What is the point of the hours, days, weeks spent in committee meetings in the budget approval process if cabinet/FMB has latitude to amend it? What is the value of the increased involvement? If this extensive consultation was required to arrive at a plan, should not any be required to amend it?

The issue of communication surrounding the altering of the capital plan is not an isolated situation or concern. Communication with all members of this House is the cornerstone of effective leadership. We entered into this house on the premise of working together, not wasting time taking adversarial positions for the sake of being adversarial. However, this is a two way street, and this respect must be reciprocal, it is the rule of do unto others.

If members of Cabinet should forget about when they were ordinary members and how they wanted to be involved and treated, a very vivid and life like reminder may come to pass. I suggested to one Minister yesterday, partly in jest, that if ordinary members input into decision making is not taken seriously and we are the last to find out things relative to our constituents and communities as an MLA undermining our credibility, I think that given the large number of chairs in this assembly, we should prop mannequins in all of those chairs, rename the Cabinet a benevolent dictatorship, increase their pay and pension accordingly, go home, and get on with our lives.

I know that this particular crop of ordinary members have great potential for working with this Cabinet for the benefit and betterment of our Territory. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.