Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When will the Cabinet be moving forward on some type of initiative that will stop them from making serious substantial Cabinet directions and changes while any government is out during an election period? Thank you. When?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In my Member’s statement today I talked about an unaccountable legacy provided by the previous Cabinet. Mr. Speaker, the issue really is that former Cabinet has made substantial policy initiatives and changes that have affected the incoming government. Mr. Speaker, my question will be to the Government House Leader, Mr. Miltenberger. Would he be willing to address this issue and pass a Cabinet directive to ensure that no future Cabinet can pass substantial changes to government policy while there is an election period on? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I would like to reflect on the tumultuous life of the 16th Assembly. Cabinet, Regular Members and the public have had fierce debate on issues such as board reform, the Deh Cho Bridge and certainly the supplementary health benefits.

Our first budget sent the public service reeling with the threat of layoffs and cutbacks that seemed to come out of nowhere. Earlier this week, the YK Seniors, in collaboration with the Union of Northern Workers as well as many other concerned citizens, staged yet another protest, an excellent protest against changes to the supplementary...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m not sure I’m going to call this a consultation, because I certainly would not define it as meaningful. Mr. Speaker, there were legitimate questions asked by the public in a way to address this situation. Certainly, find efficiencies in some form and do a strategy around that, and certainly consider the option of taxation. If it can be spread out across the Territory so we can all share in the much needed, important essence of health care. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Dana Heide, probably to his long-term regret, let it quite clearly slip that he was always given the direction...

Mr. Speaker, I have to admit, I think the contradiction in two answers still lies before the House. The Minister will tell us that she is looking for suggestions. It is almost as if she is pointing at us for those suggestions. Mr. Speaker, time and time again Members have said, as well as the public who is here today have said, consider this. Additional taxation, look for efficiencies, find another way.

Mr. Speaker, where is the analysis in answering those questions? Where is the proof to show that they have been considered? Where is the proof that the Minister has taken the time to listen to...

Thank you for that, Mr. Deputy Premier. Mr. Speaker, will the Deputy Premier be making a recommendation that this is an initiative that binds this Cabinet as well as potentially binds the future Cabinets from making those types of substantial decisions going forward? Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned in my Member’s statement today, we have the legacy of the Deh Cho Bridge, the legacy of the board reform, and certainly the legacy of the direction that is applied to supplementary health benefits. As I said the day before, these are all issues that need to be discussed and reviewed; that is not the issue. The issue is substantial directions, as I have said today. Mr. Speaker, when can we expect the government to move on this initiative beyond the point of discussion or review or thinking about it? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With a quick glance coming into the Assembly, I can see a constituent, Mrs. Ruth Spence in the gallery and it looks like we have a recent addition of Mr. and Mrs. Larry and Cappy Elkin. Welcome to the Assembly today.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek unanimous consent to return to item 8 on our agenda, oral questions. Thank you.

---Unanimous consent denied.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, at one time there was a Compassionate Travel Policy and it was stopped. It could well be suited for particular cases like this. Would the Minister reinvestigate it from that point of view, from a compassionate point of view? I mean, all I’m asking her to do, and I want to be absolutely clear, Mr. Speaker, is I’d like her to do an analysis and we could cost it out and take it from a compassionate point of view when these situations are very dire, as the old Compassionate Travel Policy allowed. Would the Minister reconsider this under that circumstance? Thank...