Indeed, since 2005, I believe, it has been mandatory for candidates to designated bilingual positions to be bilingual. However, a debate is currently underway to determine whether looking for bilingual candidates for a position that is not designated bilingual can be considered an asset. Section 91 of the act provides that a position should be designated bilingual solely based on its definition. So that's a provision that, in the case of certain positions, is designed to protect people who don't have the necessary language skills by means of an absolute designation.
