Thanks, Mr. Chair. I just want to return briefly to this issue of the reduced inspection budget. Why I am so passionate about this is because of a promise our government made about how we were going to do things better than the federal government. I think with reduced inspections, we are going to have increased risk of some of these sites becoming -- we are pretty good at generating abandoned, contaminated sites here in the Northwest Territories. We have a terrible track record of that under the federal government. We are now responsible for that. If we are carrying out inspections on these sites, we are responsible. We can't go back to the federal government on some of these sites. We don't have the purse that the federal government has in terms of trying to remediate contaminated sites. If we mess up now, it is going to cause us a lot of financial difficulty and prevent us from doing some of the good things we have all agreed to do in our mandate. I think cutting inspections is very short-sighted. Save some money now is going to lead to a greater risk of us inheriting sites and things that we really should be doing a much better job at preventing.

I want to transition from that, Mr. Speaker, into another topic, which is: how do we prevent and make sure that we don't inherit these sort of sites? Inspections are part of the picture. The other part of it is making sure that we have proper financial security in place. We have had at one time a unit; I can't even remember the name of whatever the entity was before. We have had some people working on this issue now. I know they are doing good work and hard work, but we have had this jurisdiction now for almost three years, and there is not one piece of policy, not one legislative change that has come about to make sure that we improve our financial securities and liabilities regime here in the Northwest Territories. When can we actually expect to see something emerge from this department in terms of it improving financial securities?

I am just going to give a couple of examples. Right now financial security is usually asked for, but it is not mandatory. It is discretionary. It is discretionary under the current legislation. Why can't we make it mandatory as it is now indeed under the Commissioners Lands Act? Because of changes that were made a few years ago because of the lessons learned from Giant Mine. We have had this jurisdiction for three years. When are we going to see some solid policy work, some solid legislative changes come out of this department to prevent us from inheriting more contaminated sites? Thanks, Mr. Chair.