I’d send this directly to Allan Rankin, but it appears he doesn’t solicit feedback.
I do admire Rankin’s opinions, but is he being ironic when he suggests Mr. MacLauchlan ought to replace Thomas Cromwell?
While MacLauchlan may not be the most absurd choice, I can’t agree with Rankin’s rationale - at all. Especially since there are women and men out there who are much more equipped to do the job. For the record, from Atlantic Canada my vote would be for Wayne MacKay (head and shoulders above MacLauchlan). If you don’t know of him, Google Wayne MacKay; now, he’s an “expert” who has the one feature needed at the Supreme Court - courage.
Is there any evidence (significant publications) that Mr. MacLauchlan “was a constitutional expert” as Rankin claims? I have tried to find MacLauchlan’s peer reviewed publications that relate to his constitutional expertise, but I can’t find anything. Maybe my searches are wonky, maybe it’s a matter of transparency.
Anyway, I’m not saying the evidence for Mr. MacLauchlan’s expertise is not out there, I just can’t find it. Indeed, with the exception of Alex B. Campbell: The Prince Edward Island Premier Who Rocked the Cradle, I can’t find even one substantive monograph. And, while the biography is cute and entertaining, it’s far from something that reveals any degree of constitutional or even jurisprudential expertise.
While I admire MacLauchlan’s professional (and nonprofessional) political acumen, I can’t see much else. Clearly, my high expectations have devolved towards disappointment, and that fogs my perspective. Hmmmm, I wonder, maybe a tad more transparency would help?