To answer your second question, I don't think that's a problem. I think you can just go ahead and do that, as far as I know. But I think you're going to be getting advice from others who are more knowledgeable than I am.
When it comes to the acts of the appointments commission, I think you raise some interesting questions. The current bill suggests the Public Appointments Commission would be part of the Prime Minister's Office, or at least would probably be housed in the Privy Council Office, which of course is equivalent for the purposes of this discussion.
It is correct I think that the Public Service Commission, which already is an independent organization that does merit-based appointments, could in fact take on due responsibilities of ensuring the processes, as envisaged in the bill, were properly followed.
I think I can correct you. I think Bill C-2 also points out that part-time commissioners of the Public Service Commission will go through the same appointment process as the president, that is to say, be appointed by Parliament through a vote. I think that is the suggestion the commission has made as well. So there would be some symmetry around that.
But yes, I think there are lots of machinery options, and the commission is a very viable one.