Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The bottom line is that the department doesn't have that $400,000 in the next year, which is in this budget that is before the Legislative Assembly. I have heard, from around this table, an awful lot of requests for more spending in Justice; a considerable amount of spending in Justice. I know that the members of government have heard that request as well, but we are going to have to examine all the requests for spending and then try and respond as best as we can within the resources that we have during the next business plan process.
At this point if we were to keep going with that operation, then we would have to cut something else in the department. Would that be in drafting of legislation, would it be in legal advice to departments, would it be to our lawyers at the devolution table? It would have to be someplace where there was some reduction in services. In terms of government priorities and government spending, this clearly wouldn't have been something would have come forward if we hadn't had a reduced target to reach. Given the target that this government has set for itself in terms of the savings, if we have to take $400,000 out of the department, with what is left, this is the place to do it.
That doesn't mean that it's one that we are happy about or one that we would have proposed if we weren't challenged to make reductions. Any time you have to lay off experienced and dedicated staff, it is not something that makes you happy. We were challenged to come up with the reductions and this makes more sense than cutting somewhere else. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.