Chair, I just wanted to say that the provisions being added by clauses 471 and 472 are intended to merely be declaratory in nature, which means they are not meant to change the requirements for appointment to the Supreme Court of Canada as set out in sections 5 and 6 of the Supreme Court Act. They are only meant to clarify what these sections have always required.
The amendments proposed by the honourable member for Charlottetown would likely constitute substantive changes to these sections and cast doubt on the declaratory nature of clauses 471 and 472.
It is important to remember that sections 5 and 6 of the Supreme Court Act only set out the minimum criteria for appointment to the Supreme Court. Additional requirements are determined and assessed through the Supreme Court selection process, which includes a multi-party, non-partisan appointments advisory committee whose role it is to review in detail the professional qualifications of candidates for appointment.
In practice the process is rigorous, and appointments are only made following consideration of a range of criteria regarding a candidate's professional qualifications, experience, and personal attributes, all of which inform the key consideration, which is merit.
For these reasons, we're opposed to the amendment.