This is the first time, Judge Lamer, that I'm being told to speak loudly, and I love it! I'm usually being told to take it down a few notches. Wise man. That's why you were the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. Good judgment.
You made a couple of points. Two of the points you made were that you were not sure, given the limited amount of study and examination you've had an opportunity to do, of the benefits or meaningful contributions laypersons can bring to the judicial advisory committees; and second, that some of the problems that may exist with regards to the whole process of federal appointment of judges may come from the fact that there is no legislation and no regulation framing or providing a context for the actual work of the judicial advisory committees.
So with regards to the absence of legislation or regulation, are you recommending that this government or this committee look at the idea and possibly make a recommendation that there should be a piece of legislation that actually creates the JACs, clearly explains and describes the composition and the process of appointment of members to the JACs and the qualifications required, whether for laypersons or lawyers—and I won't talk about the judges, because in most of the provinces it is the chief justice of the province or the provincial courts who actually appoints the person, or the provincial chief justice who sits on the provincial equivalent of the JACs—and also provide, at least in a general way, if not necessarily in a very detailed way, the criteria that the JACs must take into consideration, in terms of evaluating the prospective candidates and determining whether or not they meet the merit?
So my question is, are you favourable to that?