Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Minister, thank you for being here today.
I would like to come back to comments you made previously in front of this Committee, and which were reported to me, regarding the bill that aims to ensure that all Supreme Court justices can speak both official languages, French and English. We have already begun to study it in the House and we will be continuing to do so later. In your opinion, legislation such as this would divide the country.
Others have raised the objection that this bill would prevent some extremely well-qualified candidates from ever being appointed to the Supreme Court.
Of course, the possibility of people acceding to senior positions may be an important point, but do you not think that litigants should take priority? When someone is making his case in front of a court and the judge requires simultaneous translation, or when a lawyer is arguing an extremely subtle and complex case in front of a judge who is unable to grasp all the subtleties of the written arguments presented to him, do you not see that as a very major handicap for a litigant?
We know that the unequal treatment—as is the case here and everywhere—is always in the same direction—in other words, it is always Anglophones who do not know French, because usually, Francophones know English and are able to read complex material in English.
Do you not think that the interests of litigants should take priority?