Thanks, Mr. Chair. I guess I will wade into this. Be careful what you ask for because we saw with some of the other departmental amalgamations that have been put forward that, in my humble opinion, they were not evidence-based and they are not zero-based budgeting. In any event, I think we have to be very careful.

You have separate pieces of legislation that deal with land and water, and I think that that is just a historical artifact of the last manager, which was the federal government, so you have to be very careful thinking about how you are going to merge those two responsibilities. Not to say that it can't be coordinated better, and I think we have already got some examples in terms of the cross-appointment of inspectors, and those guys work very hard at their job. We want to make sure that they are properly supported.

I do want to talk just briefly about what my colleague, the MLA for Sahtu, touched on, the declining corporate management dollars in the budget for Lands. We got $26 million up front to look at transition costs of us taking over these responsibilities. That is almost the entire annual budget of the Department of Lands. Then we got another $65 million a year to administer land and waters. Look, there are lots of start-up costs. We are learning and trying to feel our way. That is great.

Has the Minister or his department or our government ever looked at the money that we got from devolution and whether we are actually using and spending it all on resource management? Or are we diverting it for other purposes? Is that what we are starting to see happen here now? Thanks, Mr. Chair.