Advert
Advert – scroll down
Displaying the 5 latest comments.
Submitted | first-name | support | concern | top-concern | message |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2026-05-23 18:49:19 +02:00 | Nadia | No I do not | Regulatory Overreach | ||
2026-05-23 09:17:43 +02:00 | Viv | No I do not | Economic Impact | ||
2026-05-22 22:16:33 +02:00 | Catherine | No I do not | All of the above | Economic Impact | |
2026-05-22 17:12:00 +02:00 | Stefan | Yes I do | No concern, I Support the Gazette | ||
2026-05-22 17:03:18 +02:00 | Barbara | No I do not | All of the above | Economic Impact |
-
-
- Fair Competition: It levels the playing field between Airbnbs and traditional hotels/B&Bs that pay commercial rates and tourism levies
- Housing Availability: Regulating STRs prevents long-term rental stock from being depleted, making housing more affordable for locals.
- Safety & Quality: It ensures a minimum standard of safety (smoke detectors, insurance) for international and local tourists. Guests deserve the same safety and insurance protections in an Airbnb as they get in a 5-star hotel.
- Community Harmony: It gives residents and Body Corporates a framework to manage noise, parking, and security issues caused by transient guests.
-
-
-
- Privacy: Forcing guests to submit to government-tracked data sharing is a violation of privacy that will drive tourists to other destinations.
- Livelihood Threat: Many South Africans rely on STR income to pay their mortgages and survive the cost-of-living crisis; over-regulation kills this “side-hustle”.
- Property Rights: A homeowner should have the right to use their private property as they see fit without government-mandated caps on occupancy.
- Administrative Overkill: The requirements are too “corporate” for a simple room-sharing arrangement and will discourage new entrants.
- Privacy Risk: Forcing platforms to share personal data with the state is an overreach that risks the security of both hosts and guests.
-