I don't know the details of the two cases you have just mentioned.
Mr. Chairman, I think this is one of the reasons why the legal aid system is pursuant to agreement. Each of the provinces is responsible for determining its own funding criteria. The federal government does not impose what the criteria shall be for granting legal aid because, as I said, this is a shared jurisdiction.
The provinces are responsible for the administration of justice in their provinces. The federal government, a number of years ago and in order to promote legal aid, had agreed with the provinces that it would co-share the cost of legal aid even though the actual operation of legal aid is a provincial responsibility.
With respect to the question that was asked earlier on whether Parliament could enact a law obliging the federal government to pay the provinces, yes, Parliament theoretically could oblige the federal government to pay the provinces, but it would then be obliging the federal government to pay the provinces to do something exclusively within their own jurisdiction. The question then is what controls the federal government would have as to how the money is spent or not spent.
Clearly, when you have flexibility, such as a system based on negotiation, the federal government, whether the agreement is for five years or three years, can take an assessment of what has happened over the course of time. It can say it doesn't necessarily like how the money has been spent in particular jurisdictions and that it would like to address that issue in the next agreement.