Thank you, Mr. Chair. My understanding of consumer choice would be that there is a choice given. The purpose is to house people and they have a choice in where they are being housed, not forced into housing. I don't think that is one of the principles at all. By providing a rent subsidy, as per most established Housing First models, you give clients more choices than a handful of, I think the Minister previously provided, 30 semi-independent housing units. So that is where I am finding the most difficulty with calling these Housing First units. I don't take issue with transitional supportive housing and semi-independent housing. It is just not Housing First. I think there is still a great deal of confusion about this. If we are going to do Housing First, let's do Housing First. The $150,000 to support the city of Yellowknife's Housing First model, which is established under those principles, that is Housing First. Anything else deviates too far away from the principles of Housing First to be called that. So let's just be clear about the language that we use, but I will drop that for now.

The other question I had was about the transitional rent supplement program. I have personal experience with this. It doesn't appear to me and the people who I know who have used it to be geared towards middle-class income earners. Those are people who may apply for the program and receive five to 10 dollars off their rent bills. But it is not helping those middle class move toward things. I know there is also the PATH program. What is the income threshold, really? Who is the TRSP really geared towards helping in the Northwest Territories? Thank you, Mr. Chair.