Yeah, thanks, Mr. Chair. I guess I wanted to -- I have the benefit of having sat through the last Assembly, and I actually served on the transition matters committee that provided its advice to this Assembly and one of the specific pieces of advice was to have fewer priorities, and that wasn't followed. I was part of the process that developed the priorities. I urged my colleagues to have fewer priorities but my views didn't prevail, and I still think we have too many. I think some of them conflict with each other, and some of them are -- it just raised unrealistic expectations for our residents and are just simply not even possible. I'll go on record as saying that trying to promote three big infrastructure projects at the same time is just not something that's even achievable financially, so. But I do believe that, you know, this Cabinet is prepared to actually work with Regular MLAs. That's not something I saw in the last Assembly so I want to give my Cabinet colleagues credit for that, that they are willing to sit down and work with us as Regular MLAs. Even if sometimes I disagree with the outcome, at least they're willing to sit down and talk with us and I think that's a huge improvement over the last Assembly where Cabinet just went to look for their three friends and did whatever it wanted. So that has been a big improvement.

I guess if -- I do want to address my colleague from Yellowknife North about what he characterized as "fake votes." These were not fake votes. We tried to work very hard to come up with a nonthreatening way to evaluate the performance of Ministers and, you know, I was part of the rules and procedures committee. I chaired it when we came up with that process. Like, we put a lot of time and effort into that. At the end of the day, though, Cabinet didn't respect the process in my view, and that's why we ended up with a process that didn't really work. So they were not fake votes. They were -- it was an attempt to try to find some compromise and some way of holding Ministers accountable. Unfortunately, it didn't work.

With this review, though, I don't feel terribly well prepared. It's been a long sitting. I have not done my homework. I'm going to confess that right now, but -- and I don't think that we've spent enough time to actually evaluate what's in this document as Regular MLAs.

I will give my Cabinet colleagues some credit for taking what was a rather broad wish list and trying to put in place some measurable targets in there I think with varying degrees of success. I would have appreciated more measurables around some of the specific priorities. But I think it's better than the last mandate that came forward from the previous Assembly but -- or Cabinet, I should say, but I think it still could use a lot more work.

Yeah, I think COVID has really taken a lot out of us all in terms of the focus that we had as a government at the beginning, our ability to do work even together as this -- as an Assembly, as MLAs, as Cabinet, as Regular MLAs. And I -- you know, I think we do need -- owe it to the public to review that very carefully. I expect that there's going to be another transition matters committee established towards the end of this Assembly, and I'd be willing to serve and volunteer to serve on that again. And hopefully the next Assembly will listen a little more carefully. I don't know.

But I have lots of other comments, Mr. Chair, that I will make as we work our way through the document. But I wanted to correct, I think, some of the things that I think I heard said, but also give this Cabinet some credit for their ability and willingness to at least work with Regular MLAs compared to the last one. Thanks, Mr. Chair.