Procedure and House Affairs Committee on May 1st, 2018

[Matthew Ball]

The international professional association that governs interpreters is know as AIIC. We can provide that for you. It's public and it's on their website.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Is there anything in your collective bargaining agreement that would touch on these types of standards, that you would have the right or the privilege to abide by those codes of conduct?

[Matthew Ball]

It wouldn't be in the collective agreement. It would be more the interpreters. All of the interpreters for the bureau have master's degrees and, therefore, are professionals and would abide by the code of ethics in their standard of practice.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you.

Okay.

You mentioned in your opening comments that you helped to secure the interpreters for our committee meetings thus far. Have you had a chance to review those committee meetings? Do you have any thoughts or analysis of how those interpretation services worked thus far from the translation bureau's perspective?

[Stéphan Déry]

That's an interesting and important question. The bureau presently has an accreditation process for official languages. All the interpreters who work for the translation bureau have been accredited by the translation bureau to standards that are renowned around the world. We're part of a world organization of conference interpreters, so we have to keep a high standard for official languages.

When we get indigenous languages, it's not the exact same standard, because we don't have—as I was mentioning—the internal capacity to assess in the 90 languages and dialects present in Canada. I'll ask Mr. Ball to explain how we work when we have a request for interpretation in indigenous languages.

[Matthew Ball]

Thank you, Mr. Déry.

I'm not sure if I understood your question. Did you ask how it goes from the bureau's perspective?

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Yes.

[Matthew Ball]

Did you mean from the perspective of organizing and administering the contracts?

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

I meant organizing and quality of the interpretation, as well.

[Matthew Ball]

From the perspective of organizing and administering, I'll be frank. Organizing and administering interpretation contracts can be challenging, depending on the rarity of the language request, but it's something the bureau has been doing—as Mr. Déry said—since 1934, and we're good at it. From an organizational perspective, we felt it was fine.

From a quality perspective—and Mr. Déry was alluding to this—the bureau doesn't have internal capacity. We don't have staff interpreters in most languages of the world. We have staff interpreters and senior interpreters in the official languages, and we cover the most commonly used foreign languages that Canada and the bureau are called upon to serve.

In other languages, when we accredit interpreters, they're what's called “accredited on file”. If my team is asked to provide interpretation for a major diplomatic event.... I don't have a Polish staff interpreter anymore, so I would probably contact chief interpreters from around the world and ask them to recommend Polish interpreters from the worldwide community of interpreters. That's what we call “accrediting on file”.

That's what we do currently with the indigenous languages. When we have a request, we have—as Mr. Déry mentioned—a pool of people who have pre-qualified in indigenous languages that we use frequently in Canada. Right now that number stands at 20 languages and some 100 or so freelancers in our pool. We would typically do that. We would ask for references from knowledgeable members of the community, and that could vary depending on the language.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you so much.

I want to follow up a little bit on the capacity side of things. We understand, from what we have heard so far, that typically most of the indigenous language translation is to English, rather than indigenous languages to French. Is that correct, from your understanding, that it tends to be more indigenous to English, rather than indigenous to French?

[Stéphan Déry]

I would say we could find interpretation on both sides, given the notice. As Mr. Ball mentioned, it could be more complicated for rare languages and languages that are not spoken.... We know that some indigenous languages are spoken in Canada by from 10 to 100 people, so it's more difficult than for Inuktitut to find interpreters who can interpret from the indigenous language to French or the indigenous language to English. However, with the necessary lead time.... So far we've been able—I would say—to respond to all the requests we have received.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

That leads to the next question regarding relay interpretation, which we've heard a bit about. We've heard that often when it's relayed, there's a loss in translation, for lack of a better phrase. Does the translation bureau have standards or concerns about that relay interpretation? Is it something the bureau tries to avoid at all costs? If not, how do you help to alleviate some of the concerns?

[Stéphan Déry]

I will ask Mr. Ball to respond. He's the career interpreter.

[Matthew Ball]

You're right, relay interpreting is something we try to avoid when possible, but there are circumstances where it's required. If we had an indigenous language, typically, most of the interpreting of an indigenous language would be done to and from English, because the majority of Canadians are English speakers. It also depends on the contact between the languages. In Quebec, there would be more indigenous languages interpreted to and from French. We try to avoid it when possible.

A good example of this is the G8, which we're currently servicing right now. Where possible, we try to have interpreters who can do French to Japanese and German to Italian, but we can't cover all language combinations, so we do our best.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Mr. Saganash.

[Romeo Saganash, NDP, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My thanks to the witnesses for their very interesting presentations.

Mr. Ball, I can totally relate to the example you gave from a code of ethics perspective. That was an important point to mention.

Mr. Déry, I will start with you.

Let's assume that the outcome of the study we are doing is positive and that the committee and Parliament accept the interpretation of indigenous languages in Parliament—which I have been hoping for since my election in 2011, as demonstrated by my discussions with the clerk at the time and with the clerks of the House. When would that happen in Parliament?

Will I be able, within a year and a half—because I will be leaving in a year and a half—to speak Cree and make my speech in Cree in the House during this Parliament?

[Stéphan Déry]

Thank you for your question. I would be happy to answer it. This is a very important question.

I will assume that the committee agrees with the recommendations made by Mr. Wolvengrey, a witness who appeared before the committee. He recommended that you focus on the interpretation of the four or five best known indigenous languages or of languages spoken by parliamentarians.

The following is just speculation. Parliament could decide to provide interpretation services in an indigenous language once a week, on Fridays, for example. The department I work for will therefore ask for proposals to ensure that we have contract interpreters. They will not be able to say that they are not available to work in Parliament on Friday because they have another contract. Every Friday, or every two weeks, they will serve Parliament by interpreting in the chosen languages.

Thanks to Parliament’s new facilities in the West Block, barriers are coming down. Right now, there are two interpretation booths, as you know. It is therefore difficult to interpret in a third language. Temporary booths should be installed, which would require more equipment. In the new West Block facilities, three booths have been installed. This allows for more interpretation in a third language, whether indigenous or other languages, when there are guests.

Since those barriers are coming down, it should be easier to provide this service if Parliament so requests. It is difficult for me to answer that question, because it is speculation and it will depend on the number of languages that we will be asked to interpret. However, I think it could be put in place quite quickly, unless we are asked to interpret the 90 indigenous languages and dialects, which might be very challenging. If we choose languages for which there are local interpreters, it will be much easier. In addition, if the demand is steady, we can make arrangements more easily to meet requests. Interpreters must also have parliamentary experience, which is very important in Parliament.

[Romeo Saganash, NDP, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Thank you. I see that time is running out.

You mentioned that there are 100 interpreters on your list, and that they can cover 20 indigenous languages.

Are you currently making efforts to add other languages to that list of 20 indigenous languages?

[Stéphan Déry]

Yes and no. As I said, we started discussions with a number of organizations to see how to promote the interpretation of indigenous languages. We are making these efforts to ensure, as in the case of any other language, that the bureau is ready to meet the demand, if there is a request from Parliament. Our goal is to make sure we have the largest network possible to recruit as many interpreters as possible. From those interpreters, we choose the best ones, with the best parliamentary experience.

[Romeo Saganash, NDP, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Do you provide training and development courses to those 100 interpreters who appear on your list?

We were talking about accreditation earlier. I think Mr. Ball mentioned accreditation. In your opinion, who should evaluate the interpreters' skill level? The officials from Nunavut mentioned to us, including the clerk, that in Nunavut there are four or five levels. I asked who evaluated those interpreters and at what level they were.

Would there be a similar mechanism in Parliament?

[Stéphan Déry]

I would say that, depending on the scale of Parliament's request, we would put the necessary mechanisms in place to ensure that we meet the demand. The greater the demand, the more mechanisms the bureau will put in place. Right now, we are working with all the indigenous organizations, as Mr. Ball said, to make sure we have references on paper. If the demand is truly great, as I said in my opening remarks, we are ready to commit and work with indigenous communities to ensure that we develop interpretation of this kind as a profession. We are already working on it with the Government of Nunavut.

[Romeo Saganash, NDP, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Am I done?

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Do you have one really short question?

[Romeo Saganash, NDP, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Okay.

Beyond the conclusions of this study, if there were an indigenous person elected who only spoke their indigenous language, and you are here to serve Parliament, would you be obliged to provide interpretation for that person?