End the heartbreak

Over at the Winnipeg Dogs blog, a commenter relates the "heartbreaking" experience of her mother having to part ways with a pet because of a landlord's policy.
That's exactly the sort of plight that could be avoided if only Manitoba would abolish "no pets" policies with a simple amendment to its Residential Tenancies Act.
Instead, the government appears to have chosen a more complicated route that involves a big dose of faith in the market.
In an e-mail to me this week, someone in Manitoba Finance (which has the Residential Tenancies Branch under its umbrella) described the government's plan as "to allow landlords to collect a pet damage deposit in the hopes that this would encourage landlords to consider pets in rental units."
It seems a big mistake for the government to think that adding such a slight incentive would work. It's as if the government learned nothing from its experience with payday loan businesses, which had to be forced via regulation to (partially) clean up their act.
The market didn't nudge the payday loan companies into better practices. Why does the Finance Minister think a little market tinkering will change arrogant property management companies?
Here's the logical, simple route the government should take: Amend the act the same way Ontario amended its Residential Tenancies Act many years ago.
Just add these words to the act: "A provision in a tenancy agreement prohibiting the presence of animals in or about the residential complex is void."