As I see it, a person who is bilingual enough is not the same thing as a person who is perfectly bilingual. Please forgive me, Mr. Chair, but I am forced to say that repeatedly.
I understand the ambition, the objective, the dream of having a country that is fully bilingual from one end to the other. We all dream of that. We all dream of having perfectly bilingual judges, not only in the Supreme Court, but in all courts all over Canada. That would be just great. It would be great if God were bilingual too. I don't know whether He is, but we hope to find out that He is when we get up there. If so, all would be right with the world.
As you pointed out just now, this exception was created because, once, you could practically count on the fingers of two hands the number of perfectly bilingual judges from an English-speaking province. That may not quite be the reality today. Since 1988, society has evolved, and bilingualism has made strides in Canada, it must be said.
Does that reality justify our enshrining in Canadian legislation the obligation to choose a candidate who may be a little less qualified but who is bilingual? Is the legislation going to force us at some stage to choose, not a more qualified candidate, but another bilingual candidate who does not even have to be perfectly bilingual? He or she could be functionally bilingual, which could turn out not to be enough in certain cases, as you say. Do you understand what I mean?