Sean Fraser

I will entirely endorse that perspective. I've put no such pressure on anyone through the process. I will just make a comment to complete the answer. Some of the most beautiful things about the country in which we live are invisible to those of us who call it home, but when you start talking to people from around the world and they look at the protections that we have in place for our democracy, [more]

No.

I'm sorry; I don't share your concern, frankly, that a judge being able to discuss their role either in a constitutional democracy or in society more broadly is somehow leading to the appointment of judges who favour one political party over another. With respect, you said that your question is not really pertinent to the conversation about the appointment of Chief Justice Joyal to the Supreme [more]

With respect to your preamble, Mr. Lawton, my own view is that we're very lucky to be in Canada, where the powers and constraints on those powers are actually outlined in the Constitution itself. We can take our lessons not from saying there is one arbiter in one circumstance who has the final say and another in a different one. There's a constitutional framework that spells it out with a high [more]

Who would you like to take the question?

I'm not aware of any objections to specific applications. Not every one of these conversations was with me personally. However, based on my review of the materials and the conversations I did have, there was no suggestion that there was one candidate who should not be named. The conversations, frankly, more often revolved around the characteristics that would make a good appointee rather than [more]

If the allegation were proven that we were making appointments on the basis of people's making donations, that would be concerning. As I've mentioned, there are judges who have been engaged with various different parties and who've made donations to different parties at different levels. That is not something I seek information about before making appointments.

Let's not divorce this from the current facts. We are nominating a superior candidate who cannot be stuck neatly into a corner based on an affiliation with one party or another. What's important to me is understanding the character of the person. Do they have integrity? Do they have an understanding of the law and experience in the law? Do they understand the role that the courts ought to play [more]

If I may, Chair, I'll offer an initial response. I do find the line of questioning that we just heard deeply concerning. I don't want to make assumptions about motivation, but it seems clear that there's at least some attempt to try to have Canadians question the independence in the judiciary based on their political affiliation. Just so Canadians at home have some comfort, for more than a [more]

Liberalist as a database is in use by the Liberal Party of Canada. I have never used it during my process of making appointments. I will occasionally receive a note about a candidate after they've come through as being recommended or highly recommended. If they have a particular engagement we're aware of from any political party, I'm not always certain where that information would come from. For [more]

Thanks very much, Mr. Brock, for the question. The short answer to your question is no, but more specifically, it's a matter of independence for the courts, in my view, not only to determine the substantive legal decisions that they make but also to control their own processes as they see fit to administer justice in the most appropriate way. To the extent that there are actors who are empowered [more]

I have considered, in depth, the record of service that the chief justice has offered to Canadians in its totality. Between me and my team, we have reviewed every one of the decisions that he's authored and a number of different speeches. The sum total of that review, including public speeches he has given, gives me a great sense of confidence that we are making a top-tier pick for the Supreme [more]

I'd like to clarify something. The advisory board was constituted only after the application process closed. When we had the benefit of some of the work of the advisory board, which operated completely independently of our team, my office engaged in some consultation with attorneys general in the western and northern provinces as well as the chief justices of those jurisdictions from which an [more]

I've also left out the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. Prime Minister It was to understand if they had experience working with some of the individuals and if they had characteristics that would be important for a person who could be chosen. It was not with a view to have them come up with new names to go find people in the community but instead to ensure that the choice that we're [more]

I would only say that his résumé is publicly available. We are very lucky to have individuals of Chief Justice Joyal's character and professional record step up and put their name forward to serve in this capacity. I'm looking forward to seeing the difference he will make. I'm here without reservation about the quality of the individual we are seeking to have appointed to the Supreme Court of [more]

Do I remember when the appointment was made? Not off the top of my head.

I believe that it should not influence one way or the other someone's appointment to the bench. Since I've held this position, there have been a number of appointments where appointees have been involved with different political parties. I don't think the fact that someone has made a donation to one particular political party should serve as either an obligation or something that bars someone [more]

Look, it's essential that people are able to operate independently, but I think it's important that we don't exclude people from opportunities to serve Canada just because they've engaged in our political process. With respect to Chief Justice Joyal, I believe he was appointed initially by a Progressive Conservative government at the provincial level. I think casting aspersions upon appointees on [more]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you so much, everyone. Before I begin, let me thank Ms. McTeer and Monsieur Giroux for their participation in the process that has led to today, where I am honoured to be here before you in support of the Honourable Glenn Joyal, who has been nominated to the Supreme Court of Canada. Chief Justice Joyal is an exceptional jurist. I'm confident in his [more]

Do you mean the judiciary more broadly or the Supreme Court of Canada? Because the answer is different.