I listened to some of the comments around the table. Economic recovery is extremely important. Economic recovery means new dreams, new developments, new things. When I hear comments that are, "These monies and allocations were given for certain projects. They can't be changed to universal childcare. They cannot be changed to something else" -- when we sit around this table and we're talking about infrastructure and we're not even discussing that in that right department, it amazes me on some of the things that are brought here at this level in that sense.

I, too, agree with universal childcare. I, too, agree with all these things. Can't have everything if you don't have infrastructure that is going to carry this territory forward. We have mines closing. We have lost a lot of jobs with this mine. We looked at it this morning. That's a lot of jobs we're talking about. How are you going to rebuild the territory if you don't have dreams and you don't have an amazing infrastructure ability to really want to do something entirely with what we got and ensuring that the federal government helps us with Indigenous procurement so that we can move forward and ownership with the Indigenous peoples because those are the things that could actually be done if you actually want to do it.

From what I see in the discussions in the past, we can do that. You can do anything you want if you put your mind to it. I firmly believe in that. I'm very much a business person; I always have been, all my life. I never depended on government, most of the time. I am very pro-business. I always will be. Other people have other agendas, and that's fine. We can't all think the same, but I know for sure that the three main projects that are designated in our mandate agenda is what we agreed on. The majority is always what we agree on.

There are a couple of things that I noticed in the last day or so that puzzle me about Infrastructure, and it is mainly to deal with the Taltson. I am very much about the Taltson expansion, and now I see that the Minister has appointed the same old board again, all deputy ministers, no arm's length, and that really concerns me. You have very capable people, the president and everyone else at NCPC, who could maybe think of different ideas instead of thinking in tunnel vision, like most governments do, and do something entirely different and think out of the box. Yet, we appoint all these deputy ministers back to a board, instead of having an arm's length board of governors in the governance aspect of the NCPC, and that would also include the Taltson expansion. I want to ask the Minister: how did she decide on this, again? Minister Archie, would you answer my question, please?