14 Years

That's the maximum prison time for someone convicted of attempting to bribe a member of parliament. Here's the relevant section of the criminal code (emphasis mine):

Bribery of judicial officers, etc.

119. (1) Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years who

(a) being the holder of a judicial office, or being a 119. (1) (a) ">member of Parliament or of the legislature of a province, directly or indirectly, corruptly accepts, obtains, agrees to accept or attempts to obtain, for themselves or another person, any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment in respect of anything done or omitted or to be done or omitted by them in their official capacity, or

(b) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives or offers to a person mentioned in paragraph (a), or to anyone for the benefit of that person, any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment in respect of anything done or omitted or to be done or omitted by that person in their official capacity.

Whoever made this offer to Mr. Cadman, and there is all evidence that an offer was in fact made, should be looking for a criminal lawyer right about now. Now, who would have the authority to "legitimately represent the party"? Mr. Harper knows, or at least he used to know.

Chuck Cadman

The late MP for Surrey North is in the news again. The allegations made in this upcoming book are serious. If the reports are accurate, the people involved have no place in public life. It is crucial that someone get to the bottom of this. Offering a $1,000,000 life insurance policy to a dying MP to gain his vote on a matter of confidence is both illegal and immoral. How far up the Conservative food chain this goes is a big question. The reports quote Harper as having known about it before hand and having done nothing to stop it. Here's the full quote from CBC.ca:

Stephen Harper is also quoted in the book, confirming some of the details.

Harper said his understanding of the offer to Cadman was that "it was only to replace financial considerations he might lose due to an election.

"I don't know the details," he's quoted as saying in the book. "I can tell you that I had told the individuals — I mean, they wanted to do it — but I told them they were wasting their time. I said Chuck had made up his mind he was going to vote with the Liberals."

Harper also confirmed the people who met with Cadman were "legitimately representing the party."

Harper had a responsibility to tell these people not to approach Cadman with the illicit offer. He also had a responsibility, if they had insisted on going forward with their plan, to separate himself and his party from their actions. There is no way that the offer should have been made with Harper's prior knowledge by people "legitimately representing the party."

If these reports are accurate, we may have found an election issue. I have no confidence in a government that is willing to pay people for their votes. It is tragic that the late Mr. Cadman may be used for political gains, however, his death does not reduce the immorality and illegality of these actions nor does it reduce the government's involvement.

Budget

The budget is out. For the most part it is as bland as white bread with the crust cut-off. The only interesting thing is the Tax Free Savings Accounts. We will see whether or not these things catch on. Harper continues to limit the amount the federal government can do. There isn't anything to fight an election on here. There is a limited amount for infrastructure which is a good thing. There is a tiny amount of money to help immigrants (not nearly enough). A tiny help for students (once again not nearly enough; almost all the new money for grad students). I do like the prospect of a ten year passport. I like the debt being paid down. There is a lot of stuff in this budget worth keeping. The sins here are of omission or of previous commission. There was no money for this budget because it was spent in the last two years. If there had been more money, we might have seen:

• Real money for the environment. Okay, not bloody likely from the Tories but we can dream. Some concrete plan to fight climate change might have been nice anyway. We have in this budget: 66 million for industrial standards (which won't be tough enough) and 240 million to try to figure out the whole carbon storage thing. The latter is great if, a this is a huge if, it works.
  
• Real money for cities. Don't get me wrong, the infrastructure money is a nice start. As is the money to help immigrants. However, in both cases it is a fracture of the amount necessary. Cities across this country need help.
• Real money for universities. Remember the millennium scholarships of Jean Chretien? Compare and contrast the numbers. The first point on this list could also have been for universities to help solve the problem. Two birds, one stone.
• Health care anyone?
• Real money to help Canada remain competitive. Ontario is in full panic mode. Perhaps Mr. Flaherty should go talk to his neighbours in Oshawa about the prospects for the Canadian auto industry. Or, he could talk to his friends at the banks about how their years are going. I don't love corporate bailouts, but some incentive for investment might have helped in this time of need.

All of these things are good reasons for people to vote Liberal in the next election. However, it is difficult in a budget debate to say, "we're bringing you down because you didn't do enough." There is no poison pill either for the Liberal caucus or for the country. The cuts to the GST were far more destructive than this budget will ever be. I'd like to see this government defeated as much as anyone else. However, I agree with my leader, this budget is neither the time nor the place to do so. Let's go win some by-elections.

John Tory Gets Clarked

John Tory has received a pathetic 66.8% of the vote at a leadership review at a party convention in London. This is a result eerily similar to the result that Joe Clark received after his defeat in 1980. I can't see John Tory staying on with that kind of support. He might do it but the pressure would build for Tory to go before the 2011 election. The knives that have come out so far have not come from people who would want to replace Tory. This vote opens the door for a lot more knives. John Tory could, as Clark did, ask for a leadership vote and then run as a candidate. Assuming Tory steps down, All Politics is Local will cover the race as it evolves.

Yet Another Tuesday Wrap-Up

A few things out of last nights contests:

First, Obama's wins in Wisconsin and Hawaii. This is more bad news for the Clinton campaign. Obama continues to out work her on the ground. There was an analyst on CNN last night who said that Obama's loss in New Hampshire was the best thing to ever happen to him. I tend to agree. He has outworked Hillary in every primary and caucus since Super Tuesday. The polls were showing a single digit Obama lead in Wisconsin. He won by 17. Turnout has become Obama's main weapon against Hillary. He's getting all the people who pollsters don't poll because they tend not to vote. Students are particularly relevant in Wisconsin. Students often rely on just a cell phone. Cell phones are rarely called by pollsters. Even if they didn't rely on cell phones pollsters wouldn't want a lot of students in their sample because they don't tend to vote. However, students were one of the groups that propelled Obama over the top in Wisconsin.

The speeches last night were interesting. Obama gave a pretty good preview of a convention speech. Long on both rhetoric and detail, it was, in fact, too long. However, it did serve to answer a lot of his critics. I love some of his policies, hate others. I'll start with the negative. His position on NAFTA and other trade deals is narrow and naive. Narrow because he doesn't understand the full economic consequences of withdrawing from NAFTA and naive because he doesn't seem to understand just how difficult such a withdrawal would be. I love his education policies. He came out against standardized testing which is huge. He also has a great proposal for funding post-secondary education. He wants to tie $4,000 in funding for every student to community involvement. It is a great idea. I would love to see it implemented in Canada. I was amazed at the number of young black men at his rally in Houston. Young black male Americans are notorious for being politically uninvolved. If young blacks come out and vote on March 4th, Obama will win Texas and Ohio.

Clinton's speech was perhaps the best indication of how far she has fallen. The speech was a direct appeal to the core of the traditional Democratic base. I was surprised she didn't break out into rousing rendition of 'Solidarity Forever' or some other union hymn at the end. Clinton is no longer even thinking about the general election. If she was, she wouldn't be wrapping herself in the rhetoric of big labour. Big labour is about as popular as big business in the United States. The only people who still have time for it are the members of the Democratic party.

McCain delivered the speech he's going to be giving until November assuming Obama wins the nomination. It is all about experience versus change. He's calling Obama naive and inexperienced (okay, not directly but through strong implications). I'm not sure that this strategy will be successful. There is an old article by a Canadian political scientist named Gad Horowitz. He is describing the differences in the political culture in the United States and Canada. He argues that America is a nation of one ideology, liberalism. Canada has both liberalism and conservatism which then allowed for the infiltration of socialism. However, Canada is not at issue here. McCain's speech is classic 19th century conservatism in a lot of ways. Campaigning against hope and the future in the United States is kind of like campaigning against hockey in Canada. You are going to be in for a rough ride. I would not be surprised if McCain ditches the conservative rhetoric and goes more to the issues in the future. Because, that dog won't hunt.

Kosovo

A very interesting development in the Balkans. The Kosovar declaration of independence has implications here in Canada. The comparisons with Québec have and will be made. Spain, which has similar secessionist concerns, has refused to recognize Kosovo. I think this is the wrong approach. The division of a country is a traumatic and dramatic moment. However, the division of one country does not guarantee the division of another. The history of Serbia is completely different from that of Canada. The last time English Canadians tried to wipe out the French was over 200 years ago. This is not true in Kosovo. There is a major difference in the ethnic tensions in the two locales. Ethnic tensions in Canada may lead to the occasional hurt feeling, they almost never (at least since the demise of the FLQ) lead to serious injury or death. Ethnic tensions in Serbia are far more dangerous. It is difficult to compare this reaction from Serbs to the peaceful demonstrations of English Canadians which characterized the last referendum campaign. There is no history of Serbs and Kosovars living peacefully within a Serbian state. The last twenty years have been characterized by ethnic conflict and UN supervision. Canada did not object 15 years ago when the Soviet Union broke up. It did not object when East Timor broke away from Indonesia. It did not object when Eritrea separated from Ethiopia. We should not be afraid to support the independence of a country because of fear of encouraging separatism at home. Separatism should be combated by proving to all Quebeckers that their future is brightest within the Canadian federation. We should not be threatened by legitimate claims for independence.

Tick Tock

Apparently, Bob Rae thinks this is a bad time to go to the polls. While I am of two minds on the issue, I do find these comments sort of ironic coming from Rae. After all, Rae wanted to bring Harper down in the summer of 2006 over softwood lumber. I didn't agree with Rae's reasoning then, and I don't now.

Get Out the Brooms

A couple of sweeps tonight in the s0-called Potomac Primary. On the Republican side, John McCain continues his shaky and inevitable path to the Republican nomination. McCain won all three states. However, he did progressively better as the states became less and less Republican. He won by only nine points in Virginia (a red state) while cruising to victory in Maryland and D.C. If the Democrats win in November, they should send Mike Huckabee a present. Huckabee has made it so that McCain will have to spend the extra time he has before the Dems sort out their nominee appealing to his base. McCain cannot win in states like Virginia and Colorado without the religious right. Tonight in Virginia, more people voted for Hillary Clinton than for John McCain.

On the Democratic side, Barack Obama continues to build momentum. Obama's talking about momentum these days. As he should. Momentum has been elusive for both Democratic front runners. Clinton is now stuck putting all her eggs in three baskets: Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Obama is a long way from winning the nomination. However, for the first time since his victory in Iowa, he has to be viewed as the favourite. The most compelling reason to vote for Obama at this point has to be his electability. Not only do national polls show him more easily beating John McCain, he is wining in states Democrats need to win in November. Let's do a little forecasting. Where are the battlegrounds?

• Florida: No real primary. Clinton won it for what its worth. She might be better with Latinos in a national election. However, I don't think it matters in terms of a national election which Democrat is on the ballot. I don't see Hillary getting that many more Latinos to the polls. I also don't see them staying home if Obama is the nominee.
  
• New Hampshire: Clinton won this too. However, McCain is very popular in New Hampshire. I question if either Democrat can beat him here. Side note: The person who is happiest McCain won the nomination? Has to be Sen. John Sununu of New Hampshire. The senator is up for re-election and will likely face the extraordinarily popular former governor Jeanne Shaheen. Early polls showed Gov. Shaheen with a double digit lead. McCain may be able to carry Sununu on his coattails.
• Ohio: Yet to vote.
• New Mexico: Draw. They are still counting ballots a week later. The race is still too close to call.
• Missouri: Draw. Obama by a point but on the Democratic side that doesn't mean much.
  
• Arizona: Yes, Clinton won here too. However, there is no way she beats John McCain on his home turf. This isn't really a swing state, in spite of what the Clinton camp may be selling.
• Iowa: Obama victory.
• Colorado: Obama Victory.
• Virginia: Obama Victory.

A real primary in Florida would help to clarify this picture. However, the bottom three results tell the tale in my opinion. States like Virginia and Colorado are where the electoral map is changing. McCain is going to have some appeal with traditional independents, so Democrats may be forced to expand their horizons. Obama is the candidate most able to do that. Arizona and New Hampshire are going to be tough slogs for either of them, so I discount those Clinton wins. Florida didn't really have a primary, so once again hard to give her credit. Thus, I really do think Obama has proven himself more electable.

Bring on the Budget

It appears that there will not be an election about Afghanistan. Dion has come out with a very reasonable compromise and after some haggling I'm sure the Tories and Grits can come up with an agreeable bill. This means that the next most likely issue to bring about an election call will be the budget.

Unsuper Saturday

If you thought Super Tuesday was the end of the primary process, you were wrong. Three more states weighed in for each party yesterday. The Democratic race was predictable. Barack Obama easily won the two caucuses (NE, WA) and took the lone primary (LA). The most impressive of the wins may be Washington. The state of Washington is a traditional Democratic stronghold. Obama was criticized after Super Tuesday for mainly winning in red states, winning in both the red states of Nebraska and Louisiana and also the blue state, Washington, gives him more credibility going into three more blue states (well two states and a district) over the next three days (ME, MD, DC). The Clinton camp is spinning this as an expected defeat, but she can't be happy about the margins. Losing by 20 points in the Louisiana primary has got to be particularly disconcerting. We aren't any closer to determining who the nominee is, but momentum (which has meant nothing in this race) is back with Obama. Maine votes today in a caucus. Obama has lost only won caucus in this entire race (NV). Look for the momentum to continue.

The Republican race was much more surprising. The presumptive front runner, John McCain, was able to eke out only won victory yesterday (WA). Mike Huckabee took the Kansas Caucus by a wide margin and then eked out a victory in Louisiana. Now, Huckabee's victory and Louisiana and McCain's in Washington are of indeterminate worth. Louisiana would have been winner take all if any of the candidates had garnered 50% but the Paul campaign and the remnants of the Romney campaign made that impossible. Thus, Louisiana's delegates are uncommitted. Washington's delegate selection process is long and arduous. The caucuses are merely the first step in determining delegates. The end of this process is the end of May. Overall, the day's results can be seen as giant screw you to John McCain. Does it throw his nomination into question? Not really. Does it show he has miles to go before he wins over the Conservative base? Absolutely. John McCain, no matter how popular he is with independents, cannot win the presidency without the Republican base. If they stay home in November, it will be a Democratic landslide.

Romney

Mitt Romney has decided to end (why do they call it suspend?) his race for the White House. This means barring a disaster John McCain is the Republican nominee. I guess the calculus just didn't work out for Romney. At 61 Romney may be positioning himself for a future run. Saying you are dropping out for the good of the party, certainly sends that message. If the Republicans lose (probably a 60% chance) in 2008, a 65 year old Romney could certainly be a contender in 2012. What exactly would make him more endearing the second time around? Well, nothing but hope springs eternal in the land of the free. McCain needs to win the rest of the states on his way to the nomination. If the people of Louisiana vote for Huckabee tomorrow, it could be a bad sign for McCain in November. McCain has not had a lot of success in the south or among evangelicals in general. Without The Base voting in droves, he has no chance against what will likely be a better funded Democratic opponent. In other words, just because the race looks over, doesn't mean there can't be a little intrigue.

Side note: I've been hearing something strange from people in my politics classes: they are getting tired of the US race. I guess two years is a long time for a campaign to go on. I wonder if this sentiment is presence elsewhere, particularly south of the border.

The Toronto Bills

As you may or may not have heard the Buffalo Bills have announced that they will play 8 games over the next five years at the stadium formerly known as the Skydome. The announcement yesterday has caused a whole slew of reactions. Stephen Brunt is convinced the Bills are moving north the moment their ancient owner, Ralph Wilson, shuffles off this mortal coil. The Hamilton Ti-Cats are furious seeing the move as an intrusion on CFL territory. The Argos on the other hand see it as a nice way to sign up season ticket holders (Argos season ticket holders get first dibs on Bills tickets). Let's parse this one step at at a time.

Firstly, this is not a move north. This is a money grab by Wilson. If you could play one game a year in Toronto and make as much as you'll make the entire year in Buffalo, wouldn't you do it? I sincerely doubt that Mr. Wilson who has stuck with the city of Buffalo through thick and thin is going to abandon it in his later years. However, when Mr. Wilson is dead and buried the dynamic changes significantly. Mr. Wilson has already said that the team will be sold not inherited upon his death making it available to the highest bidder. Who at this point would the highest bidder be? Three obvious possibilities:

1. A local Buffalo person or group tries to save the team. This is a possibility. This scenario recently played out in the NHL in Nashville. However, the Nashville deal was facilitated by the killing of a higher bid from a bidder looking to move the team to Hamilton. The Toronto Maple Leafs are majorly implicated in that move. There also is not a lot of money floating around Buffalo these days. Wilson himself is not a Buffalonian. However, a future owner would undoubtedly seek greener pastures. Where?
2. Los Angeles. Los Angeles is the one blemish for the great and mighty NFL. The largest sports league in the United States is conspicuously absent from its second largest market. The main obstacle to success in LA is the stadium. The old LA Colosseum is just that, it's old. No luxury boxes, not enough seats. There is simply no willingness right now in LA to build a new stadium. Without some sort of government assistance, stadiums are an expensive proposition. Partially because of this stadium problem, there isn't anyone beating down the NFL's door for a team in LA. This isn't the case in...
3. Toronto. The 5th largest market in North America is much more likely scenario. First of all, the NFL (as is made clear by this deal) considers Toronto to be part of the Buffalo market. Thus, a move to Toronto would not be so much a relocation as a shift in an existing location. Second, the stadium issue is not as big a deal in Toronto. Toronto has built 3 stadiums in the last 25 years - the Dome, the ACC, and BMO field. All were done with significant public involvement. There is no indication that the city would balk at building an NFL stadium, particularly if it improved the city's perennial Olympic hopes. There is also a group willing and able to own an NFL team in this city. The trio on hand yesterday, Tannenbaum, Godfrey and Rogers, have deep pockets. The pockets get even deeper if Mr. Tannenbaum can convince his partners over at MLSE to expand their empire into football.
   

So, what's stopping an NFL move to Toronto? The border is an issue. The NFL has international designs but has so far been reluctant to put teams on foreign soil. The CFL also has major objections to such a move. The Argos are fine with a game a year, but a team in their market may change their opinion pretty quickly. The CFL commissioner, Mark Cohon, has already said on record that he would fight an NFL intrusion into Canada with every resource he has. Included in his bag of tricks is trying to wrestle up some political opposition. Another factor oft cited by Bob McCown is money. The NFL's primary source of revenue is from domestic television. A weak market in Buffalo is better for the domestic interest than a non-market in Toronto. However, there is one significant problem with this line of reasoning. While Toronto means nothing to American advertisers. It means quite a bit to Canadian ones. The value of the Canadian television contract would presumably go up if it included a Canadian team.

At the end of the day, I think there's a 60% chance the Bills are in Toronto in the next ten years. What this does to the CFL is unknown. If Toronto fails in the CFL, the league is in big trouble. So, while, as a Bills fan I'd like to see my team in my city, I worry about the impact of the NFL on Canadian Football.

Race for the Exits: Super Tuesday Post Mortem

I think the best way to tackle this is to divide the post between the Republicans and Democrats. Let's start with the Republicans.

John McCain

Positives: He won the most states and the most delegates. He cleaned up in the three biggest states: California, New York and Illinois. He is the front runner for the Republican nomination.

Negatives: He won only three red states last night. One of them was Arizona, where he is senator. The second was a nailbiter in Missouri over Mike Huckabee (9,000 vote margin). The only impressive red state win came in Oklahoma. This is important not only in terms of assessing McCain's appeal with The Base but also in terms of his chances of winning the nomination. Republicans (unlike Democrats) award more delegates to states that tend to vote for them. Thus, there is one delegate for every 91,335 registered voters in California and one delegate for every 60,516 voters in Alabama. So while Huckabee and Romney won smaller states, they will be better rewarded (proportionately) than McCain.

Mitt Romney:

Positives: Impressive wins in the mountains and desserts (and tundra) where Romney won every state save Arizona. Still the choice for non-southern conservatives. He still has enough money to keep fighting. He's one every state that nobody's paid attention to. See: Maine, Wyoming, Nevada, Alaska, Montana, North Dakota.

Negatives: In a word: Huckabee. Romney needed to win the states that Huckabee took on Super Tuesday. It is difficult for a candidate who is campaigning as the conservative hope to be shut out in the South. People don't pay attention to the states where he has one because, well, nobody lives there (Nevada excluded). He is apparently assessing his situation today which is polspeak for he may not be long for this race.

Mike Huckabee:

Positives: He cleaned up in the South winning Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee and Arkansas. He was handed West Virginia by the McCain people earlier in the day. If Romney decided to call it quites he might have the opportunity to go head to head with McCain.

Negatives: Outside of the South, Huckabee barely beat 20% of the vote all night. An abysmal 4% in Mass., 8% in New Jersey, 11% in New York, 12% in California. Those numbers tell me that in a head to head race with McCain he would lose and lose badly.

Republican Overview: The race is McCain's to lose. However, he is not the nominee just yet.

On to the Democrats.

Hillary Clinton:

Positives: She won California by an impressive margin. Picked up good victories in Tennessee and Arizona. Won Mass. in spite of the endorsements. Leads delegate count going out of Super Tuesday.

Negatives: Lost the majority of states yesterday. She also lost pretty badly in a bunch of states out West. She lost two to one in Georgia which was polling much closer than that. In a proportional race, losing by wide margins is a good way to lose delegates. All the pundits say the next week will be rough for the Clinton campaign.

Barack Obama:

Positives: Won the majority of states. Carried every close race of the night. Cleaned up out West by impressive margins. Apparently, has smooth sailing for the next week.

Negatives: Lost California by 10 points. Lost in Tennessee badly. Failed to capitalize in Mass. He trails in the delegate count.

Democratic Overview: I think this is the definition of a toss-up. Hillary has more delegates but it would be absurd to call her the front runner.

Overall thoughts: The AP called Missouri incorrectly on both sides (called for Clinton and Huckabee went Obama and McCain). A fairly major screw up given Florida 2000. Not enough emphasis in the media on the delegate numbers on the Democratic side. Winning states is really quite irrelevant. This is PR, it's margins that matter.

Everything Else

This blog has become overwhelmed by the US presidential election. I suppose that is natural but I thought it necessary to chime in on a few other things in the news.

• Albertans are off to the polls in March. I really hope for the sake of democracy that someone other than the Conservatives win. However, hopes for a right wing split have been hurt by news that the newly merged Wildrose Alliance Party is having serious issues. What serious issues? Well, the president resigning on the eve of an election call is not a good sign.
• Of course, the call of the Alberta election means that the federal election is postponed until the vote is done. Still could be looking at a spring election.
• Toronto appears to have a balanced budget for the first time in recent memory. Yes, it involves a massive tax hike but at least its balanced.
• Can't put down the PS3 guys? Well, apparently you're hardwired that way.
• Okay, I know I said this wasn't going to be about the US election and this sort of isn't. But, wouldn't it be nice if we could get the boost in voter turnout that they are seeing in the US primaries? If you say it's because some of the primaries are proportional, I may scream. I mean I wish we could have candidates that actually get young people to the polls.
• I love this political cartoon in The Star.
• I know it has gone under the radar a bit, but John Tory is still fighting for his political life. He also still doesn't have a seat in the legislature.

Either later tonight or tomorrow I will post a Super Tuesday post mortem. I've considered live blogging it but honestly I don't see the appeal of live blogging. Have you ever gone back and read those posts? They are boring as white bread with the crusts cut off. Hindsight is 20/20 and I intend to take advantage of it.

Prediction Time

I may not have predicted the Giants shocking the Pats in the Super Bowl last night, but you should still read my predictions for the Super Tuesday states. State by state, All Politics is Local is prepared to tell you who's going to win in each party.

Alabama:

Obama, McCain

Alaska:

Clinton, Romney

Arizona:

Clinton, McCain

Arkansas:

Clinton, Huckabee

California:

Obama, Romney

Colorado:

Obama, Romney

Connecticut:

Clinton, McCain

Delaware:

Clinton, Romney

Georgia:

Obama, Huckabee

Idaho (DEM ONLY):

Obama

Illinois:

Obama, Romney

Kansas (DEM ONLY):

Obama

Massachusetts:

Obama, Romney

Minnesota:

Clinton, McCain

Missouri:

Clinton, McCain

Montana (REP ONLY):

Romney

New Jersey:

Clinton, McCain

New Mexico (DEM ONLY):

Clinton

New York:

Clinton, McCain

North Dakota:

Obama, Romney

Oklahoma:

Clinton, McCain

Tennessee:

Clinton, Huckabee

Utah:

Obama, Romney

West Virginia (REP ONLY):

McCain

There you go folks. No need to tune in tomorrow night. You heard it here first.

McGuinty Sends Right Message

Here's the Toronto Star article on McGuinty's response to black-focused schooling. He's get it exactly right. Now, no doubt Andrew Coyne will attribute this response to Islamophobia like he did McGuinty's response to Tory's segregation of Ontario's schools.