Clinton is a doctoral student with a master’s degree from Oxford who has worked for a renowned consulting firm, as well as one of the world’s largest hedge funds. But IAC, a NASDAQ-listed firm that owns websites such as Ask.com and The Daily Beast, was forced to defend its decision. Had Clinton gained enough wisdom in her 31 years to make her a valuable director in her own right, or was she appointed because of who her parents are?

It’s an interesting discussion, one that begs the question: should there be a minimum age requirement to sit on a corporate board?

The answer, according to most governance experts, is no. Directors at Canadian firms are tasked with overseeing management, weighing in on strategy, and keeping tabs on the company’s finances. Increasingly, they are also recognizing the value of integrating social and environmental considerations into corporate strategy and risk management. And it seems plausible that younger directors would be more in tune with issues such as climate change or the concerns of the Occupy Wall Street protesters. “A lot of MBAs are now learning about sustainability, and so a board is likelier, in recruiting a younger person, to be recruiting somebody who through their education was exposed to sustainability trends and theirimpacts on the firm,” says Coro Strandberg, a consultant who teaches boards about sustainable leadership and economic innovation, and who herself was a director of Vancity Credit Union throughout her thirties.

The benefits of having a diverse board to discuss such matters have been increasingly recognized, but while much has been written about gender and other personal characteristics, age rarely comes up. That might be because the boardrooms of Canada’s blue chip companies continue to be heavily skewed towards those who were born when you could still buy a new house for $15 000.