We often think there are different economic frameworks as well. Without programs such as friendship centres or drop-ins to help kids keep out of trouble, not get into drinking, not get into crime, not make more babies than they need to...what's the cost of keeping a kid in jail for a year versus having a program that will help provide services to him or her?
I think it is, in part, common sense in terms of the economics. The challenge is that you don't want to run structural deficits--no one does--when we ask folks to invest heavily in any kind of housing problems. Even though there are downstream investments and savings, no one is going to take from Corrections today to fund CMHC today for savings downstream tomorrow.
It's a real challenge; I appreciate that. There's always a political price to be paid for these decisions. I think the prudent thing is to graduate as many children as you can--I keep coming back to that--and to find homes. A housing first approach is certainly valuable, because they can't get a job and have a home; they can't finish school if they don't have a place to stay. I don't think there's anything to add that's new or unique to that, but certainly just to endorse that concept.