Official Languages Committee on March 7th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you.

Mr. Samson, you have the floor.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Thank you.

Thank you for your presentation. It taught me a lot about the translation demands and about the work that you do, either at conferences or with texts. That is impressive work and we need to say so.

It is said that the bureau's mission is to serve the translation needs of departments and other organizations created by federal legislation. You explained that sometimes people do not send you texts because of the cost or for other reasons, and because there are other ways of getting the translations done.

Have you noticed whether people are using external translation services more? If so, why?

[Donna Achimov]

In Canada, we are very fortunate in having a language industry that is very strong and very professional in both official languages.

As I mentioned in my presentation, it is important for us to be flexible and to work with our professionals in order to meet our federal obligations. I also said that it was important to be flexible and to work closely with the private sector. I mentioned the fluctuations in demand. We have a lot of work at certain times of the year. As this financial year ends, and because of the new processes, we are extremely busy. It is good that Canada's language industry is there to handle fluctuations of that kind. Under our mandate, we can have that flexibility. As I mentioned, we have a good partnership with the Canadian language sector.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

With all respect, my question was whether federal institutions are increasingly using private sector services rather than your own, and why.

[Donna Achimov]

Actually, 80% of the departments use our services. They are the biggest slice of the pie, if you will. However, organizations, agencies and departments can choose to use the private sector. Sometimes, the choice is not made only in terms of cost. They may use the services of an organization that provides a specialized service, or that operates a little differently. The fact remains that 80% of organizations use translation bureau services.

[Adam Gibson]

I would like to add something.

I'm newer in the bureau, and from what I've seen, there isn't a tendency for us to lose business, but there have been a few very key files. We know some departments have chosen to go 100 per cent through the private sector without going through the bureau. In those instances, we talk to them and we try to find out their reasons for doing that. Often it's price. That's obviously a driver. Everyone has budgets they have to respect. In those cases, we do talk to them about whether we can use our buying power to bring them back and whether there are other services we can offer. We can work it out and we've had some successes. In one example, Environment Canada left the bureau and then came back, just in the last year. I wouldn't say there is a tendency for us to lose business, but it is a continuous risk that we manage.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Thank you for that answer.

I can understand that there may be reasons like cost, for example. But is there a possible correlation with the huge cuts? You can call them cuts, attrition, or anything you like. The fact remains that there are fewer positions and fewer people to do the work. Perhaps even expertise has been lost, I don't know. I am just saying that, at the bureau, there are fewer people, fewer hands on deck.

This follows on from Mr. Bélanger's questions. Is there a reason that could explain why people choose to go to the private sector or other services?

[Adam Gibson]

The short answer is no.

We have lost some departments and my colleagues could probably talk at more length about what happened in previous years.

Our price is the issue. There is no problem with our level of service or with our ability to meet their needs. It is not because of a reduction in the number of our people. We are always working on that. Recently, we have improved the efficiency of our service.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

So I have no choice but to ask this question: is your price too high? What is happening? Your expertise is exceptional. I imagine that, if 80% of federal institutions are using your services more, it is because the price is reasonable. Price is not the only factor. What is the private sector doing better? If the private sector works better, we have a different problem.

[David Schwartz, Vice-President, Integrated Services, Translation Bureau, Department of Public Works and Government Services]

Our rate per word is going down. As our CEO mentioned, we are constantly trying to find ways to be more effective and more efficient. The aim of our new technology is to support our translators and our language professionals so that they can be more efficient. Our productivity is increasing.

Our price goes down each year. In this financial year, it is actually 39 cents per word. For the 2019-2020 financial year, we are planning for a rate of 34 cents per word, which is comparable to the private sector rate.

There are important factors to consider if you want to compare that rate with direct freelance rates. A department might pay 26 cents per word, but there are costs for administration, revision and quality control. The translation bureau always provides added value. We are a centre of expertise. We provide excellent services because of our language professionals. We also provide translation services after normal hours, seven days a week, 24 hours a day. We have a secure infrastructure for documents that are classified and those designated “Protected B”. We also have terminology databases. It is true that some people look only at the price, but we provide a lot of added value. That is why we remain convinced that, with 80% of the market, we are going to see growth and expansion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you very much, Mr. Samson.

We will continue with Ms. Lapointe.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

It's my turn, Mr. Samson.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Ms. Lapointe can make her point.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you for being here with us today.

I am going to ask you a very direct question, given that your expertise is in translation. In your view, what changes in internal policy could best encourage the use of both official languages?

[Donna Achimov]

There are a number of aspects to that question.

We have learned that the best way for adults, and public servants, to learn a second language is to be in an environment that shows leadership in encouraging the use of both official languages. Encouragement and leadership are critical. It is very important to find a way to encourage people to speak a second language, to let them make mistakes between themselves and to really practice. We have to find a great way to encourage people to use and learn a second language.

Each week, the official languages champions share little tricks, terminology and everyday ways to establish an environment where the use of both official languages is encouraged. The first key thing is to set up spaces in which people feel free to work in the language of their choice and to practice speaking the other language.

Another key objective is to make sure that people going back to their workplace after receiving structured training use the second language. As official languages champions, we are often fighting for everyone to be prepared to use the second language in which they have just been trained. In my opinion, training, practice and leadership in the workplace are the three most important things in keeping an environment really focused on the official languages.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you.

So, I am hearing that there are three key aspects. First, people have to get second-language training. Then they have to be able to practice the second language. Last, the internal policies must provide leadership that encourages people to practice the second official language.

[Donna Achimov]

Exactly.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

It is going to be important to get that in place if we want to improve the situation for both official languages everywhere.

Do I have time to ask some other questions, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Yes, you do.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

That is great.

In your presentation, I see the following:

…changing trends in government communications and the use of social media and plain language, leading to an overall reduction in the volume of our translation business.

That comes as a great surprise to me. How do we explain the reduction in requests for translation in the bureau. Are there fewer public servants? Are fewer people working for the government? Is it something else?

[Adam Gibson]

I will start, Mr. Chair.

We conducted some assessments to find why there has been a drop. The assessments show that one of the factors is the impact of social media. In fact, we are seeing a change in the way in which the government communicates, with the public especially. Twitter is an example, of course.

In addition, we are starting to completely revamp our web presence. Government websites are changing. The numbers of files and pages are decreasing. Communication is shorter and more direct. It is a general trend. That contributes a little to the decrease in our work.

Honestly, a link can probably be made between pressure on budgets, the numbers of translations and our workload. Three years ago, there were more budget cuts. I feel that departments have become tighter and are limiting the number of documents sent for translation.

That does not mean that the official languages are any less respected. However, we do notice changes in the number of requests we receive when there is more pressure on budgets.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

So it is partly the budget cuts.

Ms. Achimov, a little earlier you said that no translators had been laid off, but there had been attrition. I have a document that shows that, since 2011, 400 positions have been eliminated and another 140 are scheduled for elimination.

There have been no layoffs but 400 positions have been eliminated. I am asking you these questions because I do not understand. Is that also because the volume has dropped?

[David Schwartz]

That sort of goes back to our figures, the number of words and the amount of our revenues. There has been a decline.

It has been stable since 2012-2013. From 2008 to 2010, we were translating more than 400 million words annually. Now we are translating between 308 million and 310 million words annually. There are changes, but things have been stable for some years.

It is somewhat linked to what Mr. Gibson pointed out. Demand is changing because the way in which people communicate has changed. In the past, the RCMP issued a news release of two or three pages. Now, they send out a tweet.

There is some redundancy in documents like departmental plans and reports on plans and priorities. They change each year, but a good part of them remains the same.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Before my time runs out, I would like to check one thing. A little earlier, you talked about your basic activities. For documents classified “top secret”, has that changed or decreased?

[Donna Achimov]

No. As I explained, we have to keep a core of experts and highly skilled people. That will continue. We are going to make sure that we have well trained and skilled employees. That will always be the case at the translation bureau.