I realise some may have a different opinion, but as I said in the panel, I don't think you were inactive, but rather had a different approach to the delegacy. As you said in your campaign, you viewed the position as an enable of ministerial policies, rather than a policymaker. I consider both approaches to be valid, though obviously some prefer one and others prefer the other.

I think there is also an issue of inactivity and the 'appearance' of inactivity. Since your approach was more hands off, some people would naturally think you were inactive. That wasn't necessarily the case, since you did a lot of work behind the scenes, but not everyone would know that. Hence, as QuietDad rightly pointed out, the need for the Cabinet to account for its progress during a term.