Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So just to be clear, I appreciate the information. I do wonder if we still need to maintain a high level of awareness of what's happening at Snap Lake. Even though it's not in full operation, it still has a significant impact on our environment and represents a significant liability in ensuring that the company is maintaining its obligations throughout the care and maintenance period. Hopefully, we can get it back online but at this point I would hope that our current budget can accommodate that. I think I heard that from the deputy minister.

I want clarity on this. The Minister is telling us that this is an evidence-based decision to reduce this and that inspectors have a risk matrix and they've determined that there will be few requirements so this is a natural kind of progression. The deputy minister is saying they were asked to make cuts; they looked at their available programs, found the ones that would be least impacted where they could make those cuts. So which is it? Was this program cut -- was this funding cut because it will not impact services but they needed to make the cut anyway or was it cut because it would have been cut anyway due to the risk matrix. Is it evidence-based or is it reduction driven? Still unclear on that. Thank you.