Mr. Chair, I am just harking back to the last government where there was a lot of work done on looking for savings and efficiencies. It took almost two years of discussion and debate. When there was a move to act on recommendations, we acted partially on some of the recommendations, not all. There was significant pushback from MLAs when we talked about inclusive schooling and people-teacher ratio, for example, and the re-profiling the overfunding that was going on at the time. When we moved to act on it, it was a hugely contentious issue, which I suppose speaks most clearly to the issue of what would happen if you made all of those recommendations would have been binding on all of us. There would have been some significant change to government. We would have given away our ability as final arbitrators on the budgets and structure of government, and I don’t think that’s the intent of the Program Review Office.

When we get the Program Review Office assisting work, it does things besides reviews. It assists in all sorts of other things. We have to look at what the recommendations are. Are they structural issues? Are they process issues? Are they finance issues? Are there overlap issues? There’s not a

straightforward answer. It depends on the recommendations. I will ask the deputy if he wants to add anything further to that response. Thank you.