Courtesy Daily Mirror

This Bill is intended to protect tenants’ risks undermining Sri Lanka’s property rental market and also harming property owners who live on rents than on fixed deposit investments.

As the country move forward for economic challenges, it’s crucial we don’t inadvertently discourage investments in the house and apartment building industry.

Key concerns with the bill are impact on senior citizens who are vulnerable owners. Many property owners, including seniors, depend on rental income for daily expenses and medications required in old age. By making evictions harder and prioritising tenant rights, this bill could force owners to sell assets, upsetting their financial security and monthly regular income. This will be discouraging investments in houses and property. Overly restrictive regulations will deter property owners from renting, reducing housing supply increase rents. Citizens will find it difficult to locate a house or an apartment on rent as all owners will tend to look for foreign tenants.

This could worsen Sri Lanka’s housing shortage and drive up rental prices, hurting those the Bill aims to help. Unfair shift in balance as this Bill prioritises tenant rights over contractual agreements, undermine property owners’ rights. Potential for abuse will be more. Tenants might exploit the system, by depositing the rent direct to owners’ accounts by force and refusing to vacate premises, leaving owners with lengthy and costly court battles, causing monetary hardship to senior owners.

Economic consequences would be reduced investment in housing which could harm Sri Lanka’s economy, limit job opportunities for all categories in building industry (another headache for Government) and reduce government revenue. Rather than imposing blanket regulations, policymakers should encourage the current system which has been functioning smoothly all these years.

I urge policymakers to maintain status quo rather than pelting stones at a hornets’nest. Government has enough issues at hand to resolve rather than have another confrontation with the public who voted for them.

Sumith de Silva