Mr. Hill gave us an explanation about the quasi-judicial powers of the new conflict of interest and ethics commissioner. In addition, Mr. Owen told us about his experience as an ombudsman. He said that, in the rest of the world, no one required that a candidate for the position of ombudsman be a judge. In that regard, I could talk about the situation in Quebec.
Some 10 years ago, by means of a bill, Quebec carried out a reform of all its administrative agencies and tribunals with quasi-judicial powers. Everything was brought together, all of those organizations were reformed and eligibility criteria were established for positions in the various agencies and tribunals. It was quite clear: at most, it could be asked that the person be a member of the Barreau. Depending on the nature of the agency's powers, the requirement could be five years' experience as a member of the Barreau, or 10 years in cases where powers were somewhat greater.
I'll cite the example of Quebec's police ethics system, which was introduced in September 1990. That system included a position of Commissioner of Police Ethics, which required 10 years' experience as a member of the Barreau, a police ethics tribunal with exclusive powers, executive powers and power to compel persons to testify and to file documentary evidence, as well as the power to impose disciplinary penalties ranging up to dismissal of a police officer, including the police chiefs of all police departments under Quebec's jurisdiction. I believe they showed they were very serious. And yet they didn't require that candidates for the position of commissioner of police ethics or that of deputy commissioner be judges. They simply required that they be members of the Barreau.
So, as regards clause 28 of Bill C-2, I can't support the government's idea that a candidate for the position of conflict of interest and ethics commissioner be required to be a former judge.