I cannot pre-empt a Government decision on this matter and cannot make a statement on something that has not yet happened. However, the objective of the review is quite simple and it does not matter how much money is involved. That is the mistake people make; they think that if money is plentiful there is an excuse not to examine best practice in the system and that we continue to live with the old systems all the time. I do not agree with that view. Money always was and will be a scarce commodity. If it is so plentiful, why bother taxing the people? Why should we not still use it efficiently? I concur with the theory that no matter how plentiful money is, we should be as careful with it as if it were our own, even more careful as it is the taxpayers' money. I fully agree with the Deputy that the objective of everything I do is to ensure that as much of the money as possible goes to deliver front-line services. That is exactly what we are trying to do.
As everybody knows there are two steps in this process. One is to stop the ever-growing number of bodies adding to the complication for the citizen, and the second is to try to rationalise and make more efficient the existing bodies. I have pointed out time and again that as a member of a community, I get confused as to what all these bodies are doing. Those who visit my clinics and receive the telephone list of the contacts who might be able to offer assistance in various areas are testament to the fact that people want some order and rationality introduced to this sector.