Auditor General of Canada nominee Michael Ferguson waits to testify before the Commons public accounts committee …If bilingualism should be a requirement for senior civil servants, as the Liberals and NDP insist, then why don't they require the same from their MPs?
For the past week, the opposition parties have crying foul over the Harper government's appointment of, the unilingual, Michael Ferguson as Canada's new auditor general.
They say bilingualism is a "necessity" for those who "aspire to a position in the upper echelons of the public service."
Hypocritically, the opposition parties don't have the same rules for their MPs.
Remember the NDP's Ruth Ellen Brosseau who couldn't speak French fluently despite getting elected in a predominantly French speaking riding?
Political analyst Keith Beardsly argues there are many MPs, in both the Liberal party and the NDP that could not pass the same language exams that they are insisting Ferguson pass.
"Unilingual MPs (including unilingual cabinet members and critics) can fully participate in government matters because in the House of Commons all documents are in English and French. They make use of simultaneous translation when someone addresses the House and the same applies to committees," Beardsly wrote in a column for the Cornwall Free Press.
"It won't be much different for Ferguson…If he appears before a parliamentary committee there will be simultaneous translation. His departmental web site and all of his reports will be in both official languages. His department will translate his correspondence as well as whatever document he needs to see until he is proficient in both official languages."
Moreover, as the National Post editorial board so aptly notes, to make bilingualism a condition for a job is to exclude five out of six Canadians from it.
"For an auditor-general, what truly counts is his reputation for public service, incorruptibility and good judgment. And no one disputes that Mr. Ferguson possesses all of these bona fides."
136 comments