Procedure and House Affairs Committee on April 13th, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Ms. Vecchio, this is what you were referring to.

Ms. Vecchio, go ahead.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

I would like to look at a potential amendment so that we can add members' offices as part of that group of being excluded from needing to be reviewed by the translation bureau, if that's possible. I know Alain recognizes that I—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

You would wish to add, “that do not come from a federal department or member's office”?

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Yes, “a member's office", that they are excluded from needing to be reviewed by the translation bureau.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Has this addition been proposed in other committees as well?

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Monsieur Therrien.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

It's a simple problem. Languages are often subtle. When a message is translated, it's not always clear and this could lead to confusion. I think I may be the only person here who does not systematically read the English version; I always read the French version. It can as a result be very tricky to come up with arguments and comments that sound intelligent—I hope that my colleagues think I look intelligent at least some of the time.

To avoid potential confusion, the translation bureau should ideally translate them to ensure that the versions match. Of course MPs can exchange missives, but documents presented as part of our work need to be revised by the translation bureau. I think that's the best way to do it. Personally, I'd like to keep this motion.

It's not that I don't approve of your efforts, because I know that you do a lot and I'm grateful for it. I recently exchanged information with you and you've always been very courteous, which I greatly appreciate. However, in order to make sure that everything is done properly, that's what I would request while the committee is sitting. I believe there are only three weeks or a month left.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Perhaps we'll have to have a vote. I don't know if we have full agreement on the amendment that Ms. Vecchio has proposed to Monsieur Therrien's motion.

Is that correct, Mr. Clerk?

[The Clerk]

Madam Chair, I don't think there's consent to it. If the amendment is to proceed, it should go to a recorded vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Mr. Turnbull.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

I just wanted to see if Mr. Therrien was amenable to the Vecchio amendment, which I understood was adopted at other committees. I wasn't sure what his response was on that. It seemed to be friendly, but I wasn't sure. Perhaps we could just clarify that before we go to a vote, if possible. Other committees adopted that, I think. What Ms. Vecchio suggested didn't seem to be unreasonable to me, but I'll leave it to him.

Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

I believe Mr. Therrien wishes that the members' offices also comply and have their stuff done through the translation bureau.

Mr. Therrien, maybe you can explain it better.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

I agree that there are amazing resources in our MPs' offices, but translation is a profession.

We need to make sure that the words convey exactly the same message in French and English. We work to a high standard and that requires accuracy. Our arguments require a high level of precision.

I can understand why people might say that staff at members' offices can do it, but if we want the best possible translation, then it's too bad because there's no alternative to having professionals do it.

For example, I frequently ask our clerk, Mr. Vaive, for additional details. If the translation were done by professionals, I might not have to do so as often.

I'd like to believe that we have two official languages and that this is one of the reasons we boast about Canada's merits, but there are consequences. One such consequence is that we have to make sure that messages are accurate and exactly the same in French and English. For the good of our committee, I am very humbly requesting this. Whether or not other committees do so is irrelevant. But if you're claiming that your country is bilingual, then I think it goes without saying.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

To be clear, you don't give consent to this amendment to include members' offices. That's how I see your comments.

Mr. Turnbull.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Madam Chair, I just need another point of clarification, because I wasn't sure whether.... This was a good conversational exchange. I totally agree.

I just want to be clear. Did Ms. Vecchio move an amendment? That's what I wasn't clear on. If she did, then I guess we have to dispense with that first.

I wasn't sure whether we were going to vote on the main motion or whether there was an amendment put forward.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

I saw it as an amendment being put forward to include the words “or members' offices”, so we would just vote on Ms. Vecchio's amendment at this time, since it hasn't been incorporated yet into the main motion. Mr. Therrien has not seen it as a friendly amendment.

We will vote on the inclusion of those words. Then we will move to a vote on the main motion.

There are more hands up. We'll go to Ms. Petitpas Taylor and then Dr. Duncan.

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Madam Chair, I just want to know what we're voting on right now.

Could you read Ms. Vecchio's amendment? That would be great. I think we are a bit confused or perhaps I'm confused.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

The clerk can read out to you the motion with the amendment in both official languages. We would be voting on just the amendment.

Mr. Clerk, could you help us with that?

[The Clerk]

Sure, Madam Chair.

Ms. Vecchio's amendment is to add the words “members' offices” after the words “federal department”. That would end up reading as follows for the full motion:

That all documents submitted for committee business that do not come from a federal department, offices of Members of Parliament, or that have not been translated by the Translation Bureau be sent for prior linguistic review by the Translation Bureau before being distributed to members.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

A lot of our stuff is translated through the translation bureau. In this motion, there has been an exception made for stuff that comes to committee from federal departments.

Ms. Vecchio wants that same exception to be made for stuff that comes from members' offices. I am assuming, from some of what Ms. Vecchio has said, it's because of the added burden that may impose on members' offices. Obviously, the stuff that comes from the translation bureau would not have to go through the linguistic review, but everything else would.

Does that make it clear? Okay.

Let's move to a vote on Ms. Vecchio's amendment.

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 9; nays 2)

(Motion as amended agreed to)

We have disposed of those motions by Mr. Therrien that have been put on notice for a long time. I appreciate the co-operation in doing so.

At this point, we do have a fair amount of time still. Let's move in camera so that we can take a look at the draft report.

[Proceedings continue in camera]