Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, I just want to get this straight. We had the Minister first say that these cuts were being made because there was reduced activity. Then it transitions now into explanation that they re-jigged the risk matrix so that there is less work to do and that is why the cuts are being made. That does not really quite flow the way I had expected an evidence-based decision to come out of that.

Let's start with facts here. First, when we got devolution, we promised that we were going to do better than the federal government, and that is promise that was made to our residents. Now, the Minister says, at least initially, that part of the reason for doing this a reduced level of activity out there. I don't see any evidence of that. Where is the evidence that there is a reduced level of activity out there?

If you look at the business plan for the department, and the deputy minister talked a little bit about this, in 2014-15, 669 inspections were carried out; in 2015-16, 791 inspections were carried out. That is on leases, water licences, reservations' land use permits. This year their target is 768. That is a little bit of a dip. That is not a lot. Commissioner's land assessment activities, these are, looking at Commissioner's lands, usually close to built-up communities. In 2014-15, there were 1,650 inspections; 2015-16, 2,818.

So, really, where is the evidence that there is a reduced level of activity out there? Does the Minister actually have statistics on the number of active land use permits, active water licences, active leases that we are required to monitor and carry out inspections on that he can point to about a reduced level of activity? Thank you, Mr. Chair.