I would say that the outcome is much more important than the process.
We have recently applauded the fact that the government has finally heard the requests for bilingualism to be part of the criteria for the Supreme Court appointment process. There was some debate about what was meant by “bilingualism”. For us, it is clear: judges must be able to converse in French. Being able to understand French is not enough. They must also be able to speak and write in French. That's what bilingualism means to us.
Yes, passing legislation would be a way of ensuring the continuity of the obligation until the House of Commons changes its mind. As you know, such a piece of legislation could be amended by the same legislative body.