Qujannamiik. Thank you.
Just carrying on from what Mr. Okalik was saying, when you have a consensus government and you have a legislative assembly of 22 members, that's like having 22 parties. There really is not much accountability, so there really is not much of a chance. Even if you're operating in a minority, as cabinet does, because you have a cabinet of eight, including the premier, the rest of the members don't really have the cohesiveness to throw the bums out, because there is no party system. Even if there is a constant minority, there is really no accountability because there are no party politics, so it doesn't really matter how.... For lack of a better word, there really is not much of an opportunity for it to work all that well, because 13 so-called opposition members have 13 different ideas of what to do.
The party system works even in a territory like Greenland. They have a party system. Even though I think they're smaller than Nunavut, they have a party system. The Yukon has a party system. I think with a party system we'd probably be better off in Nunavut.
At the same time, when you have only one representative in the House of Commons, I know it's very hard for them to keep in touch with the people because of the size of the territory. As I said earlier, you could go through six different ridings in about two hours down south. Here you have to go to 26 different communities. When I was a member of Parliament, it took a year to go to each and every community at least once. Without a party system up here it's very hard, as I'm sure the former premier knows.