Thank you, Madam Chairperson. I was trying to decide if I wanted to speak to the mandate or not. I mean, you heard largely what my colleagues had said and -- I mean, just working backwards, I mean, it's really tough to disagree with this. I mean, because the statements are so high -- high level. You know, I often feel that the public wants more and expects more, and this is the fault of consensus government, which is we can't be specific. And the only reason we can't be specific is because it's us. We choose to be that way.
If I was in charge of a mandate by myself or was able to sort of, like, pry my Members -- colleagues to agree, I mean, we'd say simply, as I said earlier today in my statement, which is, you know, we would mandate a hundred new homes for social housing. You know, and we'd work towards that goal. We would commit the forces, like a team, an army, to meet these challenges. We'd say, for example, today we're going to -- we're going to work to get 150 kilometers of the Mackenzie Valley Highway done by the end of this term. And to me, those are the types of things that the public's looking for.
I mean, if I was to quote President George Bush, I mean, I'd say mission accomplished with this little chuckle, because the mandate itself looks like it's largely completed already. And the problem is the Cabinet's hearing this as a criticism, but it's not a criticism. The problem is these things are written as so wide. I mean, you know, better streamlined admin process, engage public, I mean we do that every day now. You know, sometimes better, sometimes worse. But in all fairness, we do this, you know, open transparent government. I mean, we try those things. We do those things. I mean, none of this is new. That's the problem. I mean, every government, including the ones, the 21st Assembly, etcetera, and on and on and on, will be struggling with the same phrases. How do we break free from the static position of -- you know, of -- the static truth of mandates, which is they're just -- they're statements that, you know, nothing is groundbreaking. I mean, I -- I'm not advocating for party politics but, you know, when a government comes into force, I mean, it says I'm going to make highways, or I'm going to set up a bottle depot in every community, or -- in the sense of recycling. And -- or we're going to build more houses. And this is how many we're going to build. And that's the problem with this process, is we don't -- you know, we're almost afraid of our shadow to make those commitments. And I don't know why that it continues to be this way. I mean, I can keep advocating for more, be specific, and I will -- will continue to advocate. But it's an unfortunate symptom of the way we do work. I mean, I believe in empowering the Premier to lead the Cabinet, but we don't do it that way. I believe, and they should be able to make decisions, but yet we -- we tie ourselves up into these ball of yarns that are fought over by kittens so they're quite a mess, unable to follow a line of decision-making and process and getting free. I mean, it's such a tangled web of confusion sometimes. And what do we do? We further hit ourselves with more policy and process.
I mean, the general public, I find in my experience, you know, wanted to hear things like we're going to build two more addiction centres by the end of this term. Like, I'm serious. That specific. You know, they would like to hear that. And I know we can't do everything for everybody, but that's the reality of government, which is you try your best, but at least try to -- try.
I don't think my point on another 150 kilometers of Mackenzie Valley being built -- you know, if we only did 149, I don't think people would be angry with us. I think they would be inspired by our blaze and trail of call to action, you know. I mean, when I hear deliver equitable access to sustainable primary health care, I mean that is every day. I mean, I can't imagine someone not attempting to deliver equitable access to sustainable primary care. I mean, it's just -- it's hard to imagine that that isn't the case. And it's frustrating because, like I say, when I talk to people, they want to hear specifics. They want to hear that there is a call to action and one that they can measure us -- every one of us against. And for better or for worse, it at least helps inspires us. Because, I mean, if we said we were going to build another hundred public housing units to help people and, you know, that would be an easy way to rally behind because, I mean, we'd be looking to the left of us and saying how do we help and get this darn thing done, and we'd be looking to the right and say how do we get those things done, and, you know, you do your part because we're all going to do it. But now it's just, well, we're going to work together. That's the mandate. And that's really what it says.
I mean, the last two speakers are right. I mean, of course they support this. I mean, who doesn't support working on addressing the effects of trauma. But, you know -- as an example, or emergency management. Who doesn't support any of these things? I mean, it's impossible not to support them. But, again, Madam Chairperson, you know, the challenge, like I say, is that I think it's -- it largely would be -- it shouldn't be taken personal, and it's not intended to be personal, but, I mean, the public really is frustrated by these challenges, which is what does it really say? And what does it really mean? And what does it really deliver? And for me to go back to them or speak to them at my constituency meeting -- which, by the way, is at 6:30 tonight for all those listening, at Javaroma -- until 8:30. And I mean, the reality is they want to know and be able to sink their teeth into something. And to that, I see the ultimate frustration of, you know, what are politicians really saying, what are they accomplishing, what are they doing? I have nothing to measure them by. And then when it comes polling day, you know, they just -- they're rating you on your personality basically as opposed to the government. Or they're mad at the government and blaming Regular Members, which is often I've seen the case. The government doing this, and it must be your fault. But if you read this, I mean, we've already done it, I mean --
So Madam Chair, yes, I support the public safety initiative statements. I support all the statements. I can run through them all but I don't think I'll do that. So I just say I support them all. I mean, it's hard not to. And that's the frustration about the mandate, is that we've waited over six months to see statements that don't have specifics. And I know if I had my way, like I say, I mean, the government would pick five or six areas, target them very precisely, and show the public we're going to rise to the challenge and if we don't rise, we're darn -- we're going to darnedest do our best. And to that, I suspect every one of us in this room will be rewarded with either the big cheers or good support, at least emotionally, with our communities for having the best interests -- their best interests in our hearts. And that really in some ways is a lot of the work we do here.
So I am going to say that's all I have to say right now. But, of course, I reserve my right to reflect differently in a different direction as I spur -- as the moment spurs or as other Members inspire. So thank you, Madam Chairperson. And good luck on measuring these things. Cheers.