Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in 1997, the Legislative Assembly held a mid-term review, and it wasn't until every single Member who was involved in that process finally left office 18 years later that another mid-term review was held. I don't think that was a coincidence. This Assembly held a mid-term review 12 days ago, and I have a feeling that, until all 19 of us are gone, there won't be another. Regardless, the review is now behind us.
Mr. Sebert received a vote of non-confidence, and we must decide how to move forward. In the system of government based on political parties, a non-confidence vote means that the opposition gets to kick the government out of power. However, we are a consensus government. Cabinet is not a ruling party, and the Regular Members are not the opposition. We are all MLAs with specific roles working together to try to improve the lives of our residents.
One of the roles of Regular Members is to ensure that the Ministers are doing their job. In my opinion, a non-confidence vote highlights our failure to do that. Holding one performance review and then removing a Minister does not fulfill our obligation to ensure good governance, in my opinion.
I am not letting the Minister off the hook, however. It is an honour and a great responsibility to hold his position, and we should not be satisfied with anything less than maximum effort on his part, and the non-confidence vote shows that we aren't.
So the question is: will replacing Minister Sebert with one of the current Regular Members improve government more than working with the Minister to improve his performance? History indicates that a removal motion can deepen the tension between Cabinet and Regular Members and undermine future prospects for consensus. Taking that into account along with the considerable challenge of taking over a department halfway through a term, I believe we are better off using the tools available to try and improve the Minister's performance, which so far in this Assembly, we haven't done.
The Premier will meet with Regular Members at our request to discuss any issues we may have with the Minister. In past Assemblies, the Premier would take these criticisms and work with the Minister to address them, and it was effective. Say what you will about our Premier, but I have been told by many constituents that Premier McLeod was the best deputy minister they have ever worked under. He knows how to manage people, and he knows how to get results, so let us utilize that. If Minister Sebert retains his position, the next few months will be a major test for him. If there is no improvement in his performance when this House meets again in February, then I'll be leading the charge to remove him. Until then, let's do our job and make government work. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.