Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister, for joining us today.
Since we are talking about appropriations, I would like to discuss the cost of the legal proceedings in connection with the so-called guerrilla war that the department is waging against French at the IRB in Montreal .
Most probably you read about this case in the newspapers. You may recall that an IRB hearing was being conducted in French and the interpreter working into French clearly was not qualified to do the job. In spite of everything, the IRB member allowed the hearing to continue. Ultimately, appeals were filed. As Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, you filed a brief with the Federal Court, defending IRB panels' use of interpreters who were not qualified to work into French.
I asked you the question before and you took up the same arguments that you presented in point 76 and in subsequent points in your brief, namely that there was no hard evidence that the translation provided by the IRB's interpreter contained errors and until evidence to the contrary was presented, the interpreter was deemed to be qualified.
I'm sorry if my introductory remarks are a little long, but I will give the minister ample time to respond.
I would like to read to you several excerpts from this hearing. I understand that your French is very good and so you will be able to appreciate the quality of the French. I do not want to be critical of the interpreter, who was merely doing his job. He even pointed out at the start of the hearing that he wasn't qualified, that he wasn't fully bilingual and that he didn't speak French fluently. This is just to give you an example of what your panels tolerate.
The interpreter said this in French: “Avant de audience, mon avocat était fait quelque paix.”
Later on, he went on to say this: “Je me souviens pas rien de mais quand je vois la date, c'est sûr que c'est le bon date. La signature, c'est mon signature, mais je me souviens pas quand et où j'étais allé pour cette document-là.”
So far, it's not that bad.