Official Languages Committee on Feb. 2nd, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Yes, of course.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank my colleague, Mr. Généreux.

Thanks also to our House of Commons representatives. Mr. Clerk, it's always an honour to have you sit in on this committee.

What we're going through is chaos. We're in committee and I'm here in my office in Lévis, in the middle of a snowstorm, and Mr. Généreux is in Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup.We're aware of the fact that you had to do some fancy footwork and make some snap decisions.

We've spent a lot of time discussing the platform this evening. The table we were given refers to Zoom standard and Zoom advanced. Is the House of Commons using the version that is compliant with speech intelligibility? That's my first technical question this evening.

[Stéphan Aubé]

I'd say that the platform mentioned can't be compared to the standard version, Mr. Blaney, because it's not the same environment.

Our goal is to address both the intelligibility of what is being said and the health and safety of participants. That's why I've been referring to a hybrid model.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

I want to make sure that I fully understand. To whom are you referring when you say "we"? You're from the House of Commons, and then there is the Translation Bureau and the interpreters.

Could you explain how that works?

[Stéphan Aubé]

The Translation Bureau provides the service. As you know, the interpreters work for the Translation Bureau. We provide the technical environment in accordance with the standards established by the Bureau.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Are you the Translation Bureau's boss, so to speak?

[Stéphan Aubé]

No, I'm just in charge of providing service at the House of Commons, under Mr. Robert, who is responsible for implementing the technologies used by interpreters on the Hill.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

So who does the Translation Bureau report to?

[Charles Robert]

It reports to Public Services and Procurement Canada.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Okay. We therefore have two entities and it's a partnership.

So you're using a hybrid system, and you said that what the interpreters in the booths are hearing comes from your system. The sound is therefore not coming from the Zoom platform, unless there are external witnesses.

Is that correct?

[Stéphan Aubé]

Yes it is, Mr. Blaney.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

There was a lot of discussion about the headsets. You mentioned that you were able to send headsets to witnesses within 24 to 48 hours, and that there had been a trial run. Shouldn't that have been a sine qua non? Even we, the parliamentarians, are sometimes told that we can't intervene if we don't have our headset.

Shouldn't the requirement to wear the headset supplied by the house become the standard for everyone?

You even pointed out that you had modified procedures at the beginning. The Clerk said this had been done by email. Now, they take the time to call people. We committee members always take the time to do the tests. It's a bit tedious, but a headset is a lot less expensive than a plane ticket.

Do you think that part of the solution might be for witnesses and parliamentarians always to use a headset approved by the House?

[Eric Janse]

Yes indeed. That would be an excellent solution.

However, even though we can generally get these headsets out to people within 48 hours to most parts of Canada, it might be more difficult on weekends or when people live in more remote areas, for example.

And this only happens once the witness's attendance has been confirmed. The committee has to have decided which witnesses it wants to hear. Then it has to contact them to confirm their presence and obtain their address so that we can send the headset. This might take a few days. After that, some tests have to be carried out.

All in all, the process might take up to a week, and as you mentioned earlier, in most instances the advance notification period for witnesses is much shorter.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Chair, I saw you signalling. I'll turn things over to my colleague Mr. Dalton, but it's a little selfish of me to do so.

Mr. Dalton, would you like to add anything?

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

No, everything's all right. This is around the third time I've used the interpretation channel to listen to the interpreters and I'm very impressed by their work. I'd like to thank them very much.

I ordered more headsets last week, and I think it would be a good idea for all members to do the same.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you very much for your comments.

Over to you now, Mrs. Lalonde, for five minutes.

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to begin, Mr. Robert, on behalf of my colleagues, by thanking you and your team for the excellent work you've done since the beginning of March. I'm a new parliamentarian, but I know that many of my colleagues here in the House have been here much longer than I have. On behalf of all of us, I want to thank you this evening for your work and for your caring attention to our occupational health and safety. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you publicly on behalf of all my committee colleagues.

This evening, we've discussed the Zoom platform at length. I'd like you to explain the reasons why this platform was recommended and why we are using it now.

[Charles Robert]

As Mr. Aubé worked on this, he's the one who has the information to properly answer your question.

[Stéphan Aubé]

Thank you Mr. Robert.

The decision wasn't an easy one. We made it in the spring, early on in the crisis. We immediately put together a team to size up what was being done elsewhere. As I mentioned a short while ago, we were also in contact with several other parliaments, and the Inter-Parliamentary Union, to find out how they were doing things and what options they had considered. For example, we worked with the British Parliament to find out how they were proceeding. They too had decided to use Zoom. However, I need to point out that the British Parliament does not provide any interpretation services.

We asked ourselves what platform we should choose to deliver quality services. We also took other important criteria into consideration, including security. We were also looking into how to integrate it with our existing systems. It's important for the interpreters to be able to use the existing consoles and booths, which are compliant with ISO standards. Zoom allowed for this integration and made it possible for us to provide the service without having to change too many things for the people working on Parliament Hill. These are a few of the criteria we considered.

We also looked into broadcasting. Zoom allowed us to integrate our broadcasting systems, and to provide other services to parliamentarians. For example, we use Zoom for press conferences, because it can function in different modes.

When we made our decision in March 2020, we also took the scale of events into account. Zoom was one of the only platforms that would allow us to have more than 300 people connected. That was another criterion we factored in.

Health and safety were other criteria. As I previously mentioned, we wanted to be able to integrate our systems and to comply with standards. The Translation Bureau didn't impose these standards on us, because we work in partnership with them. It's certainly a key factor for them. We held discussions and were told that they preferred for us to continue to use the existing systems on the Hill, because they provided the proper protection for their employees.

Those, Mrs. Lalonde, are all the criteria we took into consideration before coming to this difficult decision.

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Aubé.

I'm not sure how comfortable you are about discussing what I'm about to say. This evening, we spoke a great deal about witnesses and parliamentarians. The last witnesses referred to headsets and network cable connections. These are often important factors that allow our interpreters to have access to quality sound, and that help them do their work better.

Do you feel that if headsets weren't used in the House, it would have an impact on the interpreters' working conditions?

[Stéphan Aubé]

If we hadn't used the systems we chose to integrate with the Zoom platform, and which meet ISO standards, there would probably have been some impacts. Currently, operating remotely can lead to fatigue, but we've done everything possible to address this. That's why we opted for a hybrid system rather than a videoconferencing platform like Zoom, which could have been installed separately while the interpreters could have used different systems for interpretation.

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

Mr. Aubé, I'm going to ask you a final…

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

I'm sorry to interrupt you, Mrs. Lalonde, But your speaking time is up.

Thank you, Mr. Aubé.

We will now continue with Mr. Beaulieu for two and a half minutes.

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

I'm going to begin with a brief question.

The letter from the Board of Internal Economy mentions some statistics. As we know, most of the interpretation is from English into French. That being the case, the mother tongue of the interpreters should ideally be French, or the interpreters should be highly skilled at interpreting towards French.

Do you know what percentage of interpreters whose first language is French are working for debates and committees?

[Stéphan Aubé]

I don't have those statistics in hand, Mr. Beaulieu.