Mr Speaker, permit me this opportunity this morning to thank the Almighty God for bringing us here with good health. I believe, Mr Speaker, that we are at a critical juncture in the politics and the administration of our country. And the time has come when those of us who are called upon to serve will do so regardless of whether being in government or being in opposition. The trend we have seen in most recent times, Mr Speaker, is one in which there are individuals who believe that they are entitled, entitled to lead, probably not to serve, entitled to be in charge and not to be a follower, entitled to give instructions and to dictate from behind and not fall in line. But, Mr Speaker, we who are here must understand that we are leaders, our people look up to, particularly our children. And so our conduct must be one which resonates in the minds and in the hearts of our people to be proud of. Some of what that has taken place in most recent times indicates the level to which a few have established themselves. And so, Mr Speaker, their behaviour will do nothing but to continue on a downward slide into degradation. And so for us who are on this side, we must stand firm to our commitment of serving the people and not be ashamed to say we are putting the people first. Because the purpose for which we are pointed, the purpose for which we are elected, is for the purpose of the cause of the people of this country. And so let us not lose sight of that cause. And so, Mr Speaker, when I listened to the Prime Minister, Minister of Finance, on Tuesday, when he delivered his budget address, as it is called, under the theme health and security, the pillars of sustainability, I thought not only that theme set the foundation, it also set the tone for the direction in which the government is heading. Also, Mr Speaker, as he delved into the meat of the matter and presented it to us, I couldn't help but reminisce on what was said previously about a month ago and what was said again on Tuesday regarding the performance of the government and what the government has done. And I often say that unless we blow our trumpet, unless we speak about what we do, unless we tell the narrative, it may fall on deaf ears. It may fall on deaf ears because they are those who are making noises, empty vessels, those who will have all kinds of imaginations and things to do to distract people. And so we shall not be distracted. So when I read Mr Speaker on page 8 of the Prime Minister's statement, where he says, In my last budget, we promised and delivered paid facility fees for 24,000 primary and secondary school students, procured 10,000 electronic devices for students under the one laptop per child program, made available 1,200 MiFi devices to households to assist students with distributed learning, paid CXC maths and English fees for all secondary schools, secure low-cost ICT services for income households at $20 per month for 5,000 households, and that's the program with Flow, the Flow Communication Bundle, and next Tuesday, a meeting with DigiCell to finalize our negotiations, a similar program with DigiCell which will cover another 5,000 or more children. Mr Speaker, you go on further, the allocation of $7 million to the home care program to secure care for the elderly. A program that was tampered with by the last administration against advice. The provision of additional $10 million to the Ministry of Equity to provide social assistance. And the list goes on Mr Speaker, and it brought me to the famous Jamaican artist, Gramps Morgan, who sings People Like You, a song which was penned originally by Johnny Reed.  And that is quite appropriate Mr Speaker, to the Minister for Finance and all of us who are here, who continue to give service, to give a little more than we take, to fix more than we break. And that is so, Mr Speaker, appropriate. Because we could have been on the street today and not inside this parliament having this debate. Because like many other institutions, or if I should say structures of government, they were broken down and not one built. So whether it is the police headquarters on the instruction of the father of a politician, or the custody streets for which we are called upon to rebuild, to reconstruct Mr Speaker, they were breaking down more than they were fixing. They were breaking down the constitution of this country Mr Speaker, the laws of the land. Because of five years Mr Speaker, five years. Notwithstanding the fact that the law says we must have a deputy speaker, they did it with impunity and refused for five years, almost moving on to six years, without a deputy speaker. And yet Mr Speaker, they come in this parliament and attempt to dictate at what stage should they make their presentation in representation of the people. And then attempt Mr Speaker to say that they have looked at the standing orders which they disrespected in their time and cannot find anywhere in the standing orders which speaks to the order of speakers. But they disregarded Mr Speaker, they violated the constitution of the land and felt it was good to do so. All they did Mr Speaker was to break rather than to fix. And then they dig into triviality Mr Speaker, when we speak of all the things that we have done in this country in the last two years, just under two years. An attempt to make an issue about the fact that this government decided to fulfill its promise of establishing a youth economy. But what they don't understand Mr Speaker, no matter how they twist it, an attempt to make it appear that their programs going on, their programs, why set up a youth economy. What they don't understand Mr Speaker, that what we have done is to formalize, institutionalize and legislate the youth economy, demonstrating a clear commitment to the development of young people. So it's not a program that you go somewhere it existed today and doesn't exist tomorrow. It's not a program that can be adopted and then forgotten. It's a program that is enshrined in law. And if you know this government and you understand this government to date, you'll know that this government is a law abiding government. And so the youth economy is a demonstration of our economy, a demonstration of our commitment. And that is what we stand for Mr Speaker. And we went on as the Minister for Finance went on. He said subsidize price of fuel, flour and rice. Significant. But they will ignore the fact that the government is doing all of this and then speak about the government making $70 million this last financial year. But Mr Speaker, this is what we got. This is what we take if you want to go according to the words. But we have given more. We have given more with the reduction of that. We have given more with the contributions that we have made. $10 million one place, another $18.3 million, $7.3 million, $800,000 Mr Speaker. If you go on the list goes on Mr Speaker, and I'm sure as you multiply and add what the government has given in the last year and a half plus, you'll find in the true spirit of Gramps Morgan, we have given a little more than we have taken. My dear friend from Chazelle is smiling because he understands that. He understands what that means to the people of this country. And so as I said earlier on Mr Speaker, we cannot fail to articulate and to let the message, the narrative be heard throughout this country. We just cannot allow this to happen Mr Speaker. And I do hope that we all can find the spirit and the energy to ensure that this is not allowed. And so Mr Speaker, you move on with the program of the government and you see the performance of the economy, the growth of the economy. And the only way you can have growth is prudent management. The prudent management of a captain of one who we say there's a place for people like you who understands what it is to give and to take but to give more. To build and to fix and not break Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, these are the tenets of this administration. What we stand for, what we do and how we go about doing it. The presentation Mr Speaker is laced with successes of this administration. It is laced with things that the administration has done. And therefore with all that we have done Mr Speaker, we understand that there are problems. We understand that there are issues that we as a government must fix. Issues that then wasn't created in one year or one year and a half but issues which have accumulated over time. And having recognized the issues of the country Mr Speaker, the government is saying health and security are must. And having said health and security, we are saying to all of those who believe that it is a problem. That the government must fix the problem. We are saying put your money where your mouth is and let us make a contribution to that cause of fixing health and security. A small contribution. We started Mr Speaker, we started by saying health is too important to allow it to go down the drain at the rate it was heading. And the first decision we took Mr Speaker was to go to St Jude and do a quick analysis of the situation at St Jude. To determine the status of the St Jude project and to put a team of competent individuals and say you go down there and tell us what the problems are down at St Jude. We didn't pay a cent to get it done. And if the PM ever paid you must tell me because as far as I'm aware we didn't. But they paid a million dollars for one man to give a report.  Okay. And if we give a little more than we take. And that is the message. This government has constantly looked for ways and means of getting the job done without taking too much. And there are too many instances of the former administration taking more than the game. So that was our first commitment of looking at St Jude. And we realized that in St Jude we can go in and get that job done. Let us go to the original structure. And I believe the Prime Minister at some stage will be in a position to give even more details as to what is happening and how we will get that job done at St Jude by giving more than we take. You look at Mr Speaker, the narrative on the St Lucia Social Development Fund. And the great work that is being done under that program. Given more than we take. You look at the Christmas stimulus, 3.2 million dollars. And I'm one who will say we need to put a little more. Put 5 million for the Christmas stimulus. But we are prudent. And beg your pardon? Subject to the availability of funds. We are prudent Mr Speaker. We are prudent managers. And while we are always willing to give more than we take. We understand what it is when we do not have as much to give more than we can ever take. The Easter stimulus, Mr Speaker, 3.2 million dollars. Education assistance, 2 million dollars. Hope, 1.014 million. Short-term employment, 6.8 million dollars, Mr Speaker. And pre-hurricane cleanup, 1.5 million dollars. A government who responds. A government who understands the need of the people, Mr Speaker. That's the government of the St. Lucia Labour Party and the Blue Wave. So, Mr Speaker, and you move on. You move on. And you heard of the program for the land rationalization and resettlement. A program, Mr Speaker, that is designed to resolve a number of issues. A program that is designed to go in and get it done and energize the crowd to get that program going and to resettle people and to give them the necessary resources so as to have a comfort in their living. You know, one of the problems, Mr Speaker, that many people face within this country is the unavailability of land easily. Land is expensive. And those who have it, they've got all sorts of conditions. At the same time, there are people, all that they can do is to rent an apartment, Mr Speaker. And they cannot afford it. The conditions of some of those apartments, Mr Speaker, are degraded. But what we have seen, Mr Speaker, is those persons who are in need who are able, if they're given an opportunity with a piece of land, they will build a decent little house. And that is what this program is about. Attempting to make land available through the Crown and to give those persons an opportunity to build, at the same time, the Department of Housing assists with housing assistance and SSDF also assists with housing assistance under the normal programming. So, Mr Speaker, this government, even though the naysayers will say, well, nothing has happened. They have done nothing. Nothing is going on. They have stopped them on the new St. Lucia that has been planned. But the new St. Lucia, Mr Speaker, has been given to people without money. They came to our shores empty pockets. We gave them thousands of acres while we are now complaining about St. Lucia who are committed to the development of this country and consider them to be non-entities, non-entities. Mr Speaker, this government is about giving opportunity. We give you an opportunity into a world of possibilities rather than to bring the world without any money with the promise of developing the country. You know, Mr Speaker, one day my barber was telling me, he asked me a question. He said, Mr King, how do you all go about deciding on investors? How do you know an investor is a true investor? I said, well, they would come. They would come with a proposal and it would be looked at due diligence would have been done, etc., etc. I gave him a whole litany of what is required. He said, but I don't believe that's what it is. I said, why? He said, well, my friend told me he met a little white boy and I'm sorry to say white boy, he met a little white boy in town and a little white boy said he was somewhere in the US in New York walking down the street and he met a prominent politician here and they ended up having a chat and whatnot so the white boy started bluffing his way around and said that he's an investor and he has money, etc., etc. and the next thing he learned in St. Lucia was able to apply for concessions and he got everything. Okay, he got everything. So, Mr Speaker, the point I'm making is we at all times must exercise due diligence and this government is one you can look to when it comes to due diligence. Mr Speaker, I am one who believes that we, as I said earlier on, must put our money where our mouth is. The issue of the removal of that on plywood, lumber, steel, cement and galvanize one may say, well, it's great. I guess they may denounce it. I guess they may denounce it, Mr Speaker. But if we look at it objectively and you probably do the maths you may say, well, what is the country losing by giving plywood, lumber, steel, cement and galvanize given the waiver of that? We may be losing more than the $70 million that we're making on fuel. I'm sure. But I'll wait for the verdict. So we may be losing much more. But Mr Speaker, what this initiative is doing is just not necessarily the 12.5% that we're given to all and sundry it may appear to the poor, the marginalized, the middle and the upper class. But what it is doing, Mr Speaker, once you're able to do that is to stimulate the activity through the construction sector because it means now that there are people who will say it is time for me to build. The businessmen will say it is a good time to build because the VAT is off. And so there will be an acceleration of investment as a consequence of this small initiative where business people will say the environment is conducive. Let me start construction of my project. In fact, it would do a number of things. It will provide employment that you may lose the VAT 12.5%. But your service charge will be collected and because the volume has increased your service charge will reflect an increase in revenue for the period of time. I'm trying to build one. I will build one at this time. I'm coming close to you. So Mr Speaker, these are the kinds of initiatives. These are thoughtful initiatives. These are not initiatives that are just, you know, flown up in the air and taken. These are initiatives where the government has taken time to give consideration and to consider to look at it and to see if I give this, how much can I get? And that's the spirit of the budget, Mr Speaker. The other one, Mr Speaker, is the waiver of VAT and other taxes, which is somewhere in the vicinity of 600 million EC dollars, which of course comprises the principal, the VAT, the penalties, and the interest. I ran it by a businessman only yesterday, Mr Speaker. And he said, well, you know, I owe the government quite a bit of taxes. And it's somewhere in the vicinity of 10 million dollars. You know what happened? I'm going to get a loan to pay all my taxes because I will get it waived. That is the impact of this initiative, Mr Speaker. It is being prepared to take the bold decisions, to take those bold decisions, but knowing that those decisions will have a positive impact on the other side and then they will come forward and give the government what is due to it. So just imagine, Mr Speaker, one businessman who owes 10 million dollars is saying, I am going to go and take a loan and pay the 6 million dollars that I owe the government. Just imagine, Mr Speaker, if 10 businessmen in this country, and I'm sure there are more than 10, if 10 businessmen in this country, they owe 600 million. Just imagine the 600 million. If 300 million is really not duties, penalties and interests, just imagine, Mr Speaker, those individuals all go to get a loan just to pay the taxes, the impact that will have on the revenue of the government of this country. So, Mr Speaker, this is the creativity of the budget. This is the imagination of the budget. This is the sensitivity of the budget, Mr Speaker. This is the compassion of the budget. The compassion for the people who need it. The creativity to ensure that your decisions will bring reward and to make sure that you maintain your country on an even keel to reflect economic growth and development and to stimulate the economy and to encourage and give hope to young people through the youth economy, to give hope to small business through the MSME, to give hope to the ordinary man, the fishers, by giving them one dollar a bit to say to them, we understand what you're going through. Appreciate the service you have given to this country so we are giving you back something. That's what this government is about. We are not just taking. We are giving back. So, Mr Speaker, I really hope that our people understand what we are doing. So, when we come to you and we say to you that we are introducing a 2% levy for health and security and you begin to see your security in the country improving and the police are responding and you begin to feel safe in this country then you realize the health services are improving that when you go to the health centre, to the clinic, to the wellness centres and to the hospitals you realize the services are improving and you understand the importance of the 2%. And so, Mr Speaker, having said this, I want to move to my ministry. Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister in his budget address spoke of the work that the Ministry of Infrastructure will undertake in this financial year. Of course, whereas the theme of the budget did not reflect the Department of Infrastructure, we understand the purpose of the budget. But with this, the department has a number of projects, critical projects that we are already engaging in. The Department of Infrastructure will in this year accelerate its general maintenance of St Lucia's Road Network to attend to urgent maintenance needs on our roads, bridges and other public infrastructure. Mr Speaker, this is important because in the last year we were challenged with the climatic conditions, climate change, heavy rainfalls and some of them ridiculed us and said, well, you know the science and all this sort of thing, you all talk about science and you can't fix roads in the rain. I want them to go and fix their road in the rain. So, we have decided this year and the Prime Minister has more or less agreed that if only we can be given upfront early in the financial year the resources our road maintenance program will continue unabated. I am sure those of you who drive around because all of us drive anyway who drive around, I'm sure you realize that throughout the country, particularly our primary road network, we have done quite a bit of work in terms of maintenance. And so, I must take this opportunity to thank the Prime Minister who this year towards the end of the year gave us an additional $2.5 million to go into road maintenance and to do the volume and the quality of work that you see happening on our roads. Mr Prime Minister, let me assure you that we will continue to persevere and to pursue the agenda which you have given us. In fact, so as to motivate the men I've requested and planned a special appreciation event for them in the next two Fridays after the jazz. And I'm hoping that Prime Minister, you and other colleagues will be able to come into that event so that you can express your appreciation and if you have any disappointments you can also express those disappointments. Mr Speaker, the purpose of this is to show appreciation and that's what this government is all about. Mr Speaker, there are a number of critical roads or infrastructure that we are continuing. The Millennium Highway, which we have been speaking about for a long time, Millennium Highway and West Coast Road project continues. A number of community roads are currently receiving attention under the design finance construct model. And it is anticipated that once government's potential fiscal limits under the DFC model is satisfactory achieved, a number of other communities will see improvements to the roads. Of course, I've got to ensure that in the so doing that the Prime Minister has that space. He has that space to be able to recommit himself to doing any more DFCs because while we would like to do what the people need, we also have to understand we cannot overburden the resources of the country if we do not have it. At the same time, Mr Speaker, we are now moving into the Sustainer Renewable Energy Sustainable Development project and that I will go back to later. So the first major project, Mr Speaker, the Millennium Highway and West Coast Road project, that project was funded under the CDB, through the CDB, sorry, under what is called the UK CIF grant funding, United Kingdom Caribbean Infrastructure Fund. Cost of $43,287,000. The project is to improve and rehabilitate the Millennium Highway, which is 6.2 kilometers. The reconstruction of 24.6 kilometers on the West Coast, which goes from Bannons Bay, sorry, from Kuldisak, through to Ansari, and ending at Columbia, and the construction of what I call the South Bridge at Ansari. The Millennium Highway is from the Bannons, roundabout to the Kuldisak Junction, where a new roundabout is being constructed and that will connect to the West Coast Road. We have had some problems, Mr Speaker, in the last 18 or rather 22 months with the present contractor on the Millennium Highway. That project, Mr Speaker, is behind time. The project should have completed in March. We are now in April, going into May, and so, Mr Speaker, the contractor has been asked to speed up because it is too far gone. Even though it's only 27% attained, we need to get the project going because the project that is the Millennium Highway is holding back the other segments of the road. For example, the Japanese-funded and constructed Japanese bridge in Kuldisak, that bridge has been completed in record time, within time. Excellent work. Within the budget. Completed, and it's amazing when you have two contractors working in the same environment that one is able to come in and get the job done and move out while the other one is there to use the local parliament, TTV, and trying to find reasons why it cannot be done. Mr Speaker, that road is important so as we can move on to the West Coast Road for which a contractor is in country having received a contract through the Caribbean Development Bank. Now, Mr Speaker, I need to probably at this time just segue a little bit and to speak about the second and third phases of the Millennium, sorry, the West Coast Highway. And it is probably an issue that is troubling a few people because of what they have seen ever since the contractor landed here over the weekend. There are those who are saying that, well, you know, they have come with all their equipment, huge equipment, et cetera, et cetera, and there's so much equipment in St. Lucia and we're not given an opportunity. Mr Speaker, it was an international tender. Mr Speaker, this government is very, very, very conscious of the needs of our people. We are very caring and we always look out for our people. Mr Speaker, the tender which was issued for this project was an international tender. The funding for the project came from the UK government as a gift to the Caribbean, and St. Lucia being one of the islands benefiting from that gift. Jamaica, Dominica, and Tiga, they all got their own portion. St. Lucia got US$43 million. The terms and conditions for any CDB project demands international participation, particularly from member countries, all the member states. So the bank, the member states of the CDB are the Caricom region and the lending countries, the UK, China, Canada, and I think it's Brazil, or one of them. But the lending countries, those countries who have come forward to say that we are prepared to participate in the bank as a lending partner, you are the borrowing partners, but whenever there are tenders, we believe it must be internationally put out there. The bidding document, Mr Speaker, is very specific and the bidding document says that as a contractor, you've got to demonstrate that you have capacity. You've got to demonstrate that you have capacity, not just a name like asphalt and mining, and you come with your hands swinging, but a name and equipment and personnel and expertise. But it also says, Mr Speaker, that that contractor must also subcontract to local contractors. These are the conditions. When the contract was first negotiated, Mr Speaker, or when it was first put out there, the international tender, the ratio between the contractor, the successful contractor, and the subcontractors was 70-30. That means the contractor would be able to have 60-40. The contractor would be able to have 60% in terms of the direct involvement, and the subcontractors would be given 40% award of contracts. Upon review, we decided, Mr Speaker, in this contract, and remember the one which was done, the first contract was done in 2021, or the about 2019, 2021, Mr Speaker, it was signed in May of 2021. And so, Mr Speaker, having done that, this government said we need to get a little more. And what we have done is to reverse the ratio and to allow local tenders to be able to get as much as 70% portion of the subcontracting process. So in other words, there are greater opportunities under the arrangement that's made here. But Mr Speaker, what is also interesting is that the tender document indicated the pieces of equipment that are required for the project. So the list is there. It says 15 ton or higher hydraulic excavators, 15 tons or higher hydraulic elevators, excavators, sorry. And they gave you the list. It says that any single lot one, lot two B, two, any combination of lots excluding two B, two, and any combination of two or more lots including lot two B, three. So in other words, just so that one piece of equipment, a combination, so they tell you. So if you go down there, there shouldn't be more than one 15 ton or higher hydraulic excavator. Now, Mr Speaker, with all the equipment we have around, it may be very difficult to get a 15 ton hydraulic excavator. I may be wrong. But you know one of the problems we have in St. Lucien, Mr Speaker? Everybody has an excavator. Everybody has excavator. They have Baku. They have all kinds of things. When you call them and you say, listen, we have a job for you and they say, yes, I want it. They take three, four, five days before they can mobilize. I had a joke, Mr Speaker. We had a project to do somewhere. And a contractor, an equipment operator said, yes, he can make it. And it took him so long to get there, even when he got the equipment wrong by the time it dipped for once into the river. But we need to organize ourselves. The 20 ton Tipper trucks, Mr Speaker, 20 ton three, 200 HP motor grader one. And the list goes on, Mr Speaker, indicating the number of pieces of equipment that are required. So the equipment that is there, Mr Speaker, that you see out there, which will be engaged in the reconstruction of the West Coast Road, which comprises some 64 kilometers. Some 64 kilometers, Mr Speaker, that equipment is not all of the equipment that is required. And so I do hope that I've explained it sufficiently for those who are concerned about the number of equipment that they have seen stacked up in the Kaldisak Valley. And for those who are concerned of the impact that that will have on their own business here in St. Lucia. And so, Mr Speaker, that's Lot 2 and Lot 1 and Lot 2. Lot 2 to speed up will take in the Kaldisak Bridge to Ansari, the Ansari Bridge, the Ansari Bridge to Canaries. Canaries to Souffre and the total cost of that is $47.2 million. As I said, Mr Speaker, the Kaldisak Bridge is complete and I must take some time on this occasion on behalf of the government and people of St. Lucia to extend our wishes, our best wishes and sincere thanks and gratitude to the government and people of Japan for this landmark bridge in Kaldisak to date the longest bridge in St. Lucia. Mr Speaker, now that the bridge has been completed, we are now in the process of negotiating with the Japanese to do a second bridge and this one, Mr Speaker, will be done again in the Kaldisak Basin, more or less, at Ference. That, Mr Speaker, will help improve the hydraulics of the river because as they build the bridges, they build them wider, longer and higher and of course the passage is expanded to allow for free flow of water, thus creating the kind of hydraulics necessary to speed up the flow in the basin. Mr Speaker, one of the projects which we have just completed which was done by the last government, started with the last government, is the Road Improvement Management Program Phase 4 and that project is nearing completion and in fact it has come to an end and we are just going through the effects liability period and for this, Mr Speaker, I also want to thank the government and people of the Republic of China, Taiwan for the collaboration and the generosity they have extended to St. Lucia over the years. There are some other specific areas, Mr Speaker, I would like to now go into quickly. For this financial year, Mr Speaker, one project which has been identified and for which I have received, Mr Speaker, quite a bit of pressure from the parliamentary representative who is absent today, is the construction of the Austin Hill Road costing $750,000, Mr Speaker, and that is located somewhere in the constituency of Denry North. I haven't visited yet, Mr Speaker, but I will go and see that road and to ensure that it is done. We also have, Mr Speaker, an amount of $2.5 million, a slope stabilisation retaining walls and that, Mr Speaker, it's an annual programme to assist in places where the walls are coming down and we need to stabilise the slopes. $2.5 million, not necessarily sufficient, Mr Speaker, but it's even better than what it was last year and I thank the Minister for Finance for this allocation. Bridges and culverts, Mr Speaker, an allocation of $1.9 million has been given to demolish one of the existing culisac bridges and to assist in the reconstruction of a number of bridges and strengthening of a number of bridges. Some of them include the shock bridge, which we are hoping that we can repair rather than reconstruct at this time, because those of you who drive, I'm sure you'll realise there is a dip on that bridge. It means that the Amco pipes at the bottom of the bridge is now collapsing because of age. It's not one of those ordinary deck bridges. It's one which is designed with two huge cylindrical pipes and those pipes are now deteriorating. Also, we're looking at Truna Sea Bridge, Poirin Bridge, which has been very problematic over the years. Every now and then we've got to go in there and try to underpin it. Then you have the Denry Main Bridge and the Boskido Bridge. All of these, Mr Speaker, are bridges that we need to undertake. But, Mr Speaker, recently we did invest in some equipment, both in the lab and of course alongside the engineering unit, and one of the systems we have introduced, Mr Speaker, is a system called an Asset Management System, a road maintenance management system. And that is to allow us to avoid what has happened in the past. In the past, what you recognise is that the Ministry of Infrastructure, the Department of Infrastructure, was simply responding. They were reactive. The improvement in the asset management system, Mr Speaker, allows for continuous inspection and an assessment of bridges on culverts and the roads itself to see the level of stress and deterioration, deterioration that is taking place, and to respond in a timely manner. So instead of being reactive, we're being proactive. And hopefully, if the system is applied properly, Mr Speaker, we will see less sudden crashes of the landscape and bridges, as we have seen, the Badlil is one-to-one place where we have had a number of mudslides and landslides, and most times we are not ready for such, and we have to be running Helter Skelter to make sure we put things in place. So the asset management system would help in that regard. We have, Mr Speaker, also reconstruction and rehabilitation of roads and the allocation. It's sort of small, four million dollars. Ideally, Mr Speaker, if we had to respond to the reconstruction and rehabilitation of roads based on the rate at which roads deteriorate, we really would need to spend 20 million dollars a year. And spending 20 million dollars a year to reconstruct and rehabilitate, then you put your asset management system in place, and if that is again administered properly, then roads would last beyond the pavement strength. And most roads are designed to have a pavement strength for the Minister of Health with no life expectancy in human beings. What's the life expectancy of male and female? And in the case of roads, they don't say life expectancy because roads have no life, but they have pavement strength. And based on the pavement strength, it would determine how long that road would last. Most roads are designed, Mr Speaker, for 15, 10, 15, 20 years. So we are hoping that when we put those systems in place, Mr Speaker, we will be able to monitor and to be able to extend the life of the road or the integrity of the road for a longer period. Because if you can do that, then it means you can do preemptive maintenance and to extend it. Mr Speaker, what a cost maintenance. We are now revisiting the issue of the silting. The silting is a word in our communities that people believe can solve all their problems apart from the silting. And so, Mr Speaker, we realize the impact of the silting on our landscape itself. Because what happens, Mr Speaker, is when you go in and the Minister for Agriculture is not here and we have to work hand in glove because he spoke about the river banks. But of course, the river banks are to protect the river course. But when we get into the rivers and we start extracting what is there, then we cause the rivers to improve its hydraulics. And as a result of the improvement in the hydraulics, then what you have is... Member of the castries north, you have ten minutes left? Yes. Just give me a minute, ten. Fifteen. Leader of government business? Mr Speaker, I wish to invoke standing orders thirty to ten. So allow the honourable member an extra fifteen minutes to complete his presentation. Honourable members, the question is that standing order thirty to ten be invoked to allow the member of the castries north an additional fifteen minutes in which to conclude his presentation. And I'll put the question as many as of that opinion. Say aye. Aye. As many as of a country opinion. Say no. I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Proceed member. Thank you, Mr Speaker. And I will move on quickly so as to attempt to conclude my presentation. So I'm speaking of the silting, Mr Speaker, under the new approach and that is maintenance of water courses and that will attempt to ensure that we protect the riverbed and work with the Department of Agriculture in the protection of the riverbank. Maintenance of government buildings, Mr Speaker. One point six eight million dollars. Mr Speaker, it is okay but we need to revisit the issue of government buildings. Government buildings, Mr Speaker, must be maintained. We cannot continue to abandon government buildings because of mold, because of whatever it is and most of the government buildings, Mr Speaker, that we abandon are not, are not, the problem isn't structural. It is air quality. It is mold.  And the only thing that can solve sick buildings is to ensure that you have a maintenance regime that will, maintenance regime that will extend the life of those buildings. That is what we need, Mr Speaker. And I'm hoping that at some stage we'll be able to take this into consideration and deal with that aspect of government buildings. We have to take it serious, Mr Speaker because even the quality of paint that is used we issue contracts to small contractors. They're going by cheap paint. It is not mold resistant, not mildew resistant and then we end up with mold and mildew. The Department of Infrastructure, Mr Speaker, will be undertaking a study to really try and understand the issue of sick buildings and the mold infestation throughout the public service because at the end of the day, at the end of the day, Mr Speaker, we have to take action and stop moving out there and renting buildings. The Prime Minister will tell you the rental charges, the rental fees that we pay. Look now, we've been committed, Mr Speaker, to a building at Bois du Oige. A million dollars a month, I'm told. We can build a new building for ourselves. So, Mr Speaker, the idea is to look at the design and construction of buildings, look at the air quality, look at the refrigeration, the plumbing and electronics and the mechanical instruments of the building and make sure that whatever we're doing is good and will not interfere with our buildings. And finally, Mr Speaker, the caretaker and maintenance, what we call the caretaker maintenance program, $1.6 million, Mr Speaker. Again, good, but if at all, Mr Speaker, we are truly serious about tourism, then we must be truly serious about our environment. We must be able to maintain our environment, maintain the roads, maintain the curbs, the vegetation to instead of just simply the bushing, we need to be manicuring our environment so that it looks pristine. When people come in here, they can see an environment that is beautiful, flowers and lawns, et cetera, et cetera. But that will call for a greater investment than $1.6 million. Mr Speaker, let me move quickly to Renewable Energy Sector Development Project, which is a geothermal project in Souffre. And I know there's a lot of talk going on about renewable energy. There are a lot of gurus out there, Mr Speaker, who understand it probably more than I do and who probably have greater answers than I do. And there are people also, Mr Speaker, who are very energetic in getting it going, who are very, very confident about this sector and the expectation of the sector in terms of what it can do to reduce costs and to increase productivity in this country. But, Mr Speaker, we in St. Lucia, we did develop and we continue to follow it. We have developed what is called the National Energy Transition Strategy, which more or less speaks to where we should go with energy, geothermal, solar, wind, and, of course, a mix of fossil fuel because if we truly understand, Mr Speaker, why we all want to go into renewable energy, we have to make sure that there is something to fall back on if the sun doesn't shine for two weeks. Because when the sun doesn't shine, your PV system on your rooftop will not produce energy. So we have to make sure that we maintain that balance. We have to make sure that the system is stable and so while I understand that we want to move quickly, but we have to make sure when we move, we move to ensure that the system is stable and it can provide the energy that we're looking for. So the Renewable Energy Sector Development Project, Mr Speaker, is really the geothermal project. It's a project costing $21.9 million, which we may never recover because that more or less is a grant given to us by the World Bank to do the final stages of exploration in the country whereas we have done previous exploratory exercises. We have discovered that there is geothermal energy, but we were not able to determine the capacity of the geothermal that is under there. So in the coming, as we speak, there is a project officer which has been established and the consultants are in and out working with the department. We want to make sure that the project is viable. We want to make sure if there is energy that the resource can be generated and of course the enabling environment to scale up renewable investment with the private sector is established. Now, Mr Speaker, the most critical part of this initiative, Mr Speaker, is the legislation. The old legislation, Mr Speaker, recognizes one power producer, one power producer in Looslet. That's the only power producer. The legislation surrounds Looslet. In that, Mr Speaker, Looslet itself owns the power grid, the poles, the lines, etc. So no other person can get onto those poles or do anything because they control it. There is an agreement under the law which ends sometime in 2040 thereabouts. So as we speak, Mr Speaker, we have completed the draft legislation and we are now going into what I call the final bit of consultation to ensure that all the i's are dotted and the t's crossed with the hope that we can come to Parliament in June for the passage of the new electricity act which will liberalize that sector. What it means, Mr Speaker, is that it will provide for Looslet to survive, for individuals to be able to set on the rooftops the photovoltaic systems and to produce their own electricity to be able to sell, consume rather first and sell to Looslet or to consume all and sell all, as they say, the net metering system to allow you to be able to consume what you require and sell the balance to Looslet. All of these, Mr Speaker, we need to put together and to ensure that there are regulations controlling and governing this system. It means, Mr Speaker, with renewable energy, the sector development program, it means that there will be more than one producer, one modern one generator. So it's not Looslet alone generating electricity. I will be generating electricity and I will sell to Looslet to give to those who don't have PV on their rooftops. But we also have another issue to deal with, Mr Speaker, because the cost of maintaining the grid, the poles and the cables, etc., is that of Looslet. And so we also have to strike a balance as to how much renewable energy that we will allow for independent power producers and the population to generate and how much Looslet itself should generate to ensure that Looslet itself remains sustainable to maintain that grid. So as we speak about renewables, Mr Speaker, and we speak about reducing the cost of energy, we also have to think that there is a grid to maintain that we need to depend on because we will not be totally independent unless we find a resource that is sustainable and the resource that we're thinking of, Mr Speaker, if we're able to get it, that can mean a sustainer is the geothermal resource. Solar will not be able to sustain us entirely. As I said, there will be days you'll wake up and your solar water heater is cold and your light bulb will be black because you won't have any electricity. So if only, Mr Speaker, we're hoping that we can proceed with the project and the exploration drilling will commence in the coming months. We are looking at a number of places in the Souffre region. There are three to four slim wells in Bell Plain to be done. That's in Fonsejac. We have done consultation there already and I'm hoping that the people have brought in to the idea. Mon Liza is one. That's in Mondezi and in Saltibus. And this is to access and confirm the viability, as I said, Mr Speaker, for development of an estimated 30 megawatt geothermal power plant. The other thing that will happen, Mr Speaker, is that currently, under the arrangement that exists, an individual is able to generate 5 kilowatts of electricity and a business place is allowed to generate 25 kilowatts. When the renewable energy system comes into place, when people can now go in freely and get their renewables, get their photovoltaic systems and get their battery storage and to be able to store power, generate and store power, the electricity act will now provide for an increase in the volume of production for you. So whereas we had five, it may go up to 25 for domestic. I'm not saying that's where it will go, but it may go up to 25, it may go up to 50, it may go up to 100 to the business places. But the whole idea, as I said earlier on, is to bring about a balance. This, Mr Speaker, has a consequence. The project has hired an exploration management consultancy firm, US $3.5 million. There's an engagement of civil and infrastructure works contractors, $1.8 million US dollars, and there's a contracting contractor for drilling services, and that is $13.2 million, Mr Speaker. All of that money, Mr Speaker, as we speak now, all of that money is really grant funding. If we find the resource and the resource is sufficient enough to generate electricity, then it converts into a loan and the government would have to pay that loan. But what it does, Mr Speaker, is once you can find the resource, the government pays the loan, but the government can leverage to the private sector and then attract private sector investment to get involved in the project. The project has five sources, Mr Speaker, the Canadian Clean Energy Forest Climate, $3.7 million, Clean Technology Fund, $8.572 million, Canadian Clean Energy and Forest Climate Fund, $0.55 million, and the Government of St. Lucia will put $1 million to land acquisition, et cetera, for the project. Mr Speaker, out of this project, we were able to get a number of students, a cohort of 10 students who were given scholarships to study and to understand the whole issue of geothermal generation and to prepare them for the future and possible jobs in the sector. Mr Speaker, I want to quickly mention that in all of this, you need the regulator. The regulator is the NUC, and the NUC, which was established sometime in 2015, they have been struggling along, they have not been able to attract or generate the resources they require for their sustainability. And this year, the government has decided to give them an increase in their subvention of $250,000, which will assist them in their administration costs in running the office and to hope that the NUC can improve on its services and to be able to train its members, et cetera. Once the legislation goes by and the sector is liberated, then it means the loose deck will come under the NUC. As it is now only WASCO is being regulated, loose deck is not regulated, except by the Ministry of Infrastructure in terms of the routine inspections that we normally have to do every two years. The NUC then will come in and set the regulation, and loose deck would have to pay the NUC a percentage of its revenue to keep the NUC going and to be able to give them the necessary professional competence to run the system. So that basically, Mr Speaker, is sort of a dashboard of what is expected to happen. We are still pursuing, Mr Speaker, our target of 35% renewable energy penetration by the year 2025. We're not there yet. We're still a long way ahead, but there is need to push. And one of the ways we will attain this, Mr Speaker, is the support within the public service to be able to get the necessary competence and manpower needs of the energy unit to be able to pursue our national agenda, but also to capitalize and piggyback on the numerous funding that is out there that we need to go out searching. There's a lot of funding out there, Mr Speaker. There's the International Renewable Energy Agency, IRENA. Recently, we're able to get them to agree on a $50 million grant loan, grant loan, which loose deck is interested in. But it just one of many opportunities that exists out there where we can access. The Nook, Mr Speaker, has done quite a bit of work. The CEO has been really an asset ever since she took up her responsibility. And so the Nook has been able to benefit on training in what we call the National Energy Grid Code. And that is important, the grid code meaning that as you begin to mix the energy and have fossil fuel generation, solar generation, probably ocean tech generation, wind tech generation, and geothermal, all of these, Mr Speaker, are not generating at the same capacity and the same rhythm if I should use that term at any given time. So what you're likely to have, Mr Speaker, because they're not generating at the same pace, then you'd have instability in the grid and at your home you'll also have that instability. So you now need to be able to, one, find the details of the technical requirements. So the grid code, Mr Speaker, is really the code that will tell you what are the technical requirements necessary for you to participate in the national grid in terms of connecting to and using the grid to ensure that there is stability. So they have done quite a bit of work in that area, Mr Speaker, and I must commend the Chief Executive Officer and the Nook, the Board of the Commission for the work they have done. They have been able, Mr Speaker, to get grant funding from the Caribbean Development Bank to do a strategic and operational plan together with a grievance mechanism for dealing with customer complaints and disputes. And that is the benefit of the renewable energy system. The regulator would be able to put those structures in place and to ensure that persons who have complaints can report and get their complaints dealt with. And so, Mr Speaker, in attempt to speed up, I'll just skip a few things. Again, through the Nook, they have been able to also get assistance in dealing with renewable energy pricing and capacity limits. What I just spoke earlier on, to be able to determine at what stage do you give them more, how do you regulate the prices? Remember, you have five minutes remaining. Okay. What contributes to pricing, Mr Speaker, and to be able to regulate this, and they have been able to get assistance through the Global Green Energy Institute, the GGI. Mr Speaker, there are a number of initiatives which the Nook has been involved in. They have worked with the World Bank. They have worked with the Regulatory Energy Transition Accelerator. They have done work with, as I said, the GGI and other regional and international agencies in their effort, Mr Speaker, to bring about that kind of regulatory mechanism. Mr Speaker, WASCO, WASCO is one agency that we need to continue to give support. They are trying, and they follow Mr Speaker at this time, right at the time when the ministry is considering launching a program called Infrastructure 2030. And what Infrastructure 2030, Mr Speaker, is, is a determined and deliberate program intended to begin to think beyond now, to think to 2030 and beyond where this country is likely to go. So if I'm supposed to go by what the Prime Minister said in his budget and the plans which he has, the hotels which are to be built, what it says to me, Mr Speaker, as Minister for Infrastructure, it means that I need to have the proper road network. I need to have, as Minister for Public Utilities, a strong public utility infrastructure. I need to have in place a strong telecommunications sector, Mr Speaker. I need to have that environment. I need to have strong sewer facilities and all of these things. And so Infrastructure 2030 gives an opportunity, Mr Speaker, to renew our infrastructure, to ask ourselves, is our infrastructure for water in place? And I can tell you no, because so often what do you see? As we build a road, next week it's like wasco smells the asphalt and they're dead again. But what is happening there, Mr Speaker, is because of the road construction and the compaction during construction, that vibration. The aging infrastructure, Mr Speaker, deteriorates to the extent that weeks after or days after or even during the time of construction, it breaks up. So for us, it is an investment that we have to make to say, let us do an audit of all of our infrastructure. Putting new lines and say, listen, we want lines on the day that will last 20 years. Then we build a road that will last 20 years. Then we may take a decision that line should not be under the road pavement, but should be on the side of the road. Then electricity. Where are we going in the next seven years and beyond in the year 2030? We speak of a north-south link road from Gross Day to Dennery. What is likely to happen? What is likely to happen, Mr Speaker, is the potential of not just a road, but the opening up of a vista of opportunities, a community, maybe a new village, a tourism place. Then your water requirements, your water needs increases and you need to have that infrastructure in place. You know, Kabul came to St. Lucia, Mr Speaker. And what did we find? Kabul doesn't have or we don't have the capacity to pump enough water to Kabul based on the size of that facility. The Royal Tun came in and we have been in problems. So infrastructure 2030, Mr Speaker, is a program that will allow us to be able to review our infrastructure, to augment what is existing and to put in place an infrastructure plan that will be geared for 2030 and beyond. And that program, Mr Speaker, we're hoping we can launch this year. Mr Speaker, I spoke of water. Briefly I went in. Again, underwater and infrastructure is the question of the John Compton Dan. This one is a story by itself. We spent quite a bit of money, Mr Speaker. A dredging fund was established and after spending 60 million there about, Mr Speaker, we were only able, and I say we, because whether it's this government or the government before, all that was achieved was 10% dredging. $60 million. And that is an issue we need to deal with, Mr Speaker, so as to attempt to improve on our water supply and to be able to provide to our people and to the investment that is likely to come into the country. So, Mr Speaker, there have been also some projects which were undertaken and they are more or less completing. The Viewport Water Supply Project, the John Compton Dan spillway, the Denry North Water Supply Project, an amount of 187,000 and 173,000 being allocated. The rehabilitation and upgrade of the Northern Water Distribution Pipeline, which was... Emma, you need to wrap up now. I will wrap up now, Mr Speaker. And so, Mr Speaker, this gives you a synopsis of the program of the Department of Infrastructure, which I have not yet touched the issue of airports and seaports and what we are doing there, what we are doing, I have not spoken of the green energy, Caribbean-efficient green energy buildings, Mr Speaker, and if I may indulge just to quickly indicate that St. Lucia and Grenada has been selected for a Willbank project called Caribbean Efficiency and Green Energy Buildings. And what this is going to do, Mr Speaker, is ready to do an audit of our green... of our buildings, public buildings and other institutions that the government may select, whether I am crazy government or government itself, to do an energy audit and to be able to retrofit those buildings to bring about a reduction in your price of electricity consumption. Now, this, Mr Speaker, is probably the one project that will impact us almost immediately. Geothermal will impact us maybe in the next... I may not be here in the Parliament. May impact us maybe in another 10 years. But energy efficiency, the ability to change your infrastructure, your lighting fixtures and your light bulbs and other amenities to drive your prices down. Once we do that, Mr Speaker, we will see the prices going down and will benefit for everyone. All the others call for massive investment, whether it's geothermal, et cetera, et cetera. I have a bit, Mr Speaker. I will pass it on to my colleague, Minister for Housing and he will deal with it. It was just to give you from Slasper's standpoint information on the position of Slasper and as far as the land at Lutoc, not happening at Lutoc, which was purchased by private sector concern. So, so, Mr Speaker, I want to thank you very much for your tolerance, your patience, your understanding. And I look forward to your encouragement in the future. And in closing, I also want to say thank you to my staff, my permanent secretaries and a number of others within the public service. I want to commend the Prime Minister and his staff in the Department of Finance who have worked very hard. I know those days are considered by me because I remember my time, I call it red IDs. You work until three, four and five o'clock in the morning and you back up at seven o'clock to get things going. I want to commend you, sir, on your work and to say thank you and the goodness.


We've been covering the FTC Xbox, PlayStation, Nintendo, all this Activision Blizzard acquisition stuff, Activision Blizzard King stuff for a while. And we all know that, yes, it does look like the sale is going through, it might even be finalized at some point today. And when it is, we are going to get call of duty on future Nintendo platforms beginning in 2024 with an in-development switch. This is according to court documents, by the way, saying that it's going to begin on an in-development switch coming out next year. So take that for what you will. I don't know if Microsoft actually knows it's coming out next year, but that's what the legally says. And it's going to start then and gonna last for 10 years. So that's really cool on something that we already knew. But it turns out that some new details have come up about the Nintendo and Xbox contract. And this ain't just about call of duty anymore. Oh no, no, no. This deal is so good for Nintendo fans that you're not going to believe the terms. And also why those terms came up because Sony signed a 10 year agreement over the weekend specifically for call of duty to come to PlayStation. And it led to people digging into the exact contract between Nintendo and Microsoft. And oh boy, guys, we're getting everything. I kid you not, we're getting everything. Now, before I dive deeper into this, a few things I want to point out. One, stop getting mad at me because there's an Xbox logo in my background event because people got mad about it. Look, now you see a PlayStation logo. Oh, look, now you see my Nintendo Switch back there as well, even though it's usually right here in the dock. Guys, I enjoy all of gaming. There's a PlayStation 5 directly behind me as well. Like I enjoy all aspects of gaming, not just Nintendo. I just happen to prefer Nintendo over the rest. So I spend a lot more time playing Nintendo games than I do other things, including third party games. But guys, this is a story we need to dive into and we need to dive into it right about now. So I'm getting this over at Expooter, a very good website when it comes to stories like this. And it says Nintendo's 10 year deal of Microsoft covers all future Activision Blizzard games. Read that headline again. We're not just talking Call of Duty. We're talking Diablo. We're talking Warcraft. We're talking, if there's a new Starcraft game that comes out, we're talking Spyro. We're talking Crash. Anything Activision Blizzard makes all future Activision Blizzard games have to come to Nintendo. Again, beginning next year. Oh, this deal just became so good for us. Well, let's go beyond the headline because Sony's deal looks pretty raw in comparison and Sony's probably got no one to blame but themselves. Scrolling down here, here are the highlights from the story. Nintendo's 10 year deal with, sorry, Microsoft's 10 year deal with Nintendo includes Call of Duty and all other Activision content after the merger closes. This tidbit was stated in the documents published by the US District Court who, yes, if you're wondering like, oh, how did we get our hands on the contract? We don't have our hands on the contract. The ones that do are the US District Court because the contract was submitted to them in evidentiary findings. So evidence, right? They wanna say, hey, we signed this contract. We're bringing games to more gamers. They needed the contract as proof. And so this little detail about the contract came out. It ain't just about Call of Duty, everyone. That's what the headline said. That's what Phil Spencer talked about. Actually, Nintendo got this contract to be for everything. All right? The deal is quite different from Sony's which will only receive Call of Duty content for the next 10 years. Sony was also offered the same deal as Nintendo back in January of 2022, but it declined it. That's right. Sony could have had all Activision Blizzard games, all of them for the next 10 years. Sony declined it. And then after they won the injunction, you know, after the injunction didn't go through, Microsoft's new deal presented to them was worse. So everyone talking about how, oh, Jim Ryan played him and blah, blah, blah. No, Jim Ryan cost his consumers games. That's just straight up. There's no guarantee future Activision Blizzard games beyond Call of Duty go to their platform, but it's going to Nintendo. Pretty interesting here. Nintendo may get many Activision games after the merger closes. And this includes titles like Overwatch. We have Overwatch 2 out right now. Diablo, Diablo 4 recently released. Possibly World of Warcraft, which would be, damn, bringing that to Switch? What? I mean, well, you could run a little bit on a potato, but cool. And like the Switch and subsequent consoles. So they just mentioned Switch because that's the only system out right now. Although we know from court documents that Call of Duty won't first appear until 2024 for an in-development device. I presume all of these games will appear for an in-development device. This just made third-party support of Switch massively increase from one of the major former third-party companies. Pretty crazy that Microsoft acquiring them actually helped out Nintendo that much. That's insane. Microsoft loves Nintendo. Of course, they gave the same contract to Sony. So what are you gonna do? Microsoft recently claimed it is committed to bring Call of Duty titles on the in-development Switch model. It seemed to confirm the existence of multiple consoles in development. Earlier this year, Microsoft and Nintendo closed the deal to bring Call of Duty entries on the Switch and the next console after the merger eventually locks. It seems like there is much more to the contract than most gamers initially thought. The giant company is planning to also bring other Activision Blizzard, by the way, the name of the company's officially Activision Blizzard King. Just to be clear. On the Nintendo consoles, which is far different than the deal Sony signed some time ago to keep Call of Duty titles on the platform. Microsoft stated that it is contractually obligated to release all future Activision Blizzard titles on the Nintendo platforms. The conglomerate reiterated its contract with Nintendo in the recently published documents by the US District Court from the trials against the Federal Trade Commission as per an aforesaid deal between the companies. Nintendo will receive a wide variety of Activision Blizzard content in the future unlike Sony. Here's a quote, Nintendo has a contractual right to obtain Activision content post merger, including Call of Duty. So Call of Duty's part of it, but not just Call of Duty. And it's all in the pages of the documents from pages 74 to 120. It has been widely believed in the past that Nintendo would only get Call of Duty entries in the future, like Sony. But the contract between the two companies goes much deeper than that. In fact, Sony was offered the same proposal back in January 2022 for all Activision Blizzard content, but the deal did not proceed. This is a long time ago, by the way. Like this is over a year ago. Anyways, additionally, Microsoft only recently claimed it's committed to bringing Call of Duty games on an in development switch model. Again, this came out during the court case findings, hitting two birds with one stone. The conglomerate also said that Nintendo could release the Switch successor as early as next year. As per the vague wording in the official documents, there seem to be multiple Nintendo consoles in the Brewer. And Microsoft is bringing Call of Duty to at least two of them. Here's a quote, Xbox has also contractually agreed to buy versions of Call of Duty to Nintendo for its Switch console and upcoming console upgrade. Again, this is from the contract. So even though Call of Duty might not come to Switch or an in development switch until next year, it's still going to come to Switch. So basically the next gen and the current gen are both gonna get a Call of Duty next year, is essentially what the contract is saying. In the FTC trial, Nintendo was not considered to be an equal competitor to Sony and Microsoft, it's according to the FTC. But Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley and Phil Spencer highly disagree with that notion. An assortment of Activision titles will further diminish the argument because more third-party content will be on the platform. It is clear that Nintendo fans will be eating well for the next 10 years. Popular Activision titles such as Overwatch, Diablo, World of Warcraft and the sword, including future content that could come out on Nintendo Switch or subsequent consoles in the future. This is massive. This is huge. This is the W. Us Switch owners have been wanting from third-party companies for so long. A commitment to bring everything. If only we can get Ubisoft to sign such an agreement with Nintendo. But you know what the funny thing is, what's gonna happen when we get all of the Activision Blizzard content in the future coming to that next-generation device is it will encourage other companies such as EA who recently finally gave us the current version of their football game. FC 2024 is actually going to be the current updated version with all the recent releases. They haven't done that pretty much the entirety of the Nintendo Switch's existence. And now we're gonna get the fully updated full game coming from EA. Why? Well, maybe they know about the next system coming and they wanna bring bigger and better support to it. Now you got this agreement in place that's gonna bring even more third-party games to Switch. Not less, more. This wasn't just Call of Duty. We feared it would be Call of Duty but they would keep Crash and Spyro exclusive. Nope. Guess what? Microsoft ain't keeping anything from Activision Blizzard exclusive for the next 10 years because it's all coming to Nintendo. I can't, I can't even fathom this right now. It's all coming to a Nintendo system. You wanna talk about Microsoft loving Nintendo? Nintendo wasn't getting most of these games. We had Overwatch. Like we weren't getting a majority of these games. Now we're gonna get all of them and probably getting most of them day and date. Some of them a bit later. Like if we get Diablo 4, I wanna see it's gonna release later than Diablo 4 right now because it's already out. I, guys, this is incredible. This will help convince Ubisoft. This will help convince, you know, take two to bring more than NBA 2K over. Guys, this is exactly what we've been wanting to Switch owners when it comes to third-parties. Commitments. It sounds like Nintendo's next system is not only gonna be heavily boosted by Nintendo's own offerings, right? We're gonna get some incredible offerings from Nintendo. We already have support from games like Mortal Kombat 1 coming up, Hogwarts Legacy. It looks like the support's only gonna ramp up even further on that next device. If you wanna ensure, if you wanna make something different about this next device, one thing Nintendo can now promise to their investors and promise to Nintendo owners with that next platform is not only will you continue to get the utterly incredible Nintendo software, but now they have full commitment of major third-party support from one of the formerly biggest third-party companies out there now, technically not third-party, although they're still behaving like third-party for Nintendo for the next 10 years. Damn. Just, what else can you say other than, damn, that is awesome. So, shout out to Phil Spencer and Nintendo. You know, we got Chintaro Furukawa signing this deal. What an incredible deal for Nintendo. If you're a Nintendo fan and you've been wanting to play these major games on Nintendo's next system or maybe even some of them on the current, you gotta be happy as well because this is obviously a win for you. Right now, it really seems like the only people that are gonna be upset about this whole FTC and the whole merger stuff happening are one, people who are anti-merger in general, even though the company was gonna merge with somebody regardless, whatever your anti-merger in general. Sony fans who are probably not only upset that this deal went through because Sony was fighting it so vehemently, but now that their 10-year deal looks like garbage compared to Nintendo's, can't believe that Jim Ryan wouldn't try to get the old deal back. Instead, they're just, you know, whatever with this deal. And beyond all of that, obviously people worry that Microsoft, after these deals expire, will just suddenly stop this and make it all exclusive, right? Like that's the big fears after 10 years, will they make this all exclusive? Well, that's a distinct possibility. I would say if things are getting really successful, and I've said this about Switch the whole time too, third-party companies could make a lot of money on Switch if they show consistent support.  And what's nice with this 10-year commitment is that is building an audience over time. And I got a feeling, especially between Nintendo and Microsoft, that there's gonna be a new deal signed as we start approaching the end of the current. This is incredible. I'm, this is just, wow. This is the biggest news of the year. I mean, besides games coming out, you know, like tears of the kingdom, we got Pikmin 4 later this week, but besides actual game releases, this is literally the biggest news for an Nintendo Switch. Damn. I'll catch you guys in the next video.


Who didn't seriously think Livikings was on the gear? It was so obvious, everyone knew it, so it's not like a revelation. But now everyone's coming out, talking about the ethics of, you know, taking steroids and not telling your following. Let's analyze the ethics of what Livikings has done here. So Livikings sells his ancestral lifestyle, all of these tenants and getting out into nature and eating organs. So basically, Livikings was giving the assumption that the way he looks was based off of him following these ancestral tenants. And he would say, you know, if you eat these organs, you know, testicles and raw heart and liver, then you're going to have the same health benefits as him.   It's misleading, you know, there are plenty of gullible people out there and Livikings is capitalizing off of that. But of course, no one really wants to eat raw testicles and cold raw liver out the fridge every morning. So what does Livikings say? If you don't want to eat the testicles raw, then buy my supplements, which is basically just dried up, desiccated liver and organs and testicles in a capsule. Very convenient with a super high markup so it can make a bunch of money. Now you've got all these bodybuilders coming out. Oh my God, this is so unethical, Livikings. I can't believe you didn't tell everyone you're on steroids. You're telling everyone you're not taking steroids. You're misleading people. We've even got carnivores like the Carnivore MD and Sean Baker talking about the ethics of misleading people. I'm just face-palming the whole time.  Who also sells supplements, right? Who tells people there's nothing wrong with having a super high cholesterol. Sean Baker tells people to eat only meat, right? Which is not supported by any reputable scientific literature. The only evidence he has to support his claims that Carnivore diet is healthy is short-term anecdotes because people remove literally every other food from their diet, it's an elimination diet. They feel better in the short-term. There's no long-term outcome data on this diet and it's putting people at super high risk for heart disease, the number one killer. These carnivores are cholesterol deniers and they are dare criticizing Liviking for lying about his steroids use. And I'm not just saying, well they're hypocrites so they can't criticize Liviking. I'm not trying to appeal to hypocrisy or you can't criticize Liviking because you do things wrong too. But what I am saying is that there's a massive elephant in the room that no one's talking about when it comes to ethics. Liviking and these other carnivores, but we'll talk about Liviking, he's promoting the consumption of murdered animals. Animals that go into a slaughterhouse alive and in fear and come out chopped up into pieces. Liviking, who went viral through his amazing intelligent marketing campaigns, is encouraging people to eat animal organs that were torn out of the bodies of living animals. Immense suffering caused by animal agriculture, immense environmental destruction, incredibly damaging to human health. But from an animal rights perspective, it's an absolute nightmare. The more people like Liviking who go viral and tell people, eat organs, eat animal flesh, you need it, it's essential for your health. Who suffers because of it? The animals who are being decapitated. Now, you could say, well, you know, Liviking's following are being victimized by Liviking. He's targeting the vulnerable who believe him and who are gonna buy his tenants. Who cares? If you fall for Liviking, if you looked at Liviking, you know what? He's full natty, bro. If you fall for these snake oil salesmen at this point, then there's no helping you. There are always gonna be people like Liviking who come out and there still are people like Liviking everywhere, kind of or MD, Sean Baker, these people, right? They don't rely on any science. It's all just a cool story. I'm a cool storyteller. Yeah, believe my anecdotes here. Believe, don't believe the scientists. Don't believe scientific consensus because that's all a conspiracy.  But listen to me because I've got all the answers. I'll be able to help your health. Don't listen to scientific consensus. Just listen to Liviking and carnivore MD and all these other people because they've got the answers. But forget about the animals who are being decapitated. Forget about them, right? The real victims are the people who bought Liviking's program, who bought his shitty supplements, thinking that they were gonna get big and ripped like Liviking who has a ridiculously and obviously unnatural physique. What is the big issue here? Look at Liviking's page. He has body parts of animals stitched together in some type of horror story monstrosity on his table, goats with their skulls cut out and their brains exposed, different types of animals cut up into pieces on his table, promoting it and all people want to criticize Liviking for is lying about his steroid juice, forgetting about the victims of that slaughterhouse that he promotes. The world is insane. If you're more concerned that Liviking lied about his steroid juice, then the decapitated sentient conscious beings on his table, then you have your priorities mixed up. This just goes to show how much contempt animals are treated with. All anyone is talking about is his steroid stack. Oh my God, 12 grand on steroids. Oh wow, that's not very ancestral.  You know what? It's pretty ancestral. There were cannibals back then too eating each other, which was fine. Living consistent with my ancestral ways. Some human brains and some human centipede-like centerpiece on the table saying, hey, eat this, you need it for your health. You know what I mean? It's 100%, yeah, yeah, definitely, mate. No talk of the conscious beings who are slaughtered for this lifestyle. What these carnivores are masters at doing is saying, you know what?  Your health is going to deteriorate. But what they're doing is distracting you from the horror story that had to happen in order for those animals to be on their plates and on your plate. They help humane washi industry. You know, this is all grass-fed. They don't wanna talk about factory farming, which is what most people are going to buy. When someone advocates just eat meat or just eat animal organs, where are they gonna get those animal organs from? Everyone has a local homestead family farm. No, 98% of the animals that are eaten in the US are factory farmed. Horrible, torturous hellholes, right? And the free range animals go to the exactly the same slaughterhouse as those factory farmed animals. If you think that what happens to those animals is so humane, take a step in their shoes, take a walk into the slaughterhouse and experience what they have to experience before they die.  Just take a step back and look at the bigger picture here. What is he promoting?  But what is he promoting? What does that look like if everyone ate all meat diets? What does that mean for animals? I just get so sick of people missing the point. They look at animals as food products because they're always chopped up on the plate. Liver king actually did a pretty good job of helping people connect to the animals, showing their heads and the organs and the hooves and all the other parts that people don't see because what you see in the supermarket is usually just chopped up bits of animal body. The world is full of scammers, people with bad intentions, people who want to mislead, people who have ulterior motives. They want to make money, they want everyone to follow their lifestyle. They've got all the answers, they know best, all right? What we promote as vegans and animal rights activists is not so popular. People don't really want to hear eat more fruits and vegetables and whole grains.   People don't want to hear that, they want to hear, do what's best for you, you're going to look like liver king and you'll get all these muscles and you'll be so much more successful and healthy and happy and follow me, I've got all the answers for you. What veganism asks is for you to do something for those who can't help themselves for the most vulnerable beings, right? All these people here, they're capitalizing of the mass murder of the most vulnerable beings on earth and all people care about is that liver king lied about his obvious steroid use, who cares? The reason I'm making this video, it's not because I'm really interested in like liver king drama, I'm making this video so that people have a little perspective. All I keep saying is liver king, liver king, liver king on social media and no one talking about the animals. No one cares. Vegans do, animal rights people do, but most of the people who are criticizing liver king are eating chopped up tortured animals themselves. So liver king was not getting canceled when there was a horrible stitched together human centipede centerpiece on his table, animal brains, organs, chopped up, slaughtered body parts on his table. But now the truth is out. The obvious steroid use has been exposed and everyone's losing their minds. If this isn't an insane and backwards world, I don't know what is.


Welcome to Bloodborne Pathogens in Schools, Revised 2018, a project of the Educational Service Unit No. 8, School Nursing Department. Bloodborne Pathogens training again? Absolutely. Everyone who works in a school setting has a potential risk for exposure to Bloodborne Pathogens and that includes you. While you might even have a small first aid kit in your classroom or office that contains gloves and band-aids. Why? There's a good chance you will come into contact with body fluids like blood or vomit. And your school nurse wants you to have easy access to personal protective equipment and follow universal precautions. Plus, the training is an annual requirement. Universal precautions are defined as an approach to infection control to treat all human blood and certain human body fluids as if they were known to be infectious for HIV, HBV, and other bloodborne pathogens. BBPs are microscopic organisms that are present in human blood and body fluids that can cause diseases in humans. The viruses that are of most concern when administering first aid or care at school are HIV or human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B or HBV, and hepatitis C or HCV. HIV affects the body's immune system so that it is unable to fight infection. There's little risk of HIV transmission at school as the virus does not survive long outside the body and only reproduces within a human host. There is also no cure for AIDS and no vaccine for HIV. Hepatitis B and hepatitis C both cause liver infections and the term hepatitis means inflammation of the liver. Symptoms of both of these diseases include fever, nausea, headache, and fatigue. And although the symptoms may be similar, the viruses are spread in different ways. The CDC states most people become infected with hepatitis C virus by sharing needles or other equipment to inject drugs. For some people, hepatitis C is a short-term illness, but for the majority, it becomes a long-term chronic infection. The majority of infected persons might not be aware of their infection because they're not clinically ill. And like HIV, there is no vaccine for hepatitis C virus. Hepatitis B can range from a mild illness lasting a few weeks to a serious lifelong illness. Many people with hepatitis B showed no symptoms and don't know they're infected. According to kidshealth.org, HBV most commonly spreads through sexual activity with an HBV-infected person, shared contaminated needles or syringes for injecting drugs, and transmission from an HBV-infected mother to her newborn baby. Fortunately, there is a vaccine to prevent hepatitis B, and anyone who is at risk, including some school personnel, should be vaccinated. You may be wondering how BBPs can spread in a school environment. These pathogens are most likely to be transmitted when an individual touches a contaminated surface and then touches his or her, mouth, nose, or eyes. They can also enter a person's bloodstream through a break in the skin, like a neck, cut, or even acne. Hepatitis B can survive outside the body for at least seven days. During that time, the virus is still capable of causing infection, even if the blood is dried. All blood spills, including those that have already dried, should be clean and disinfected, and it goes without saying that gloves should always be worn. Other types of PPE provided by your district may include gowns, face shields, and masks, especially if you're trained to provide CPR. Seaglasses or goggles, lab coats, shoe covers, and heavy-duty utility gloves. Those of us who work at school often see bloody noses, abrasions, cuts, and other minor incidents that require us to respond to a student injury or illness. Many times a student with a small abrasion or cut can apply direct pressure to the wound and try to stop the bleeding herself, or she can plug her nose to stop a nose bleed. But at other times, we must step in and help. Remember, universal precautions assumes every person may be infected, so although your first response might be to immediately offer help to an injured person, it is vital to first protect yourself with personal protective equipment. So put on your PPE before helping, and if the injury is serious, have someone else go call 911. Use your first aid techniques to stop the bleeding, minimizing blood loss, and apply direct pressure to the wound. Afterwards, remove and dispose of your soiled gloves carefully, using the technique demonstrated by your school nurse. And never touch the outside of the glove with your bare hands. After removing your gloves, wash your hands with warm water and soap for at least 20 seconds. According to the CDC, hand washing is one of the best ways to protect yourself. Follow these five steps to wash your hands the right way every time. Wet your hands and apply soap. Lather your hands and scrub all surfaces for at least 20 seconds. Need a timer? Hum the happy birthday song from beginning to end, twice. Rinse your hands well, and turn off the water using a paper towel, if possible. Dry your hands using a clean towel or an air dryer. Unfortunately, sometimes hand washing facilities aren't available. In that case, use an alcohol-based hand sanitizer or an antiseptic towelette. But wash with soap and water as soon as possible. Never attempt to clean up blood or other body fluids unless you are trained and authorized to do so. Remember, never use your hands to pick up sharp objects. Your custodial staff will use tongs or forceps followed by a broom and a dustpan, and they will follow the district policy for disposal. The custodial staff also will implement a cleaning schedule. A lot of activity goes on during your work day at school. Keep yourself safe by monitoring your classroom and work areas and following these work practice controls. Wash your hands frequently and refrain from touching your face. Don't eat drink, apply cosmetics or handle your contact lenses in areas where contamination might be possible. And keep your food and drink away from those areas, too. Guidelines developed by the CDC protect you from exposure to BBPs. Your district's exposure control plan contains information, including what to do if you suspect an exposure. If you're not sure what to do, ask your administrator or your school nurse. In summary, you've learned a lot about blood-borne pathogens and how they are transmitted. Let's review some of the precautions you can take to protect yourself. Minimize your exposure to blood-borne pathogens by always using universal precautions and wearing PPE when appropriate. Keep your environment clean and your hands washed and utilize work practice controls. Thanks for listening. Please contact your school nurse if you have any questions about blood-borne pathogens. And on behalf of the ESU 8 School Nursing staff, I hope that you have a fabulous and healthy school year.