No, I appreciate that but, sorry, we use COVID as an excuse or the pandemic as an excuse, but the time frame was June 2018 and the pandemic didn't start until March of 2020. That's 18 months, almost two years in the meantime, and really the next steps were already identified. The report on June 12, 2018, indicated the next step was to appoint the transitional committee.
I'm not quite following all this work that was supposedly done in the three and a half years. It seems to me from your technical briefing, honestly, the presentation, it's pretty clear that things just paused and then picked up again in December of 2021.
I will leave that one for now and I'll move on to something different because I think my assumptions on that seem to be fairly accurate.
On call to action 56, we've had this conversation a couple of times over the last few weeks already. Call to action 56 explicitly calls on the Prime Minister to answer the national council for reconciliation's annual report by providing a response. This interim board of directors that issued these 20 recommendations back in June of 2018 also advised that this should be the process, yet according to the bill it's the minister who would respond to the national council's annual report.
Can you tell me how this happened and who made the decision not to respect that call to action and have the minister respond instead of the Prime Minister?