I thank my colleague, Mr. Casey, for introducing this motion, but, with respect, I should tell him that it is moving a little too fast.
This matter is extremely important and fundamental for our institutions of justice. We must not adopt a model of this kind right away without studying it and without hearing from witnesses on the matter. I am sure that my colleague could suggest experts who could come before the committee to speak for or against a public model. I think that he wants the same thing as we do, to adopt a process that is as transparent as possible. However, respecting judges' privacy must be one of the principles of that process.
It would be premature to adopt a ready-made model without hearing from experts and having studied the question in a little more depth. Adopting this motion would prevent us from consulting experts and groups who have been looking at the matter for a number of years. Instead, we should adopt the motion that my colleague from Gatineau is going to introduce. It will allow us to hear from witnesses who have studied the matter and then put our heads together to consider the best model to adopt.
My colleague is as hesitant as I am with the idea that the government would like an open model. I understand that. Nevertheless, we still have to let experts come before the committee to give us their opinions on the process of appointing judges.
My thanks to everyone for listening to us.