Procedure and House Affairs Committee on March 20th, 2018

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

What is the situation in Yukon?

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

They're not official languages, but they do make provisions. It's in the research report that you have there. Everyone got a report of what occurs in other legislatures, and in Yukon there's some provision, but it's not an official language. It hasn't been used very much.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

I have a question regarding the two official languages.

If English is used as an intermediary when translating Inuktitut into French, does that not create a situation in which the two official languages are not given equal importance?

In this example, would English not be seen as a bit more important than French?

[Charles Robert]

Indeed, I addressed that in answering Mr. Graham's question. Yes, that is a risk, but you would really have to ask the interpreters how great a risk it is and how it could be managed.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

I was going to make one other comment here. It's a comment rather than a question. On the use of relay languages, I thought your analogy to Plato's cave was interesting. You're more academic than I am. I thought it was like the child's telephone game, in which you go around a circle, or like the use of Google Translate to go back and forth in the same language. The story is that someone took Dorothy Parker's famous rhyme, “Men seldom make passes at girls who wear glasses”, and translated it into some language—I think Portuguese—and then back to English and it said, “Ships carrying men don't stop at icebergs carrying women”, or something like that.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

I think that is a legitimate issue.

The other thing that occurs to me is that as a practical matter, if you're trying to engage in debate— as opposed to someone delivering an S.O. 31—it seems to me that once you get involved in a relay language, it's no longer possible to have simultaneous translation. You have something like a delay. Occasionally when I've chaired hearings at the international human rights subcommittee, we've had someone speaking a non-official language such as Farsi or something like that, and it has slowed things down very considerably. Have you given any thought as to how to deal with that particular practical issue?

[Charles Robert]

In fact, that it is a real issue, but I think the ones who would be best able to guide you in how it might be successfully addressed would be the interpreters themselves. They're the ones who actually live the experience of trying to work with the languages and provide to members the very best service possible. I know that when the issue was being addressed on the Senate side, we had to take into account their preferences as best we could, even though André has said that in the new chamber the location for the third language interpretation will be—I'll use Mr. Graham's language—a remote site. Interpreters hate that.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Right.

[Charles Robert]

They don't feel they can provide the best service when they're caught up in that situation. They will make the best of the environment they're offered, but they will give you fair warning that they will not be able to do as best they might.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Mentioning the word “time”, the relay, that takes more time. We have to think of the timing considerations, in what we come up with.

Mr. Christopherson.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thanks, Chair.

Thank you both for being here.

This is an exciting project, I must say. I've been really looking forward to this. Canada is still an unfinished work, a work in progress, and this is part of nation-building. Certainly it reflects a lot of the importance of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's report, and I mention this because the government is committed to implementing every single one of those recommendations.

I want to underscore that on page 321, under “Language and culture”, in number 14, the commission called upon the federal government to enact an aboriginal languages act that would incorporate certain principles, including the following:

i. Aboriginal languages are a fundamental and valued element of Canadian culture and society, and there is an urgency to preserve them....

iii. The federal government has a responsibility to provide sufficient funds for Aboriginal-language revitalization and preservation....

v. Funding for Aboriginal language initiatives must reflect the diversity of Aboriginal languages.

This is interesting, and I just throw it out to colleagues. This may be a jumping-off point to address this promise, since I consider nation-building to be a file that we all own and have as a priority. In 15, the commission's report states:

We call upon the federal government to appoint, in consultation with Aboriginal groups, an Aboriginal Languages Commissioner. The commissioner should help promote Aboriginal languages and report on the adequacy of federal funding of Aboriginal-languages initiatives.

There may be an opportunity to use this as a segue into that promise, given its obvious connections.

Having said all of that, I don't have a lot of questions. I appreciate that we need to start with your framework, but I would be interested, notwithstanding your remarks here, to know what you would consider to be the biggest administrative challenge we would face as members wanting to bring this about. What's the biggest one?

[Charles Robert]

I think I alluded to it. It's the notion of unintended consequences that might come about from a good-faith effort to bring in third languages. We're speaking in the context of aboriginal languages, Mr. Christopherson, and that's why you feel there's a need to recognize them. It's part of the Canadian identity and needs to be promoted. But there are other senators and members who might want to speak another language, and if we open the door, they should have the same right. There should be no real discrimination from that point of view.

The challenge comes when you are not able to find an interpreter who can work in French and an interpreter who can work in English. For the third language you need two people if you want to make sure that you're not jeopardizing, as Mr. Reid pointed out, the possibility of treatment with respect to the relay of the languages and the delay.

I don't think it's an insurmountable challenge, but I think this committee would be overlooking something that could potentially be a serious issue if you didn't look to address it and be conscious of it.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Okay. I would assume that there are probably some lessons to be learned from other nations that have gone through this.

[Charles Robert]

Yes. I remember once watching a program on the European Parliament and the 28 languages that are used there. The interpreters were having a hell of a time finding somebody who could do Danish into Greek. They found everything else, but that combination presented some difficulties. In the end, I think there were something like 500 combinations. Actually, for the European Parliament, it is the single largest budget item in its operations.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I've been to a European Council meeting as a delegate and the whole perimeter of the council chamber is filled with interpreters.

[Charles Robert]

What makes it successful is that they are trying to find everyone who can move into each language without a relay.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

That's good, Chair. Anything else I have would probably be for other witnesses.

Thanks very much, and good job.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Could you explain the technicality of the department that does all this translation you're referring to? Do you hire them? Does that come under your budget?

[Charles Robert]

There is no budget, at least when I was working on it in the Senate. I assume it's the same in the House. We have a memorandum of understanding, and they provide service. They will translate a gazillion words a year; they will produce so many pages. It's almost as if you're renting a car. You try to estimate how much mileage you're going to use so you avoid extra payments. You work with them so they have an understanding. If they really require this much for translation, we have to hire this much in the way of staff. We have to budget for it accordingly. Those are the parameters of the memorandum of understanding that we establish with that division of Public Works.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

That comes under their estimates.

[Charles Robert]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Ms. Tassi.

[Filomena Tassi, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Thank you for being here today.

Did I hear correctly that the West Block does have an additional booth, but it's not in the chamber?