You made some assumptions that I don't agree with.
What we're talking about is a trade-off. In the ideal world, all nine judges would be bilingual. In a practical sense, it's going to be very difficult to find judges from B.C. and Alberta who have had the same opportunity to be bilingual. So the test is this. Will you sacrifice the competency of a judge in order that he has an understanding, without the help of an interpreter, to hear the case? In my opinion, to sacrifice competency in order that all the judges.... They may not be bilingual in accordance with the amendment; they just understand with an interpreter. I think it's a bad trade-off for the litigant. I would prefer to have a competent judge who needs the help of translation than someone not as competent who does not.