Oh, we’ve got the “rule police” over there. So this does open the door for some unusual circumstances.
The situation as described by my colleague is such that it envisions one elderly person living in a public housing unit paying no rent and one grandchild moving in who works at the Northern Store, which we know, as a private sector employer, doesn’t pay a lot of money. It doesn’t envision Grandma getting a public housing unit for free and four or five grandchildren moving in, who all make $100,000 a year at the mine. It doesn’t envision that scenario.
All I’m saying is that I support the concept of some discretionary latitude on the part of the housing authorities to look at cases on an individual basis. Translation of this motion for me is “Let common sense prevail.” I think that surely the government, with all of its resources and intelligence, can figure out a policy that does not fling the door open wide for abuse of free accommodation, but at the same time allows for those situations where — the key thing is — the person living in that house adds to the quality of life and the independence of the person living there without penalizing them to the point that it is prohibitive to have any family member live with them in aging years. Thank you.