I understand Mr. Samson's concerns. However, as I said, this study has been proposed by two members of the committee from two different parties. This shows that there is an interest in it, all the more so since the automated translation tool will be introduced April 1. Consequently, it is urgent that we turn our attention to the Translation Bureau. In addition, there will be other staff cuts in the months to come. This also points to the urgency of acting on this.
The government's mandate is to ensure that we offer a space where people can work in both official languages and communicate in their official language in a proper way, in a way that is correct and respectful toward francophones and anglophones. At this time, there seem to be some concerns. Because of this tool and other issues at the Translation Bureau, respect for that right could be beginning to deteriorate. If someone uses the automated translation tool to communicate, even for a brief text, the communication would not be done in correct and respectful French.
That is why I believe we should begin this study. Mr. Fergus has proposed that we hold a first meeting on this topic, and then three other ones. That would allow us to conduct a relatively brief study, without preventing us from subsequently studying other topics which Mr. Samson, Mr. Lefebvre, Ms. Lapointe or the other members of the committee may propose.
I want to repeat that I support Mr. Fergus' motion. I would like us to proceed with this study immediately after the one mentioned in Mr. Samson's motion, which I was very happy to support.