Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I support the principles of what my colleagues are raising here today. They are bringing forward the frustrations and, if I may define, the swell of frustrations out there in our communities regarding some of the principles of why the social housing transfer moved from Housing over to ECE.
Mr. Speaker, I think, actually, it was a good thing. I think the principles of it were sound, but the problem with the issue really rose when they only did half the transfer. Mr. Speaker, they sent over the auditing process of the application form but they didn’t fulfill their mandate by transferring the administration of where that payment goes. That’s where the problem exists, Mr. Speaker, because now there are two stops when there really should be one. Before it was simple. Yes, I agree that people could go to Housing if you didn’t need income support, but I really believe in my heart that a Service Canada model style of business would help everyone. In these times of need, this issue seems to surface, as it wasn’t fully implemented. I think that’s where the fault lies.
Mr. Speaker, my colleagues will talk about the market rent problems that have emerged out of this and I would agree with them, but I think the real failing of this process was it was never fully fulfilled, which is finish the job by transferring all the administrative positions over the income support and process one application at one time. Mr. Speaker, that is the solution to this problem. It’s becoming more evident as we discuss this and go forward. Creating two service shops creates twice the burden, Mr. Speaker. I think the government is on the right track. I think the government needs to make the right decision, though, and finish the social housing transfer all in one. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.