I have a follow-up question to the comment that putting language like “must” or “implement” in the legislation fetters ministerial discretion. Of course, that's the purpose of legislation: to fetter ministerial jurisdiction. It's for the legislature to give direction to the executive about what the legislature, the representative of the people, believes must be done. My view would be that it's entirely appropriate.
In the final line of the first paragraph, there's the phrase, “The strategy may include...”. I wonder why it doesn't say, “The strategy must include”? Such language is closer to the original. I see the value of some of the amended language, but this would actually ensure that these things are done, not that they're mere suggestions contained in legislation.