Official Languages Committee on Oct. 7th, 2025

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Thank you.

I would like to thank the witnesses for your presentation and for participating in the committee's proceedings today.

We have discussed the renewal of interpreters' contracts. As we know, French and English are the two official languages in Parliament. Under the Official Languages Act, we can use either language in our proceedings. We are therefore entitled to high quality simultaneous interpretation, and that calls for a level of human resources that is sufficient to meet the needs.

We also know today that things are changing. Various technological advances have come about and they will be continuing over the years to come. Hybrid Parliament is here to stay; we will not necessarily be going back to the way things were. Given technological advances and the need for rigorous management of public funds, Parliament has to optimize the way it uses its resources.

How do you think we can protect and promote the profession of interpreter while at the same time taking the various demands I have referred to into account?

[Jean-François Lymburner]

Obviously, resources are central to our concerns. As the previous witnesses said, regarding the next generation, we are working with two universities in Quebec to add interpretation programs. We are very active in that area.

Regarding transformation, to attract young people to the field, we have to admit that artificial intelligence may deter some people who would have liked to become interpreters or translators. So we are working very closely with the universities to develop modernized courses. Obviously, the way technology is used is changing rapidly. In fact, to give you a bit of background, I think that in interpretation we are about two years behind what we are experiencing in document translation, where the tools have improved immensely. They are changing at top speed and the translation bureau is part of that transformation.

You will certainly have already used interpretation tools on your phone when you were on vacation. Mention was made earlier of the headsets that are starting to emerge. At present, however, this is mainly limited to use that is not risky and is not protected. For now, there are no cases where artificial intelligence can be relied on to provide a service like the one we offer here, other than for subtitles, maybe. This may change, because the quality of these tools is improving rapidly, so it is important to take them into consideration. Ms. Levesque, who visited our colleagues at the European Parliament, could also tell you about that.

The fact remains that we still have to find interpreters who are interested and, in most cases, are able to come and work here on site. That is the first criterion: location. Second, we need people who are accredited by the translation bureau. On that point, the pool has not grown much. We have held several new exams, and last time the success rate was 0%: No one passed the interpretation exam, which is one of the most rigorous in the world. But we are not giving up. We are continuing to work with them.

We hope that new employees will be joining us over the next few years, because we do not just have freelancers. As was clearly explained before me, freelancers often have other options and we can't be sure they will say yes every time we call. So responding to peaks in demand is something that has to be done every day.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Thank you.

I am going to take you in a different direction now. As you know, a modernized Official Languages Act has been enacted. It was a lengthy process, and federal institutions now have new obligations in respect of official languages that need to be interpreted in accordance with the substantive equality standard.

Has the advent of these new obligations created new needs in terms of translation and interpretation? Have you identified any, and do you have the necessary resources to help institutions meet their obligations under the Official Languages Act?

[Jean-François Lymburner]

The translation bureau offers services to departments and agencies, but it can also serve other clients on an optional basis; that is, the organizations can come to us.

At the moment, we are seeing a drop in demand for the traditional translation done in the translation bureau. Certainly there is more content being created every day, but it is a relatively expensive service. So the bureau is continuing to translate its clients' very important documents, but demand from departments and agencies for traditional translation has been declining for several years. In Parliament, on the other hand, demand is on the rise. You are creating more content and there are committees that are working very hard, and that generates a lot of documents. That is why we have a dedicated parliamentary team to meet your needs, and yes, we use translation tools.

In terms of interpretation, sign language interpretation is increasingly in demand in the world. That is the case not only for foreign languages, Indigenous languages and Canada's official languages, but also for sign languages. There are lots of climate change events and press conferences, the population is diverse, and private sector firms are also seeing an increase.

At the translation bureau, our efforts are mainly directed to supporting Parliament, but we also offer services to departments when possible and when they request it, since it is optional.

Regarding your question about official languages, I meet regularly with the Commissioner of Official Languages and we believe it to be very important that an equal level of quality in both languages be provided. It may be too soon, however, to see whether the new tools are going to have a negative effect on quality. You might be surprised to learn that some tools that people have access to and consider reliable enable them to improve the quality of both their oral and written work. It is still too soon to say, but we are monitoring the quality of our services. This is very important. At the moment, our three major focuses in the bureau are the next generation, quality and modernization.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

My time is up. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you.

Mr. Beaulieu will now have the floor for six minutes.

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

Thank you.

Mr. Lymburger, if I understood correctly, freelance interpreters account for about 60% of the interpreters who work in Parliament. Is that correct?

[Jean-François Lymburner]

That is a very good question. I should have been clearer on that point.

As was said earlier, the translation bureau has about 60 employees—public service employees—who provide interpretation services, as is the case in the booth today.

I want to clarify that of the 70 freelancers whose services we use, it may be for only one meeting in the year. At present, a majority of interpretation services is provided by our employees.

We are trying to correct the situation, but we do plan on working with freelancers, because they are part of the solution. Since expertise in the field of interpretation is limited, some of our freelancers are former translation bureau interpreters. Freelancers account for a little under 70%. We are trying to correct the situation.

In cases like the G7 summit, however, where services have to be provided in several languages, we sometimes retain other freelancers from elsewhere, depending on needs.

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

Thank you.

Do you believe that a contract that gives precedence to the lowest bidder could mean, for example, that an interpreter who has no experience or who is not familiar with parliamentary work could be selected, if more experienced interpreters were available but were more expensive?

Does the translation bureau think that parliamentarians would be equally well served in either case?

[Jean-François Lymburner]

First, the procurement process that was discussed this morning is one of the processes we use, depending on need, but is not the only one.

I do not entirely agree that only the lowest bidder would be selected. As was said earlier, our interpreters first have to be accredited by the translation bureau. We believe that is a guarantee of quality. So not necessarily all bidders would be selected. Security clearance, which is an important factor, also has to be taken into account. Because we need interpreters in a variety of situations, we evaluate them and they have to get their security clearance.

The fact remains that we are also managers. A bit like everyone in society, we work under pressure and we have to take the price and value of the services into account.

In the past, we used a variety of methods in order to recognize certain interpreters' expertise. I could give Ms. Plouffe the floor afterward, so she can provide more details on that subject. However, when we analyze the work, we assign the resources each day based on a finite capacity planning model. It truly is a puzzle. We allocate our people and our resources.

It is not really accurate to say that we only use the services of the lowest bidders. Interpreters make up a small group. We know most of them. Some of them are assigned to certain committees and others to new committees. The price of the services is not the only factor we take into account when we use a freelancer.

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

Do you think saying that the new procurement rules are going to favour the lowest bidder is false?

[Jean-François Lymburner]

You have to look at the facts. Lowest bidder is often associated with lower quality. It happens that quality management is my field of expertise.

Quality assurance was mentioned earlier, and you are involved in that. If you have complaints about certain interpreters, I suggest that you make them. We take complaints very seriously and we make sure that our services get improved. Obviously, we ensure the quality of the services within our team by overseeing all of the services we provide. This year, there have not been many complaints. The services provided at the G7 summit were excellent.

Is this easy, in a situation where there is a limited number of interpreters? No. We are working on this at the moment, because we are still at the stage of analyzing feedback from organizations like the International Association of Conference Interpreters. There are more than 17 organizations that govern interpreters all across Canada.

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

When you choose interpreters for an outside event, do you take their knowledge or experience into account?

[Jean-François Lymburner]

Certainly. We try to make up three-person teams by matching full-time employees.

Ms. Plouffe did a very good job at the G7 summit. It was very difficult. In fact, I am going to give her the floor to explain how she manages interpreter assignments on a day-to-day basis to support parliamentarians.

[Annie Plouffe, Vice-President, Services to Parliament and Interpretation, Translation Bureau]

I am going to describe how we organize the work day-to-day and talk a bit about quality.

We have our pool of employees, who provide 60% of the hours of interpretation we provide to committees. Our employees have expertise in each committee. Lead interpreters are assigned to ensure continuity of services and to collaborate with the freelancers.

We start by assigning our employees and we then check the availability of freelancers who have the necessary quality index and security clearance and reside in the region. That is how we do it. All freelancers have the same quality index at the moment, based on the evaluations done by our internal experts.

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

So I understand that all freelancers are subject to the same evaluation, including outside ones.

[Annie Plouffe]

For the moment, all freelancers who have a contract with us have the same evaluation. Our employees have their own evaluations.

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

That doesn't seem reasonable to me.

[Annie Plouffe]

It is because they start with accreditation. When we have concerns, then we do analyses. Since we have had the quality index, we have revoked two accreditations. So we monitor things very closely. There is excellent co‑operation on this. What gives us the guarantee of excellence is the accreditation.

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

Is it possible that in future you might hire interpreters who do not have accreditation?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

I would request a very quick answer because time is up.

[Annie Plouffe]

For Parliament, no, that is not the case.

For the government, in some cases, the G7 summit for example, I did not have interpreters on contract who could work at the G7, because they had to speak four languages. But some freelancers are accredited by the United Nations and have done G7 and G20 meetings in the past. So yes, we do hire interpreters in some cases who do not have our accreditation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu.

Mr. Bélanger, we will now go to you for five minutes.

[Jim Belanger, Conservative, Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, ON]

Good afternoon.

I am trying to understand the difference between the current process and the one that is going to be proposed. Is the only difference that the contract will be awarded to the lowest bidder?

[Jean-François Lymburner]

Price is a consideration, but bidders also have to meet all the requirements: They have to have their accreditation and security clearance and they have to live in the region before they can submit a bid.

We are in that process right now, so I am going to limit my remarks to prices per se. People spoke earlier about a 70% cost increase. That is what we have experienced at the translation bureau since the pandemic because there are a limited number of interpreters and they have different rates. Most of the time, we use pretty much all of them when we need interpreters.

I am going to ask Ms. Levesque to talk about the process, which also includes an evaluation of the suppliers. I really want it to be clear that it is the same thing for all professional services. We are required to evaluate performance and we follow the criteria set by the department.