Official Languages Committee on Feb. 2nd, 2021

[Eric Janse]

It's a question you should ask the Translation Bureau when it appears before your committee.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

You're right.

Do you have any idea why 86% of francophones give evidence in English? Is it because the chairs don't provide any guidelines on this?

Here at the Standing Committee on Official Languages, most of the discussions are in French. It's difficult to imagine what it's like elsewhere, but it would appear to be the other way around.

People seem to switch into English as soon as there's a technical glitch. As most of the committee chairs do not speak French, this has much more of an impact on francophones.

Could the solution be to have conditions that would encourage witnesses who want to give evidence in French to do so?

[Eric Janse]

I believe we do that already. All witnesses know that they have an absolute right to speak in the language of their choice and are even encouraged to do so. Some witnesses are bilingual and can respond in both languages, which affects the statistics.

However, I've taken note of it. We could do even more to encourage witnesses to speak in their preferred language, given our excellent interpretation services.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

I don't know if you can comment on it, but I was wondering whether you think the headset should be compulsory.

[Charles Robert]

The problem is still headset availability. If they've been sent out to the witnesses, we can insist that they use them.

The chair recently said that all members have to wear their headset. It's less of a problem for us now, but it's another story for the witnesses.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

I meant the M.P.s too, because some are still not using them.

[Stéphan Aubé]

I'd like to add something briefly.

Connectivity is just as important, if not more so. It needs to be tested before the meeting begins to test the sound quality, and make sure that the meaning comes across. Most of the problems that have been occurring are the result of problematic Internet connections.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you very much.

The final intervention is for Mr. Boulerice.

Mr. Boulerice, you have two and a half minutes.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Once again, I'd like to thank Messrs. Robert, Janse and Aubé for being with us this evening.

Mr. Aubé, I'd like to return to the connectivity and Internet hookup problems.

What platforms did you test before reaching a final decision? The previous witnesses mentioned KUDO and other platforms designed specifically for interpretation.

What other options were given serious consideration?

[Stéphan Aubé]

We tested two other platforms, one from Microsoft and one from Cisco.

We had to decide quickly between a specialized platform and a hybrid model. Following our research and consultations, we chose a hybrid platform because the quality was higher and it allowed much more flexibility in terms of all the other essential services we provide to Parliament.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

I get it.

I'd like to return to the various options.

For parliamentarians and witnesses, what should be required in terms of Internet connectivity to improve the standard, and reduce the likelihood of hearing injuries for interpreters? What do we need to do to get things on the right track?

[Stéphan Aubé]

Even though I have Wi-Fi at home, I still connect through a cable to keep connectivity as strong as possible.

Also, as some people mentioned, it's important to make sure that people have a good microphone. Other standards should also be developed. People could make sure that they turn off their microphone when they're not involved in the discussion to keep noise down.

A little more planning would also be a good idea, with tests done prior to the meetings to ensure that the sound and the Internet connection are good. That's what will really have an impact on intelligibility during meetings.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Could sound input attenuation act as a buffer between Zoom and the interpreters? Would it be possible to do this?

[Stéphan Aubé]

It's already been done, Mr. Boulerice.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Hats off to you, then.

[Stéphan Aubé]

It's required in order to meet the ISO standards, Mr. Boulerice. We had to replace all of our consoles at considerable expense.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Boulerice.

I've now heard all the questions and answers from the members and witnesses. Before ending the meeting, I have a question for Mr. Aubé.

In coming to a decision on the tools—you mentioned Zoom and other hybrid systems—the emphasis was on health and safety.

Did the confidential aspect of parliamentarians' work influence the equipment decisions?

[Stéphan Aubé]

Mr. Dubourg, security is an essential criterion. As you know, our meetings require different levels of security. The platform we decided upon allows us to take this into account and to continue to provide the required services.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you very much.

That's it for the meeting.

Members of the committee, allow me to warmly thank the witnesses, Mr. Charles Robert, Clerk of the House of Commons, Mr. Eric Janse, Clerk Assistant, and Mr. Stéphan Aubé, Chief Information Officer.

Thank you very much for your testimony. I'd also like to take this opportunity to thank all staff, and particularly our interpreters and technicians.

Thank you and good evening.

The meeting is now adjourned.