Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks to all of you for being here today. It was interesting to listen to your introductory remarks and to note some of the similarities, actually, between your job and the job that we do. I mean that in the sense that part of it is substantive and dealing with process and administration, but part of it is what I don't want to call ceremonial in the sense that it doesn't matter, but ceremonial in the sense that, as you said, for the people who come before you, it is a very significant day for them.
I can tell you, as a new MP a couple of years ago, I felt very awkward going to places and standing up, saying, “On behalf of the Government of Canada...”, or “On behalf of Canada...”. I almost felt like a bit of a phony at first and was quite uncomfortable. But I quickly got to the point where I realized it was important to the people in the room, whether it was a 50th wedding anniversary or whether it was a retirement party. I have now become not only quite comfortable doing it, but appreciate the value that those ceremonies have for the people who are involved. So when you talk about reinventing yourself time and time again, I know of what you speak.
There are a couple of issues I want to briefly touch on. The issue of partisan affiliation or having been politically involved in the past has come up today. My sense is that partisan affiliation should neither determine nor preclude political appointment. Someone should not be appointed to something simply by virtue of their political affiliation or their activities in the past.
Having said that, I would go so far as to say it would be absurd to preclude everyone who has been politically active from political appointment. That's a fine line that we need to walk.
The issue really is qualification. I appreciate that the process of appointment of judges has changed. We have a process right now that we would probably all agree is not the perfect process, and we need to move toward that.
Having said that, Mr. Simard, you've been very involved. In your opinion, are the four people sitting at the table with you today qualified to do this job?