[English translation not provided.]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that you've seen the media reports of the eviction of a family from public housing last month at Fort Liard. A family of five

was evicted from public housing during one of the coldest months of the year for falling behind in their rent. I am sure you're thinking, Mr. Speaker, that the family must have owed a lot of rent money for such drastic action to be taken. But sadly, this family was evicted from their house for owing just over $1,000.

What has happened to the family? Thankfully, their respective families have stepped up and provided a place to stay for the short term. However, nobody had the space for the family to stay together, so our policies have split up this family and inconvenienced two other families, and subjected the children to teasing by their peers at school — pretty dire consequences for $1,000.

And to really make sure that this family will not be able to get on their feet any time soon, the costs for the rental officer and the Sheriff’s office related to this eviction have been added to their existing bill, and they now owe well over $2,500.

One simple thing that is getting lost in evicting people from public housing is that one way or another, the G.N.W.T. is going to incur costs, through increased social assistance payments for the families to rent a place on the open market, or for downstream costs related to the upkeep of the families. This leaves a bitter taste in my mouth, like wasabi sauce.

I know that we need rules. I know that people living in public housing are expected to pay their fair share for their housing. But as an MLA, I also know that I expect the delivery or withholding of government programs and services to be based on common sense. Just shuffling families between income assistance programs doesn't address the core issues and doesn't save the government any money at the end of the day. Mahsi cho.