“The government plans to cut a quarter of the Translation Bureau's staff. Without these skilled interpreters, Parliament would only work in English. Cheap contractors and AI cannot do this work. I want the government to cancel these cuts so francophones get the best interpretation.”

“Madam Speaker, without the House of Commons interpreters, there would be no bilingual Parliament. It would be in English only. That is why the government’s plan to cut the Translation Bureau’s staff by 25% constitutes a serious lapse in judgment. These employees have exceptional expertise that low-cost contractors and ChatGPT simply do not have. Francophones deserve the highest quality interpretation services. Good enough just does not cut it. Will the government show some respect for francophones and cancel these cuts?”

“We need skilled interpreters so French-speaking members can do our jobs, since 90 percent of translation here is from English to French. I want the government to reverse cuts to these services and protect their quality.”

“Madam Speaker, as Gilles Duceppe always says, there are two languages in the House of Commons: English and simultaneous interpretation. He is not wrong: Ninety per cent of translation is from English to French because everyone chooses English, even a good number of Quebec Liberals. Without our exceptionally talented interpreters, our privileges as members of Parliament would be violated. Let us be clear: French is not an irritant to be entrusted to the lowest bidder with lesser accreditation standards. Will the government maintain the full scope and quality of our interpretation services and reverse the cuts?”

“The government is cutting the number of House interpreters by 25 percent to save money. This hurts the rights of French speakers. The government spent 40 billion dollars on a pipeline, so it should not say it lacks money for French.”

“Madam Speaker, it is disheartening that French is still treated as an inconvenience in Ottawa. Cutting the number of interpreters in the House by 25% shows disregard for the rights of francophones, all in the name of saving a few bucks. The same Liberals who have $40 billion to invest in a pipeline should not expect us to believe—”

“The government is cutting the number of House interpreters by 25 percent to save money. This ignores the rights of French speakers. The government found 40 billion dollars for a pipeline, so it can afford interpreters. I want the minister to reverse this decision.”

“Madam Speaker, it is disheartening that French is still treated as an inconvenience in Ottawa. Cutting the number of interpreters in the House by 25% shows disregard for the rights of francophones, all in the name of saving a few bucks. The same Liberals who have $40 billion to invest in a pipeline should not expect us to believe that they cannot afford to pay translators. Francophones are not second-class citizens. It is disappointing to see a minister from Quebec leading the charge on this. Will he reconsider and stand up for our interpreters and our rights?”