Yes, thanks, Madam Chair. I just want to highlight what this institutional control program is all about.

In Saskatchewan, the mining that takes place is generally in the northern part of the province. They've got a bunch of abandoned uranium mines there that I guess were federally owned, operated, or regulated and so on; a few gold mines here and there too, but. So they had this problem of these abandoned mines and no way of really trying to deal with them or find funding and so on. So what they did was they thought long and carefully about this, and they talked to people in the mining industry as well. The mining industry wants to get some certainty about when they can walk away from a site after using it. And that's not an unreasonable thing. You know, they'd go in, use an area, and they want to know when they're clear and free.

So what they -- the Saskatchewan government did was ask companies if you're going to leave a site, mining companies, there's two pots of money that you can and should be paying into. The first one is to kind of take care of ongoing maintenance -- care and maintenance at the site. Things like, you know, you might have to do a geotechnical inspection every few years of openings that have been closed or dam structures that have been left on site that, you know, tailings covers, to make sure that they're still working the way that they're supposed to. So those kind of ongoing care costs, you know, that money can be put into one pot.

A second pot, though, is to really deal with unforeseen events, like Mount Polley in British Columbia, where there was a catastrophic tailings failure and tailings went all the way down into Quesnel Lake, polluted salmon-bearing waters - what a mess. So, you know, there's some risk associated with those with some sites, so companies that are at high risk sites, they can put some money into an unforeseen events pot of money and then the government can access that to take care of, you know, potentially, you know, unforeseen catastrophic events.

Now this is a pretty new system in Saskatchewan. It's only been in place for I think less than a decade, and there's only two or three companies that are -- maybe three or four, that are in this program. But at least somebody's thought it through as a way for the government to actually have money in place to deal with sites and operators can then walk away and leave it, and they don't have to worry about the liability associated with these sites. And, you know, when you think about some of these sites, they're going to be here hundreds of years into the future. Where are the resources going to come from to manage them in a collective sense? So at least the Government of Saskatchewan has thought this through; they have a system in place. We have got nothing for Giant Mine, quite frankly, other than the environmental agreement that does I think start to look at some of this perpetual care plan that's going to have to be generated. But as a government that wants to promote responsible resource development, we have a duty to come up with a system that's going to allow industry to have clear and free -- knowing when relinquishment's going to take place and walk away but some public confidence that there's still resources that can look after sites for the regular care and maintenance and unforeseen events. And that's the beauty of this system. But we've got nothing. And I don't know what's happening within the departments to actually look at this issue. So I'll be very curious to see how the Cabinet responds to this recommendation. Thanks, Madam Chair.