2017年亲眼目睹了在我的邻居身上发生的一桩类似案件。租客彻底停止付租，房东向房东与租客委员会（LTB）提出申诉，本以为能够尽快解决，然而，听证程序竟一拖就是整整一年。在这期间，租客一分钱都没付。等到最终的驱逐令下达时，房东已损失大约三万加元，这笔钱房东根本无力讨回。
A striking example unfolded in my neighbourhood in 2017. A tenant stopped paying rent entirely. The landlord filed a case with the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB), expecting a timely resolution. Instead, the hearing process dragged on for a full year. During that time, the tenant paid nothing. By the time the eviction order was finally issued, the landlord had lost roughly $30,000—a loss that would never be recovered.
这个案例绝非偶然。许多那些只拥有一套地下室单位或公寓单位的小房东在这样的制度下苦苦支撑：即便数月收不到租金，他们仍必须继续支付房贷、水电费和物业税。显然，不良租客可受到不合理制度保护，而房东却要独自承担全部的财务风险。
This story is far from unique. Many small landlords—people who own one basement suite or a single condo—struggled under a system that required them to continue paying mortgages, utilities, and taxes for many months while receiving no rent at all. The message was clear: irresponsible tenants could rely on the system for protection, while landlords bore all the financial risk.
