Article content continued

It would appear the government is committed to the importance of diversity by appointing persons who are ethnically diverse and bilingual. This is a laudable goal. When I was in government, we were proud to appoint in our region judges of Acadian, Métis and Asian descent. There were many others in other parts of Canada, all highly capable jurists. But there should also be emphasis on regional diversity, which has been historically important, given the rich cultural fabric the provinces brought into Confederation and the traditions that are still visible in the day-to-day lives of Atlantic Canadians.

The inclusion in the Supreme Court of Canada of a jurist drawn from these traditions and experiences helps preserve national cohesion. It ensures that the court will benefit from deep knowledge of the unique economic, social, legal and historical aspects of life in a part of the country that helped found the Canada we know. It’s the ultimate irony — a whole region seems set to be denied representation in the name of “greater diversity.”

As a former federal minister, I can appreciate the need for fluency in both official languages, yet that does not mean that Canadians who are not proficient in both official languages are unsuited for office or the judiciary. Modern technology is sufficient to allow judges and others to do their work while acquiring proficiency in these languages. I have no doubt that many Canadians could point to some of the best judges and even politicians in our history who were not fluent in both French and English, including current members of the Supreme Court. To automatically disqualify all Canadians from those offices based simply on how many languages they speak is to deny Canadians the opportunity of have the most qualified and capable people considered for those positions. The ultimate goal remains, as it must, quality and legal excellence above all else. The Supreme Court is too important to have the government conduct a social science experiment.