Official Languages Committee on Feb. 16th, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Good evening. I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to the 16th meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages. Today, we are considering the challenges of the parliamentary interpretation service in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

We must follow certain procedures. I know that a number of you, especially committee members, are very familiar with them. However, since we are hearing from witnesses, I will allow myself to outline those procedures.

First, I would once again like to welcome a new member of the committee, the member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, Joël Godin.

For those participating virtually, I would like to take the opportunity to remind all participants of the meeting that taking screenshots or photographs of your screen is not permitted, and also highlight the fact that this was mentioned by Speaker Rota on September 29, 2020.

Members and witnesses may speak in the official language of their choice. Interpretation services are available for this meeting. You have the choice at the bottom of your screen of “floor”, “English” or “French”. Before speaking, click on the microphone icon to activate your own mike, and when you are done speaking, please put your mike on mute to minimize any interference.

I remind everyone that all comments by members and witnesses should be addressed through the chair. When speaking, please speak slowly and clearly.

Unless there are exceptional circumstances, the use of headsets with a boom microphone is mandatory for everyone participating remotely. Should any technical challenge arise, please advise the chair. Please note that we may need to suspend for a few minutes as we need to ensure that all members are able to participate fully.

For those in the Wellington Building, masks are required, unless you are seated, when physical distancing is not possible. Should you wish to get my attention, signal the clerk.

I would now like to welcome our witnesses. We are hearing from Steven MacKinnon, parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement. We are also welcoming, from the Department of Public Works and Government Services, Michael Vandergrift, associate deputy minister, Lucie Séguin, chief executive officer, Translation Bureau, and Matthew Ball, director of interpretation and chief interpreter, Translation Bureau.

Mr. MacKinnon, you have seven and a half minutes for your presentation. Each party will then have six minutes to ask questions.

On that note, I give you the floor.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I also thank the committee members for their kind invitation.

This evening, I am speaking to you directly from the Quebec side of the Ottawa River. I am joined by the people you just introduced, whom I will not introduce again. Suffice it to say that it is with pride that, for four years, I have been fulfilling the duties of parliamentary secretary in this department alongside the people accompanying me this evening, among others.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to speak about how my department is working to protect the health and safety of our interpreters during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Translation Bureau, which is about 87 years old, is part of Public Services and Procurement Canada. It supports the government in its efforts to serve and communicate with Canadians by providing linguistic services, such as translation and interpretation in both official languages, as well in indigenous and foreign languages. In addition to spoken languages, we also provide interpretation in sign languages.

The exceptional work of our interpreters is essential in facilitating meetings such as this one. Interpreters work mostly behind the scenes, ensuring parliamentarians and Canadians can follow our proceedings in the official language of their choice. Their work has been especially important over the last few months, as evidenced by your interest in this file.

I know that I speak for every parliamentarian and all Canadians when I say thank you to our interpreters.

In the fall of 2017, the Translation Bureau created the Conference Interpretation Advisory Panel and a special procurement working group representing the freelance interpreter community as together we sought a new contracting mechanism.

Many of the six guiding principles—and I worked on those with Minister Foote at the time—agreed upon between PSPC’s acquisitions branch, the Translation Bureau and the interpreter community back then continue to guide us today.

First, our goal is to ensure compliance with the federal government’s contracting policy by maximizing flexibility and agility to meet the specific needs of the interpretation community. Second, and this is very important, is to focus on the quality of services offered to clients. Third is to promote the economic vitality of Canada’s interpretation community. Fourth is to work together to define the most relevant, sustainable and effective tool for all. Fifth is to reduce the administrative burden associated with the new solution, both for the interpreter community and for the Translation Bureau. Finally, we recognize the practices related to the profession of conference interpretation.

The government is taking important steps to ensure that our interpreters have the support they need to do their jobs safely. Their health and well-being remain the top priority.

Creating the best possible conditions for interpretation ensures not only that the language rights of all Canadians are respected, but that the dedicated professionals who provide this service are protected at all times.

The Translation Bureau works closely with the House of Commons and the Senate, federal departments and agencies and other partners to provide interpretation of parliamentary and government proceedings, including virtual sessions.

To be clear, the bureau is not responsible for the technical aspects related to interpretation, such as providing the necessary equipment. That responsibility belongs to clients—including the House Administration—with whom the bureau collaborates closely to make sure interpreters have everything they need to provide quality service.

Even in ordinary times, interpretation is a demanding and complex task. We know that it requires very specific technical conditions to be performed safely, particularly with respect to sound quality.

The pandemic has forced us to find different ways to meet and work together. Now more than ever, it is especially important to respect public safety guidelines. As we rely more and more on virtual meetings, we continue to adapt to new challenges.

Health and safety is a priority for Parliament, and it is priority for our government, and we are making every effort to ensure that our staff and freelance interpreters are protected.

At all times, interpreters are instructed to interrupt the service if the sound does not allow for safe interpretation.

Since virtual sittings of Parliament became the norm, the government has strengthened existing measures to protect interpreters at meetings involving remote participants.

May of these measures came out of recommendations made to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.

For example, Parliament is providing headsets with an integrated microphone to members of Parliament and senators, as well as to witnesses appearing before parliamentary committees. These headsets improve sound quality and decrease health and safety incidents.

Another measure is having a technician present with the interpreters at all times and having sound checks conducted ahead of meetings.

Moreover, the Translation Bureau has reduced the length of assignments for interpreters working at virtual sessions without reducing their compensation.

The bureau has also instructed participants to provide written statements to interpreters in advance, as I have done tonight, when possible, as well as to use video conference to allow interpreters to see their facial expressions and adjust their tone.

To ensure high-quality and safe interpretation services, the Translation Bureau is pushing forward with several research initiatives to develop evidence-based solutions. For example, it has undertaken a research project with the University of Geneva in Switzerland on fatigue and cognitive load during remote interpretation.

Furthermore, the National Research Council of Canada has tested a new active sound limiter. This type of device can protect interpreters from acoustic shock and can measure their daily exposure to sound levels so that they can avoid exceeding the daily dose.

The National Research Council of Canada has also provided the bureau with preliminary results of an analysis to confirm that sound levels in Parliament do not exceed federal noise exposure regulations, and is continuing testing and sampling to ensure safer working conditions.

I should also note that the Parliament of Canada, on the advice of the Translation Bureau, has replaced all of its interpretation consoles with models equipped with built-in sound limiters, which also meet international standards.

Finally, with the support of health and safety experts at PSPC and external audiologists, the bureau is developing a hearing protection standard for interpreters.

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic prompted an abrupt shift in how interpretation services are being delivered. Although far from ready to go completely virtual, the work to improve conditions for interpretation was already well underway. As a result—

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you.

I know that committee members had provided us with questions they wanted to ask. If you would like to split your floor time, don't hesitate to let me know.

Mr. Blaney will begin and will be followed by Mr. Williamson. They will have six minutes to ask questions.

Mr. Vice-Chair, go ahead.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I welcome our witness and his partners.

Mr. MacKinnon, thank you for appearing before the committee.

You are seeing all the challenges of real-time interpretation. Our meeting started a bit late.

I would like to begin by thanking you for the sensitivity you are showing toward our interpreters. We have already held two meetings on this issue. Today's meeting is the third. The committee felt it was necessary to get to the bottom of things.

It is true that you provide us with headsets, but we have learned that they could be of better quality, especially for people working in Parliament. It's not about having stereo sound, but rather about having better sound quality for interpreters, who must hear and interpret at the same time, which presents an additional difficulty.

Mr. Parliamentary Secretary, our first suggestion would be to provide high-quality headsets. Some interpreters have only one earpiece. We can imagine the work our interpreters do.

The other aspect I would like to discuss is hybrid Parliament. This evening, I am in Lévis, you are in Gatineau and our chair is in Montreal. We know there are two types of meetings. Some are held in person and others are virtual. As soon as someone is in virtual mode, like me this evening, do you consider that to be a virtual meeting, as suggested by the European Parliament's definition?

We want to make sure there are enough interpreters. We recommend three interpreters for a four-hour segment. I would like you to talk about that. I feel that you are very concerned about ensuring that the interpreters, who are the ears of the House, provide us with a very important service in the best possible way.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Exactly.

Thank you very much, Mr. Blaney. I thank all of you for worrying about the plight, health and work safety of interpreters. I thank them from the bottom of my heart, once again, for their work.

As I said in my presentation, Parliament and our clients provide headsets and all the technical equipment that we use in our work and that interpreters use. I am sure it would be a good idea to send your suggestion to them. Of course, you regularly make recommendations to our partners on the technical equipment provided to interpreters and on its use.

Concerning the definition of “meeting”, as I said in my presentation, we have had to adapt along the way. Measures were taken as we went along. The Translation Bureau and freelance interpreters have had to adapt a number of things, including the contract between us. That contract was amended in December, but retroactively, to cover the period starting nearly at the beginning of virtual meetings. Unfortunately, that agreement or those contracts are about to expire.

Discussions and informal negotiations are underway. I have participated in them with stakeholders and interpreter representatives to discuss those issues. The formal consultation process that was launched on February 5 through a request for information is still ongoing. This will naturally transform into a request for a proposal to sign a contract on July 1 that will better regulate and anticipate interpreters' virtual circumstances.

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

Thank you, Mr. Parliamentary Secretary. From what I understand, you are sensitive to the fact that needs have skyrocketed. At the same time, we have had issues. The interpreter community is talking about toxic sound. What we are realizing is that, as soon as a witness is in virtual mode, as you are this evening, interpreters must take into account that context and the systems being used. I encourage you to take into consideration the fact that, as soon as the participant is in virtual mode, the meeting is of a hybrid variety. At that point, teams must be adapted. We want to take care of our interpreters, as they are precious.

I would like to put another question to you. Have you made efforts to ensure a sufficiently large pool of interpreters? I think there is a shortage, especially when it comes to interpreters working from English to French. That is often the direction of interpretation. However, we sometimes have interpreters who must interpret into a language they are not used to working in.

Is that something you consider to be extremely important?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Absolutely.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Mr. MacKinnon, can you answer in 20 seconds? Time is flying.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Telework circumstances have resulted in interpreters participating in an increased number of activities. They are working fewer hours in a typical work shift. So it is certain that those resources are under pressure. However, Mr. Blaney, we are proud of being able to respond to all the party whips' planning requests and of serving our parliamentary partners properly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. MacKinnon.

I now give the floor to Mr. Arseneault for the next six minutes.

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Chair, I may be wrong, but I think it is Mrs. Lalonde's turn.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Okay, we are listening, Mrs. Lalonde.

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

Thank you very much. I will share my time with my colleague Ms. Martinez Ferrada.

I thank Mr. MacKinnon and the Translation Bureau officials for joining us this evening. My colleagues and I are really worried, as we have said, by the long-term hearing problems and the ongoing or increased injuries suffered by our interpreters.

When they appeared, the representatives of the International Association of Conference Interpreters, or IACI, mentioned that 70% of interpreters who were surveyed had been injured through remote interpretation.

Could Mr. MacKinnon and the Translation Bureau officials tell us what the Translation Bureau is doing to prevent those injuries?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Of course. I will ask Ms. Séguin to give you more details in a moment.

Mrs. Lalonde, we have begun a fairly serious and rigorous research program, and we have adopted certain measures that have necessarily improved the interpreters' hearing experience. As an example, I mentioned the headset, which is constantly being evaluated and will continue to be evaluated at the suggestion Mr. Blaney made this evening.

I will let Ms. Séguin tell you about other measures we have adopted to protect interpreters' health and safety.

[Lucie Séguin, Chief Executive Officer, Translation Bureau, Department of Public Works and Government Services]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for inviting our colleagues from the Translation Bureau and from Public Services and Procurement Canada to participate in this very important study.

The Translation Bureau takes very seriously the increase in the number of health and safety incidents. The vast majority of the Translation Bureau's salaried employees have reported incidents. The majority of them are reporting excessive fatigue and headaches, but also tinnitus, ear pain and hypersensitivity.

To deal with that, as Mr. MacKinnon mentioned, the bureau immediately implemented very rigorous measures. It also began a research program to obtain evidence on the impact that has on interpreters, not only in the short term, but also in the long term. As our colleagues from the IACI said when they appeared, on February 2, there is very little evidence, very little scientific data on the impact that has on interpreters' hearing health.

I will talk about a few of our initiatives. We are developing and implementing a program for protecting interpreters' hearing. The program includes training, research and tests in a variety of areas including acoustics, interpretation function and audiology, which are carried out by experts, by qualified physicians.

We immediately implemented and distributed internal and external sound limiters, which are used to protect interpreters from acoustic shocks. That is another measure we have adopted.

As the parliamentary secretary mentioned, we have shortened work days and have increased the rest period between assignments.

We informed you of the situation, and I am happy to see how seriously you are taking interpreters' health and safety. For instance, you do sound checks with interpreters beforehand. We really appreciate that.

In addition, committees have instructions: headsets with integrated microphones, as Mr. Blaney mentioned, cable Internet connections and awareness of our environment—in other words, minimizing noise and muting our microphone when we are not speaking.

In addition to the sound checks we are doing, there is now always a sound technician and a coordinator on site in case of problems, which is a step forward.

We have also instructed interpreters to interrupt the service if they feel that their health and safety are at risk. This is really important because we want to avoid them increasing the volume, which could lead to acoustic shocks.

I could give you more details on the research underway if you like, but we work closely with our colleagues from the House of Commons in charge of technological aspects.

Thank you.

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

I have one minute left.

I am really proud of all the measures you have adopted. We all thank you for that.

I will yield the floor to my colleague, who has a question for you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

You have 45 seconds, Ms. Martinez Ferrada.

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Hochelaga, QC]

I have 45 seconds, so I will be brief.

I thank the witnesses for joining us this evening.

Earlier, my colleague Mr. MacKinnon told us that the Translation Bureau has existed for 87 years. I am interested in what has happened over the past 10 years in terms of the political and economic decisions that have been made. Do you think that would explain work now being given to independent employees?

What is the situation of full-time staff following the decisions made over the past 10 years? I think the Translation Bureau has been weakened over the past 10 years. Right?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

You have 10 seconds to answer the question.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Yes, in 2015, when we were elected, there was little succession recruitment, and there were few interns, students and relationships with the universities attended by our interpreters and translators.

So we have been working on reversing the trend.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. MacKinnon.

Mr. Beaulieu will be asking questions over the next six minutes.

We are listening, Mr. Beaulieu.

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

Thank you.

We have been told that using interpreters to translate into their second language generally leads to lower-quality interpretation. Since the majority of interpretation is done from English to French, francophones are the ones paying the price.

However, in the interpretation services arrangements request, you seem to want to enshrine in a legal contract the practice of having two interpreters per team, which implies that one interpreter will necessarily interpret into their second language.

Don't you think it would be better to increase the quality of services instead of decreasing it?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you for your question, Mr. Beaulieu.

Of course, quality is our main concern.

To follow up on the answer I gave my colleague, Ms. Martinez Ferrada, we have been concerned about the quality of the French, the English and the Translation Bureau's products. In 2015, we appointed a chief quality officer, and ever since, that concern has been reflected in nearly all the decisions made, especially in the 2017 contract with interpreters.

We are now in the procurement process. We have already adopted certain elements by mutual consent, if you will, as we went, considering the pandemic and telework. We launched a new procurement process to guide those decisions. The issues, including the second language issue, will be addressed during the procurement process.

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

If you're looking for the best possible quality, it's always best to work in teams of three. Interpreters tell us that interpreting into a second language rarely provides the same quality.

You say that there should be teams of three when it comes to remote interpreting. You define this by saying that the majority of participants testify or speak remotely. But the European Commission, for example, says that it only takes one person taking part remotely for it to be considered remote interpretation.

Shouldn't remote interpretation be defined in the same way? Rather than a majority of remote stakeholders, a single remote person would be enough to define remote interpretation.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you for the question.

As I said, we've adopted a number of measures, precisely to provide a framework for working virtually, and we'll continue to be attentive to interpretation services.

I'd like to emphasize that they are indeed professionals, very well-trained people in the majority of cases. We're very privileged. We have the enormous privilege of being able to benefit from their expertise. We've had dozens of conversations with their representatives. We'll continue to listen carefully to what they have to say, especially since we want to renew the contractual relationship. The current process gives us a great opportunity to do so.