Mr. Chair, may I respond?
There are two points to bear in mind in this debate. First, one-third of appeals from the provinces come from Quebec, and all the argumentation, all the decisions, all the briefs are in French. They are not translated. So a unilingual judge has only the little brief written by his clerk to assist him in understanding a lot of files.
Second, the Official Languages Act was passed in order to make the public service, which was operating in English, aware of the fact that that was discriminatory toward francophones, who were required to work in their second language. People said at the time that the introduction of linguistic obligations would discriminate against everyone from the west. Now we see that the Chief of Defence Staff, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, the Prime Minister of Canada and the Clerk of the Privy Council all come from the west and they are all bilingual.
We are now hearing exactly the same arguments against the bilingualism requirement in the Supreme Court of Canada as we heard 40 years ago about mandatory bilingualism for public servants. Under the bill that I have supported before parliamentary committees, a lower level of bilingualism would be required of judges than that required for public servants.