Make the case for one Ontario School System

I think one or both old line party leaders should grow spines and dare to piss off voting Catholics in Ontario with a secular school system once and for all. It's either that or fix the school funding formula. And that'll happen about the same time hell freezes over.

Is there a way to discuss this issue without yapping on and on about these political parties? I'm not referring to you, LP.

It's a simple matter of equity. Either we have to fund all forms of religious schooling or none of them. I might be amused to see who gets elected to the Satanic School Board, but we'll all probably be rather less amused when taxes go up to pay for the plethora of new educational bureaucracies.

Who pandered to the Catholic vote for several decades in a row?

The NDP isnt in government pandering to Catholics now, and it's not the NDP shortchanging the public school system by $1.2 billion dollars or whatever the amount is today.

And it is interesting that you want to post tongue-in-cheek like this when the reality is we're still dealing with another old line party legacy, an obsolete electoral system invented before electricity and causing parties to have to play these stupid politicks as a result. Well, I say it looks good on them. If you dont appreciate impotence at Queen's Park, then the solution is simple: dont vote for it!

Yep, great policy with the economy in the tank.  Let's worry about divisive politics.  How about you all come up with some ideas for the unemployed.  (Don't see 1/10th of the posts compared to this thread)

I think that might resonate a bit more with Ontario. 

When the economy is in better shape this objective will gain much more momentum.

And you invoked Jesus in your sermon.

The NDP doesnt have to do anything to risk Francophone support by our 19th century electoral system. We can simply let the neoliberalizers drown in their own pile o' shit while scooping up  disaffected voters along the way. 22 percent in '011 is the high water mark.

Yes we can!

Canadian Civil Liberties Association brief on the public funding of religious schools, September 21, 2007 [Executive Summary]:

• Public funding of religious schools could weaken the public school system and undermine its contributions to the vitality of our democracy.

• Having opened its doors to everyone, regardless of wealth, status, race, religion, and ethnicity, the public school system has performed an integrative and unifying function for Ontario society.

• Within living memory, this country jailed thousands of innocent Japanese Canadians, denied many aboriginal people the right to vote, restricted immigration from developing countries, and turned back Jewish refugees from Hitler's Germany. There is no reason to believe such behaviour could never again be possible.

• Our community must work to shore up our integrative institutions. One of the most important of these is the public schools.

• If the funding proposal goes ahead, public schools could lose significant numbers of students to the religious schools. If this were to happen, the public schools would no longer be able to perform their integrative role. In time, our community could become a much less tolerant place.

• In the event of such public funding, there may well be no legitimate or effective way to control any hateful or discriminatory messages espoused by particular religious schools. Although our democracy may defend the right of any group to hold and attempt to spread such views, it is repugnant for the public purse to subsidize the exercise.

• The impetus to inspect, monitor, and control religious programs in schools would raise thorny questions about government intervention in religious affairs.

• The sheer costs of funding many religious schools would likely reduce the quality of the entire educational system.

• Contrary to the arguments of some, the current public funding of Catholic schools cannot justify the critical risks associated with the proposal to fund more religious schools.

• A constitutional amendment should be enacted to end the anomaly of public financing for Catholic schools.

Accordingly, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association recommends as follows:

(1) At a minimum, there should be no new public funding of any religious schools and

(2) A constitutional amendment should be enacted to terminate the public funding of Catholic schools.

Source

It's good to see the citizen taking the right side on this issue  

It could happen? Have examples ready for where this would be the case.  This needs to be documented.  People in every community are going to need to know what this would look like for them.

These hypothetical are distractions and not really convincing IMO.  Whether we would invent such a system if it did not exist, that's not the issue.  Make the case.

Now i realize that's the Citizen reporting, not a press release from activists.  I'm just trying to explain what i mean by more details. 

Of course it's the issue! What better case can be made for changing a bad system than to say it's a product of a bygone era that no longer applies today? Once one considers the reasons why such a system would be a bad idea if it didn't already exist, one can can readily see why it should be changed.

Excellent! You're right! And therein lies the solution.

The NDP should put forward a progressive, dynamic, bold program aimed at protecting and expanding employment, retirement income, etc. - and I mean bold. (I know, I know, it's the ONDY, but hope springs eternal.)

At the same time, it should include a few democratic reforms, like abolishing separate schools, without any big fuss.

Any other party that dares to challenge the NDP on this and make a big deal out of it will be rejected by the voters, who only care about the economy, their jobs, and their livelihood!!

The timing is perfect. It's now or never.

And in the unlikely event the ONDP had the courage to call for such a democratic reform as one secular school system, would you still be insisting that such a move is "neoliberal" and anti-Catholic Orange Order-style bigotry?

No, because at that point it would likely come down to a democratic decision made within the party itself.

But I think that demanding the NDP deal with this particular old line party legacy given the realities of our 19th century electoral system is a bit much considering all the other little problems that persist in this long-time bastion of political conservatism in Ontario.

It's clear which old line parties are responsible for faith-based school funding in Ontario and across Canada. And I continue to support the NDP because they understand which old line party policies need major overhaul first and foremost based on the most urgent needs of Ontarians, like dealing with child poverty, homelessness, soaring unemployment, and last but not least, an inequitable public school funding formula which remains so since the Liberal Party promised to deal with it in 2003 and have not. 

So after years of underfunding by our two old line parties, the issue is separate school funding?

That's not my first gut reaction. Because that shouldve read:

 After years of underfunding – first by the Harris and Eves' governments and by the McGuinty Liberals - Ontario's public school system is in a mess and requires more equatible funding across the existing public system.

And the ONDP is the only party pledging to come good on the other two party's broken promises to fix the funding formula.

Straw man much? 

Cost does not have to be about dollars.  Making a cost/benefit analysis does not have to be about dollars.  One cost of consolidating the systems would be some instability during the phase in period where people aren't really sure what's going to happen with some processes.  Another cost will be that some schools will be closing and that means for some kids their schools will be closing.

I didn't suggest putting anything up for referendum. The way our political system works is that parties put forth platforms that they feel will be popular with voters.  In cases that do not involve human rights, i think showing that a particular solution is favoured by the people makes a good case for it, assuming that the people have enough information about the choices.  The reason that it's important for an idea like this to have the support of the people is that it's the people who understand the costs of making the change (much better than politicians in Toronto).

Your response is not up to your par.  "Let the NDP satisfy itself"?  The point is the NDP is not satisfied that this is worth prioritizing.  Unless the NDP membership get sold on the idea, by school consolidation activists, the issue won't be part of the platform.  If consolidation activists want the NDP to do something here, they need to build a stronger case than they have done so far.

One could just as easily say let Harper satisfy himself that socialism is the way to go and boldly put a guaranteed minimum income forward as part of their next platform.  Let you satisfy yourself that i'm right here and boldly agree with what i'm saying.  Right.  That's a good way to change someone's mind.

It is about dollars. This is the most outstanding issue today with public school funding in Ontatrio, not which of the public schools are this label or that one. Parents across Ontario are at their wits end with writing cheques for basic school supplies, extracurricular activities, and things that used to be covered by the province. And now Ontarians are pestered at the door with children selling candy and raffle tickets to replace school funding chiselled away by our two dirty old line parties in government.

The kids are propping up these McGuilty Liberals who are shortchanging them in return.

The neoliberal business model for running public services into the ground efficiently and cost effectively isnt working well around the world, and it's not working here in Canada either. Those jokers in government may well be too timid and weak to tackle this old line party legacy issue for public school funding, but theyre also refusing to fund all public schools adequately and equitably regardless.

McGuinty's Liberals are cowering behind an issue that is secondary to his government's broken promise to fix the public school funding formula.

Well now you seem to be making a parallel case for the neoliberal business model of running public sector economy, and at the same time, deflecting blame from the Liberals(again) for continuing to break their election campaign promises to fix the school funding formula.

Separate school students are about a third of total in Ontario and recieving about a third of public school funding.

We also happen to be enjoying multibillion dollar infrastructure deficits in Ontario and across Canada - $130 billion dollars altogether. Are we going to blame separate school funding for this as well as a chronic lack of money for job training and retraining, and money pared back from other areas of social spending?

Or is it simply that the 30 year-old neoliberal ideology and social democracy in general are incompatible? 

The NDP cant promise to fix ALL of the old line party legacy issues in one four year term. Look at McGuilty Liberals, they racked-up well up over 50 broken promises before their first term was up. Can't blame the NDP for being realistic about the shear size and breadth of the neoliberal-old line party mess that needs cleaning up and overhauling.

Our Liberals would do it now except that theyre clinging to 100 percent of power with just 22% of the registered vote. Fear of not winning a phony majority and "strategic voting" is what rules party politics in Ontario. 

BA: 

"71,000 Ontarians lost their jobs in February.  More job losses are being announced every day.  Please explain how this issue is even close to important to people when people are afraid of losing their homes, their incomes, their retirement savings and the stress it places on people.  Idiotic focusing on this issue and the divisiviness it would cause during a time of high unemployment doesn't even come close to strong enough."

------------------------------------------------------------------------

They could not begin to explain their interest from any practical political position, BA. In Northern Ontario, raising it would guarantee defeat.

I'm having trouble following exactly what is being proposed. And that makes all the difference. The method can make the difference between opposition and support to the idea. 

I'd like to know if what we are proposing is reducing the FOUR systems to TWO or to ONE? The articles cited are either vague or seem to suggest a single bilingual system. This threatens self-determination for the francophone national minority in Ontario. And may even be unconstitutional, depending on what we mean by a bilingual system. Keeping the boards separate (linguistically) is important (i.e. The Francophone "community" should control its education directly - it took decades to get to the point it is now)

Secondly, are we talking about integrating the catholic schools into the public system by making them secular - or are we just removing funding? or some sort of half-way solution somewhere? While it is arguable that the "removing funding" may work on the English side where many communities have both systems. It is dangerous for the French system, and worse, is an assimiliationist policy. Most French school boards are in the catholic system. To remove funding from these is essentially removing funding from the French system. Besides, most communities unless large enough, have only either a Catholic French shcool or a Public French school. To simply do away with the French Catholic system without integrating its schools into the public system can lead to assimilation if the only public shcool in certain areas is an English public school.

You can see why the details of the plan to eliminate catholic school funding are more important than the question of whether to do it or not. In fact, the HOW is the question. One way is progressive and the other isn't.

The defenders of the reactionary system of public funding for certain religious-based schools challenged the leftists among us to present the case for one single public school system, divided only along language lines (English/French).

Posted above are the civil liberties case, the liberal-democratic case (Ottawa Citizen), and the socialist case.

So we have met the challenge. Nobody seems to have anything to say to refute those three cases, other than "it's too expensive", "it's too unpopular" or "it's not important enough".

In other words, no amount of rational persuasion is going to convince these supporters of an archaic, expensive, divisive, and discriminatory education system that anything should be done to change it.    

"If you make a catholic school secular it's no longer a catholic school. It's a public school. "

Yes but, what I meant were the physical schools could become private Catholic schools. Which leads to your "third" issue since most French schools are in the catholic system (8 catholic boards vs 4 public) - the constitutional rights are threatened unless new schools are built to replace them.

"I don't see why public funds should go to French Catholic schools but not to English Catholic schools."

Nor do I. I was not suggesting that. I was in fact wondering if forced "secularisation" of the catholic schools is in any of the plans as was done in Quebec and would solve the problem of having to build new schools to replace them.

I don't believe in forced secularization. If the Catholic school buildings are publicly-owned, they could be sold or rented out at market rates to house private Catholic schools, or the private schools could be evicted and the buildings used as public schools. Where necessary, new schools should be built for the use of the public French school system, unless it is found to be practical to have English and French schools housed in the same buildings.

What the Catholics decide to do about continuing with their parochial schools is their business.

Didn't it happen in Quebec because of a 'sea change' in public opinion, a reaction to church/government entanglement?? Duplessis?

I really don't see that happening in Ontario. It would not fly politically. If we want all kids in public schools, there will have to be accommodation for current religious schools and who knows what all will come under that label - That's the tricky part.

 I am in favour of having most kids in the public system, but to do thatI think we would have to accommodate many types of religious education as well as secular - ie, all of those in private schools now, and maybe more.

And everyone's school taxes were lowered(ya right), the lame and lepers were cured, and children were only jerked around a little with bussing and school changes while public school funding and everything else continued to suffer mysterious funding gaps. The NDP was martyred for trying - privatization eventually set in -  and they all lived happily ever after in neoliberal Ontario. fini

Yes we should keep the barn door wide open for private schools. Must abide by corporate-friendly neoliberal agreements GATS and NAFTA at all cost. Screw the Canadian constitution and 1.2 million Francophones and Catholic voters though. Now, how do we convince the NDP to promise to do this sordid deed and shoot themselves in the feet for doing it?

We'll make neoliberal voodoo work right here in Ontario for the first time ever. Yes we can!!

So youll let us know when the inquisition comes rolling into town, right? And remember, we're counting on you

Fidel, and everyone else here who is interested for some facts. This is an important economic and principled issue. First the economics. Education funding in Ontario, as per our govt public accounts, is the second highest line, after health care, so to suggest that this isn't an economic issue or real concern, is far off. 

Fidel suggested that catholic schools are underfunded. The reality is that the funding formula actually provides a lot higher funding per catholic student in comparison to public school student. Public boards wish we got the same funding as Catholic boards. It isn't just the flawed funding formula but the twin problem of declining student enrolment that is effecting very school board in Ontario (both public and catholic), but nationally. Keeping half filled schools open is wasting resources that could be better spent in the classroom where the students are. It would eliminate chocolate bar sells!

Funding has actually increased dramatically under the Liberals but you are right, the formula is flawed, and you are right the liberals have been slow at correcting it. This past year there was a provincial panel setup to look at the funding formula which cannot be separate from declining student enrolment. 

If you have two half filled schools in a town (ignore the religious or secular designation for a moment), one would be of mind to consolidate to one school, thus saving on resource costs, and needless administrative overhead, and create one school. Each child should get the same funding allocated to them, regardless of race, sex and creed, thus creating equity and fairness. The money saved could go into extra programming, teaching staff, classroom resources, and extracurricular activities. If there is enough community interest,religious and non-religious groups alike could use the school facility (since it is owned by the public), and offer religious education in off school hours. This is putting all students and parents first. 

I can tell you as a parent I would be interested in sharing buildings and particularly if the money saved could be put into the classroom. We have a crazy system where we bus kids past schools that are publicly funded and closer to children's homes, due to whether they are public or catholic school attenders. 

This is not chump change we are talking about here. So I will post the whole powerpoint in a new comment.

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

No I did not. I linked to the tvo.org article where Kitts' graphs show Catholic students are about a third of students and receive about a third of total funding depicted in the second graph. I realize it's not exactly 1-3-2/3, but it's close enough for me.

And the reality is that per pupil funding for secondary school students is significantly higher than for primary. Primary school teachers are teaching significantly more classroom hours than their highschool counterparts(see "close the gap" campaign http://www.etfo.ca/closethegap/pages/default.aspx)

The reality is that one of McGuinty's more than 50 broken election promises is that he failed to deal with the broken public school funding formula. Pass the hat school funding is what we have in Ontario today ... BESIDES over a million people without family doctors, appalling hospital conditions, a multi-billion dollar infrastructure deficit, "stubborn" rates of CHILD POVERTY, homelessness, and SOARING unemployment.

We cant run public sector economy according to a failed neoliberal business model. It doesnt work today as much as it didnt work last year and the ten years before that.

So Fidel, the Ministry of Education would actually have the money to close the gap between elementary and secondary teachers, and have lots left over to provide better education for all students. Looks like a win-win to me.

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

that is not a constructive response. I'm showing that the NDP could provide as one of its planks a consolidated school system that puts parents and students first, and meets the principles of economic and social justice that are the underpinnings of the party. ______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

Why not pledge to come good on McGuinty's broken promise to fix the funding formula?

How Ontario's education funding formula is shortchanging students  Hugh Mackenzie 2007

Sure the NDP will lose votes. That's why in the last election, the last poll taken on support for one school system hit 78% for consolidation. 

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

Is that why McGuinty's Liberals won 22% of the registered vote?

I really dont think those voters will swing NDP for any reason. Central issue next election will likely be soaring unemployment and rising poverty.

Ben Levin, former Ontario Deputy Education Minister, said to Daniel Kitts: 

Levin is actually the current Deputy Minister, having returned to the job in December, 2008.

Nice to know you've got the Liberal government bureaucracy on your side, eh Fidel?

Sure sounding Bush-like here Fidel: "you are either with us or against us." So if NDPer supporters and progressives which incidently, the vast majority I spoke to support consolidation and focussing on investment in education programming rather than investment in infrastructure, it means that they support neo-liberal policies. 

That's rhetoric and creates a black and white picture - so unbecoming of a social democrat. Thanks goodness the federal NDP is more enlightened and adopted a one school system policy. So the federal NDP must be neo-liberal lovers.

Anyway, running on the economy is a given. Just because the NDP adopts as party policy one school system does not mean that becomes what they promote during the next provincial election. There are lots of NDP policies that we have on the books but due to election timing does not get highlighted. 

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

He's also working on a report to justify tuition increases for Gary Doer, so we know where he stands.

I agree with that sentiment. 

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

Bull-fucking-shit. Those that play the I am more progressive than thou card because you don't agree with me are no different than the religious fundamentalists they claim to be so counter too.

http://mediumonline.ca/?p=1074

The federal Liberals projected a surplus of $55 billion over five to six years by 2010. They spent $80 billion "paying down the mortgage" at the expense of everything else that matters and produced the worst overall performing economy of 30 industrialised countries in the 1990's. They accumulated surpluses and lied to Canadians that the money wasnt there for people programs. And the equalization forumula still needs fixing.

2010 is when North American union is expected to happen. It will be the end of Canada and of rule by ourselves and of ourselves. And I wont support the scaling back of any people programs whatsoever in preparation for a police state.

As an example, two-thirds of Canadians surveyed last year are supposed to be against this phony mission in Afghanistan. And yet the NDP didnt receive two-thirds of whatever the abysmal voter turnout was in October.

And I dont think promising to fire a bunch of people from their administrative jobs in downturn is such a good idea. Rae's NDP backed off public auto insurance partly because CUPE made a case against it due to the bad neoliberal economy even then, and partly due to concerns about a probable NAFTA challenge.

I think that with this flunky electoral system the way it is, the NDP should let it ride as a third rail issue same as before. I think that with this economy in tatters and overall discontent with pick an issue in general, there could be a repeat of 1990 in 2011.

I am still stuck on the comment that bringing Ontario schools in line with the rest of the country and securalizing their public school system in 2009 is somehow considered "bold".  Ontario must be a strange place to live.

 Are these Catholic schools overtly religious or just called Catholic? Are there prayer times, etc.?

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact,

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact, youre

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact, youre tha

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact, youre tha

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

In fact, youre the guy who wants Doer to drop everything in Manitoba and restore billions of dollars in core funding to PSE that was robbed from provincial governments since 1995!

But when it comes to Catholic students in Ontario, mr generosity for himself isnt so generous anymore.

No soup or lower tuition fees to you. And if Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, PEI and New Brunswick fund only one school system, then why isnt PSE more affordable in those provinces among all else that is lacking?

And you claim to know something about farming???

You appear to be conflating two important but generally separate (and private!) functions of livestock.

However, I'm ready to learn. Draw me a picture.

Did not quite know where to post this but it shows that separate school problems are not restricted to Ontario.

Unionist is correct of course, and the ON NDP continue to pay the price of not adequately addressing the separate school issue.

Doesn't the NDP ever want to win an election again in Ontario? 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article5835156.ece

Oh that's baloney. It's an old line party legacy issue in Ontariario, and neither Liberals nor Tories have dealt with it properly. It was not the cause for Mike Harris exiting stage right before an election. And it did not prevent Pinocchio and his Liberals from winning a phony majority. Breaking over 50 of his election promises of 2003 didnt prevent Pinocchio and his Bay Street hirelings part deux from winning a 22 percent majority.

According to the federation of elementary school teachers in Ontario, the real issue is a chronic funding gap between primary and secondary schools in this province, persistent since Harris-Eves' and their uncommon nonsense revolution

unionist, we have a $100 billion dollar infrastructure deficit in Ontario, and the second-hand economic ideology for giving the country to the Yanks real cheap isnt working very well at all. You might think this is an issue that's going to catapult the NDP into 22 percent phony-baloney majority territory, but then I'd have to say you have no idea what youre talking about. And this is why this old line party legacy issue is not taken seriously by the ONDP right now.

If Pinocchio McGuilty wants to be seen and heard doing something progressive instead of the usual banning cell phones and chewing gum and the like, then let him and his Bay Street hirelings shoulder all of the risk for what could be an executive decision for a change. But leave the NEW Democrats out of it. We dont need this stale air wafting over on to our party. McGuinty's going to have a lot more on his plate than pandering to the anti-Catholic bigots next election.

I think that this "issue" would be better sold as a progressive leftist policy and not the election breaker that someone described above. In all likelihood, the 22 percent who voted Liberal last election will not be swinging NDP if our party relies on this one to put us over the top. Personally, I dont think the ONDP will be able to appeal to very many of those relentless voters in the large minority.

The ONDP needs to appeal to younger voters not the grey hairs whove voted old line party all their lives. This is not a fresh new idea in Ontario and therefore, I dont believe it will speak to those 4 million or so Ontarians who didnt vote last election.

Maybe if we "throw the priests and nuns out of our public schools", as unionist mentioned a while ago, and we pawn off the building of new schools with McGuinty's AFP's, money(and debt) will suddenly grow on private money trees for new infrastructure and public-private services. I dont want to be involved in this neoliberalized race to the bottom. We cant run public services according to a neoliberal business model, and I just think we shouldnt be helping rightwing ideologues in Pinocchio's Liberal government to do it either. This government already doesnt properly fund a slew of important public services.

We did have nuns in public schools when my dad and his brothers came to Northern Ontario from Montreal. But that was in the 1920s. I suppose they were still in schools for some time after that. My father liked telling the story about flipping a nun arse over tea kettle in the bowels of the school, all over an accusation and undeserved strapping. Three local boys ganged up on my dad, the new kid from Montreal, because he had nice clothes on. Appaerntly he beat hell out of them, too, and one of them retold the same story at dad's funeral. We couldnt believe it all those years.

I think it's a gift for the Liberals, and they should run with it next election. They'll prolly steal a bunch of votes from the Tories for it, too. Luck to them, and let them do battle for progressive old line party supporters who always vote rain or shine. And if the ONDP must represent a protest vote for wayward old line party supporters with kids and grandkids in separate schools by the NDP remaining sub-neutral on the issue, then it's a chance I think we should take. It's dirty, I know, but the last week of the last election was pretty nonsensical as far as I could tell.