Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
As we are gathered in Ottawa, I would first like to acknowledge that we are on the traditional territory of the Algonquin people.
I would also like to acknowledge and thank Cécilia, Dagmar and Claudette, who are interpreting this meeting.
I am joined today by Matthew Ball, vice-president of services to Parliament and interpretation. I'd also like to highlight the presence in the audience of Martin Montreuil, our first ever director of parliamentary affairs and interpreter well-being, and Justine Bret, director of interpretation and Canada's chief interpreter.
Honourable board members, I'm here to provide an update on the situation with our interpretation services. I know you remain very concerned about it, and I want to assure you we are tirelessly working on improvements.
As we have made clear in our previous appearances, the issues related to interpretation are of key importance to our department. Since my arrival in January, I have devoted more time to this than to any other issue at the translation bureau. I'm serious when I say this is our top priority.
If the issues persist, it is simply because there is no miracle solution. I have just returned from a meeting at the European Parliament, at which interpretation services are facing very similar difficulties. This situation is not unique to Canada, and here, as elsewhere, there is no easy way to fix things.
I'm proud of the efforts the translation bureau has made with its partners. Indeed, over the past six months, we have made more progress than ever, and today it is my pleasure to give you an overview of our accomplishments.
As you know, there are two aspects to the issue of interpretation, which are both discrete and closely linked. I will talk first about health and safety, and then I will give an update on capacity.
As for the protection of interpreters, I want to first thank you, Mr. Speaker, for standing in the House and giving a reminder on headset usage rules. Awareness is still a key ingredient in decreasing the number of incidents. Meeting attendants must be attentive at all times, when they are attending remotely, of course, but also when they are there in person. Indeed, even if in‑person meetings offer the best working conditions for interpreters, we recently had feedback cases most likely caused by in‑person participants who brought their earpieces too close to their microphone. Audio equipment is very sensitive; it needs to be used carefully.
As a result, there continue to be incidents. The good news is that these incidents seem to lead to fewer injuries than before. Nevertheless, each incident is a cause for concern. Of course, as is the case for construction workers or peace officers, where it is impossible to eliminate risks, in a similar way, it is unrealistic to think that we can completely eliminate sound-related incidents for interpreters. However, we must continue to focus on preventing them.
On this topic, the House administration informed you about the new sound checks that were carried out in April and May. We called on leaders in audiology and acoustics to review the results, report any hazards to interpreters and recommend any measures we should take. We will take advantage of the summer recess to carefully study their recommendations and establish a renewed and detailed action plan in consultation with all key stakeholders.
In doing so, we are fulfilling the commitment we made toward the labour program following the instructions we were given in February. We are also establishing the environment of continuous improvement that we need to deal with this situation in the long term, not only because we genuinely care about the well-being of our interpreters, but also because by improving their working conditions, we are decreasing the risk of service disruptions. We are making the profession more attractive to future interpreters and we are ensuring that we have the healthy interpreters we need to meet Parliament's needs.
Talking about capacity now, honourable board members, you can rest assured that meeting your interpretation needs is one of our top priorities. We are fully aware of the difficulties you're facing because of our limited capacity. Still, we are making progress.
In 2022–23, our interpreters collectively worked 15,000 hours for the House of Commons, which surpassed our previous peak of 14,000 hours in 2017–18. Unfortunately, given a number of factors, such as the need to expand our teams for the sake of health and safety, or the frequent session extensions, this did not lead to an increase in the number of sessions we could cover. That is why we indicated in our May 17 letter that our capacity for the fall would remain at around 160 hours of interpretation per sitting week, which usually covers House proceedings, 57 committee sessions and three caucus meetings.
With regard to remote simultaneous interpretation, we have participated in the pilot project since January 2023, and we will continue to collaborate this fall as the House administration's careful implementation approach unfolds and according to the whips' priorities.
Honourable board members, know that we are continuing to do everything we can to increase our capacity.
I have already spoken to you about our collaborations with universities to foster the next generation of interpreters. I, myself, have met with Concordia University, McGill University, Université du Québec à Trois‑Rivières and Université de Montréal to encourage them to create interpretation programs in order to increase the number of graduates. We are also seeking the services of a recruitment agency to help us find more interpreters who are willing to join the translation bureau.
With regard to our other recruitment path, the accreditation exam, we have decided to hold it twice a year in order to reach as many candidates as possible. The next exam will take place on June 26. We also hold workshops for candidates to help them become accredited.
Despite all these efforts, it is still impossible for us to predict how much our capacity will increase, even in the short term. We are dealing with a number of uncertainties, including how many people will pass the exam in June, the renewal of our freelance interpreters' open contract and the implementation of the new collective agreement for our staff interpreters.
Among other things, duration of work is a core topic in our current discussions with our interpreters. On one hand, exposure time to virtual sound has greatly decreased, but on the other hand, some interpreters still have entirely legitimate concerns about their health and safety.
Fortunately, our weekly planning meetings with the administrations of the House of Commons and the Senate make it possible for us to react quickly to fluctuations in our capacity. Once the uncertainty disappears, if the number of interpretation hours that we can provide surpasses the current 160 hours, you can rest assured that this increase will have an immediate impact on the planning of parliamentary sessions and that you will be quickly informed.
In closing, honourable members of the Board of Internal Economy, and you as well, colleagues in the House of Commons administration, thank you for your support in our efforts to protect interpreters and ensure the delivery of quality interpretation services to Parliament.
Mr. Ball and I will now be happy to take your questions.