ARCHIVÉ - Transcription, Audience du 22 octobre 2013

Volume 2, 22 octobre 2013

TRANSCRIPTION DES AUDIENCES DEVANT LE CONSEIL DE LA RADIODIFFUSION ET DES TÉLÉCOMMUNICATIONS CANADIENNES

SUJET:

Enjeux relatifs à la faisabilité de créer un service de relais vidéo Avis de consultation de télécom CRTC 2013-155 et 2013-155-1

TENUE À:

Salon Outaouais

Centre des conférences

140, Promenade du Portage

Gatineau (Québec)

22 octobre 2013

Transcription

Afin de rencontrer les exigences de la Loi sur les langues officielles, les procès-verbaux pour le Conseil seront bilingues en ce qui a trait à la page couverture, la liste des membres et du personnel du CRTC participant à l'audience publique ainsi que la table des matières.

Toutefois, la publication susmentionnée est un compte rendu textuel des délibérations et, en tant que tel, est enregistrée et transcrite dans l'une ou l'autre des deux langues officielles, compte tenu de la langue utilisée par le participant à l'audience publique.

Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des télécommunications canadiennes

Transcription

Enjeux relatifs à la faisabilité de créer un service de relais vidéo Avis de consultation de télécom CRTC 2013-155 et 2013-155-1

DEVANT:

AUSSI PRÉSENTS:

TENUE À:

Salon Outaouais

Centre des conférences

140, Promenade du Portage

Gatineau (Québec)

22 octobre 2013

- iv -

TABLE DES MATIÈRES

PAGE / PARA

PRÉSENTATION PAR:

- v -

ENGAGEMENTS

PAGE / PARA

Gatineau (Québec)

--- L'audience reprend le mardi 22 octobre à 0900

1427   THE CHAIRPERSON: Order please. Madam Secretary.

1428   LA SECRÉTAIRE : Bon matin. Nous commencerons ce matin avec la présentation du Centre québécois pour la déficience auditive. S'il vous plaît, vous présenter et présenter votre collègue. Vous avez vingt (20) minutes pour votre présentation.

PRÉSENTATION

1429   MME THERRIEN : Merci. Madame et messieurs les commissaires, bonjour. Tout d'abord, nous souhaitons vous remercier de l'invitation à participer à la présente audience. C'est avec grand plaisir que monsieur Gilles Nolet, le président du Centre québécois pour la déficience auditive, que nous abrégerons plus loin en CQDA, et moi-même, directrice de cet organisme, sommes devant vous aujourd'hui.

1430   Comme vous le savez sans doute, le CQDA est un regroupement d'organismes représentant les personnes vivant avec une surdité au Québec -- personnes sourdes, malentendantes, devenues sourdes, sourdes-aveugles -- ainsi que leur famille. Le CQDA regroupe aussi la plupart des organisations d'intervention en surdité au Québec.

1431   L'approche privilégiée par le CQDA en a toujours été une d'inclusion. Le regard que le CQDA porte sur le service de relais vidéo est donc global et concerne toutes les personnes vivant avec une surdité et leur famille, peu importe leur mode de communication.

1432   C'est aussi avec ce regard que le CQDA a participé au cours des dernières années aux diverses discussions concernant le service de relais vidéo, que ce soient les travaux de la compagnie Mission ou les rencontres avec les compagnies de téléphonie.

1433   Aujourd'hui, nous souhaitons partager avec vous certains éléments de réflexion.

1434   À la suite des mémoires déposés dans le cadre de la présente consultation, le CRTC a questionné certains intervenants sur les services qu'ils entendaient offrir aux personnes sourdes et aveugles en matière de service de relais vidéo, question fort pertinente s'il en est une.

1435   Le service de relais vidéo ne peut prétendre desservir qu'un seul pan de la clientèle sourde tout en délaissant une clientèle encore plus démunie parce que vivant avec deux limitations sensorielles.

1436   Le CQDA ne possède ni les compétences ni les connaissances pour proposer une solution pour cette clientèle délaissée, mais les intervenants et les chercheurs se doivent d'être spécifiques, innovateurs et inclusifs dans leur démarche. On ne peut en effet, en tant que société qui se veut inclusive, oublier les personnes sourdes et aveugles dans le cadre des présents travaux ainsi que des travaux à venir en matière de relais vidéo.

1437   Nous nous permettons de rappeler la position du CRTC, rédigée de la manière qui suit au paragraphe 11 de sa décision 2009-430 concernant l'accessibilité des services de relais. Nous citons:

« Dans des décisions antérieures, le Conseil a établi un cadre réglementaire qui reconnaît les besoins des personnes ayant une déficience auditive ou un trouble de la parole sur le plan des télécommunications. Le Conseil a décidé que les Canadiens ayant une déficience auditive ou un trouble de la parole devraient, au même titre que tout abonné à un service téléphonique pouvoir communiquer au moyen de ces services. Il a aussi noté que les services de relais fournissent aux personnes ayant une déficience auditive ou un trouble de la parole les moyens techniques de communiquer par téléphone avec d'autres abonnés. »

1438   Le CQDA est d'accord avec la position du CRTC.

1439   Traditionnellement, le service de relais vidéo a été perçu comme étant un service pour les personnes qui utilisent une langue signée, parce qu'il met en scène des interprètes en langue des signes québécoise ou en American Sign Language.

1440   Nous citons ici le CRTC dans son avis de consultation 2013-155. Au paragraphe 5, il est écrit:

« Dans la politique réglementaire de radiodiffusion et de télécom 2009-460, le Conseil a reconnu les avantages importants que le service de relais vidéo apporte aux personnes ayant une déficience auditive ou un trouble de la parole qui communiquent grâce à la langue des signes. »

1441   C'est une vision très répandue que le CQDA ne partage pas.

1442   Il n'est pas le seul puisque la phase 8 de l'étude de la compagnie Mission nous apprend que les services de relais vidéo de la France, de l'Allemagne, de la Suède offrent certaines communications visuelles autres que les langues signées.

1443   Bien, que ce ne soient pas des langues à part entière, il existe aussi au Canada d'autres modes et codes utilisés par certaines personnes vivant avec une surdité qui méritent d'être prises en compte dans le cadre de la présente réflexion sur la faisabilité d'un service de relais vidéo puisque ces modes et codes constituent un moyen visuel de pallier la déficience auditive.

1444   Le CRTC écrit d'ailleurs au paragraphe 8 de l'avis de consultation qui nous intéresse qu'il y aurait 27,1 pour cent des personnes recensées sur les 35 470 adultes et les 2620 enfants qui utiliseraient un code autre que la LSQ et l'ASL.

1445   Un éventuel service de relais vidéo canadien peut-il réellement se permettre d'ignorer plus du quart des personnes qui vivent avec un problème auditif sur la base de non-utilisation d'une langue des signes?

1446   Pensons seulement à un jeune enfant du début du primaire, qui commence à peine à écrire, et qui est soutenu dans ses apprentissages par un interprète qui utilise un code de communication appelé le langage parlé complété.

1447   Comment cet enfant peut-il communiquer avec ses amis de manière autonome? Par téléscripteur? Par service de relais IP? Pas vraiment puisqu'il ne maîtrise pas l'écrit. L'accès aux télécommunications lui est donc refusé en ce moment. Et si le service de relais vidéo ne lui offre pas le soutien dans le mode et le code qu'il lui faut, il devra attendre de savoir mieux écrire pour téléphoner à ses amis par relais IP ou par relais téléphonique.

1448   Un enfant du même âge qui utiliserait la LSQ ou l'ASL pour communiquer n'aurait pas plus accès au téléscripteur ou au relais IP pour téléphoner à ses amis, mais, en revanche, il jouirait d'une pleine autonomie de communication grâce au service de relais vidéo.

1449   Comment notre service de relais vidéo canadien pourrait-il favoriser ainsi l'autonomie d'un enfant et pas celle d'un autre sur la base du moyen de pallier son handicap?

1450   La phase 3 de l'étude de la compagnie Mission qui recense les intérêts et les points de vue des utilisateurs fait clairement état des différents groupes susceptibles d'utiliser un service de relais vidéo adapté à leurs besoins. On y parle de codes et de modes autres que les langues des signes.

1451   Nous sommes d'accord avec cette analyse qui, à la fois, élargit le bassin d'utilisateurs potentiels du service de relais vidéo tout en rejoignant les 27,1 pour cent d'utilisateurs qui n'utilisent pas la LSQ ou l'ASL.

1452   La phase 8 de l'étude de faisabilité de la compagnie Mission met aussi de l'avant les diverses formes de communication non liées à la LSQ ou à l'ASL que peuvent supporter les services de relais vidéo. Mission écrit, et nous citons, qu'« qu'il n'existe aucun obstacle technique empêchant un fournisseur de service de relais vidéo d'offrir d'autres formes de langage visuel ou de langage signé y compris la translittération signée, le langage parlé complété, la lecture labiale, la translittération orale ou le dactylangage. »

1453   Plus loin, Mission indique, et nous citons encore, que « l'inclusion d'autres formes de communication visuelle dans le service de relais vidéo ne devrait pas représenter un fardeau administratif supplémentaire pour sa surveillance. »

1454   Nous l'avons vu plus haut, le service de relais vidéo est perçu pour la plupart des gens comme un service pour les personnes utilisant une langue signée pour communiquer. Cette perception pourrait être à l'origine de la disparité des réponses rapportées dans le rapport numéro 3 de l'étude de faisabilité quant à l'importance du SRV pour les utilisateurs, soit 97 pour cent pour les utilisateurs de l'ASL et de la LSQ contre 70 pour cent pour les utilisateurs de la lecture labiale.

1455   LA SECRÉTAIRE : Je suis désolée, je vous demanderais s'il vous plaît d'aller un petit peu moins vite lorsque vous parlez. Merci.

1456   MME THERRIEN : Je vais tenter.

1457   LA SECRÉTAIRE : Merci.

1458   MME THERRIEN : Dans ce même rapport, on indique aussi que les intentions d'utilisation du service par les non-utilisateurs d'une langue signée sont peu élevées.

1459   Pour expliquer ce manque d'engouement, nous pourrions mettre de l'avant le fait que très peu d'informations circulent en ce moment quant aux avancées ailleurs dans le monde quant aux possibilités de lecture labiale ou d'utilisation d'autres codes lors d'un appel par service de relais vidéo.

1460   De manière empirique, nous pourrions nous attendre à ce que l'importance accordée au SRV par les utilisateurs non culturellement sourds soit accrue si ces utilisateurs étaient plus au fait des possibilités variées de communication offertes par cette nouvelle technologie.

1461   Étant donné la volonté du milieu de se doter d'un service de relais spécifiquement canadien, n'est-il pas pertinent d'envisager d'innover ce type de service de relais afin d'être encore plus inclusif en matière de modes et de codes de communication, surtout si le téléscripteur venait à disparaître au profit d'Internet et de la vidéo?

1462   Nous le savons, il n'existe aucun obstacle important à cet ajout, tel que stipulé à la page 77 de la phase 3 de l'étude de faisabilité de la compagnie Mission. De plus, le rapport de la phase 6 de la même étude indique que la translittération, qui permet la lecture labiale, n'exige pas de compétence supplémentaire de la part des interprètes déjà formés à cet effet.

1463   Le CQDA croit que la notion de service de relais mise de l'avant par le Conseil en 2009 devrait inclure, en 2013, les autres modes et codes de communication utilisés par les personnes déficientes auditives ou avec trouble de la parole, surtout si ce service devait un jour remplacer le téléscripteur.

1464   Qui plus est, les entreprises qui souhaitent offrir un service de relais vidéo au Canada devraient être en mesure de démontrer les efforts qu'ils investiront afin d'inclure ces modes et codes dans leur offre.

1465   Un autre aspect qui préoccupe le CQDA est la fiabilité du service de relais vidéo.

1466   En ce moment, le comité sur l'interconnectivité travaille à la mise en place du service de texto au 911 pour les personnes sourdes, malentendantes et avec trouble de la parole.

1467   D'entrée de jeu, le comité met de l'avant que ce service de texto au 911 constitue ce qui est qualifié en anglais de best effort, donc qu'il ne peut être entièrement fiable à cause des aléas des télécommunications sans fil et par Internet.

1468   Le service de relais par protocole IP actuellement en fonction n'est pas non plus exempt de problèmes.

1469   Nous le savons tous, les téléphones cellulaires perdent leur signal parfois de manière impromptue. Le réseau Internet vit aussi certaines ratées.

1470   Comment les entreprises qui offriront le service de relais vidéo et les fournisseurs d'Internet seront-ils en mesure d'assurer la fiabilité du service dans de telles conditions?

1471   Peu d'information transpire à ce sujet.

1472   Le service de relais vidéo constituera-t-il lui aussi une mesure de best effort?

1473   Si c'est le cas, cela nous inquiète. Il faudra en informer convenablement les Canadiens vivant avec une surdité ou un trouble de la parole qui, tout en utilisant de manière active le service de relais vidéo, pourraient préférer conserver leur téléscripteur et une ligne filaire par mesure de sécurité, ces outils de communication s'étant toujours avérés fort fiables par le passé.

1474   Le service de texto au 911 qui entrera graduellement en vigueur à partir de 2014 a été mis en place parce qu'il était impossible de localiser avec précision l'appelant qui utilise un téléphone cellulaire pour contacter le service d'urgence 911 si l'appelant ne peut confirmer verbalement sa localisation.

1475   Dans le cas du service de relais vidéo, quelles mesures seront prises afin de connaître la localisation de l'appelant lors d'urgence? Cette mesure sera-t-elle semblable à celle requise pour le service de relais par protocole IP, soit celle d'indiquer sa localisation avant de faire l'appel?

1476   Ici encore, de l'information publique sera nécessaire afin de faire comprendre aux utilisateurs du service de relais vidéo l'importance de se géolocaliser avant d'effectuer un appel.

1477   Cette information peut sembler banale au premier regard, mais l'expérience du CQDA lors de discussions concernant le service 911, démontre que la plupart des citoyens canadiens sans limitations fonctionnelles qui effectuent leurs appels d'urgence par téléphone cellulaire croient que le service de géolocalisation par triangulation est suffisant pour que les services d'urgence 911 sachent où ils se trouvent, ce qui, nous le savons, n'est pas le cas, d'où la nécessité pour l'appelant de confirmer sa localisation.

1478   Un autre élément à considérer : quelles sont les possibilités que le service de relais vidéo puisse assurer un service d'urgence 911 en tout temps, même si service de relais n'opère pas 24 heures? Dans son intervention écrite, le CQDA proposait de s'inspirer des services d'urgence déjà offerts par les organismes d'interprètes sociocommunautaires.

1479   Mais cette possibilité est-elle vraiment réalisable? Le CQDA n'a pas de réponse à cette question et aucun intervenant n'a soumis de proposition à cet effet.

1480   Le CQDA croit que c'est une avenue qui mériterait d'être envisagée et analysée avant d'être rejetée puisqu'une communication par relais vidéo sera plus rapide qu'une communication par téléscripteur, par relais IP ou par texto au 911, dans un moment où chaque instant compte.

1481   Diverses parties prenantes au dossier ont indiqué qu'elles ne souhaitent pas l'implantation d'un service de relais sur la base du modèle américain.

1482   D'une part, la communauté sourde canadienne souhaite une implantation rapide d'un service de relais au Canada; d'autre part, elle souhaite un modèle canadien qui se doit d'être réfléchi.

1483   Nous voilà donc devant un dilemme : utiliser le modèle américain en vue d'une implantation rapide, sans garantie de qualité pour les services en langue des signes québécoise; ou effectuer une implantation lente, mais graduelle, d'un service de relais à notre image, de qualité et qui respecte la spécificité canadienne et les deux langues des signes utilisées au Canada.

1484   Étant donné la pénurie actuelle d'interprète, le CQDA est d'avis que le service de relais vidéo demeure une nécessité, mais qu'une implantation lente et graduelle s'impose. On ne peut risquer le départ massif d'interprètes sociocommunautaires au profit de l'implantation rapide d'un service de relais vidéo.

1485   L'interprétariat, et plus particulièrement l'interprétariat en langue des signes québécoise, est très fragile. Du point de vue du développement durable, il faut éviter de drainer les ressources sociocommunautaires existantes au profit du relais vidéo de relais vidéo.

1486   Des mesures protectionnistes de ressource doivent être mises en place. Et nous croyons que ces mesures passent par de la recherche, de la formation et une croissance graduelle du service dans le respect des ressources humaines disponibles en ce moment.

1487   Des services de qualité, une offre diversifiée, des mesures protectionnistes, une implantation lente nous semblent des atouts permettant d'assurer à la fois la satisfaction graduelle des besoins des personnes vivant avec une surdité, la disponibilité d'un nombre suffisant d'interprètes qualifiés, mais, plus encore, la pérennité du service de relais vidéo.

1488   Trop de questions subsistent sur les possibilités et les limites d'un éventuel service de relais vidéo au Canada et nous faisons face à trop d'enjeux importants, principalement concernant la disponibilité d'un nombre suffisant d'interprètes pour prendre l'implantation d'un tel service à la légère.

1489   Sans nier l'importance pour les personnes sourdes gestuelles d'avoir accès à un tel service répondant plus adéquatement à leurs besoins, le CQDA croit que l'implantation d'un éventuel service de relais vidéo doit inévitablement passer par une période de recherche accrue, incluant des tests plus poussés que ceux effectués uniquement en ASL par Telus à partir d'un modèle américain.

1490   Ces tests et ces recherches permettront de mieux saisir les réelles possibilités offertes aux personnes sourdes, malentendantes, devenues sourdes, sourdes-aveugles et avec trouble de la parole, tout en permettant un accès immédiat au service pour les personnes utilisant la LSQ ou l'ASL pour communiquer.

1491   C'est pourquoi le CQDA souscrit à la proposition d'implantation soumise par la compagnie Mission, mais en y ajoutant de la recherche plus élargie concernant d'autres modes et codes, incluant la lecture labiale.

1492   De plus, la recherche permettra la formation d'interprètes qualifiés pour le travail en service de relais vidéo, formation non disponible en ce moment et plus que nécessaire chez les interprètes LSQ qui n'ont pas, contrairement à certains interprètes en ASL, déjà expérimenté le travail en service de relais vidéo assurant ainsi une plus grande qualité de service pour les anglophones, mais assurance que n'ont pas les francophones.

1493   Cette qualité de service constituera un élément important dans l'expérience client. Et nous le savons tous, une bonne expérience client est synonyme d'adhésion, d'utilisation accrue et de pérennité. Et le service de relais vidéo n'y échappera pas.

1494   La réflexion que nous portons tous aujourd'hui sur la faisabilité de l'implantation d'un service de relais vidéo au Canada est importante, non seulement pour les personnes qui utilisent une langue des signes pour communiquer, mais aussi pour ceux qui n'utilisent pas une langue des signes pour communiquer, mais un autre code ou mode de communication.

1495   À notre avis, la volonté d'une spécificité canadienne en matière de relais vidéo s'inscrit aussi dans une volonté d'inclusion de tous les Canadiens déficients auditifs ou avec trouble de la parole.

1496   C'est pourquoi nous croyons que le Canada se doit d'innover en matière de service de relais vidéo et de ne pas se contenter de copier ce qui est fait ailleurs dans le monde. Oui, copions ce qui est positif ailleurs, mais osons élargir le service de relais vidéo aux autres usagers potentiels de cette nouvelle technologie en offrant plus que des langues signées.

1497   Faisons mieux en matière de service de relais, mais faisons lentement afin de préserver les services d'interprétation des autres secteurs d'activités. Nos interprètes sont précieux et rares; on se doit de leur accorder notre plus grande attention.

1498   Madame et messieurs les commissaires, merci de nous avoir donné la chance d'être entendus aujourd'hui.

1499   LE PRÉSIDENT : Merci. Vice-Chairman Pentefountas has a question.

1500   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Bonjour. Il me fait plaisir de vous voir ici aujourd'hui, même si j'ai de la misère à vous voir, les interprètes sont tellement proches. Ceci étant, vous n'avez pas chômé depuis la remise de votre mémoire. C'est le moins qu'on puisse dire, vous n'avez pas chômé depuis la remise de votre mémoire.

1501   MME THERRIEN : Non, on n'a pas chômé.

--- Rires

1502   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Non, non, non.

1503   MME THERRIEN : Vous nous plus, à ce que je vois.

1504   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Vous faites honneur à -- merci -- vous faites honneur à votre groupe. Commençons par où, là? Il y a tellement de matière, puis il y a du nouveau qui vient d'embarquer.

1505   Nous, le cadre de cette décision, de cette discussion et de cette audience était autour des langues ASL et QSL. Vous avez décidé -- et il n'y a pas de mal à le faire -- d'élargir un petit peu ce cadre-là.

1506   Nous avons déjà une pénurie, si vous voulez, d'interprètes en QSL et en ASL, mais très certainement en QSL. Expliquez-moi un petit peu les mécaniques de cette approche qui permettront à d'autres d'en profiter. Est-ce qu'il faut avoir plusieurs interprètes qui sont prêts à agir auprès des intervenants? Est-ce que vous pensez un petit peu à la mécanique et comment tout ça fonctionnera? Même si c'est à l'extérieur de ce qu'est le cadre de cette audience-là, je suis prêt à vous entendre.

1507   En fait, plusieurs interprètes en ce moment au Québec font d'autres codes et d'autres modes. Nos interprètes en ce moment qui sont avec monsieur Nolet font quelques signes, mais monsieur Nolet utilise beaucoup la lecture labiale. Donc, elles font ce que l'on appelle du pidgin, donc pas tout à fait de la langue des signes pure, mais une langue des signes associée avec un peu d'oralisme et une structure français. Donc, déjà, on n'est plus dans l'ASL en ce moment, mais c'est visuel.

1508   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Mais faut-il avoir tous ces gens-là présents, prêts à servir au centre des appels? Et, ça...

1509   MME THERRIEN : Sûrement, oui.

1510   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : ...éventuellement sur une base 24 sur 24/7, là.

1511   MME THERRIEN : Oui.

1512   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Oui?

1513   MME THERRIEN : Et ce n'est pas quelque chose de compliqué. Comme je vous dis, en ce moment, les interprètes qui sont ici font très souvent l'autre mode, et Mission l'a confirmé dans son rapport. Mais il y en a plusieurs aussi qui ont déjà le langage parlé complété. Alors, les interprètes ne sont pas confinés à seulement qu'à la langue des signes, mais bien souvent offrent des services dans ces autres codes et modes.

1514   Donc, je ne crois pas que la ressource en interprétation au service de relais vidéo viendrait qu'à manquer.

1515   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Bien sûr.

1516   MME THERRIEN : Mais la personne demanderait : « Oui, je veux avoir, moi, mon service en LSQ, mais avez soutien d'oralisme. » Donc, ce serait une adaptation plus personnalisée du service.

1517   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Est-ce que les mêmes interprètes peuvent être formés pour servir ces diverses tâches?

1518   MME THERRIEN : Absolument, ce n'est pas.

1519   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Et est-ce votre prétention ici aujourd'hui?

1520   MME THERRIEN : Absolument. Absolument, ce n'est pas quelque chose de compliqué.

1521   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Et ça rajoutera quoi au temps de formation, si vous voulez? Puis on va embarquer plus en profondeur sur cette question-là.

1522   MME THERRIEN : Au niveau de la formation des interprètes gestuelles, il y a une portion d'oralisme, ce qu'on appelle ce qui permet la lecture labiale. Quant au langage parlé complété, c'est une formation qui est très courte, qui ne prend pas excessivement de temps. Donc, ce ne sera pas un fardeau supplémentaire ou ça n'étirera pas la formation de façon indue à notre avis.

1523   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Et, si on n'était pas tout à fait prêt, si on était prêt à lancer en QSL, est-ce qu'il faudra ralentir le lancement pour permettre à ce que les interprètes soient capables d'agir dans ces autres langues également?

1524   MME THERRIEN : Si, lorsque vous parlez de lancement, vous parlez de phase de recherche, je dirais non, parce que le service pourra être offert en langue des signes aux personnes sourdes, mais en même temps, étant donné que nous serons en étape de recherche, nous pourrons faire des essais sur les autres modes en même temps. Donc, je ne crois pas que ça nuirait du tout au service au départ.

1525   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Vous soulevez une autre question. Qu'est-ce que vous voulez dire par « étape de recherche »?

1526   MME THERRIEN : Bien, si on prend l'étude de la compagnie Mission, on regarde que les cinq premières années est une étape de travail et de recherche avec les organismes qui forment les interprètes. Et, pour notre part, ce cinq ans-là est comme un moment où on teste des choses, où on regarde ce qui est possible et ce qui n'est pas possible, parce qu'il se pourrait que ce que l'on propose aujourd'hui ne soit pas possible au niveau de la technologie. La lecture labiale à l'écran, on ne connaît pas vraiment si c'est possible, clair et ainsi de suite.

1527   Donc, moi, dans... bien, au CQDA, dans notre conception de ce que Mission présente, c'est que, les premiers cinq ans, c'est vraiment une période exploratoire, une période de tests. Comment ça fonctionne? Pour amasser encore plus de données pour que le CRTC puisse dire : « Oui, effectivement, implantons si possible. Et voici ce que l'on peut implanter. »

1528   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Et, pendant cette période-là, est-ce qu'on doit, est-ce qu'on sera en mesure d'imposer des standards quant à la qualité et la quantité des services qui peuvent être offerts? Ou est-ce qu'on laissera le tout à l'administrateur qui pourrait gérer tout ça?

1529   MME THERRIEN : Non, il faut imposer des standards dès le départ, aussi les valider tout au long de la période de recherche pour voir si les standards, on peut les atteindre ou pas, là. Si je comprends bien votre question.

1530   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Oui, mais parce qu'il me semble qu'au cours de ce débat-là, en partie, ce sera la qualité et la quantité des services. Et, là, vous nous dites que ce sera difficile d'établir des balises compte tenu du fait qu'on va être en période de recherche plutôt qu'en période de service, si vous voulez.

1531   MME THERRIEN : Mais la recherche comprend aussi l'implantation de balises et de validation de ces balises-là. Pour moi, c'est un tout.

1532   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Mais parlez-nous-en des balises, là, dès la première journée. Qu'est-ce que vous prévoyez?

1533   MME THERRIEN : Au niveau de la qualité, il est clair que la qualité doit y être. Au niveau de l'éthique, de la sécurité et tout ça doit y être. Au-delà de ça, je dois vous avouer que je ne suis pas une experte non plus pour établir tout ce genre de balises. J'y vais de façon vraiment, là, empirique en ce moment.

1534   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Mais vous devez avoir en tête un minimum de qualité de service qui doit être offert. Sinon, les gens vont dire que vous n'êtes pas bien, bien exigeante.

1535   MME THERRIEN : En fait, le CQDA n'est pas très technologie, il n'est pas très versé dans ce genre de choses-là. Nous, on travaille beaucoup pour l'humain et avec l'humain. C'est dans ce sens-là que j'ai de la difficulté à répondre de façon spécifique à vos questions autrement que ce que je vois en ce moment au niveau des services d'interprétation, leur qualité de service, leur processus de plainte, leur processus de protection.

1536   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Écartons la technologie pour l'instant. Sur certaines questions fondamentales, d'abord, devrait-on dès la première journée avoir un service 24 sur 24?

1537   MME THERRIEN : Non.

1538   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Non.

1539   MME THERRIEN : Nous n'aurons pas... vous allez drainer les interprètes sociocommunautaires. Et pour nous, d'où l'intérêt de cette phase-là proposée par Mission, parce que nous commençons graduellement. Et, en même temps, ça nous permet de voir l'engouement.

1540   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Et quelle sera l'image de ce service-là? Pas 24 sur 24, strictement, seriez-vous contente avec strictement les heures de bureau? Est-ce que vous serez plus heureuse avec plus de temps de service, mais d'une piètre qualité? Parlez-nous-en d'une base, d'un minimum dès la première journée de ce service-là.

1541   MME THERRIEN : La qualité restera toujours le principe le plus important. La quantité, je crois que c'est beaucoup moins important.

1542   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : O.K.

1543   MME THERRIEN : Pour l'instant. On se doit... surtout qu'en matière de service en langue des signes québécoise, il n'y a aucune expertise en ce moment, il n'y a rien. Tout est à bâtir. Donc, commençons petit, commençons bien. Et, graduellement, grandissons.

1544   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Et si la communauté anglophone est en mesure de se lancer d'une manière plus robuste dès la première journée, devrait-on ralentir un petit peu leur cadence pour permettre à ce que le service soit égal dans les deux langues?

1545   MME THERRIEN : Absolument, absolument. De toute façon, si on regarde la pénurie d'interprètes, si on regarde les statistiques, pour le CQDA, on n'a pas constaté qu'il y aura beaucoup plus d'interprètes de disponibles pour les anglophones, si on regarde les ratios et les chiffres. Donc, pour nous, ce n'est pas vraiment si clair qu'on pourra partir à la course chez les anglophones et au pas de tortue chez les anglophones. Et, de toute façon, nous ne voulons pas. On est quand même un pays bilingue. On a quand même deux langues officielles. Et déjà -- et on l'a écrit dans notre présentation pas d'aujourd'hui, mais celle que l'on a déposée -- les francophones au Canada ont attendu plusieurs années pour avoir le » de sous-titrage au complet. On a attendu jusqu'en 2012 alors que les anglophones l'avaient. Pourquoi devrions-nous toujours attendre et être en arrière? Je crois qu'un service équivalent est nécessaire aux mêmes heures, même nombre d'heures, même service.

1546   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Par principe, même si dans les faits -- et c'est un grand si, parce que nous avons entendu de l'Ontario Relay Group d'hier nous dire qu'eux autres peuvent être prêts à lancer beaucoup plus rapidement que la communauté francophone et eux ne devraient pas retarder l'autre -- et, là, vous, vous dites clairement qu'ils doivent fonctionner les deux en même temps et partir les deux en même temps.

1547   MME THERRIEN : Oui.

1548   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Ça me fait penser un petit peu à la construction des deux super hôpitaux de Montréal, là, même si, à un moment donné, les Anglais étaient prêts, il fallait ralentir un petit peu pour permettre à CUSM de se joindre. Alors, c'est clair. Ça, c'est bien.

1549   Le bassin que nous avons présentement d'interprètes, ils seront en mesure d'assurer quel nombre d'heures sur une base quotidienne d'un service éventuel, de servir?

1550   MME THERRIEN : Je ne suis pas en mesure de répondre à ça.

1551   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Pas en mesure, O.K. Voulez-vous qu'on parle un petit peu de la façon qu'on puisse financer ce service-là?

1552   MME THERRIEN : Um-hum.

1553   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Est-ce que vous avez des idées? Je n'en ai pas vu dans votre document du jour, là, mais...

1554   MME THERRIEN : Effectivement, parce que, tout comme je disais un peu plus tôt, nous nous intéressons beaucoup plus à l'humain qu'à tout l'aspect finances et gestion. Ce que nous souhaitons, c'est qu'il y a des services qui répondent aux besoins. Mais, pour le financement, pour avoir été présente hier et avoir entendu les réponses des autres participants, je crois que le financement doit être -- désolée, une petite perte de concentration, ça va revenir -- le financement doit se...

1555   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Les finances ont cet effet-là sur nous tous.

1556   MME THERRIEN : Oui, c'est ça, effectivement. Alors, au niveau du financement, je crois que le modèle proposé d'un seul et même... que les compagnies de téléphonie, que les compagnies d'Internet, de tous les intervenants qui touchent de près ou de loin le de relais vidéo contribuent au financement de ce service-là.

1557   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : À quelle hauteur? Ca, vous n'êtes pas en position, en mesure de répondre à cette question-là?

1558   MME THERRIEN : Non.

1559   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Et quelle doit être la participation financière des utilisateurs de ce service-là?

1560   MME THERRIEN : Tout comme avec les outils qu'ils ont en ce moment. Que l'on parle du téléscripteur, ils doivent fournir leur téléscripteur, parfois avec des aides financières du gouvernement. Et ils doivent payer pour leur accès au service, leur accès téléphonique.

1561   Alors, pour nous, l'accès au service de relais devrait être sous la même forme. Eux fournissent leur équipement et par la suite bénéficient du service, sans plus.

1562   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Et leur abonnement à un service Internet également.

1563   MME THERRIEN : Absolument, oui.

1564   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : O.K. Sur la question du 911, je pense que vous avez bien fait le tour de cette question-là lors de votre intervention aujourd'hui, c'est dans le dossier public. Et si mes collègues du contentieux ont d'autres questions, libre à eux de les poser en temps et lieu.

1565   Et quant aux critères qui devraient être inclus dans une éventuelle demande de proposition pour la fourniture du SRV, est-ce que vous avez des idées précises?

1566   MME THERRIEN : Il est clair que, dans l'appel d'offres, il faudra avoir de l'embauche canadienne. Nous ne souhaitons pas... Parce que nous avons aussi une communauté sourde anglophone au Québec donc qui utilise la langue des signes canadienne et non pas américaine dans le American Sign Language, là; c'est la même langue, mais il y a quand même des spécificités. Donc, c'est un produit canadien à notre image et non pas une imposition de leurs pratiques. Donc, le modèle est à faire en ce moment. Mais, pour moi, le premier critère est d'avoir du personnel canadien.

1567   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Vous ne voulez pas parler de finances, mais il devrait y avoir quand même un plafond de financement ou est-ce que...

1568   MME THERRIEN : En tant que Canadiens...

1569   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Si.

1570   MME THERRIEN : ... on a un budget, on a des tartes et on doit se doter du meilleur service avec le financement que nous aurons pour se service.

1571   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Très raisonnable. Quant à la gouvernance et des budgets, la séparation entre les deux langues, est-ce qu'on doit imposer des quotas, est-ce que vous avez pensé à ce partage entre les deux communautés linguistiques?

1572   MME THERRIEN : Moi, je ne vois pas de partage. Je vois le service de relais comme étant un tout.

1573   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Un tout. Et si on suit votre modèle puis tout le monde soit appelé à contribué, que ce soient les compagnies de téléphonie de ligne terrestre ou Internet ou sans-fil et il y a un budget global qui est ramassé à travers le pays, est-ce que, en parlant des tartes, est-ce que vous avez songé à un pourcentage de ces tartes-là qui doit aller vers les services anglos par rapport au service franco?

1574   MME THERRIEN : Nous n'avons vraiment pas réfléchi à ce genre de partage.

1575   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Et, quand je parle de la gouvernance, je parle de la gouvernance d'une entité d'ordre administrative. Là aussi, il doit y avoir de la représentation des deux communautés. Est-ce que vous avez pensé à un partage quant à cette question-là?

1576   MME THERRIEN : Pas au niveau du pourcentage, mais je crois que les deux langues officielles devraient être présentes...

1577   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : O.K.

1578   MME THERRIEN : ...pour défendre les besoins de chacun.

1579   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Vous avez mentionné dans vos documents du jour, mais surtout votre mémoire de ce printemps, que vous pensez qu'il devrait y avoir des téléphonistes de SRV, ils devront être en mesure de répondre rapidement à un appel d'urgence, et ça, même la nuit. Comment un tel système fonctionnera-t-il?

1580   MME THERRIEN : Là encore, nous ne sommes pas des experts. Nous nous basons sur ce qui se fait en ce moment dans les services qui... Au Québec, nous n'appelons pas... c'est des agences, mais des services régionaux d'interprétation. Et, ce qu'ils ont comme système, c'est qu'il y a toujours un interprète -- entre guillemets -- « de garde ». Donc, s'il y a urgence la nuit, ces interprètes-là sont contactés en premier et assurent le service et assurent le service. Et, s'il y a une autre urgence, bien, on contacte un autre interprète.

1581   Comment physiquement ou technologiquement, ça pourrait se faire, on ne le sait pas, d'où notre intérêt de tenter ce genre de chose au moment de ce que nous appelons la période de recherche le premier cinq ans.

1582   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : En tout cas, c'est clair que vous nous apportez aujourd'hui l'idée d'une phase assez expérimentale, si vous voulez, et de recherche lors de ce premier mandat, si mandat il y a.

1583   Quant à l'idée d'une surcharge pour les utilisateurs, est-ce que ça vous semble raisonnable?

1584   MME THERRIEN : Qu'entendez-vous par « surcharge »?

1585   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Bien, au-delà du paiement pour un service Internet ou ligne téléphonique terrestre et autre, une surcharge, une charge dédiée aux utilisateurs de ce service-là.

1586   MME THERRIEN : Je ne crois pas qu'il doive y avoir surcharge puisque c'est un service d'accessibilité, tout comme il n'y a aucune surcharge pour les services de relais téléphoniques ou par IP. Je ne vois pas pourquoi les personnes vivant avec une surdité devraient payer pour pallier leur handicap.

1587   S'ils souhaitent avoir des services supplémentaires, tout comme, nous, si nous souhaitons avoir un afficheur ou des trucs supplémentaires, nous payons, je crois que c'est une équité. Les sourds ne doivent ni être désavantagés ni avantagés... pardon, j'ai dit « les sourds », mais les personnes vivant avec une surdité.

1588   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Et tous les utilisateurs des services devraient payer pour ce service-là?

1589   MME THERRIEN : Collectivement, je crois qu'on est une...

1590   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Je comprends, collectivement, tout à fait.

1591   MME THERRIEN : ...qu'on s'est donné ce mandat social-là il y a plusieurs années.

1592   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : J'ai tenté à plusieurs reprises de vous amener sur le terrain de la qualité du service. Je vais essayer une autre fois. Je ne suis pas lent, je suis rien que slow, mais j'aimerais essayer.

1593   Si on prend un exemple concret des exigences qui sont présentes chez nos voisins du sud, le FCC exige que 80 pour cent des appels soient répondus à l'intérieur d'une période de deux minutes. Quand est-ce que vous pensez qu'on sera en mesure d'offrir cette qualité de service?

1594   MME THERRIEN : Je ne suis pas en mesure de répondre à ce genre de question-là, parce que, de toute façon, si on regarde les statistiques concernant les appels de relais IP ou relais vidéo en ce moment, la qualité de service, elle est excellente, mais elle n'est pas parfaite. Donc, je crois que c'est en essayant et en travaillant... Je reviens toujours à notre période de cinq ans. C'est là où nous saurons face à l'engouement quelle est la période d'attente ou pas.

1595   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Quel pourcentage de la communauté que vous représentez est au courant de l'idée d'un service SRV?

1596   MME THERRIEN : Il est clair que la communauté anglophone... c'est clair que la communauté anglophone est très au courant. La communauté francophone en langue des signes, oui, parce qu'elle est très, très, très en contact avec la communauté anglophone.

1597   Mais pour ce qui a trait aux personnes devenues sourdes, aux personnes malentendantes francophones, beaucoup moins, beaucoup moins. Pour eux, leur participation à l'étude de Mission a été vraiment un eye opener, si on peut dire, pour eux, parce qu'ils ne connaissaient pas les possibilités autres que les signes. Alors, pour eux, ça leur a permis de s'y intéresser de façon plus grandissante.

1598   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Mais, présentement, est-ce qu'on parle de 10 pour cent ou 20 pour cent? Est-ce si bas que ça? Impossible à dire, d'après vous?

1599   MME THERRIEN : Vous attribuez les pourcentages à quoi, là?

1600   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Des gens qui sont au courant de ce service-là.

1601   MME THERRIEN : Oh, je ne saurais vous dire au niveau du pourcentage, mais c'est sûr que, au niveau de la communauté sourde, eux, ils sont très au courant. Au niveau de la communauté... il n'y a pas de communauté de demi-sourds et de malentendants, mais au niveau des personnes sourdes et malentendantes, étant donné qu'ils ne font pas nécessairement partie de regroupements ou d'associations et qu'il n'y a aucune information publique à cet effet, c'est sûr que ces individus-là sont beaucoup moins informés.

1602   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Et que faut-il faire pour mieux renseigner la communauté dans son ensemble? Faut-il prévoir des budgets, faut-il...

1603   MME THERRIEN : Absolument.

1604   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Est-ce que vous avez songé à ça?

1605   MME THERRIEN : Oui, absolument. En ce moment, si je peux faire référence au service de texto au 911, il y aura bientôt mise en ligne d'un site Internet dans les deux langues et soutenu aussi par des vidéos en langue des signes ASL et LSQ. Donc, à partir de ce moment-là, lorsqu'il y a ce genre d'outil-là, c'est un seul outil de communication, il y en a plusieurs autres, mais je crois aussi qu'au niveau des médias, plusieurs des organismes de demi-sourds et malentendants ont des revues aussi dans lesquelles on peut faire publier de l'information, mais je crois que, oui, il faut une campagne de communication...

1606   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Une campagne, oui, tout à fait.

1607   MME THERRIEN : ...pancanadienne à tous les niveaux.

1608   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Au point où on doit peut-être engager même une agence de pub et des vrais... Est-ce qu'on doit dédier un pourcentage des sommes qui vont être ramassées pour ce service-là envers un plan pédagogique, littéralement au-delà des sites Web qui sont gratos ou presque, vraiment engagé, fait le complet, là, une agence de pub qui va planifier, qui va coordonner?

1609   MME THERRIEN : Nous sommes dans le communautaire.

1610   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Oui.

1611   MME THERRIEN : Et, nous, habituellement, nous faisons des miracles avec peu de moyens. Alors, embaucher une grande compagnie, ainsi de suite... je crois qu'on peut, on est assez innovateurs. Si on demande aux organismes qui défendent les droits des personnes avec problèmes auditifs, je crois qu'on peut trouver des moyens simples et adaptés sans engager des fonds qui pourraient être alloués à la recherche et aux services plutôt que...

1612   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Nonobstant le faible niveau de conscientisation de ce service-là présentement?

1613   MME THERRIEN : Bien, je pense qu'on peut faire bien avec peu d'argent...

1614   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Oui.

1615   MME THERRIEN : ...plutôt que d'embaucher une firme qui va coûter très cher pour faire peut-être quelque chose de très chic et de très beau, mais pas nécessairement... Il n'est pas nécessaire que ce soit très chic pour transmettre l'information, c'est ce que je veux dire.

1616   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Mais j'ai pris bonne note, le communautaire oeuvre dans le domaine des miracles, et c'est bien.

1617   MME THERRIEN : Voilà.

1618   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : On va vous mettre au défi alors. Les gens ont également cette impression, nous avons brièvement fait mention hier qu'il y a des changements technologiques qui viennent à grande vitesse et qui peuvent peut-être rendre ce service-là désuet dans un avenir très rapproché, même à l'intérieur de cette période quinquennale de recherche, si vous voulez. Que répondez-vous à cela?

1619   MME THERRIEN : Pouvez-vous me rappeler quelles seraient ces technologies qui pourraient...

1620   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Il n'y a personne chez vous qui pense à d'autres solutions technologiques que vous prévoyez, qui sont visibles à brève échéance?

1621   MME THERRIEN : Nous sommes un organisme communautaire et vous avez en ce moment l'entièreté des ressources.

1622   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : O.K.

1623   MME THERRIEN : Alors, la personne, ce serait moi. Si vous parlez des autres technologies de communication, tel que Skype et ainsi de suite, je ne sais pas si c'est à ce genre de technologie...

1624   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : En partie. Mais si ce n'est pas sur votre radar, c'est beau, c'est cool.

1625   MME THERRIEN : Non, c'est...

1626   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Ça va.

1627   MME THERRIEN : Non, désolée.

1628   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : O.K. Il est également question de, quand vous parlez d'éthique et de cette capacité qui doit être offerte aux interprètes de briser ce lien de confiance et de confidentialité qui doivent exister entre l'utilisateur et l'interprète dans les cas d'un crime qui peut être annoncé ou d'un suicide potentiel, vous serez d'accord à ce que ce lien soit brisé pour le bénéfice et de l'utilisateur et de la société at large?

1629   MME THERRIEN : Question fort délicate s'il en est une, parce que, en ce moment...

1630   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : On est là pour ça.

1631   MME THERRIEN : Je ne crois pas que ce lien-là -- à moins que je ne me trompe ou que je ne sois pas au courant --, mais je ne crois pas que les autres services de relais en ce moment brisent ce lien. S'ils le font, bien, je serais d'accord à ce que les interprètes le fassent aussi.

1632   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : O.K.

1633   MME THERRIEN : Mais si, en ce moment, ils ne le font pas, je ne vois pas pourquoi on le ferait en matière de relais vidéo.

1634   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Bien, dans le contexte bien délimité de ces deux exemples-là que je vous ai donnés, là, dans le cadre de l'utilisateur qui parle d'un suicide ou qui risque de se faire mal à lui-même ou à autrui, vous ne pensez pas que ce sera des cas exceptionnels où l'interprète doit être en mesure de dénoncer ou d'aviser les autorités appropriées?

1635   MME THERRIEN : Je voudrais juste faire la distinction entre l'élément humain...

1636   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Si.

1637   MME THERRIEN : ....et l'élément pratico-pratique. Je reviens : je ne sais pas si les services de relais téléphoniques ou IP, lorsqu'ils reçoivent aussi la communication... Pourquoi la personne en ce moment utiliserait le relais vidéo pour dire qu'il veut se suicider et qu'il ne le ferait pas en ce moment avec un ATS? Le souhait est là aussi par écrit ou par relais vidéo. Alors, si les téléphonistes de ces services actuels brisent la confidentialité, je ne vois pas d'objection à ce que cette pratique-là continue au niveau du service de relais vidéo.

1638   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Parfait.

1639   MME THERRIEN : Mais, si, en ce moment, les téléphonistes ne brisent pas la confidentialité, pourquoi est-ce que ce seraient deux poids, deux mesures parce qu'on est passés en langue, dans un autre mode de relais?

1640   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Oui. Je pense que ça complète plus ou moins. Juste pour parler brièvement en résumé, les autres langues de signe devraient être offertes sous forme de ce qu'on appelle best effort ou les meilleurs efforts pour offrir ce service-là, si j'ai bien compris, bien saisi...

1641   MME THERRIEN : Est-ce un best effort? Moi, je crois que ça devrait tout d'abord être testé pour voir la viabilité, la faisabilité, parce que nous savons que, de plus en plus d'enfants sont implantés, utilisent une lecture labiale...

1642   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Oui.

1643   MME THERRIEN : ...et bien souvent le langage parlé complété pour communiquer. Donc, de plus en plus, il y aura de ces besoins-là et au niveau de la lecture labiale aussi. Est-ce que ce sera un best effort ou est-ce que ce sera un jour -- et on a le droit de rêver -- peut-être un service intégré tout simplement et non pas un best effort?

1644   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Où toutes les langues doivent être... on doit être exigeant quant aux services qui peuvent être offerts pour toutes les langues. O.K. Je trouve ça également intéressant que vous avez réfléchi au fait qu'il y a cette grande possibilité à ce que les interprètes soient drainés par ce genre de service-là. Ça démontre une certaine réflexion, une certaine sensibilité. Et, en conséquence, ça risque de retarder un petit peu la quantité de l'offre.

1645   Quant à la formation, si on était pour commencer à zéro -- puis je vais clore sur ça -- ça prendrait combien d'années pour former? Tu sais, c'est le processus de certification dont on parle puis il y a l'école, l'UQAM, qui serait en mesure de former du monde. Quand est-ce qu'on va avoir un bassin suffisant d'interprètes certifiés pour offrir ces services-là sans drainer les autres besoins d'interprète?

1646   MME THERRIEN : C'est la question que nous nous posons depuis plusieurs années, parce que, au Québec, contrairement aux interprètes ASL, nous n'avons pas de formation complète...

1647   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Si.

1648   MME THERRIEN : ...en ce moment. Donc, nous travaillons parallèlement avec le ministère de l'Éducation pour mettre en place ce type de formation-là. Et il est clair que l'UQAM pourra former des interprètes. Mais, en ce moment, c'est toujours l'oeuf ou la poule. La certification de l'UQAM devrait prendre un an, mais elle prend des années et des années parce qu'il n'y a pas suffisamment d'interprètes pour ouvrir les cours. Donc, un interprète, parfois, la formation s'étale sur quatre, cinq ans parce que le cours n'est pas offert.

1649   Donc, c'est toujours l'oeuf et la poule. Si on annonce qu'il y a un service de relais vidéo et qu'il y aura besoin d'interprètes, bien, là, il y aura un bassin suffisant pour que ce soit accéléré. Donc, pouvons-nous vraiment donner de temps en ce moment? C'est très difficile.

1650   Mais, avec le projet de recherche, il est clair que, là, il y aura un intérêt et que, là, l'UQAM va aller chercher beaucoup plus d'étudiants. Donc, ce sera beaucoup plus rapide, d'où l'intérêt du cinq ans. Après cinq ans, on devrait avoir quand même formé suffisamment d'interprètes pour passer à une étape beaucoup plus intense d'offre.

1651   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Et, là, je reviens à une question-là, fondamentale, si la communauté anglophone est prête à rouler et vous avez mentionné vous-même que, dans la communauté anglophone, ils sont plus en avance, si vous voulez, sur le nombre et, nous, nous avons du rattrapage, vous ne pensez pas que c'est le cas?

1652   MME THERRIEN : Plus à l'avance sur le nombre?

1653   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Si. Um-hum.

1654   MME THERRIEN : Ils ont beaucoup plus d'interprètes, mais ils auront beaucoup plus de demandes. Si on regarde les statistiques, à titre comparatif, sur les besoins en interprètes pour le service de relais LSQ et le besoin d'interprètes au niveau d'ASL, ils ont une pénurie très semblable, très semblable.

1655   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Et également un défi quant à la rétention de ces interprètes-là.

1656   MME THERRIEN : Bien sûr, parce qu'on a parlé beaucoup des Américains qui viennent les voler. Ce que nous n'aurons pas au niveau de la langue de signes du Québec, personne ne viendra voler nos interprètes.

1657   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Il n'y a personne qui peut voler les nôtres, oui, oui.

--- Rires

1658   MME THERRIEN : Voilà. Et l'idée que les interprètes qui sont en ce moment chez les Anglais... les Américains, pardon, reviendront au Québec par fibre patriotique, peut-être, mais je crois que nous devrons entrer dans une concurrence financière pour les ramener chez nous. Et, là, l'offre pourrait au Canada subir des contrecoups si les entreprises américaines haussent les salaires et que le Canada n'est pas en mesure de les hausser et ainsi de suite.

1659   Alors, moi, ça m'inquiète, cette tentative-là d'aller les rechercher des anglophones, parce qu'on devrait être concurrentiels avec des compagnies qui le sont fortement aux États-Unis.

1660   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Je comprends. Écoutez, vous ne voulez pas parler trop, trop de finances. Je ne vous amènerai pas sur le terrain juridique non plus en vous demandant de penser à ce concept de contrainte excessive, là. Je pense que votre soumission du jour et votre mémoire sont assez clairs de ce printemps. Je vous remercie d'avoir pris le temps d'être parmi nous aujourd'hui. Et je ne sais pas si mes collègues auront d'autres questions ou si le contentieux veut intervenir. Alors, je vous laisse dans leurs mains bien habiles.

1661   THE CHAIRPERSON: Commissioner Shoan.

1662   CONSEILLER SHOAN : Merci, j'ai quelques questions et je vais les poser en anglais, mais, s'il vous plaît, prenez votre temps avant de répondre. At page 14, well, actually, before I get into that, I just wanted to pick up on the conversation, the exchange you had with my colleague, Commissioner Pentefountas with respect to the availability...

1663   MS THERRIEN: I'm sorry, I have some difficulty hearing you.

1664   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Oh, sorry. Is that better?

1665   MS THERRIEN: Much better, thank you.

1666   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Great. I wanted to pick up on the last exchange you had with Commissioner Pentefountas with respect to the availability of interpreters. Yesterday, I had a discussion with the Ontario Association of the Deaf and they were quite insistent that a restricted schedule not be implemented that the service be 24/7 from the outset. And so we discussed various models which would ensure adequate supplies of interpreters.

1667   One of the suggestions I made was supplementing the existing supply of Canadian interpreters with American interpreters or others until a sufficient supply of Canadian English interpreters existed. I was wondering whether there was a supply internationally of French language interpreters that had some working knowledge of LSQ or could be made to have a working knowledge of LSQ in the interim until a sufficient supply of French language LSQ interpreters was developed in Québec. And, if so, where could they be accessed?

1668   MS THERRIEN: There are none. LSQ is specific to Québec.

1669   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Thank you very much. On page 16 of your submission, you referred to un service de garde. And I thought that was an interesting concept. I actually hadn't seen that anywhere else. You noted later on that a service such as that didn't exist anywhere else. But I think you touched upon it again in your presentation today.

1670   So I was hoping you could explain it in a little bit more detail. I think there's, when we discussed the notion of an offering, there's a bit of a push pull there with respect to a 24/7 service. And often the crux of the issue is the availability of an emergency service to service people in the middle of the night. So I was hoping you could explain a bit more of this concept of a service de garde.

1671   MS THERRIEN: I'm going to try in English. If I can't, I'll --

1672   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: No problem.

1673   MS THERRIEN: -- transfer to French.

1674   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Sure.

1675   MS THERRIEN: As I said before, at the moment, Québec agencies all have a specific emergency service for when the offices are closed. So, if a person is sick, needs to go to the hospital, had an accident or whatever, what they do, they have a specific -- well, they just call the agency and the agencies call service for evenings and night. They just call directly the interpreter that is on call during the evening and the night. And that person goes, let's say, to the police office or the hospital for the emergency. So for the relay service, our question -- we don't have the answer --

1676   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Right.

1677   MS THERRIEN: -- we're just questioning, but our question would be: if one person, one or two interpreter would be on call and there is an emergency when the relay services are closed, well that interpreter will get it, whatever it be on her -- whatever the device. Technically, we didn't really think about it.

1678   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: M'hm.

1679   MS THERRIEN: But that person would receive the call and assume the relay.

1680   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

1681   MS THERRIEN: And where is the interest of this is that the interpreter will see the other person and what is going around, so will be able not only to relay the request at that moment, but maybe relay the urgency or whatever of the situation tot he 911 service.

1682   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Great. So, okay, it strikes me that it sounds very similar to the emergency service put in place by the Ontario Interpretation Services that I was discussing with the CHS earlier this week, okay, good to know. Thank you. So as a point of clarification, in your submission at page 20, you refer to certain basic ancillary services that a VRS service should ensure and you referenced video mail and access to perhaps other modes of communication other than ASL or LSQ as well as emergency service.

1683   I wanted to touch upon the point of the voice mail, because in your submission you said it should be free. And then this morning you said if hearing people pay for it, we should pay for it. So could you clarify your position on that?

1684   MS THERRIEN: Yes, I don't -- that was a mistake in our submission.

1685   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

1686   MS THERRIEN: It was a mistake.

1687   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay, nor problem.

1688   MS THERRIEN: So that's why I came back with that this morning.

1689   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Great, thank you. In terms of outreach and education, you mentioned that the Canadian government, certain departments and agencies should put into place a publicity campaign to educate and sensitize users and the Canadian population with respect to VRS. Who do you think would be the appropriate agencies and departments to lead such an initiative?

1690   MS THERRIEN: Like I said before, as with the texto 911, we have the -- and I don't have the name of the group that will be putting online a Web site. So that would be one thing. I do believe that all the phone companies and Internet companies should have something on their Web site concerning the relay. CRTC has a role to play in forming or asking other government bodies to inform the population of this new service. And we all have -- my organisations and other organisations, we do also have a responsibility to relay that information and even complete that information with our members and our people also. So I think it's a group effort.

1691   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay, that's fair. I asked this question earlier this week and I was curious about the situation at your end with respect to our requirement to have both a land line and an Internet subscription in order to access relay services. Is that the case where you reside? Do you have any take on with respect to whether only an Internet subscription should be required or both services, subscription of both services?

1692   MS THERRIEN: I know that in Québec some companies started to not ask for a home phone. They agree to accept only a cell phone number. So that is okay. But in the case that the relay service is not offered 24/7, the person, the deaf, deafened or hard of hearing person will still need to have another way of calling 911 or calling people. So for a certain period of time, they will need both. But would it be required? I don't think so. If they do have a subscription to Internet or a subscription to a cell phone, that should be sufficient in my mind.

1693   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Right, one or the other should be sufficient, not both.

1694   MS THERRIEN: M'hm.

1695   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay, very good. Those are my questions. Thank you very much.

1696   THE CHAIRPERSON: Commissioner Duncan.

1697   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Good morning. I'd like to talk about the other modes and codes of speaking communication that you referred to. And I notice first of all in the notice of consultation -- and I guess my question is it seems to me you disagree with it -- it is assumed that individuals who use the sign language other than ASL or LSQ are not likely to use the services of a language interpreter, due to the lack of availability of interpreters in sign languages other than ASL or LSQ, this assumption was also applied to VRS.

1698   So if I'm understanding your comments this morning, my take away was that the interpreters using LSQ in Québec do use other modes and so you would not agree with that statement then, they will use interpreters. Okay, that's very helpful.

1699   I was also interested to know -- because the 27.1 percent is, as you mentioned, mentioned in the notice -- if you have any information that would give us any idea how that would break down. It seems to me that it's not generally available, but maybe in your view, you have...

1700   MS THERRIEN: It is not generally available because statistics are very hard to have, but I know that Eastern Québec, many don't even use LSQ, they use another code, which is -- it's a code, it's called français signé, Signed French. So there are a lot of children with Signed French. So we have to really look at that from a global perspective.

1701   But the interpreters do provide many different services. Like I said before, Monsieur Nolet at my left usually leap reads, but now he's getting support with sign, but it's not perfect LSQ. So that is a mode and a code, it's a pidgin mode, it's a mix-up of everything, but it does answer his needs. And it's possible with video relay, while with TTY and IP relay, it's not possible to adapt to the need of the person at the end doing the call.

1702   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: One way maybe to gather some information on that might be to survey interpreters, because maybe we'd get some feedback or some idea of the techniques they are using.

1703   MS THERRIEN: There is a survey. UQAM will come and talk to you -- I think it's Thursday. They did a survey -- I think it's somewhere in 2007 or 2008 and they did a survey. But I don't know if it's a crossed survey.

1704   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Across the country, you mean?

1705   MS THERRIEN: No, no, no, it's in Québec for LSQ. I'm just talking about --

1706   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Oh just -- okay.

1707   MS THERRIEN: But a cross survey, what I mean is if an ASL interpreter -- I know that they do have the information for the LSQ interpreter that does also what we call -- I don't know how to say it in English -- but the lip reading procedure. But I'm not sure if they did the LSQ that have the ability to do that lip reading and also the other codes and modes, I'm not sure about the other codes and modes because, usually, UQAM concentrates on LSQ and the lip reading procedure.

1708   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: To pick up on Commissioner Shoan's question then, the signed French that you referred to, is that a service that would be maybe available in France then as opposed to it's not québécois, it's --

1709   MS THERRIEN: I am not sure, I'm sorry. I'm not qualified to answer that.

1710   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Okay, but maybe something we could --

1711   MS THERRIEN: Investigate.

1712   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Right, yes. And, let me see -- I'm feeling like I'm missing something, but anyway that's fine. Thank you very much, it's very helpful. Thanks.

1713   THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Merci beaucoup. We will take a 10 minute break and resume at 10:20.

--- Suspension à 1009

--- Reprise à 1022

1714   THE SECRETARY: Please take your seats.

1715   THE CHAIRPERSON: Order, please.

1716   THE SECRETARY: We will now hear the presentation from the Toronto International Deaf Film and Arts Festival, who is appearing by videoconference from Toronto.

1717   You have 15 minutes for your presentation. Thank you.

PRÉSENTATION

1718   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): Hello. Can you hear me?

1719   THE SECRETARY: Yes, we can hear you.

1720   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): Yes, good day, ladies and gentlemen, and the CRTC Commissioners. My name is Catherine MacKinnon, and I'm a filmmaker with the -- involved with the Toronto International Deaf Film and Arts Festival, which would be -- we'll call it TIDFAF from now on.

1721   And so I really appreciate to have part of this -- my presentation here at this time.

1722   My background involvement with TIDFAF is, really, the celebration of -- through the deaf cinema through their visual medium. This biannual showcase -- conference showcases the work of talented national and international deaf, hard of hearing, deafened, deaf-blind artists as well as those who produce works in collaboration with the deaf and hearing communities.

1723   We just recently celebrated one of our festivals, the fourth one, from May 9th to 12th, 2013, and it was really a wonderful success. Ninety (90) percent of the films have sub-titles, voice-overs, sound design and music in their films.

1724   We also had films that had audio description for those who had blind or low vision audience members so that, this way, they would be able to participate in the Festival.

1725   We also provided full accessible environment in both American Sign Language and la langue des signes Québécoise and the international sign language interpreters. We also had CART, or real-time captioning services, for deafened adults.

1726   Our Festival venue spaces were also wheelchair accessible. This was a full requirement, and it has been all these years.

1727   So now to address what is Video Relay Service.

1728   Now, you're familiar -- it is a video telecommunication service, and it allows culturally deaf, oral deaf, deafened, hard of hearing individuals to communicate over the internet using video enabled technologies such as video telephones and similar technologies with hearing people and also with real-time via sign language-spoken language interpreters.

1729   Now, I have another hat. I am a filmmaker as well, and I produced several films. I lived in Los Angeles, California for many years, from '07 to '11, and I would fly back and forth between Los Angeles and Toronto, you know, to complete my other role as a TIDFAF member and also a film producer.

1730   And so this really involved use of video relay constantly because I was able to hire production crews, book equipment, put together scene details. And all of that would have been impossible without the VRS.

1731   Now, another thing that's really important is, you know, I'm also a member of a family. And I find this really important to be able to communicate with them from Los Angeles.

1732   And you know, it's really essential because in addition to just getting the information back and forth, the interpreter would be able to relay any information about background noise, any emotions displayed in the voice and so on.

1733   I never experienced that before, and it was one way in which I was able to really feel a full part of the conversation. It was really wonderful.

1734   Client services were constantly there, and it was just wonderful.

1735   I did work on one film, by the way, and that was under the American Independent Film Industry. It was entitled "The Hammer".

1736   It was a biopic based on the real life story of Mark Hamill, who was a UFC fighter. So while on the set with Wi-Fi capability, I was able to make phone calls using the VRS, cater -- call caterers, also, to be able to get different details that were related with the shoot.

1737   Now, with my technology, what I use on the set would just to use my simple Apple MacBook Pro laptop, iChat, and then I would have pre-programmed the listing of all of the VRS numbers. And then I would be able to very quickly make phone calls.

1738   Now, I am also an oral deaf person, and one thing that the VRS is also capable of using, and that is what they call a VCO, the voice carry-over. So I would -- the interpreter would make the connection with the hearing party and then would be able to switch off -- like put the call on mute and then be able to give strictly the signed version of what the hearing person was saying, so it was a wonderful way in which my family could hear my voice, not just hear it via an interpreter.

1739   So it was really a wonderful, wonderful piece of technology. And I also find that, you know, communicating with other people that I would communicate with in my film industry, that they -- I would also use VCO, the voice carry-over.

1740   Now, when I moved back to Canada, wow, what a shock. What a shift.

1741   I had -- you know, in the United States, I was very confident because I was fully independent. But when I moved back to Canada, I faced the frustration of not having, you know, like a VRS service on which I could confidently make my own calls.

1742   I was having to rely on others, so I didn't have equal accessibility from that point on.

1743   I had lots of business to attend to with arranging for the TIDFAF procedures, and so I really found that I was unable to make the contacts. I couldn't just rely on the staff of TIDFAF because, you know, like they were busy doing what they had to do. But in addition to that, they also couldn't particularly negotiate issues that we would have.

1744   Now, our Festival has grown, really, over the years, and so we need a VRS, a Video Relay Service, to be able to continue providing the sort of quality films that we've been providing.

1745   And so like, for instance, it's a benefit to the deaf. It's a benefit to deaf and hard of hearing. It helps us to communicate back and forth between the Board members who are -- you know, have varying degrees of hearing loss.

1746   Now, in Canada, for accessibility, we need to have VRS here.

1747   I did use the VRS that has just been set up in more recent months, and it took me and hour and a half wait on the phone to make a two-minute phone call. And that's not acceptable.

1748   So -- and of course, no, they didn't identify whether it was male or female caller. There was also -- like with the relay service in the United States, I did have that advantage of knowing whether it was a male or female that I was talking about.

1749   So we do need to have an equal system that would give us that same kind of accessibility here.

1750   So to summarize, then, it is our hope to improve the services in Canada that we're offering for the next TIDFAF convention that will take our celebration that will take place in 2015 in the month of May.

1751   So this is our hope, that the VRS will be established by that time, that this will become successful and that we can have equal accessibility with the arts community and also that our deaf and hearing Board members can be fully involved.

1752   So I thank you very much for your time in listening to my presentation today.

1753   TIDFAF strongly supports the establishment of VRS service here in Canada, and also that national, provincial organizations, grass roots organizations can all work together along with CRTC and that we have the languages of ASL and LSQ, that's both la langue des signes Québécoise and the American Sign Language, that it be used equally across Canada.

1754   Thank you.

1755   THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Commissioner Shoan has some questions for you.

1756   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Hello, and thank you for being here.

1757   I'm very impressed with the entrepreneurial spirit you've demonstrated as a filmmaker and a Festival director, and I have some questions with respect to the economic benefits of VRS.

1758   But before I get into that, I note that you partnered with the Nova Scotia Cultural Society of the Deaf to hold a deaf film festival in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia in September. How did that go?

1759   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): Yes. Yes, I was in attendance there. Yes. Oh, yes. You're very right about that.

1760   And yes, we had lent some of our films to be shown there. And there were actually 200 people in attendance. It was wonderful.

1761   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: I found it very interesting to read about the films showcased at that festival, specifically with respect to the fact that some of the films were shown with BSL, which is British Sign Language, and some of them actually had MSL, which is Maritime Sign Language.

1762   So I was curious about Maritime Sign Language and British Sign Language in terms of are they languages unto themselves? Are they dialects of ASL? Are there fundamental differences between the languages?

1763   Could you explain a little bit further?

1764   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): Yes, I can do that. That's a very good question because, really, I am an eastern myself. I'm a Maritimer from both PEI and Nova Scotia.

1765   And with MSL, the Maritime Sign Language, the history of that, really, had to do with the Amherst School for the Deaf, that they had two schools -- teachers at the school who had moved to Canada from Britain, and so a lot of those signs, of course, were interpreted -- sorry, were presented to the students in the classroom.

1766   And that would have been from about the 1800s, and that -- some of those signs persisted and they're still mixed -- you know, some of those old British signs are still incorporated into the Maritime Sign Language.

1767   But -- and very definitely part of the use of them that was preserved by -- because of seniors but, of course, as they die off, then it's becoming more and more Americanized.

1768   So I would say among the young deaf ones, there's still a lot of those signs that, I guess, maybe are -- could be called a dialect of ASL that are unique to that particular area. But you know, there's definitely a mixture.

1769   Now, as for -- as for BSL, that is the sign language used in England. And that is ASL used in Canada to be dialect to eastern Canada using MSL, Maritime Sign Language. So yes, they would use the American Sign Language alphabet and many of the other signs in conjunction with MSL.

1770   For example, this -- these signs that I'm showing, like M on the palm is "mother". "Father" is F. "Over there" would be this sign. There would be "boy" and "girl".

1771   Those are signs that they still use that are borrowed signs from BSL. And this had to do to go back to that event when we had two deaf teachers at the Amherst School for the Deaf in Nova Scotia.

1772   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Great, thank you.

1773   This morning, we heard from the Quebec Centre for Audio Deficiency, and they spoke about making best efforts on any prospective VRS service to providing languages other than LSQ and ASL, providing services such as lip-reading and other services, other language linguistic communication services.

1774   Would you have an expectation as well that a VRS service make best efforts in the English language to provide some sort of MSL or BSL or other regional dialect?

1775   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): Hmm. I would say it would depend.

1776   With VRS, they could, for instance -- like for a person who is, for instance, using voice carry-over as I would use, then it would help if they would have both spoken English and ASL.

1777   Now, like, for example, in some instances the deaf person may use a sign and say, "Oh, sorry. Can you repeat that sign?" Then I would most likely give the American Sign Language equivalent just to make sure.

1778   And it's whatever it takes to make clear the communication between individual clients.

1779   Now, for instance, when I lived in Los Angeles, sometimes I would use signs and they'd say, "Excuse me" -- the interpreter would interrupt and say, "Excuse me. Can you repeat that? I'm not familiar with that sign".

1780   And then I would explain to them, "Oh, well, I'm from Canada. That's why". And then I would give the ASL equivalent for that sign.

1781   So I'm hoping -- is this answering your question?

1782   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Yes, very much. Thank you.

1783   To segue a bit into the economic benefits of VRS, I had actually -- I had some general questions about the economic benefits of VRS, but you've provided some terrific examples of how it affects your day-to-day functions as Festival director, so I think I'll use those and ask specific questions with respect to that.

1784   One of my question was around mobile, and you answered fairly early on in your presentation about the benefits of VRS being a very mobile, communicative service allowing you to be on set and conduct your business.

1785   So I guess as a preliminary question, do you feel having access to a mobile -- the mobile aspect of VRS is something that should absolutely be put in place?

1786   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): Oh, absolutely. Yes, for sure. Yes.

1787   Yes, because that's the way of today and tomorrow. It would -- no matter where you are, you can use your -- like the Apple is more popular. I can use my iPad and then certainly mobile VRS.

1788   You can do that in the United States, so there's no reason why it can't be done here. It's greatly beneficial.

1789   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. And in terms of the platform that could potentially be used to implement VRS, we've had some earlier discussions today and yesterday about whether the platform that could potentially be implemented, whether it would be hardware based, software based, a combination of the two.

1790   Given the plethora of communications devices available today, do you think there's a need to mandate a particular hardware device? Do you think a simple software solution would suffice?

1791   What's your perspective on that?

1792   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): I would say -- it's my understanding the software has -- plays great part. That's what enables the communication link-ups. And there's tremendous developments in the software industry that really would help to alleviate anything that would come up.

1793   Yes, I think it would be software.

1794   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Do you think the potential implementation of a VRS service would help spur greater economic contributions from the deaf and hard of hearing community in different industries such as the film industry or other potential industries?

1795   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): Yes, I definitely feel that because it's -- really, it's the key to opportunity and for job opportunities, especially, in the film industry. And of course, here in Toronto there's a great -- a great need for that, for producers and directors and so on.

1796   And I know of other deaf actors and producers and directors -- I mean, it helps anyone in the arts industry as well.

1797   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Thank you.

1798   Let's talk about the formal training of operators and specifically the interpreters they employ.

1799   Who would be responsible for that training in English and -- in the English language in Canada, we actually -- there's a certification standard established by AVLIC. We're still searching for an answer on that -- on the French language side.

1800   Do you have a suggestion about who would implement or apply an operational standard in terms of certification for training?

1801   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): Yeah, that's a very good question. But at the same time, there are many different ways to make this successful.

1802   There are the TSPs, the telephone service providers. There are other -- for example, yeah, like the percentage of the phone bill could be set aside, like a small percentage would gain the economic -- the economics necessary to provide this kind of service.

1803   And actually, the whole thing -- we want to be able to provide a full package that training be involved and that this would -- like it would be good to even open it up to -- out to combine the expertise that can come up with a solution to the -- what is the best way for training. And this would be in both languages, ASL and LSQ.

1804   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Thank you.

1805   Have you had a chance to read the study commissioned by Bell Canada submitted by Mission Consulting and its corresponding recommendations?

1806   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): Yes, I did read it. Yes.

1807   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. They proposed a --

1808   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): Yes. And I would like -- yes. I would like to say that, you know, like for instance the financial responsibility would be some -- you know, like for instance, with Bell they suggested a small percentage of each bill be put aside for relay service and that that would be the money necessary to run the service.

1809   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: That's correct.

1810   It's also proposed a phased-in approach --

1811   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): Yeah, just --

1812   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Sorry. I'm sorry. Go ahead.

1813   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): So go ahead.

1814   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

1815   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): No, no. Sorry. You go ahead.

1816   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. The report also recommended a phased-in approach with respect to the implementation of VRS, and the initial phase of the implementation would involve the grant -- the giving of grants to interpreter agencies and interpreter schools to build up a body of competent and skilled interpreters.

1817   What's your view on that proposed approach?

1818   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): Yes. Yes, it's very good.

1819   Remember that our deaf film festivals, we got money from one particular company, and that's exactly the same. It's -- it was referred to in the benefits package. And so the money then would be given out to the different parties involved. So we really -- with the deaf film festival.

1820   So it would really be not much different to this approach, that there would be money presented from different agencies. So it would be handled through like, for instance, with the deaf festival was handled through one company.

1821   For example, they felt that, okay, so if we want to improve the service, of course we have to have the training. And then once funding has been established and put in place, then it can be doled out, you know, in an equal way to the various agencies that would provide the -- part of the training and so on and so that the whole would benefit from -- that would be the -- you know, the whole of Canada. The VRS service would benefit from that.

1822   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: All right. Thank you.

1823   I have one final question. In the event that it was decided that a VRS service should be implemented, do you think as use of VRS rises that TSPs should be able to shut down or close or minimize their investment in MRS such as the TTY or the IP Relay service?

1824   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): Yeah. So -- yeah. I guess I stopped using it eight or 10 years ago, so yes, that would no longer be needed.

1825   And can you repeat the question again? I just want to clarify the various components of it.

1826   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: The question was simply that if a VRS service is implemented, do you feel that TSPs could retire their TTY and IP Relay services?

1827   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): Okay. Well, yeah. Like I do think that the IP Relay is still good, and the reason for that is that it's good for those who don't know sign language, deaf and those who are late deafened. And likewise, you know, ASL, there's a lot that would -- you know, would benefit from that.

1828   But now with the VRS, they are the ones who would benefit, the culturally deaf people, in both languages.

1829   So therefore, I would say that both would benefit so that the IP Relay should -- that should continue in concert with the VRS because there are many deaf people who do not know sign language because they became deaf later in years or they acquired deafness that started off, maybe, as being hard of hearing, you know.

1830   And so really, as the population is aging, we have larger and larger numbers of people that are becoming deaf or deafened, I would say, and they would be the ones to benefit from the IP Relay.

1831   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: That's great. Thank you.

1832   Those are my questions. Thank you for being here, and congratulations on your success thus far.

1833   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): Thank you ever so much for your time.

1834   And yes, I hope that the proceedings go well for the rest of the week, and I wish you well.

1835   THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. We have no more questions. Enjoy the day.

1836   We will now take a five-minute break.

1837   MS MacKINNON (interpreted): And you, too. Thank you.

--- Suspension à 1049

--- Reprise à 1059

1838   THE CHAIRPERSON: Order please, everyone.

1839   THE SECRETARY: Just for the record, we would like to announce that we will now hear la Maison des Femmes Sourdes de Montréal et le Comité d'aide aux femmes Sourdes du Québec qui comparaît par vidéoconférence de Montréal.

1840   Et ensuite, nous entendrons TELUS Communication Company et nous irons pour le dîner.

1841   So now we will hear the presentation of la Maison des Femmes Sourdes de Montréal et le Comité d'aide aux femmes Sourdes de Québec.

1842   S'il vous plaît, vous présenter et vous avez 15 minutes pour votre présentation.

1843   Merci.

PRÉSENTATION

1844   MME COUTURE (interprétée) : Je suis directrice de service de la Maison des Femmes Sourdes de Montréal. Je suis très contente de vous faire parvenir ma lettre d'appui pour le service relais vidéo en collaboration avec le Centre d'aide des femmes Sources de Québec.

1845   Je vais vous expliquer un peu en quoi consister notre organisme. Nous avons plus de 150 membres et nous offrons des services pour les femmes sourdes qui vivent des difficultés, afin d'améliorer leur condition de vie.

1846   Les services que nous offrons aux femmes sourdes, ce sont pour les femmes en difficulté, les femmes victimes de violence conjugale, les femmes victimes d'agression sexuelle également.

1847   Les services que nous leur offrons, ce sont de l'aide, de l'écoute, du référencement, de l'accompagnement avec des intervenantes sourdes également.

1848   Donc, elles sont issues de la même communauté, de la même culture et elles utilisent la langue des signes québécoise pour l'American Sign Language, tout comme nos membres.

1849   Maintenant, concernant le Centre d'aide des femmes Sourdes de Québec, elles offrent des services également pour les femmes sourdes.

1850   En fait, elles offrent de (inaudible) pour les femmes afin de prendre le pouvoir sur leur vie en leur offrant de la formation, des ateliers, des conférences de l'accompagnement, de l'aide, de l'écoute également.

1851   Les intervenantes du Centre des femmes Sourdes de Québec sont également sourdes afin de comprendre la réalité de leurs membres.

1852   La Maison des Femmes Sourdes de Montréal ainsi que le Centre d'aide des femmes Sourdes de Québec, travaillons avec les femmes sourdes dans le besoin. Et comme les employées sont sourdes également, nous croyons utile l'utilisation du service relai vidéo.

1853   Souvent, nous travaillons en collaboration avec des organismes de personnes entendantes. Donc, nous devons être en relation presque quotidiennement avec eux.

1854   Et, avec un service relais vidéo, cela pourrait permettre un certain confort afin de communiquer directement avec ces gens.

1855   De plus, les femmes sourdes qui viennent à notre organisme, la langue qu'ils utilisent prioritairement est la langue des signes ou l'American Sign Language et non le français ou anglais écrit.

1856   Donc, elles ont une certaine vulnérabilité avec... une certaine carence au niveau de l'écriture et de la lecture en langue française ou anglaise.

1857   Donc souvent, lorsque les femmes ont une certaine information à aller chercher, ou afin de comprendre un document, elles doivent venir à nos services pour avoir de l'aide avec tout ce qui est communications écrites en français ou en anglais.

1858   Donc, elles viennent chercher de l'aide à nos services pour les aider à comprendre la communication écrite.

1859   Je vais vous donner un exemple, si vous me permettez. Une femme sourde qui a un problème avec sa carte de crédit, donc, son compte Visa. Donc, elle vient nous voir à notre organisme, ce qui lui demande un certain courage, parce qu'elle peut avoir certaines difficultés financières.

1860   Donc, elle n'a pas vraiment d'intimité à venir chercher des services à notre organisme.

1861   Alors, elle vient nous voir. Elle dit : « Est-ce que c'est possible de téléphoner via le service relais Bell pour communiquer avec le centre de cartes de crédit Visa? » Donc, elle ouvre un peu sa vie privée à des gens qu'elle connaît un peu moins, ce qui lui demande un certain courage.

1862   Avec un service relais vidéo, elle pourrait faire ça à domicile de chez elle et contacter directement le service à la clientèle de la carte de crédit en question, sans nécessairement passer par notre organisme.

1863   Avec le service relais vidéo, pour elle, ce serait une communication naturelle, puisqu'elle utiliserait la langue des signes québécoise pour l'American Sign Language. Ça serait une communication directe, donc, une communication beaucoup plus accessible pour elle. Les obstacles seraient alors levés.

1864   Nous sommes convaincus qu'avec l'implantation de services relais vidéo, l'accessibilité serait totale. Il y aurait une grande influence sur leur vie et je crois que c'est un service qui est vraiment important et essentiel.

1865   Elles deviendraient beaucoup plus autonomes, elles auraient du pouvoir, enfin, sur leur vie. Ça serait des décisions qu'elles prendraient elles-mêmes et cela répondrait exactement à la mission de la Maison des Femmes Sourdes qui vise à rendre plus autonomes les femmes en difficulté.

1866   Avec l'utilisation d'un service vidéo, serait vraiment un outil adéquat pour elles afin de répondre à leurs besoins et de rendre leur vie beaucoup plus autonome. Elles seraient alors moins dépendantes d'un service autre afin de toujours essayer de comprendre la communication écrite en français ou en anglais et de faire des téléphones, des appels téléphoniques pour elles.

1867   Également, cela éviterait de... cela leur permettrait d'économiser du temps, parce qu'elles doivent se déplacer pour prendre un rendez-vous et venir à nos services. Et si elles vont dans des organismes de personnes entendantes, elles doivent également réserver un interprète. Donc, ça éviterait des frais de kilométrage et de transport pour l'interprète qui doit se rendre sur place.

1868   Donc, avec un service relais vidéo, comme c'est une communication directe, l'interprète serait déjà à un endroit. L'interprète n'aurait pas à se déplacer et ça éviterait des frais de déplacement et de temps pour la personne sourde et interprète. Donc, une économie.

1869   Nous sommes convaincus qu'avec la mise sur pied d'un service relais vidéo, cela changerait la vie de nos femmes sourdes.

1870   Nous sommes également conscients qu'il y a un manque d'interprète au niveau de la province du Québec. Par contre, il y a toujours des solutions, peu importe ce qui arrive dans la vie, il y a toujours des solutions aux embuches que nous rencontrons.

1871   Avec la création du service relais vidéo, je crois qu'il va y avoir une belle visibilité auprès de la population en générale.

1872   Donc, peut-être même que ça pourrait donner le goût à des gens à devenir interprète. Ça pourrait peut-être influencer certaines personnes et ça pourrait améliorer peut-être la profession.

1873   Donc, peut-être que ça va améliorer la formation, l'embauche d'interprètes, l'affichage de nouveaux postes. Donc, nous sommes conscients de tout cela.

1874   En conclusion, nous croyons fortement qu'il y a un besoin et que la mise sur pied d'un service relais vidéo influencera tout le monde, autant les organismes, autant les femmes sourdes, autant la clientèle et la population sourde en général.

1875   Alors, je vous remercie beaucoup de votre écoute.

1876   THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Vice-chairman Pentefountas will have some questions for you.

1877   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Alors merci, Monsieur le Président.

1878   Merci beaucoup, Madame Couture, d'avoir pris le temps d'être parmi nous via notre bureau de Montréal, veuillez saluer Monique pour nous en quittant, s'il vous plaît.

1879   Alors, si je comprends bien, ça serait fort utile, le service, parce que ça permettra à des organismes comme la Maison des Femmes Sourdes de Montréal de déplacer des ressources envers d'autres besoins. Parce que les femmes qui dépendent de votre maison vont être en mesure d'acquérir un niveau d'indépendance qui leur a été étrangère jusqu'à l'introduction du service.

1880   Et, vous avez certainement d'autres besoins qui vous préoccupent.

1881   We're not getting audio.

1882   O.K. Mais, j'aimerais ça...

1883   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : Des ajustements.

1884   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : J'aimerais ça entendre les réponses...

1885   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : Allez-y, Monsieur.

1886   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : O.K.

1887   Est-ce que vous êtes en mesure de nous dire ce que madame Couture est en train de signer?

1888   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : Oui, juste un instant.

1889   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : O.K.

1890   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : On est en train d'interpréter la question.

1891   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : O.K.

1892   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : Nous avons un petit décalage.

1893   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Voilà. On va être patient.

1894   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : Effectivement, comme je vous mentionnais durant ma présentation, le besoin est essentiel.

1895   Lorsque nous avons des commandites, de la recherche de commandites à faire, au lieu de le faire par appel téléphonique, nous pourrions le faire par service relais vidéo. Ça prendrait moins de temps, et ça serait plus accessible pour nous, étant donné qu'on aurait recours à notre langue naturelle.

1896   Alors, nous sommes capables, nous les intervenants, d'écrire le français ou l'anglais. Mais la langue des signes est notre langue naturelle. Elle est beaucoup plus accessible pour nous.

1897   Alors, c'est sûr qu'il y a toujours des besoins. Mais, je crois vous avoir pas mal tout dit concernant nos besoins.

1898   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Merci.

1899   Et quant à l'abonnement à un service internet, est-ce que ça touchera au caractère abordable du SRV?

1900   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : Le coût, nous sommes prêts à l'investir. Nous sommes prêts à nous adapter parce que nous avons des besoins.

1901   Nous avons déjà les bandes passantes haute vitesse. Nous utilisons déjà des logiciels tels que Skype ou ooVoo. Alors, imaginez si nous aurions le service relais vidéo également. C'est des besoins que nous avons et nous serions prêts à investir en conséquence.

1902   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Et, est-ce que la majorité de vos membres utilisent l'ASL ou le QSL... LSQ, pardon?

1903   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : La LSQ en très grande majorité. Mais nous avons quelques clientes qui utilisent l'American Sign Language également.

1904   L'American Sign Language, c'est une langue signée comme la LSQ, donc, le service relais vidéo est l'outil qui nous permettrait d'utiliser ces deux modes de langue-là.

1905   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Combien estimeriez-vous le pourcentage de votre clientèle qui ne parle couramment ni le français ni l'anglais?

1906   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : Nous n'avons pas des statistiques qui me permettent de vous répondre de façon adéquate et juste. Mais, selon notre estimation, je crois que nous sommes près de 85 p. cent, 85 p. cent de notre clientèle a des carences au niveau de l'écriture et de la lecture.

1907   Donc, elles passent par nous, les intervenantes, pour les aider à comprendre la teneur d'un texte en question.

1908   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Quatre-vingt-cinq p. cent, d'après votre expérience?

1909   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : Ah oui!

1910   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : C'est un chiffre...

1911   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : Tout à fait. C'est quand même considérable.

1912   C'est considérable, la majorité de notre clientèle ont des carences en français et en anglais auprès de notre organisme, notre clientèle.

1913   Je ne parle pas de la clientèle de d'autres organismes. Je parle uniquement de notre clientèle.

1914   Lorsque les clientes viennent nous voir à la Maison des Femmes Sourdes, ça correspond environ à 85 p. cent.

1915   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Bien, c'est un chiffre frappant, franchement.

1916   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : Effectivement. C'est considérable.

1917   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Merci beaucoup. Ça complète pour moi. Je ne sais pas...

1918   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : D'où la raison que nous offrons de l'accompagnement et que nous travaillons en collaboration avec d'autres organismes.

1919   Il faut aider les femmes, quelle que soit la façon pour leur permettre d'adapter leur niveau de compréhension. Donc, c'est assez lourd comme travail auprès des intervenantes.

1920   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Vous, vous êtes basés à Montréal?

1921   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : Oui, à Montréal.

1922   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Montréal étant une ville multiculturelle, multi ethnie. Est-ce que parmi les gens qui n'ont ni le français ni l'anglais comme langue maternelle, quelle est leur expérience auprès de votre maison et des langues de signes?

1923   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : Il y a des immigrantes qui immigrent au Canada et qui ne connaissent ni le français, ni l'anglais, ni la LSQ et ni l'American Sign Language. D'accord?

1924   Donc, c'est déjà arrivé qu'une personne parle le créole ou l'espagnol. Mais, le niveau de communication, ça va être plutôt de la gestuelle. Disons, on va utiliser la langue internationale des signes pour nous aider à communiquer avec cette clientèle-là.

1925   Mais, imaginez, pour ces clientèles-là, si pour nos Québécoises et nos Canadiennes, il y a un obstacle au niveau de la communication, imaginez pour nos immigrantes. C'est d'autant plus pire étant donné qu'ils n'ont pas accès ni au français ni à l'anglais.

1926   Donc, la dépendance envers nos intervenantes n'est pas de 100 p. cent, mais de 110 p. cent.

1927   Elles ne peuvent pas prendre de décision éclairée sur leur vie et elles ont un grand besoin, il y a une grande dépendance envers nous.

1928   Si nous avions le service relais vidéo, ça serait plus favorable pour apprendre la langue et les inciter à apprendre la langue pour pouvoir communiquer. Et ça enlèverait énormément de barrières.

1929   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Mais dans l'immédiat, cette clientèle ne serait pas en mesure d'en profiter du service, si j'ai bien compris? Non? O.K.

1930   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : Bien sûr, bien sûr que ça va les aider. Ça va être d'autant mieux. Bien sûr.

1931   Ça va les... comment dire? Quel exemple je pourrais vous donner?

1932   Les immigrantes, quand elles arrivent ici, apprennent la LSQ ou l'American Sign Language et même les deux. Donc, avec cet outil-là qui est le service relais vidéo, ça favoriserait le contact. Ça briserait l'isolement pour cette clientèle-là.

1933   Donc, elles s'intégreraient d'autant mieux à la communauté au lieu d'être à part et isolées.

1934   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Merci beaucoup, Madame Couture. Merci beaucoup d'avoir participé à notre audience aujourd'hui.

1935   Monsieur le Président?

1936   Mme COUTURE (interprétée) : Ça me fait plaisir.

1937   THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. I believe that concludes our questions. Enjoy the day.

1938   THE SECRETARY: I would now ask TELUS Communication Company to come to the presentation table.

--- Pause

1939   THE SECRETARY: Please introduce yourself and your colleagues, and you have 20 minutes. Thank you.

PRÉSENTATION

1940   MR. WOODHEAD: Thank you, Madam Secretary.

1941   Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. My name is Ted Woodhead, and I am Senior Vice-President, Federal Government and Regulatory Affairs, with TELUS.

1942   We are pleased to have the opportunity to talk to you today about the feasibility of establishing a Video Relay Service in Canada.

1943   To my immediate right is Eric Edora, Director, Regulatory Affairs. To my left is Andrea Mazerolle, Operations Manager, Operator Services. And to Eric's right is Isabelle Morneau, Senior Regulatory Advisor.

1944   At TELUS, we have the objective to put customers first in everything we do. Putting customers first includes making sure our products and services are accessible as possible to all of our customers.

1945   TELUS has always accepted its responsibilities to deliver accessible telecommunications to Canadians, and is proud of its historical record in this regard.

1946   Many years ago, TELUS recognized that VRS would mark an important opportunity for enhancing accessibility of telecommunication services by allowing deaf and speech-impaired Canadians to use telecommunications in their primary language, sign language.

1947   VRS would eliminate many of the difficulties these persons might experience when using traditional voice telephone service.

1948   Also as a telecommunications provider with significant experience in delivering traditional message relay and IP Relay services, TELUS wanted to investigate whether VRS would be a compatible offering with its other operator services.

1949   Therefore, we decided some years ago to undertake a VRS trial with customers in selected communities in Alberta and British Columbia. This trial would allow us to gather data regarding implementation, service delivery and customer response to VRS in Canada.

1950   TELUS and our trial partner, Sorenson Communications, conducted the 18-month VRS trial in Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton.

1951   Our trial included 306 customers in these cities, with TELUS installing video phones in residences, schools and some businesses. As a result, trial participants had access to VRS at their homes, at their businesses and in their schools.

1952   This trial was a success in that it demonstrated an overwhelming positive response for VRS from trial participants.

1953   In our survey responses, we heard that VRS allowed them, for example, to call friends and family without the delays associated with traditional relay services, to participate in work teleconferences in an interactive manner and to be able to make calls to set up arrangements such as health care appointments, travel or other personal engagements.

1954   These are conveniences that are taken for granted by non-hard of hearing people. However, for many of our trial participants, it marked the first time that they were able to experience these same daily conveniences.

1955   Most importantly, trial participants told us that VRS finally freed them from the limitations of text communications and allowed them to conduct their conversations in their primary language.

1956   Finally, they could use telecommunications in a manner where they could convey their tone, emotions and feelings in their own voice.

1957   Because of this trial and the customer response to the service, TELUS strongly supports the implementation of VRS in Canada.

1958   Andrea?

1959   MS MAZEROLLE: Thank you.

1960   We are confident that the results from our VRS trial give the Commission a sense of the significant pent-up demand for VRS amongst the deaf and hard of hearing community in Canada.

1961   We have reviewed the submissions filed by the interested parties to these proceedings as well as the numerous consumer comments received by the Commission. We are certainly not surprised at the strong support for the establishment of VRS in Canada. This is completely consistent with what we learned from our trial.

1962   Of course, the reason that we are at this proceeding is because we recognize that implementation of VRS comes with some special considerations.

1963   Our trial was made possible from a $3.2 million spend from TELUS' deferral account dedicated to accessibility of telecommunications products and services, and initially we had thoughts to potentially offer the service directly in the future.

1964   However, it became quickly apparent that VRS does not fit within TELUS' operator services portfolio.

1965   Provision of VRS requires specialized skills and a deep understanding of the deaf culture. The single most important competency and the most expensive component of the service is the sign language interpretation that allows a deaf person to converse in sign language to another person who does not sign.

1966   These are skills vastly different from those required to provide traditional Message Relay Services such as TTY Relay and IP Relay. This is why TELUS strong believes that the CRTC should not require any specific telecommunication service provider to provide VRS because most lack these skills.

1967   Companies that offer VRS in other countries are specialized VRS providers that have developed competencies in delivering the service. Notably, in the U.S., where VRS is offered 24/7, not a single VRS provider is a TSP.

1968   TELUS anticipates that the Canadian experience would be similar, where VRS would be provided by a specialized VRS provider, which provider does not have to be a TSP.

1969   TELUS does not support using the current funding model for text message relay services where the cost of the services are recovered from a per telephone line tariff for VRS. We also observed that many of the parties representing the deaf and hard of hearing community do not support such a model.

1970   Our main opposition stems from the fact that it assumes that VRS is obtained through a local exchange line, when it is a video connection over the internet. In fact, a local telephone is unnecessary for a customer to obtain VRS.

1971   In addition, the current traditional relay services tariff is required to maintain those services, which must still be offered in the marketplace. A considerable number of customers would continue to rely on traditional relay and IP Relay, even if VRS were available.

1972   Eric.

1973   MR. EDORA: We recognize that the implementation and ongoing provision of VRS will pose significant costs, though the exact amount of those costs remain largely unknown.

1974   On the record of this proceeding, the Commission received cost estimates from two different sources. The Mission VRS feasibility study assumed approximately 15,000 potential users in Canada, an average usage of 37 minutes per month per user, and a per minute VRS rate of $4.30. At the fully operational phase, Mission estimates annual VRS costs of $32 million.

1975   On the other hand, Sorenson assumed 25,000 VRS potential users, with an average usage of 60 minutes per month per user, and per minute relay rates set at $5.94, declining over time to $5.53. These assumptions result in annual VRS costs at a fully operational stage at over $103 million.

1976   These two estimates vary widely. This indicates that there are significant variables that are still uncertain.

1977   TELUS is of the view that the Commission has to ensure that VRS is provisioned in an efficient manner, while also preserving the integrity of the future VRS fund. In other words, we recommend the Commission use a competitive procurement process that results in selecting a service provider that meets defined service characteristics at the lowest possible costs.

1978   Therefore, we propose that the CRTC, in its determinations in this proceeding, direct that VRS be implemented by first employing a three-year phase-in implementation period.

1979   For this phase-in period, a single provider would be chosen after an RFP process. The RFP would be conducted based on specific service parameters, including hours of operation, quality of service standards such as interpreter requirements and call response times, and equal availability of ASL and LSQ interpretation.

1980   We also agree that VRS should support inter-operability so that VRS can be supported across various devices. The record of this proceeding should provide the Commission with suitable evidence upon which to make these determinations.

1981   Responses to the RFP would then set out proposed rates for per minute relay compensation and a winner then selected.

1982   We also propose that the CRTC undertake a review of VRS near the end of the first three-year -- I'm sorry, of the three-year phase-in period. As part of this review, the VRS provider would be asked to file a detailed report documenting user statistics and costs.

1983   These data would be used by the Commission to set a VRS per minute compensation rate for the full scale 24/7 VRS implementation to be implemented at the end of the three-year initial period. That full implementation would also be subject to an RFP process.

1984   TELUS agrees with the general sentiment of many parties, including most of the advocacy groups, that VRS should be funded through a national fund managed by an independent entity. TSPs, including wire line, wireless and internet service providers, would contribute to the fund based on a set percentage of their revenues.

1985   THE SECRETARY: I'm sorry. Can you just slow down a little bit for the interpreters?

1986   Thank you.

1987   MR. EDORA: Thank you. I will.

1988   Therefore, the obligatory role of the TSPs in Canada for VRS is to contribute to the service funding, but not to offer the VRS service themselves.

1989   As part of its determinations here, the CRTC should direct a CISC committee to set up a consortium dedicated to VRS funding and administration similar to the consortium for the national contribution fund.

1990   This CISC committee could also design the RFP for the three-year implementation period based on specific service parameters set out by the CRTC. Once the consortium is running, it can immediately undertake the RFP process and select the VRS provider for the first three years.

1991   Isabelle.

1992   MME MORNEAU : Merci, Eric.

1993   Considérant le nombre limité d'interprètes en langages signés, TELUS est d'accord avec le fait que toute introduction du service de relais vidéo (SRV) soit basée sur un model fondé sur l'offre. Par conséquent, durant cette période d'introduction progressive de trois ans, le SRV serait offert sur une base limitée, en fonction d'un horaire restreint. Il est aussi nécessaire que le service de relais vidéo procure un accès équivalent pour les personnes communiquant soit en ASL ou en LSQ.

1994   Toutefois, le nombre limité d'interprètes soulève une question qui requiert une sérieuse analyse. La disponibilité des interprètes en langage des signes est une situation qui a été soulevée par plusieurs parties représentant les communautés de personnes sourdes et malentendantes. Il appert qu'une introduction du service de relais vidéo aura un impact sur la disponibilité des interprètes au niveau du travail d'interprétation dans la communauté.

1995   Nous comprenons, sur la base des commentaires reçus, que la situation est critique et requiert d'être soigneusement considérée, et ce, pour les deux langues signées. Nous croyons qu'une approche de mise en oeuvre progressive du SRV permettra de tenir compte de la quantité disponible d'interprètes en langages signés.

1996   Le rapport que le fournisseur de SRV devra déposer pendant la période d'introduction progressive pourrait indiquer tout type de problèmes rencontrés à différentes étapes de l'introduction concernant la disponibilité des interprètes en langages signés.

1997   De plus, si de tels problèmes sont identifiés durant la période initiale, ceci pourrait être apporté à l'attention du CRTC, qui, en retour, pourrait instaurer les ajustements nécessaires reliés à la disponibilité du SRV de manière à atténuer toute pénurie d'interprètes.

1998   TELUS a également la conviction que le SRV présente une formidable opportunité pour renforcer la capacité actuelle au niveau des compétences en interprétariat au Canada. Nous croyons qu'un SRV canadien fera en sorte que la vocation sera plus attrayante, simplement parce que les interprètes vont anticiper des perspectives d'emploi qui seront plus stables, enrichissantes et lucratives. Au fur et à mesure que la demande d'interprètes va croitre, les institutions d'enseignement deviendront motivées à instaurer de nouveaux programmes de formation d'interprètes ou à améliorer leurs programmes de formation existants.

1999   Le programme d'introduction progressive de trois ans laissera suffisamment de temps pour que le marché réagisse et se développe potentiellement vers une offre du SRV au Canada, 24 heures sur 24, 7 jours sur 7.

2000   En outre, au fur et à mesure que la quantité totale d'interprètes augmentera, cela augmentera le nombre d'interprètes disponibles pour offrir des services d'interprétation dans le cadre du SRV et directement dans les communautés.

2001   TELUS est d'avis qu'un plan de mise en oeuvre soigneusement élaboré jouera un rôle central dans la résolution des problèmes résultant de la quantité limitée des interprètes en langages signés.

2002   MR. WOODHEAD: TELUS is thankful for the opportunity to add our voice to the important issues under consideration in this proceeding. Our proposal tries to bring solutions to the Commission so that VRS can be implemented relatively quickly and without disruption to the interpreter needs of the general community.

2003   There's something of a balancing act in that.

2004   We also believe that we have brought forward a realistic approach so that a 24/7 VRS service can be made available in Canada with some time.

2005   With that, we welcome any questions you may have.

2006   THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Very thoughtful presentation.

2007   I have a number of questions, so I know these questions -- and so will my colleagues. And then we'll try to have lunch, so I'll try to be succinct with the questions, and if you're succinct with the answers, we'll get to lunch faster and get clarity, too, at the same time.

2008   Why is a bilingual service -- you pointed out -- it's in paragraph 10 of your written submission. Why do you think a bilingual service is unattainable?

--- Pause

2009   MR. EDORA: Thank you for the question.

2010   The VRS service that we're -- that we are in favour of is ASL to English, LSQ to French. I believe the reference at paragraph 10 is to a translation service where a customer would, for example, sign in ASL and then the interpreter would then translate that into French for a French hearing customer.

2011   That's not a service that we are advocating, though it can be investigated in the future.

2012   Our issue is that, with sign language interpretation, our understanding is the skill is normally ASL to English, that type of translation, LSQ to French.

2013   If it's ASL to French, that is, we understand, a very different interpretation type of skill and one where if, for example, there was a lack of LSQ interpreters for LSQ to French, we doubt that there would be a significant base of interpreters for that type of skill, the bilingual translation skill.

2014   THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Thank you.

2015   Regarding your views on funding, just in your presentation here to try to work those, you suggest that everyone should contribute, wire line, wireless, internet, for this three-year period based on a set percentage of revenues.

2016   How large do you think that initial fund should be? Because you're suggesting we won't really know the cost until after three years when we can set a rate.

2017   So if we're going to set up a fund, as you suggest, for these initial three years, how much money should be in that fund?

2018   MR. WOODHEAD: Let me take a crack at that.

2019   I think what you want to do -- where you're going to get the best sense of what the service is going to cost is out of a response to an RFP where the prospective provider would -- where I think everyone agrees the largest chunk of the cost -- and I'll try and slow down. I apologize to the interpreters.

2020   Where the largest chunk of the cost is going to be for the actual interpretation costs itself. And I think that the best source for that would be as the -- as you got -- as you went through the RFP process and saw the responses.

2021   So once you have that in hand where you're satisfied or some other consortium or body is satisfied that they have received the best possible service at the most economical price, then I think you would know what your sort of funding envelope day one would be. And that may be at some point 18 months out from your decision, two years. I'm not exactly sure.

2022   THE CHAIRPERSON: Sure, okay. I understand now.

2023   So maybe let's take it right back to the beginning. So you -- and I'll just tell you what my understanding is from what you've said and then you can say yes, no, you mean this.

2024   The CISC committee strikes a consortium similar to the national contribution fund. For the record and for those who aren't familiar with what that consortium might look like, what would that consortium be formed of?

2025   MR. WOODHEAD: Okay. So I'm -- I obviously went through the process years ago setting up what, at the time, was called the Canadian Portable Contribution Consortium.

2026   For those who aren't familiar with the process, the CRTC has something of a unique structure called the Canadian Interconnection Steering Committee. And this -- the CRTC is very familiar with this process. It invented it. It's unique, perhaps, in the world.

2027   It was implemented after 1997 to put in place local competition.

2028   So that group brings together -- it's open to the public, but it brings together all of the various stakeholders from the industry and other groups that are interested in particular topics, and it attempts to resolve -- not policy issues; that's your domain. But once you have established a sort of direction, how do we get this done. How do we implement it? And it draws on a broader pool of resources.

2029   In my opinion, and it's TELUS' submission that, in this particular service, it requires skill sets, frankly, that the industry does not necessarily have and it has sensitivities to it. And I've been listening carefully to the other stakeholders since -- over yesterday and this morning.

2030   And I think it's pretty apparent that there are some interesting views that are going to need to be taken into account in developing how we're going to implement the service.

2031   So that is what I was suggesting, and that the Commission, for example -- sorry, Mr. Chair, but what I was suggesting was that that would occur and we would also establish something like the Canadian VRS consortium that would have various stakeholder members. The TSPs who obviously fund the service would want to be represented. I think consumer groups. And I think other stakeholders from the deaf and hard of hearing community would want to be represented.

2032   And they would oversee the service and the collection of funds and remission of those funds to whomever the ultimate service provider would be for the service in Canada.

2033   THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. And so that consortium would then issue an RFP, and the successful bidder would then have set a rate for those three years. And that money would be provided by, is your suggestion, across the board wire line, wireless --

2034   MR. WOODHEAD: All TSPs.

2035   THE CHAIRPERSON: All TSPs?

2036   MR. WOODHEAD: In my view, that's -- the important distinction there -- and there may be others who say that internet providers should not. TELUS is a large internet provider. But I'm suggesting -- and I'll tell you, again, from my perspective, this is a -- I'm making the word up, but it's in the order of a social obligation.

2037   This is a service that is fundamentally consistent with the values of the way the industry has been regulated and this country operates. I think we've heard passionate advocates for the fact that this service is valuable. I think it has many, many benefits.

2038   And as a result, I believe, to use the old parlance, that it should be supported by the general body of subscribers, but in this case, by the industry as a whole. That will keep the costs relatively down, but will ensure that there is a broad base for funding of this project and this initiative and with a source of funding going forward for augmentations to it in some of the things that we've heard today, including 24/7 provision and other types of enhancements to the service.

2039   THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. So that would be set as a fixed percentage.

2040   Would that -- you're suggesting that be a tariff or is there any reason why the industry just could not make that contribution and not pass it along to subscribers?

2041   MR. WOODHEAD: Under the -- under the portable contribution regime -- I mean, if I had to sort of walk you through how -- I think you would direct everyone to become a member of that consortium. You would set based on industry revenues, so that's the denominator, if I want to put it that way, the total pool of revenues. And the cost as per the RFP per year -- and that can be trued up every year -- would be the numerator and then you'd spread it out across the various participants based on their total revenues within those categories.

2042   THE CHAIRPERSON: Right. And would they pass that along to their subscribers?

2043   MR. WOODHEAD: Well, personally, I'm not a big fan of surcharges on bills, and I believe -- and I'm casting my mind back again -- that that was, in fact, disallowed for contribution.

2044   But there's no question that the general body of subscribers would -- that money would be recovered from the general body of subscribers. That's virtually everyone who subscribes to a phone service. That something in the rate would recover that fee.

2045   THE CHAIRPERSON: And you suggested in your written presentation that that rate couldn't be too onerous. I just wanted to get your thoughts on -- or rate or that impact as you're describing it.

2046   Now, yesterday, I think it was, the Ontario Association mentioned 20 cents per month. Is that too onerous, or --

2047   MR. WOODHEAD: Well, as I say, I'm --

2048   THE CHAIRPERSON: -- what are we talking about, five cents, 20?

2049   MR. WOODHEAD: -- not advocating a surcharge, so --

2050   THE CHAIRPERSON: I know, but at the end -- but you were suggesting that sooner or later that would flow through.

2051   MR. WOODHEAD: Yeah, it will. It will flow through. I'm not going to suggest it wouldn't.

2052   THE CHAIRPERSON: Right.

2053   MR. WOODHEAD: So the reason -- I'm not trying to avoid the question.

2054   We've seen orders of magnitude in the two -- one costing model from the Mission study, I think, came in at $32 million. The -- another came -- from Sorenson came in at 100 million.

2055   I'm not able to tell you with any specificity, but -- what per subscriber that might role out to, but what I can tell you with certainty is if the -- you broaden the base of the people who are going to pay it, the amount will come down relatively, and that will ultimately be less onerous on any subscriber who all will be subsidizing the provision of the service.

2056   THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes. That makes sense.

2057   Okay. Just on another point, over the last, I think, 2008 to 2012, the TSPs have collected about $75 million more than what it costs to provide MRS. Why -- shouldn't -- put it this way. Why is that happening, for starters?

2058   MR. WOODHEAD: Well, I'm going to pass this off to Andrea in a second here.

2059   But in that time -- this was raised back a ways, and since that time, I -- the IP Relay service has also been launched, and that's been absorbed into this.

2060   I note that, you know, there was a Commission letter of 15 July, 2013 where it shows the splits of revenues and expenditures. And these -- the gap has come down considerably.

2061   I will also say, and it relates to something that some of the other stakeholders have raised, is that we have no intention of not providing MRS. The number of MRS users is falling. The costs are relatively fixed because you have stand ready costs to service customers.

2062   I don't -- I see that -- the MRS use going down over time, particularly with the rise of VRS and replacement of VRS, but there will always be customers.

2063   And I can't imagine -- I mean, it would be your decision, obviously, but I cannot imagine a scenario where we were going to disenfranchise customers who did not use ASL or LSQ and we wouldn't stand ready to serve them with a text-based service.

2064   So you know, to the extent that, in the past, there may have been healthy -- a surplus there, it's been eaten up by IP Relay and it is increasingly being eroded by dropping revenues from MRS and IP Relay. And that will be exacerbated by this service.

2065   But Andrea --

2066   THE CHAIRPERSON: Sure. I mean, part of what I'm trying to get -- I mean, I don't think anybody's suggesting that it's not something that wants to be done any more. But if VRS comes through, it would seem likely -- not necessarily so, but it would seem likely that MRS usage demand would lessen. And as people more -- people who are becoming hard of hearing are more technologically savvy, they will be less dependent on it than they used to be.

2067   People will still be dependent on it, as we've heard plenty of that. I'm talking about sort of managing the costs there, the overall impact on the subscriber that if the revenue being collected to operate MRS is more than is required, perhaps we might adjust that -- it would be something we would look at adjusting once VRS came in and then the overall impact would be apportioned appropriate to the needs of the deaf and hard of hearing communities.

2068   MS MAZEROLLE: So there's a couple of things with that.

2069   So as far as our revenue, it's not actually tied to our traffic volumes. The local access line tariff --

2070   THE CHAIRPERSON: Sorry. Can you move a little closer to the mic?

2071   MS MAZEROLLE: Is that better? No?

2072   THE CHAIRPERSON: There; that's better.

2073   MS MAZEROLLE: Okay, sorry.

2074   Our local access line, our revenue tariff, it's decreasing year over year, as you mentioned, as people move to different technologies. They're getting rid of their home phone and land line. But that does not directly tie into our number of calls that we get per year.

2075   And yes, we are seeing traditional relay traffic decrease year over year as people do migrate to those different technologies. So we do expect to see some substitution if we were to implement VRS.

2076   In our trial, we did see some impact when we did launch our trial to our traditional relay services, but it was an interesting fact that when we actually surveyed our participants in the trial, we specifically asked the question, "Do you still use traditional Message Relay Services?"

2077   And the response was that 37 percent of the trial participants did.

2078   Now, would that go away with the permanent implementation of VRS? That's a question. But we do know that there are people in the community that will continue to rely on those services.

2079   The costs that you referenced, Commissioner, those are fixed costs. We basically staff for coverage.

2080   We are a 24/7, 365 operation, and so whether we get one call in or we get 100 calls in, we still have to make sure that we have appropriate numbers of staff to answer those calls.

2081   THE CHAIRPERSON: Understood.

2082   Do you think it would be appropriate going forward if VRS was approved, though, to review the MRS tariff?

2083   MR. WOODHEAD: I mean, it's open to you to do that at any time.

2084   MS MAZEROLLE: Yeah.

2085   MR. WOODHEAD: As I say, I think to the extent that someone has a concern that there's --

2086   THE CHAIRPERSON: I didn't ask you if you thought we could do it. I asked you if you thought yes or no.

2087   MR. WOODHEAD: Yeah, you could do that.

2088   THE CHAIRPERSON: Do you think it would be appropriate?

2089   MR. WOODHEAD: Well, I'm saying I don't think it's necessary, I guess, because --

2090   THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

2091   MR. WOODHEAD: -- I believe that the costs are fixed, usage is going down. They will meet at a point somewhere soon.

2092   THE CHAIRPERSON: Thanks.

2093   Why -- it's consistent among the carriers that they say VRS is outside of their field of expertise. Why couldn't you just sub-contract it similar to the way you did with the trial, or along the lines of that?

2094   MR. WOODHEAD: We could. That was actually permitted initially in the United States, and then it was that you were not allowed to sub-contract. And that is why there are, in fact, no more telephone companies in the United States actually offering the service, point one.

2095   Point two, this service is clearly outside of our expertise. It requires interpretation skills and people with skills that we don't normally have as opposed to MRS and IP Relay, which were text-based alpha numeric services, which telephone companies are very commonly aware of and have expertise in.

2096   My third point would be as to why would you want to necessarily place an intermediary who, frankly, is offering little value when there are specific VRS providers who have scale in this particular service, who have efficiencies in delivering this particular service, experience?

2097   That's really my answer.

2098   THE CHAIRPERSON: What rate do you think VRS users should be charged, or consumers?

2099   MR. WOODHEAD: We're -- the actual users of the service?

2100   THE CHAIRPERSON: Yeah.

2101   MR. WOODHEAD: I -- we're suggesting there is no explicit charge to them, that it's funded -- this is a service that is -- would be funded by the general body of subscribers. The larger the base of people who implicitly are subsidizing this, the more affordable it becomes for everyone.

2102   THE CHAIRPERSON: So there would be no charge to the deaf.

2103   MR. WOODHEAD: No.

2104   MR. EDORA: No charge for the VRS service. The customer would still be responsible to pay for the internet connection for the --

2105   MR. WOODHEAD: Yes.

2106   MR. EDORA: -- to connect to the VRS service, but the VRS service itself will have no surcharge.

2107   THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Hands in the air behind you. Applause.

2108   Could you give us some idea of what the primary technical challenges would be in making VRS available through wireless and mobile as opposed to just wire line?

2109   Maybe you -- what I'm looking for are the barriers regarding band width, speeds, data caps, that sort of thing.

2110   MR. WOODHEAD: Sure. I'll be perfectly honest with you. When we were discussing this and looking at this internally -- and I'll tell you, I'm not actually -- this is really my personal thing. And it's not that I don't think that we can't design an RFP and certainly, you know, providers in the United States -- certainly the provider we used supports and is working on applications that support iOS and Android applications.

2111   I think that's terrific, and I think that we should be headed in that direction, too, because of the pervasiveness of these devices in everybody's lives.

2112   And what my one concern is, I'll tell you, is that on the -- what's called the macro wireless network, so when you're walking around using your data on your device, at some point in the network there will be congestion at some point. And I believe that will impact with a live streaming service quality, and I am very concerned about a situation like that where there wasn't a work-around for 911.

2113   I do not want to be personally -- I just think that we need to go eyes wide open into that one and have a solution.

2114   And we -- Andrea and the Sorenson folks, to some extent, worked around this with the 10-digit numbers.

2115   You know, one of the people this morning mentioned like it's not because we don't have very, very good wireless networks and internet services in this country, but these are not, you know, my grandmother's telephone line. It's not 59 carrier grade.

2116   They're best effort services, and there will be instances where you get congestion in these networks. And that's my one cautionary note.

2117   MS MAZEROLLE: The only thing that I would add to that is that is why we specifically requested in our trial that participants did not give up their TTY and land line because we did not know with an internet connection and a new partner in this service the risk in terms of placing an emergency call and the potential to lose that call.

2118   THE CHAIRPERSON: So would text 911 be a reasonable redundancy on that? If you had failure on the -- a mobile VRS, you could -- assuming your mobile device would have a texting capacity?

2119   MR. EDORA: Absolutely. The text to 911 service is designed so it actually integrates all of the functionality of the existing 911 service that you get off your voice connection, so it has the automatic location identification and the automatic number identification.

2120   So in fact, the text to 911 service might actually be the preferred mode of access because it is a fundamentally more reliable service than calling in to the intermediary VRS operator for 911 services.

2121   THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

2122   MR. WOODHEAD: Mr. Chairman, I wanted to make sure I fully answered your question as well in terms of data caps.

2123   I don't actually see that as an issue. I know some people have raised them.

2124   Ours, I believe, start at around 100 gigs. I believe that the data caps and the way that data caps are going generally, anyway, that that's a problem searching for a solution. But it -- I don't think it's particularly an issue.

2125   THE CHAIRPERSON: What I took from what you said was that there isn't really any specific technical challenge other than congestion which people could face, which is a risk with all mobile devices.

2126   MR. WOODHEAD: That's right.

2127   THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thanks.

2128   When you did the trial and you expanded to 24/7 and then retracted it to five -- I think it was 5:00 a.m. to midnight, what sort of consumer reaction did you get?

2129   MR. WOODHEAD: Andrea will answer that.

2130   MS MAZEROLLE: We got very little reaction or response to it. We made sure that we did communicate the revised hours and the limited hours, but we did not get much of a response either way.

2131   THE CHAIRPERSON: So now, if this wasn't initially offered on a 24/7 basis for whatever reasons, how would that work across time zones?

2132   Like if it was a 5:00 a.m. to midnight, when it starts at 5:00 a.m. in Newfoundland, it's four and a half hours different than it is in Vancouver, right, so it's actually 12:30 a.m. in Vancouver. But then that person in Newfoundland, obviously, can't -- they stop at midnight and it's just 7:30 at night or something in Vancouver.

2133   How would that work? Would it be just one set time period across six time zones, or would it hop across different time zones?

2134   If somebody in Newfoundland wanted to phone their brother in Fort McMurray, would they just have to adjust, or what?

2135   MS MAZEROLLE: There are several different options, and depending on what sort of hours of operation, you know, we were looking to implement, you could make either technical adjustments to that, let's say, someone in the east would not be able to reach the video service at a certain time. You know, messages could be displayed and that sort of thing. Or else you could extend your windows so that it would -- it was offered at the same time across Canada.

2136   What I'm saying is that, you know, the technology is available today to limit that access, so you could do it by time zone. But because the service is reliant on interpreters, it wouldn't matter about the -- I was going to say it wouldn't matter about the call coming in.

2137   So if I'm a deaf person and I'm calling from my time zone, it wouldn't matter that I'm calling someone in a different time zone because I'm reaching them during my time.

2138   I'm not sure if that makes sense.

2139   THE CHAIRPERSON: Yeah, that's a little bit what I was trying to get at.

2140   The Alberta Association yesterday mentioned that they thought there should be interpreter centres located across the country rather than in -- just in -- so obviously in terms of hours of access and that sort of stuff.

2141   Did you have any view on that, or was that something that you would be happy leaving to the consortium to figure out?

2142   MS MAZEROLLE: I would be happy to leave that to consortium, yes.

2143   THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

2144   MS MAZEROLLE: But it is an option. I think --

2145   THE CHAIRPERSON: There's lots of stuff in this hearing that everybody would be happy leaving to somebody else to sort out.

2146   MS MAZEROLLE: Yeah. But --

2147   MR. WOODHEAD: If I could, what --

2148   THE CHAIRPERSON: And I don't blame anybody for that. It's a complex issue.

2149   MR. WOODHEAD: Yeah, yeah. But I think that actually can be figured out, and there may be some technical solutions to doing that.

2150   But as well, I mean, I think this would be, you know, an element of that RFP as to what -- you know, what coverage we're looking for. And you know, are there -- is there any kind of redundancy in the call centre resources by time zone or whatever. And that can make your costs go up and down, but ultimately, whatever you decide in terms of the service description, you know, we'll all work to that.

2151   THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. We talked about 911.

2152   Quality of service maintenance. Did you -- what -- were -- what were the challenges, if any, that you experienced during the trial in terms of maintenance of quality of service?

2153   MS MAZEROLLE: So just --

2154   THE CHAIRPERSON: And what would you foresee them to be?

2155   MS MAZEROLLE: You're talking specifically about quality of service overall?

2156   THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

2157   MS MAZEROLLE: Okay. Our experience with Sorenson as our partner -- so there are several different areas that you can look at in terms of quality of service. So one of them would be, let's say, speed of answering.

2158   I believe it was mentioned that in the U.S. the speed of answer standardization is 80 percent of the calls are answered in two minutes, or 120 seconds.

2159   Sorenson over-delivered on that speed of answer throughout the trial. And the impact to the customer is reduced wait time, so you have fewer abandoned calls.

2160   We, you know, have heard during the proceedings that people -- some people were willing to wait quite a while, and I think 10 minutes was mentioned. Others are not.

2161   People are individuals. If they have an important call to make, they might find another means. So that's one definite measurement.

2162   As far as the quality of interpreting, again, we don't have an insight into actually how to evaluate that, but we did have discussions and as part of the contractual obligation was the existing training programs with the interpreters, how often were they coached, all those sort of programs, to ensure that the quality of interpretation was there.

2163   And I think that was about it as far as quality of service standards.

2164   And you know -- and we can get into the technical part as far as the IP connectivity, availability of service, that sort of thing as well.

2165   THE CHAIRPERSON: How did -- how were the privacy and confidentiality standards established for MRS, and do you see that VRS would have any different issues?

2166   MS MAZEROLLE: The quality of service standards for our relay services, our agents and our managers are -- throughout their training process, the confidentiality of relay calls is emphasized and all our agents are required to sign confidentiality agreements in regards to that. So they're well aware of that.

2167   I think in terms of VRS, you need to extend the strictest confidence of the calls because these are people's conversations. It's not to be, you know, public knowledge.

2168   They're sharing credit card information. They're talking to their doctor. They're talking to their bank.

2169   And I think the privacy issue with VRS is the fact that it is a visual language, and so if you've had a chance to visit a VRS centre, the screens are quite large so that the video can be seen clearly. And you need to make sure that there are privacy screens or that people walking by cannot see the conversation.

2170   So I think that's a consideration with VRS that you do not see in traditional relay services.

2171   THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I saw that at the trial centre in Calgary.

2172   MS MAZEROLLE: Yes.

2173   THE CHAIRPERSON: And it was one of those issues.

2174   Thank you. A couple more questions.

2175   In the U.S., the FCC is moving to rationalize rates through a tiered system, moving lower -- this is lowering rates from roughly $6 a minute to roughly $3.40 a minute.

2176   Do you think -- do you have a view on whether the $3.40 a minute rate might be roughly what we'd be looking at here?

2177   MR. WOODHEAD: I think it's -- you know, the -- depending on what you end up with in the service description, if you go 24/7 or you go some more limited period of time to start, that could have an impact as to whether that's a reasonable proxy.

2178   I think if it was a like for like service that we were thinking about, I think that's probably a place just in terms of efficiency that, you know, the U.S. government, as I understand it, is going to use its purchasing heft for its own VRS needs for its own employees, et cetera, to use its procurement heft to drive the cost down.

2179   I mean, is it necessarily to a penny within where, you know, if we all spent the next two years, you know, poring through costing studies that we might come up with a slightly different answer?

2180   THE CHAIRPERSON: That's right.

2181   MR. WOODHEAD: No. But for the sake of everyone's sanity, maybe that's a reasonable proxy given the events that are going on.

2182   I mean, if we're reasonably confident -- and I know there were issues with some of those rates in the early going. But I think the FCC is grappling that head on.

2183   And you know, it may be a reasonable proxy.

2184   THE CHAIRPERSON: Just one thing -- and I think this is probably one of the issues that you're looking at -- that your suggestion of having this trial period is about, that just trying to talk about the range that we're looking at in terms of conversation minutes here.

2185   I think Sorenson's submission assumes 60 conversation minutes per end user per month. Mission's is 37. And -- but in your trial, you had 109.

2186   That's a big range, between 37 and 109. Is there anything to take from that to assume that the trial might have been -- that the trial participants might have been somehow more enthusiastic than the population at large or anything or that we can -- is there anything you can say to us that might help us make a little sense of that range of numbers?

2187   And you can say no.

2188   MS MAZEROLLE: I won't.

2189   So -- and I think this goes back to our opening statement, and I think everyone has seen, you know, in the discussions over the last couple days the desire to have this service in Canada.

2190   And I think what we saw in the minutes during our trial really was that pent-up demand. It was the opportunity to reach out to people in a way they hadn't been able to do in Canada before.

2191   And we need to keep in mind the deaf community in Canada -- or for many of them. I won't say all of them. They have seen this technology in the U.S. for the past 10 years, so you can imagine the anticipation when TELUS came to -- in town halls and told them, "We are going to offer this service, but we can only do it for one year". That -- we were going in with a one-year trial.

2192   So not only did we say this is a trial. It has a start and an end date, and after that date, it would go away.

2193   So I think this is a very different situation in that they've seen it for a long time in the States. They wanted it in Canada. They knew it had a start and an end time.

2194   The communities and the advocacy groups that we met with fairly regularly throughout the trials, they communicated updates that we would give in the meetings as well. And I do believe that also sort of started conversations.

2195   So I think what we're seeing here is an early adoption, pent-up minutes, not something that you would see necessarily in a mature service that you see, let's say, in the U.S. But the 37 minutes, if you equate that to, let's say, calls per month, that's only six or seven calls per month.

2196   And I -- that just seems incredibly low. I think if you're calling your doctor, you're calling the schools, you know, just the day to day, it -- to me, it seems incredibly low.

2197   MR. WOODHEAD: And I think that what Andrea is saying there, at least intuitively to me, Commissioners, makes sense, that there's this pent-up demand aspect.

2198   But if I could just say one other thing. I mean, if we're collectively going to stand up for this service, you know, I don't think that we -- if it's -- if it is, in fact, 106 minutes or it's whatever it is, if it's that valued and successful in terms of the people that need it, I mean -- and we get the funding base broad enough to do this, I'm -- I think that, you know, you need to kind of stand up for the service and not worry that it's too successful.

2199   THE CHAIRPERSON: I just want to come for a second before I turn it over to my colleagues back to this issue earlier about where you're suggesting that the rates or whatever are passed along to consumers not be onerous.

2200   I do need, if I -- if you can, to get some idea of what you think would be the highest possible -- or the -- where's the line on "onerous" for you in terms of a per month impact on subscribers?

2201   Is it 20 cents, is it 50 cents, is it a dollar, is it two dollars, is it two cents?

2202   MR. WOODHEAD: Do you want -- sorry. I mean, we can try.

2203   THE CHAIRPERSON: Well, not so much in too much, but in terms of onerous.

2204   MR. WOODHEAD: Yeah, I get the point of it. I get your intent.

2205   The problem, as I said, it's dependent on many variables about which we really don't know the answers. And you know, what I think -- you know, put it another way.

2206   "Mr. Woodhead, what do you think is the line at which customers would become very irritated because you effectively have increased their rate over some period of time by 50 cents or whatever it is?"

2207   I'll take that back to my Ouija board and I'll --

2208   THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. I will turn it over to my colleagues, and then I think legal has an undertaking it's going to ask you for when we conclude our questions.

2209   Mr. Simpson.

2210   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Just cleaning up a few items, and as I was doing my reading this may have been asked.

2211   The first question I have is, with respect to, as your proposal suggests, that internet retail revenue be part of the contribution process, what is your position with respect to internet inter-carrier payments?

2212   MR. WOODHEAD: I think it would just be retail revenues. I think the inter-carrier payments, not that it's relevant to the -- I mean, it's -- off the top of my head, Commissioner Simpson, I don't think that would be included in the adjusted gross revenues.

2213   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Okay, thanks.

2214   We all learned a lot from the trial, and one of the things that you indicated, and I'm taking this statement in context to your position that this isn't really your cup of tea because it's really a personal service that relies on technology. It's not a technology service.

2215   It seemed to me and you actually stated it in your write-up on the report on the trials that the B.C. Video Relay Group was relied upon by both yourself and Sorenson at certain points to answer a lot of technical questions.

2216   And I'm curious what -- from that learning perspective you had on the trial how you see handling both customer care and technical issues going forward if this program is rolled out.

2217   MS MAZEROLLE: So to address your first point, I think we would be looking for another provider. We wouldn't be doing that ourselves.

2218   So it was a challenge, and the trial was -- it was a really, really good learning opportunity for TELUS to get a better understanding of what the challenges actually are.

2219   When the B.C. VRS committee came to us and said that a lot of the community were coming to them for specifically technical questions during the trial, we had assumed that -- we had set up two emails that we wanted those questions to come through, so we wanted that so that we could also track sort of the technical issues and keep a record of it, follow up and that sort of stuff.

2220   Given the closeness of the community and the ASL as the first language, we realized very quickly what a challenge it was for the participants in the trial to communicate with TELUS through email their technical challenges, so that was something we learned very quickly.

2221   And thankful -- we were truly thankful the support of the advocacy groups that we met with, the B.C. VRS, the Alberta Association of the Deaf and the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Society, because without their support, we wouldn't have been able to learn as much as we did and identify the challenges and, hopefully, we've gotten a lot better at that.

2222   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Just one final question.

2223   You had stated that -- in your -- both your written submission and I think in your oral that the inter-operability is important, but the use of multiple devices is somewhat of an unknown. And perhaps we didn't learn as much as we'd like to learn from a trial that used proprietary technology.

2224   But is there anything you can offer the Commission by way of understanding from your experience as to whether the use of multiple devices should be contemplated at the outset or a more proprietary closed system be used at the outset to ensure consistency of training and understanding of the use of the technology before we move on to other devices?

2225   MS MAZEROLLE: Well, I can -- thank you.

2226   I can speak to the challenge we had during the trial in terms of technology.

2227   Not early on, but during the trial, TELUS rolled out a new modem. Up until that time, customers had been using a D-Link modem and did not really see any sort of technical issues.

2228   We rolled out, in support of our optic TV program, a new modem from Actiontec. Now, what that did to the customer was it created a black screen when they tried to connect to the Video Relay Service.

2229   As you can imagine, a black screen video doesn't work so well.

2230   So as far as the complexity, in order to resolve that issue because, unfortunately, we could not roll back and provide the customers with the old modem, we had to engage Sorenson -- because they did have a proprietary codec or video code -- we had to engage the manufacturer of the modem, Actiontec, and we also had to engage our internal engineering resources to develop and get a fix in place.

2231   Once that fix was in place, we had to put into a lab and all the testing that goes along with rolling a new technology, so it was not a simple process.

2232   So I know this is a very long answer to your question, but when it comes to rolling out new technology, a new device, I think there are a lot of unknowns that you cannot necessarily anticipate.

2233   Some things will work, and other things won't. And it's when it doesn't work where you're going to run into a challenge because it's who owns the responsibility to fix the issue and what sort of leverage do you have with the manufacturers of that to resolve the issue.

2234   MR. WOODHEAD: If I could just add to that briefly, I mean, I was interested in seeing that -- and you should direct this question to the -- any of the providers of the actual service that come along after because if people -- while some appear to use proprietary technology, others as well -- it would appear to me to be developing applications to spread the use of it across iOS and Android and Blackberry and so on and so forth.

2235   That could also be written into or -- written into your RFP, and you know, if -- I think as with the rest of the world, that's the way it's going. You know, I think that's a legitimate question to ask and you'd want to have a good -- you know, have an answer provided that undertakes that.

2236   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Yeah, thank you.

2237   Just sort of on that theme, how are you handling the recovery of your costs as MMS moved into wireless?

2238   MR. WOODHEAD: As multi-media services?

2239   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Yeah. As they moved from a fixed device in the home to using a wireless device to send MMS. Is that something that's been on your mind?

2240   MR. WOODHEAD: Well, there's -- are you talking about MMS integrated with --

2241   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: MRS. MRS, message --

2242   MR. WOODHEAD: Oh, MRS. Sorry.

2243   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Yeah. Sorry. I probably said MMS. My apologies.

2244   MS MAZEROLLE: I'm sorry. Could you please repeat the question?

2245   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: How are you recovering your costs with respect to MRS being used over wireless devices?

2246   MS MAZEROLLE: Well, all of our costs are covered under the Local Access Line tariff, whether it's -- it doesn't -- it's not device dependent.

2247   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Okay. These clean-up questions are always fun because they're highly technical and the precisions make all of us cringe sometimes.

2248   This goes back to 911 and -- 911, and again, it's a technical question.

2249   Could existing 911 network support direct access to PSAPs and 911 call takers using VRS?

2250   MS MAZEROLLE: I just need to get a little bit of clarity there.

2251   So when you're referring to 911, are you talking about TELUS ability to support 911 calls to the PSAPs or the VRS provider supporting calls to the PSAPs?

2252   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: I think it's in the more global context of 911 access, you know, using VRS.

2253   MR. WOODHEAD: So maybe let me try and poke at that a little bit.

2254   So are you asking whether an end user on a VRS platform could make an end to end call with a public service answering point and emergency response centre currently?

2255   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Yeah. I presume that this question's coming from the fact that during the trial, you know, when 911 was not --

2256   MR. WOODHEAD: Right.

2257   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: -- part of the menu and from that trial, what -- is it possible but it was simply prohibited as part of the trial.

2258   MR. EDORA: I'll let Andrea speak to the -- how we worked 911 calls during the trial. But the -- from a practical perspective, a VRS user would not be able to make a direct 911 call because that connection to the Video Relay Services call centre is an internet connection; it's not a voice-placed 911 call.

2259   And so what you would have if VRS were to permit 911 calls is a caller calling in to the VRS centre saying, "I need 911 assistance" and then the operator would then have to find out where that person is and then contact -- using a back channel telephone number, contact a direct PSAP in that serving area.

2260   But perchance I can let Andrea speak to what happened during our trial.

2261   MS MAZEROLLE: So during the trial -- and we mentioned earlier today is the concern around technology. And we did not offer 911 during the trial for a couple of reasons.

2262   In order to support 911 or emergency access requests, you need to be able to retrieve customer data. To do that, you would have had to build databases and have the corresponding trial participant for that, and that's why we did not support that as well as, you know, the internet connection.

2263   And we did not want -- new vendor, new technology, we want to make sure before we went down that path.

2264   So what we did do, we did ask participants not to use VRS to call emergency services, but we knew that there was potential for people to request it anyway, so we wanted to make sure that our customers were taken care of and covered in the event that they used VRS to get emergency services.

2265   And so what we did is we worked with Sorenson to develop a process and we provisioned a 10-digit number that gave them direct access to our toll operators, who could then connect to emergency services for them.

2266   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Thank you. That was super.

2267   Same question with respect to intermediary issues with your zero dial operator. Does it work?

2268   MS MAZEROLLE: I'm sorry. I couldn't hear you.

2269   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Does your zero dial operator facility that you described also work with VOIP intermediates?

2270   MS MAZEROLLE: Yes.

2271   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Okay. And whose responsibility would it be to ensure VRS user information is current at all times for 911? Is it the customer, the intermediary; who?

2272   MS MAZEROLLE: It is the customer's responsibility to maintain that information.

2273   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: This goes back to the first question.

2274   Should a Canadian VRS offering be based on a common platform or should there be multiple platforms, or can there be multiple platforms in this VRS world?

2275   MR. WOODHEAD: Well, as we envisage it, because of the number of users, there would be one platform per se because you would have a provider that is meeting a certain service description for the various functionalities that you want however you're going to define them. And that would be your platform or egress into the provider. And it may have different functionalities associated with it, but there would only -- we don't see multiple providers in a market of this size.

2276   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: So from your standpoint from what you've learned, there's no benefit to a single platform or -- because there's always the opportunities versus the problems associated with each scenario.

2277   MR. WOODHEAD: I think the benefits of a single platform in a market of this size probably outweigh any negative effects.

2278   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Yeah. Okay. That's it for me. Thank you very much.

2279   THE CHAIRPERSON: Commissioner Shoan.

2280   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for being here.

2281   I'd like to commend TELUS for taking a leadership role with respect to this -- the pilot project. I found your final report very, very interesting.

2282   You mentioned a little bit earlier some of the hardware issues you had during the course of your trial. And earlier to that, there were also some allusions to some of the best practices you've learned.

2283   I wanted to give you one final opportunity to elaborate on some of your observations from the trial with respect to any other issues, software or otherwise, dropped calls, video pixelization, band width congestions just in order to ensure we have a fulsome record with respect to your experience in terms of conducting that trial.

2284   MS MAZEROLLE: And just to clarify, you're looking for specific technical issues or --

2285   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Any sort of your experience with respect to that trial, things that you discovered through the course of that trial that you think should be taken into consideration going forward.

2286   You mentioned, for example, the impact on the users when you changed hardware and there were some earlier comments with respect to concerns about congestion.

2287   But if there's anything else you'd like to get on the record, now's the time.

2288   MS MAZEROLLE: Okay. I think one of the things -- and we -- I think I said it before, and I'll say it again. We learned an incredible amount during this trial.

2289   And I think the key thing for any provider is it's one thing to know that ASL is another language or LSQ is another language, but it's quite another thing to understand and to have people who get that.

2290   And it took going into this trial for TELUS to see the challenges that the customers were having communicating in English to really get that.

2291   So what we took away was the absolute need for focus on communications and focus of support of the community, whether it's the installation of technology.

2292   One thing we realized was that it is critical if, let's say, the provider were to provide the device, you need to have someone who's fluent in ASL install that device just for that communication piece.

2293   Having different avenues of communication advertising such as the Alberta Association put together a video blog, so using video and ASL in communications to the groups as well.

2294   As far as technical, we had very few technical challenges in terms of, you know, the black screen that I mentioned before.

2295   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Right.

2296   MS MAZEROLLE: I think there's an awareness that some of the costs -- and we mentioned this previously. We were very aware going into the trial that we did not want the cost of internet to be cost prohibitive. And I think that's about it.

2297   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay, great. Thank you.

2298   To the point about cost prohibitive, I noted in your report that the estimated cost of the video phone employed by Sorenson was about $400. It was gifted to the users and left with them after the trial was completed.

2299   Do you see that type of hardware investment as absolutely necessary for any future platform?

2300   We've heard from some intervenors over the last couple of days that, given the ubiquitous access to all sorts of multi-media devices, Smartphones, tablets, what have you, that it's possible a simple software solution would serve.

2301   What's your -- what are your views on that?

2302   MS MAZEROLLE: I think it would depend on the customer.

2303   The Sorenson video phone came with a lot of bells and whistles, you know, the call waiting, the flashing. So a lot of extras, if you would, that the deaf community liked or they enjoyed having.

2304   I don't think some of the other devices out there would necessarily have all the bells and whistles, but would it still serve the purpose, would it still provide, you know, good video quality and good VRS service? I think the answer would be yes.

2305   I think the technology we see on a day to day basis is improving, and I think the number of devices out there is opening up.

2306   So not necessarily.

2307   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay, great.

2308   MR. EDORA: May I add to that?

2309   I think -- the ideal situation I think all of us understand is the customer be able -- is able to choose the device and then is able to access VRS. And I think that's what we mean by inter-operability.

2310   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Right.

2311   MR. EDORA: And I think you can define the service standard to actually try to build that into that.

2312   And you should ask the service providers when they appear if their services actually allow that type of user selected device.

2313   But in terms of customer affordability, if a customer has an iPhone or any other -- an Android device or an iPad, they have paid for it. And so if they select -- for example, if the provider has a proprietary device that they can select to put into their house or they can select their iPhone, the customer has that choice and has shown -- I think we've heard from many advocates they're willing to pay for that.

2314   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Thank you. Thank you very much.

2315   Earlier this week, we had an intervenor appear before us and say in terms of the minimum amount of band width that should be -- or the upload or download stream, pardon me -- I couldn't remember which one it was. I think it was the download stream for VRS should be 20 megabytes per second.

2316   When I queried why that was the case, it seemed a little bit high given that some VRS service providers had told us that 1.5 megabytes per second was optimal, they indicated that they were accounting for throttling concerns so that they had 20 megabytes per second. They could ensure that even if there were multiple usages in the house they could still ensure that their VRS service wouldn't be interrupted or suffering any quality of service issues.

2317   You touched upon this a little bit earlier and, frankly, this might be a question that's solved through the CISC-like process that you've proposed. And if that's the case, simply say so.

2318   But can you address that concern in any meaningful way?

2319   MR. WOODHEAD: I'm not aware of other parties' throttling practices, but TELUS doesn't throttle, so it's not an issue on our network.

2320   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay, thank you.

2321   I just want to go back to the model that you've -- you presented today in your presentation just so I fully understand it.

2322   So you're proposing that the Commission first implement the three-year phase-in period. And through that -- in that initial three-year period, we would issue an RFP, select a single service provider. That's single service provider.

2323   Pardon me, interpreters. I'll slow down.

2324   That single service provider would do the initial work, come back to us with a detailed report detailing user statistics, costs and like information.

2325   We would then take that information and create a CISC committee that would create a national fund which could be, for example, the Canadian VRS consortium, something along those lines. And the consortium, from that point, would issue a second RFP to pick a provider based on the information gleaned from the initial three-year period.

2326   Is that correct?

2327   MR. EDORA: It's generally correct. There's one -- there's one clarification I'd like to make.

2328   The CISC process that we're anticipating, we have recommended just because prior to getting the consortium set up, you're going to need an entity or you're going to need some sort of body that can actually set up the consortium.

2329   And so the CISC is supposed to -- is the entity that we think, with the dialogue with all the parties that participated, it's CISC that actually creates the consortium. And it's the -- and also creates the RFP.

2330   But once the consortium is actually completed or created, then it's the consortium that actually takes over the actual administration of the RFP, the awarding of the RFP and the administration of the actual VRS service going forward.

2331   So it's the consortium that actually has the ongoing operations, ongoing maintenance and supervision of the VRS service provider after that.

2332   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. That's very clear. Thank you. I was wondering about that.

2333   So in that situation, the consortium would select VRS provider or providers and they would base their services based on standards set by this consortium, or would they enter into contractual relationship with the consortium, or would it be the TSPs?

2334   Could you outline or explain that a little bit further?

2335   MR. EDORA: Again, perhaps we should -- I'm not sure about the total legalities of all of this. But the way we've envisioned it is the CRTC sets service standards and then the service standards go to the CISC to create the consortium and also to create the RFP.

2336   Once the consortium is created, then they're the entity that awards the RFP. And that can be by contract to a single VRS provider.

2337   We anticipate a single VRS provider because that's just the market reality for Canada. And then it's an ongoing relationship between the consortium and the VRS provider that delivers VRS services in Canada -- ongoing contractual relationship.

2338   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay, great. And as you said, these are also details that can be settled later. I was just curious as to whether you had a perspective now, and that's very much appreciated.

2339   So I note your model is based on a CISC-like process. There was a separate hybrid model that I wanted to place in front of you and get your perspective about. And it's a hybrid model with obligations still placed on the LECs by tariff or via Section 24 condition and subsidization of the service through a centralized fund established under Section 46(5) of the Telecomms Act.

2340   In this model, TSPs would be required to contribute to the national contribution fund to pay for VRS. However, some or all LECs would be responsible for provision of the service and would be required to file a tariff with the terms and conditions upon which it would be provided.

2341   And in this situation or this potential model, the fund administrator would provide each LEC with an amount set by the Commission to subsidize the cost of providing the service.

2342   I think you've been very clear about the model you prefer, but if you could perhaps explain a little bit further about what aspects of this hybrid model you feel would be workable and what would be unworkable, that would be helpful.

2343   MR. WOODHEAD: The biggest problem I have with that hybrid model is that it would probably, in my estimation, be the most costly.

2344   You're going to use the large corporation costs where I believe the cost structures of the VRS providers are more favourable than ours are.

2345   The second point is that it's not trying to duck it, but we do not have expertise in the delivery of this service. We stand in no better position to offer this service. In fact, we stand in a worse position to offer this service than people who make it their business to offer this service.

2346   Other than those, you know, it's really could you do it that -- and it's not -- you could do it that way. You could mandate that the phone companies provide this service and get compensated for it out of some variant of the contribution fund or, indeed, the contribution fund.

2347   But our position is that that's not the most efficient way to do it, and I -- and nor is it the least costly way to do it. And I think it also will add delay because we don't -- we would have to spool up. We, ourselves, would have -- the trial would have taken much, much longer to get under way if we did not go out to a sub-contractor to do it.

2348   MR. EDORA: There is one more point that I'd like to add.

2349   And I have to say that, Commissioner Shoan, what you've actually indicated we broadly agree with. The national contribution fund, TSPs are responsible for contributing to the service and making it available in Canada. Of course, that's a sentiment we agree with.

2350   The main issue that I have with what you've suggested is that it has a LEC tariff associated with that. And as we noted in our opening statement, this is not a Local Exchange Carrier service at all.

2351   In fact, we anticipate that most customers will bypass a Local Exchange Carrier entirely to take VRS instead and then have access via a wireless device, for example.

2352   And so to impose a LEC tariff on a service that LEC customers will not take, it doesn't make a lot of sense to a LEC like TELUS.

2353   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Thank you, Mr. Edora. That's very clear.

2354   I had a question about the common platform that would be used for this. And I believe Ms Mazerolle sort of touched upon it earlier in the sense of it depends on the bells and whistles a particular user would want.

2355   But I was a bit curious from your perspective, and this is somewhat theoretical, about this platform that would be used or implemented, who would own it? Would it be the administrator? Would they simply -- or would the administrator set standards and then ensure inter-operability?

2356   The Mission Consulting report suggested that a third party administrator would have some sort of -- either license the model or own the model and then charge a fee back to the users of it.

2357   Could you provide a bit of input on -- in terms of what you think this model should look like or perhaps be managed or owned?

2358   MR. WOODHEAD: Under -- the way we conceived it, if there was or -- if there was a common platform, you would be -- you would be putting out a Request for Proposals to providers to provide you with a platform. So the platform in other sort of analogous things like this I've gone through over the years remains with the actual provider. You're really just licensing that platform as the consortium and the services it provides to consumers.

2359   I suspect if you had multiple providers you may pick a common platform designer or owner and they would license it to different service providers but, again, I just think that overly complicates it, especially for a market of this size.

2360   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

2361   MR. WOODHEAD: So, as I say, we are suggesting that in these circumstances a common platform is the best way to go and we would support getting access to that type of functionality through a consortium RFP and keeping a check on rates by reissuing that RFP periodically, every 3 to 5 years or something.

2362   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Great. Thank you very much. Those are my questions.

2363   THE CHAIRPERSON: Vice-Chair Pentefountas...?

2364   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

2365   Briefly, at the risk of getting people's grumpiness coming out as we are well into our lunch hour, was one of the questions posed by the Chairman answered as to the composition of the consortium? Did you have a view on that?

2366   MR. WOODHEAD: I believe at some point I said, I would see -- obviously there are various stakeholders that in the governance of an -- specifically with a service like this, the governance of it is very important, so under our model where we are not favouring surcharges on bills for everybody, but rather that this be funded through the Contribution Fund, or some variant of it, I think that you would want to have TSP representatives, just like under the contribution consortium.

2367   I think because of the nature of the service you want to have the other stakeholders on the governance of that, so whether it be consumer groups or specifically people from the targeted community that we are looking at, so deaf and hard of hearing.

2368   You know, when we did it for the contribution consortium, in order to make it workable so you don't have a Board of 58 people, you have classes of shares and there's one member for each class of shares and that's how you do it to keep it manageable.

2369   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Okay. All that to say basically the consortium would be comprised of the carriers, the accessibility groups, and I gather the Commission --

2370   MR. WOODHEAD: Yes.

2371   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: -- would be the three principal parties.

2372   Now, I understand that the carriers are unable, unwilling, disinterested in costing estimates. Unlike the MRS it's just not your field of expertise and you don't want to get involved in that.

2373   That being said, you will be an integral part of the consortium and if you are not in a position to put forth costing estimates, I daresay that the accessibility groups would be challenged and the Commission would perhaps even be challenged. So why this unwillingness to get involved at this stage in costing estimates for the process?

2374   MR. WOODHEAD: Well, I mean, as I say, we have no expertise in the costing of this. Like none; zero.

2375   I will give you two models.

2376   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: You will give me this, though, that you have a certain expertise in costing?

2377   MR. WOODHEAD: We have an expertise in costing of --

2378   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Telco services.

2379   MR. WOODHEAD: -- of telephone services consistent with a Phase 2 methodology --

2380   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Exactly.

2381   MR. WOODHEAD: -- that is based around a telco network. Other than that, you know, we would be guesstimating anything.

2382   I'm not trying to avoid it, if that's where we end up, that's where we end up. I was trying to actually suggest maybe a practical way through that more lengthy process would be to use an RFP mechanism to get proposals, costing proposals or pricing proposals from service providers who actually have expertise in this and let the competition in that alone drive your price down to what is a reasonable market rate.

2383   That was my only reason for suggesting this.

2384   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: So you will get involved in costing, but as a member of the consortium.

2385   MR. WOODHEAD: Well, we would be on the Board.

2386   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Exactly.

2387   MR. WOODHEAD: Yes. Yes. As would the Commission, as would, you know.

2388   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Okay. I have created a new acronym. All these acronyms that have been sort of hit upon us and so I'm going to call it the MPEUM, the Minutes Per End User Per Month, and there is a wide range there.

2389   But I gather there was some pent-up desire or the service, but that's not unreasonable, 110 minutes per month, or 109 minutes, which is what you had, which is roughly four -- not even four minutes per day, which would be consistent with the way people use phones, even today -- maybe not teenagers, but most people.

--- Rires

2390   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: So we are closer to that upper end of the scale rather than the lower end of the scale given that. Are we not therefore looking at a global per annum cost which is closer to the $100 million range and much further than the $30 million range?

2391   I know you don't want to do any costing, but --

2392   MR. WOODHEAD: Well, probably.

2393   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Okay.

2394   MR. WOODHEAD: It's going to cost more if you use it more and the standby costs are more.

2395   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: And at that range, what would be the monthly surcharge per telephony or Internet user in Canada, if you were to sort of look at those estimates?

2396   MR. WOODHEAD: Yes. We haven't done any of those estimates, so this is sort of similar to the question --

2397   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Very much so.

2398   MR. WOODHEAD: -- that your colleague asked about what's the point of onerous here.

2399   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Not what the point of onerous is, but what the actual rate would be.

2400   MR. WOODHEAD: Well, we are not suggesting any surcharge on anybody.

2401   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: But it will work its way into the system.

2402   MR. WOODHEAD: It will work its way in through so --

2403   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Roughly, given the number -- this is one of the areas in which you are experts in, I mean you understand what the global Canadian market is for telephony and Internet and wireless. What would that mean per subscriber of a wireless service as an example?

2404   MR. WOODHEAD: I don't know off of the top of my head, but what I will do is we will take this away and take maybe the lower benchmark, the upper benchmark, something in the middle, spread it across the total base of subscribers or an estimate of that --

2405   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: That would be a good undertaking.

2406   MR. WOODHEAD: -- and give that math to you.

Engagement

2407   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Fantastic. Appreciate it very much.

2408   Just in closing, Madame Morneau, vous avez fait mention d'un accès équivalent entre les deux langues. Je pense que c'est l'alinéa 22 de votre présentation.

2409   MME MORNEAU : Oui.

2410   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Est-ce qu'un accès équivalent veut dire un lancement équivalent et un service équivalent?

2411   MME MORNEAU : Je crois qu'un lancement équivalent veut dire un service de qualité égale et de disponibilité égale pour à la fois les clients qui communiquent en ASL et en LSQ.

2412   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : C'est exact.

2413   MME MORNEAU : Donc, ça peut vouloir dire des heures de restriction lors de l'introduction du service qui sont équivalentes, effectivement. Donc, un service qui serait disponible en ASL d'une heure donnée à une autre heure donnée serait équivalent pour un usager de service de relais vidéo qui communique en SLQ.

2414   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Et même si une langue est plus avancée en termes de disponibilité, par exemple, les services doivent tous les deux être lancés en même temps et au même niveau de service?

2415   MME MORNEAU : Bien, effectivement, oui.

2416   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Est-ce que ça sera la position de TELUS?

2417   MME MORNEAU : C'est notre position, effectivement. On ne voit pas pourquoi ça serait le contraire, finalement. L'anglais et le français sont deux langues officielles au Canada. Ça devrait être la même chose pour le langage des signes.

2418   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS : Merci pour la clarification. Je voulais juste m'assurer qu'accès équivalent voulait justement dire ce que vous venez de nous rapporter. Merci beaucoup.

2419   MME MORNEAU : Merci.

2420   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

2421   THE CHAIRPERSON: Commissioner Duncan...?

2422   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Thank you. So there are obviously not too many questions left to be asked, but I do have a concern and it seems that we would be required to insist -- or it could be argued we would be required to insist on the provision of VRS, which I understand that you are agreeable to, but to the point of undue hardship.

2423   So undue hardship, as I understand it, doesn't only relate to the undue hardship it imposes on the TSPs, but also on individual Canadians. So when you are doing your thinking and your number crunching coming up with models -- you know I think it's really important -- it's a difficult question to answer, but we have to turn our heads to that and what that would mean is, you know, we would probably put the limit on the service we could offer. But if you could include that in your consideration?

2424   MR. WOODHEAD: Yes, absolutely.

2425   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: The other thing that I wanted to talk about was the structure that you proposed and setting it out the way you did I thought was very helpful.

2426   I'm just concerned that -- it's clear the Commission has different rules, whatever the proper legal term would be, to impose its will on TSPs, but if it were set up in a consortium and the consortium was to take over the operation of it, how would the CRTC exercise its influence in the longer term?

2427   MR. WOODHEAD: Well, I think we have to look no further than the contribution consortium where they set the contribution rate every year and it's approved by the Commission, where the consortiums founding documents require the consortium to -- and I'm thinking of things that, you know, we can talk about going forward but, you know, I think it would be very important for you to get some kind of periodic reporting from the consortium and the provider about things like quality of service, call handle times. Is there packet loss experienced? Customer complaints, customer kudos. So I think that those would need to be worked into the actual foundational documents of the thing.

2428   So you are part of it and you have a right to seek information and you are in fact -- actually, it is a creature of your regulatory powers that it actually exists.

2429   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: So you are feeling that we would have the regulatory authority, or it could be put in place that we would have the regulatory authority, other than to the extent -- more authority than to the extent of saying, "Well, we gave you 100 million this year, but next year it's 95?

2430   MR. WOODHEAD: Yes, I do.

2431   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Other than that --

2432   MR. WOODHEAD: Listen, I'm not trying to sweep this away from you, like that is not my intention at all.

2433   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: No, I don't think you are.

2434   MR. WOODHEAD: What I'm trying to do is to take away the day-to-day operation of this thing and give it to kind of people who know that service, like they are the providers of the service, have a governance structure such that all of the stakeholders have some visibility into the operation of the thing.

2435   And I think because it's a lot of money and it could potentially be a lot of money and a lot of growing amount of money that, you know, you are comfortable that that money is being used in the right way and that everybody is getting value for it.

2436   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Okay. Thank you.

2437   So my last question, and it is picking up on what you have already been asked, but you are suggesting that it's more cost-effective to rely on people who are in the business, but if we were to say -- you know, the phrase we have been using or the ILECs or some subset of ILECs, so what if we just said that TELUS, Bell, Rogers, you three, you will offer the service, and then you would resell it to the other TSPs. Would a system like that work? It would give us more control over -- perhaps more control; maybe not.

2438   MR. EDORA: I understand, Commissioner Duncan, why that type of model might immediately appeal to the Commission because many services are delivered in that type of manner.

2439   I guess the fundamental issue that we have with that is, again, I think we have been pretty clear that we would just outsource the service to someone else, and I anticipate Bell and Rogers would probably come to that same conclusion. Again, you are imposing an obligation on, in this particular case, 3 LECs where we are all outsourcing it to someone else, and it all might go to the same provider. We all might all choose to outsource to the same provider and then the customer is then -- ultimately the service is delivered from that provider to customers.

2440   So I think our model, what it's trying to do is have a structure where that one provider is chosen by a consortium that then reports back to the Commission. We just feel that's a simpler model and by rights, I mean, from an operational perspective there should be no impact on the end user and in terms of implementation it might actually be faster.

2441   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Okay. Thank you very much, that's helpful. Thank you.

2442   Those are my questions.

2443   THE CHAIRPERSON: Legal?

2444   MS POPE: I just wanted to follow-up on the comment that one of -- I'm sorry, I forget which person said that there were agreements regarding confidentiality currently in use for your relay services; yes.

2445   Would you be able to file copies of those with the Commission?

2446   MS MAZEROLLE: Yes.

2447   MS POPE: Great. And could you undertake to do that by Monday, October 28th?

2448   MS MAZEROLLE: Yes.

Engagement

2449   MS POPE: Great. And then, just to remind you of the other undertaking, which is an estimate of per-subscriber costs, including the upper and lower limits, and including considerations of undue hardship for subscribers.

2450   MS MAZEROLLE: Yes.

2451   MR. SPEAKER: Great. Thank you very much.

2452   MR. WOODHEAD: Counsel, is that for the same date?

2453   MS POPE: Is that same date possible?

2454   MR. WOODHEAD: I think so, yes.

2455   MS POPE: That would be great; thank you.

2456   THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.

2457   We will adjourn for lunch and resume at 2 o'clock.

--- Suspension à 1304

--- Reprise à 1403

2458   THE SECRETARY: Please take your seats.

2459   Nous entendrons maintenant la présentation de monsieur Martin Boucher. Vous avez 15 minutes pour votre présentation.

2460   Merci.

PRÉSENTATION

2461   M. BOUCHER: D'abord, je tiens à vous remercier de m'avoir autorisé à venir présenter mes préoccupations devant vous. Je parle au nom des entrepreneurs sourds et malentendants du Québec et du Canada en général.

2462   Donc, lorsqu'on parle des personnes sourdes, on s'entend bien qu'on veut inclure aussi les personnes malentendantes et devenues sourdes.

2463   Donc, ma première langue est la langue des signes québécois. Donc, comme entrepreneur, comment puis-je développer des stratégies pour convaincre mes clients d'utiliser mes produits et mes services?

2464   D'abord, je possède une langue qui est riche, qui est riche en expressions, qui est riche en vocabulaire, et l'interlocuteur entendant a aussi son intonation et je peux voir l'intonation de mon client via un service éventuel SRV.

2465   Donc, avec un Service de Relais Vidéo, je vais pouvoir voir les expressions de l'interprète et ainsi comprendre les intonations et les hésitations de mon client. Donc, c'est une bonne façon d'avoir des bonnes stratégies appropriées pour chacun de mes clients et pour répondre à chacun de leurs besoins.

2466   Souvent les entreprises régulières fonctionnent avec une... bon, par téléphone souvent, tandis que, nous, nous devons utiliser un ATS, donc ce qui fait que nos conversations sont beaucoup plus longues et plus ardues.

2467   Si on avait effectivement accès à un Service de Relais Vidéo, effectivement, on aurait un niveau de communications équivalentes à ceux des entreprises entendantes, donc qui ont le même fonctionnement qu'une entreprise régulière.

2468   Ce matin, on a parlé aussi de la rapidité d'élocution via un Service de Relais SRM et un Service de Relais Vidéo. On voit qu'on peut aller jusqu'à 180 mots/minute, ce qui est presque l'équivalent d'un discours entre deux personnes qui entendent, donc une communication facile et une communication agréable.

2469   Par exemple, lorsqu'il y a un problème de technologie, on veut avoir une information précise, donc il faut appeler, entrer en communication à un service de soutien technique et on doit expliquer via le SRB, le Service de Relais Écrit toute la complexité de notre problème et ça prend un certain avant, effectivement, qu'on puisse se faire comprendre.

2470   Et la personne qui reçoit l'appel, qui doit répondre, qui est un Centre d'appels, qui doit répondre à plusieurs personnes à l'intérieur d'une heure, effectivement c'est un discours... c'est une explication très longue pour lui parce qu'il est habitué à répondre à tant de clients à l'heure, tandis qu'avec un service de relais Bell, de Relais Écrit, c'est beaucoup plus long.

2471   Donc, si on avait à un Service de Relais Vidéo, effectivement la communication serait plus importante, plus... équivalente à ceux des autres appels qu'il reçoit.

2472   De plus, une entreprise qui est composée de personnes sourdes doit réserver une partie de ses fonds et de ses profits à payer les services d'interprétation, donc, avec les frais liés au service d'interprétation.

2473   Donc, au lieu, effectivement, d'appeler un interprète pour chaque fois que j'ai besoin d'appeler quelqu'un, j'accumule plusieurs besoins et je fais venir un interprète pour faire l'ensemble des appels, mais tandis qu'une personne entendante, une entreprise régulière, dès qu'il veut parler à un client, il peut acheminer à un téléphone tout de suite.

2474   Tandis que, nous, il faut un peu calculer le nombre d'appels qu'on a besoin pour faire venir un interprète pour que ça vaille la peine, donc, on accumule souvent les messages qu'on doit faire par téléphone.

2475   Donc, une compagnie, une entreprise composée de personnes sourdes et une entreprise de personnes entendantes, je dirais que l'entreprise de personnes sourdes doit effectivement travailler plus, investir plus, faire plus de profit parce qu'il y a une marge de son argent qui doit être réservée pour les services d'interprétation.

2476   Tandis qu'une entreprise régulière, ses profits, il peut les réinvestir effectivement au développement de sa compagnie, tandis qu'une compagnie de personnes sourdes doit penser à une partie de ses profits pour payer les services d'un interprète, ce qui fait qu'au bout de la ligne, pour le même travail, une entreprise de personnes sourdes va être moins rentable qu'une entreprise de personnes entendantes.

2477   Donc, s'il vend des produits, s'il est une compagnie efficace, compétente, vend beaucoup de produits, investit dans ses produits à nouveau tandis qu'une entreprise pour personnes sourdes, il y a toujours une marge de profit qui est réservée pour payer les services d'interprétation.

2478   C'est dommage parce que, effectivement, pour un investissement identique, le revenu ne peut pas être équitable.

2479   Et aussi, la flexibilité des horaires des interprètes n'est pas toujours disponible. Les interprètes souvent ont plusieurs emplois et sont, par exemple, dans le monde de l'éducation à temps complet, sont disponibles que certaines heures.

2480   Donc, ce n'est pas juste lié selon mes disponibilités et selon la disponibilité de mes clients, c'est aussi qu'il faut inclure la disponibilité des interprètes effectivement pour pouvoir faire fonctionner une entreprise.

2481   Il est arrivé des situations, pas aujourd'hui, par chance, où est-ce qu'on devait contacter une personne très importante pour notre entreprise, pour le développement de notre entreprise, donc, j'ai essayé de contacter selon son horaire de disponibilité, elle avait très peu de temps à nous consacrer.

2482   Donc, le temps que je puisse faire accorder la disponibilité de l'interprète et du besoin de la personne que je voulais rejoindre, lorsque j'ai appelé pour parler à cette personne-là, la personne était déjà occupée. Le temps qu'elle avait consacré pour moi avait déjà passé, elle était à un autre rendez-vous.

2483   Mais il a fallu quand même que je paie effectivement l'interprète parce qu'un interprète, habituellement, a un taux horaire fixe et, habituellement, pour compenser pour le déplacement, un deux heures minimum.

2484   Donc, il a fallu, en plus de payer l'interprète, j'ai dû re-céduler l'interprète pour refaire un appel téléphonique, pour refaire le même appel téléphonique.

2485   Aussi, il y a toute la préoccupation des répondeurs. Lorsqu'une compagnie, une entreprise entendante a des messages, ils peuvent... les gens peuvent appeler aussi longtemps, aussi souvent qu'ils veulent ou à la vitesse qu'ils veulent.

2486   Une entreprise de personnes sourdes, si on a des messages téléphoniques, il faut vérifier est-ce qu'on en a suffisamment pour faire appel à un interprète ou je dois attendre plusieurs jours pour avoir suffisamment de messages pour que ça soit rentable de faire appel à un service d'interprète.

2487   Tandis qu'une entreprise entendante dès qu'il y a un besoin, dès qu'il voit qu'il y a un message, peut enfin de journée décider de faire ses appels.

2488   Donc, souvent on est en compétition avec d'autres entreprises, ce qui fait que, nous, parce qu'il y a ces difficultés-là, bon, le service n'est pas équitable et, des fois, on peut perdre des clients, on peut perdre des bonnes occasions.

2489   Ou on peut aussi recevoir des plaintes comme entreprise, parce qu'on n'est pas efficace, parce que, effectivement, il a fallu combiner plusieurs horaires pour être en mesure de rendre le même service, tandis qu'une compagnie régulière n'a pas cette problématique-là liée à l'embauche d'un interprète sur une base temporaire ou permanente.

2490   Vous savez, à peu près le coût horaire d'un service d'interprétation, ça peut varier entre 25,00 $ à 80,00 $ l'heure. Donc, nous, comme entrepreneurs, donc il faut prévoir effectivement une marge. Au moins, nous, notre petite entreprise, CINÉAL(ph) on a l'année passée défrayé à peu près 3 000,00 $ en frais d'interprétation.

2491   Pourquoi on a défrayé 3 000,00 $? Parce qu'on n'a pas... on n'a pas un gros revenu. Si on avait un revenu plus élevé, une compagnie avec un chiffre d'affaires plus grand, on pourrait effectivement se payer plus d'heures d'interprétation, mais il faut aussi se limiter selon les revenus de notre entreprise.

2492   Mettons les compagnies qui ont des revenus un peu plus faibles, donc, n'ont pas... ont moins de chance de faire appel à des interprètes, ont moins la possibilité de faire appel à des interprètes qu'une autre compagnie.

2493   Donc, pour avoir des clients assidus, rendre un service de qualité, donc on peut à certains égards moins performer parce que, effectivement, on a ce problème lié aux frais d'interprète et à la disponibilité des interprètes.

2494   Donc, c'est déjà arrivé avec le service SMM, SRM, qui me demandait est-ce que... quelles sont les procédures pour utiliser... Des fois les compagnies me demandent comment fonctionne le Service de Relais Écrit? Donc, ça prend le temps de leur expliquer.

2495   Et lorsque, après deux jours, trois jours, je n'ai pas de nouvelle d'eux, je n'ai pas de rappel d'eux, est-ce que c'est parce qu'ils ne sont pas intéressés ou parce que, effectivement, ils n'ont pas compris la procédure comment utiliser un service de relais?

2496   Et, parfois, c'est parce qu'ils n'ont pas... ça n'a pas fonctionné parce qu'ils ne connaissaient pas... ils n'ont pas bien compris ce que j'avais expliqué. Donc, si on avait un Service de Relais Vidéo, effectivement ces problèmes-là seraient aussi réglés.

2497   Donc, si on avait effectivement accès à un Service de Relais Vidéo, donc on pourrait performer autant au travail qu'une personne entendante performe au travail.

2498   Qu'est-ce qui empêche les sourds parfois d'acquérir, d'avoir accès à des emplois? C'est parce que, effectivement, ils ne peuvent pas communiquer de façon aussi rapide.

2499   Peut-être avec un Service de Relais Vidéo effectivement les entreprise entendantes seraient plus enclines à embaucher des personnes sourdes et on aurait une diminution du chômage chez les personnes sourdes.

2500   Avec le Service de Relais Bell, le Service de Relais par Écrit, on dit qu'une image vaut mille mots tandis qu'avec le Service de Relais Visuel on voit qu'une image vaut vraiment 1 000 mots, un signe vaut 1 000 mots.

2501   Vous voyez, j'ai remis dans mon dossier l'ensemble de l'information que je voulais vous transmettre et je veux d'abord vous remercier d'avoir pris le temps de lire ma documentation.

2502   Et j'ai aussi mis la liste des entreprises gérées par des personnes, des petites entreprises gérées par des personnes sourdes au Québec et au Canada.

2503   Donc, je vous remercie sincèrement de m'avoir écouté.

2504   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Alors, merci, monsieur Boucher. Nous de même, nous voulons vous remercier de nous apporter une perspective autre, nouvelle, d'avoir un point de vue d'un entrepreneur. Ça rajoute certainement à compléter le dossier.

2505   Vous savez sans doute qu'aux États-Unis, depuis une décennie, ce service est disponible. Je n'embarquerai pas dans les coûts de ce service-là, c'est un autre débat.

2506   Mais est-ce que vous pouvez nous parler de l'impact que ce service-là a eu et continue d'avoir au sein de la communauté d'entrepreneurs sourds aux États-Unis?

2507   M. GÉLINAS (Interprété): Bonne question. Alors, on s'est aperçu que, oui, et on a lu aussi qu'aux États-Unis... bien, c'est-à-dire qu'on n'a pas été évaluer ce qui passait ici, on a regardé plutôt ce qu'il y avait au Canada.

2508   Il y a une personne qui a essayé avec Telus, la compagnie a fait un essai. Donc, ça, je suis au courant de ça, de cette expérience qui a été faite avec le SRV. Il y a eu beaucoup d'appels qui ont été faits et que les entreprises sourdes fonctionnaient mieux avec ce service-là.

2509   Quand le SRV a terminé, quand l'essai a été terminé, les conséquences pour la communauté étaient vraiment désastreuses pour les différentes entreprises. Donc, on a pu comparer réellement qu'avec le SRV et le Service de Relais par Message, qu'il y avait vraiment une grande différence, qu'il y avait beaucoup plus d'avantages avec le Service Relais Visuel.

2510   M. BOUCHER (interprété): Est-ce que vous me permettez que j'ajoute quelque chose? Vous me permettez, oui?

2511   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Certainement.

2512   M. BOUCHER (interprété): Donc, je comprends ce que lui dit par rapport à la possibilité des différentes compagnies, mais quand on regarde les Droits de la personne, quand on veut l'égalité au niveau des langues, au niveau de l'accessibilité, donc il ne faut pas empêcher les personnes sourdes de pouvoir communiquer. Donc, c'est intéressant et plus facile de comprendre lorsque nous avons l'image.

2513   Donc, les petites compagnies de personnes sourdes, en utilisant le Service Relais Visuel pourront créer plus de relations, donc on ne pourra plus nous empêcher de dire qu'on ne peut pas offrir nos services parce qu'on est des personnes sourdes puis d'avoir une entreprise efficace.

2514   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Pour retourner sur la communauté d'affaires sourde aux États-Unis, vous n'avez pas de données ou des... même du témoignage anecdotal? Ça va.

2515   M. BOUCHER (interprété): Non.

2516   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: O.k.

2517   M. BOUCHER (interprété): Mais on n'a pas fait de recherche sur cette partie-là, non. Désolé.

2518   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: C'est bien. C'est beau.

2519   M. GÉLINAS (interprété): On n'a pas regardé ce qui se passait aux États-Unis.

2520   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Pas de trouble. Doit-on, si un jour il y a un service SRV au Canada, distinguer entre l'utilisation de ce service à des fins personnelles par rapport à l'utilisation à des fins d'affaires?

2521   M. GÉLINAS (interprété): Personnellement, par exemple, si je comprends bien votre question, personnellement lorsque je veux discuter avec ma famille, bien, si par exemple j'ai besoin de communiquer avec le système de la Santé, un médecin, donc, ça, ce sont des appels personnels.

2522   D'autre part, lorsqu'on parle d'appels pour les compagnies, par exemple, si je vais dans un magasin et que, au niveau de la technologie personnelle pour mon travail de production de vidéos, donc je dois me rendre dans les magasins puis avoir de l'information pour les nouvelles technologies par rapport au cinéma.

2523   Donc, j'aimerais pouvoir être capable de poser mes questions, mais la capacité de communication est très réduite. On doit essayer d'écrire pour essayer de se faire comprendre. Donc, si j'avais... j'écris un message sur mon téléphone, sur mon cellulaire, et là, le vendeur, il va pouvoir me poser des questions.

2524   Par exemple, si on avait le Service Relais Visuel, on pourrait utiliser mon téléphone pour avoir notre communication. Donc, directement, on pourrait se parler en langue des signes à travers le Service Relais Visuel.

2525   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUTAS: Je comprends ça et je ne veux pas vous couper, sauf que dans la communauté entendante souvent on voit des tarifs autres. Si vous êtes en affaires, vous avez un certain tarif, en raison d'une utilisation accrue tandis qu'au niveau personnel, il y a souvent d'autres genres de tarifs, d'autres façons de tarifier.

2526   Est-ce que, vous, qui voulez utiliser ce service-là à des fins... O.k. Je vous donne un exemple. Est-ce que vous devez payer une surcharge? Est-ce que vous devez contribuer à une autre hauteur à ce service-là?

2527   M. BOUCHER (interprété): Je comprends mieux votre question maintenant.

2528   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Étant donné les motifs de l'appel?

2529   M. BOUCHER (interprété): Donc, je comprends au niveau du tarif téléphonique. Par exemple, le tarif résidentiel ou le tarif commercial, je comprends que c'est différent.

2530   Donc, quand on parle, par exemple, d'appels importants au niveau de la communication avec les clients, c'est certain qu'on est prêt à payer ce qu'il faut pour le niveau commercial.

2531   Pour faire suite à ça, j'ajouterais qu'au niveau commercial, je sais que les tarifs sont plus chers pour les entendants, donc c'est la même chose pour les sourds, on ne demande pas de privilège. On dit que c'est équitable pour un service commercial, c'est plus dispendieux.

2532   Donc, si on a le Service Relais Visuel, bien on serait prêt à payer un supplément que pour un Service personnel, bien sûr.

2533   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Et avez-vous calculé le nombre de minutes que vous aurez besoin de votre téléphone pour des fins de votre entreprise? Je ne sais pas si vous étiez ici ce matin, je pense qu'on peut le citer, on parlait en anglais, mais on parlait d'un certain nombre de minutes par utilisateur.

2534   M. GÉLINAS (interprété): Pour vous répondre, c'est très variable. Par exemple, on pourrait s'attendre à trois heures sur un sujet particulier plus technique où on va nous poser beaucoup de questions et donc, on devrait répondre. Donc, c'est variable, tout dépendant quel est l'objet de l'appel.

2535   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Alors, peut être?

2536   M. GÉLINAS (interprété): Donc aussi, le lendemain, bien, on peut ne pas avoir besoin du tout du service. Ça va dépendre, chaque journée. On peut prendre une journée, par exemple, puis faire tous nos appels et toutes nos publicités dans la même journée. Et, par la suite, ne plus utiliser le service pour quelques jours.

2537   Donc, je comprends que vous aimez avoir des chiffres précis, mais c'est difficile parce que c'est très variable, selon l'utilisation de nos besoins.

2538   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Mais trois heures pour un appel, ça me donne une méchante idée.

2539   M. GÉLINAS (interprété): Puis lorsqu'on parle, par exemple, de trois heures, c'est peut-être un total pour la journée, tout dépendant s'il arrive six clients, bien, je dois leur expliquer à chacun d'eux, donc ça fera un total pour la journée de trois heures. Ce n'est pas trois heures pour chacun des clients. Ce serait un total, selon les clients qui appellent.

2540   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Est-ce que la personne qui accompagne monsieur Boucher peut s'identifier pour les fins...

2541   M. GÉLINAS (interprété): Oui, bien sûr. Alors, je suis Productions Cinéal(ph), je suis une compagnie de production vidéo pour les personnes et je suis... c'est une production pour les sourds.

2542   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Et votre nom?

2543   M. GÉLINAS (interprété): Et mon nom s'est Sylvain.

2544   L'ADJUDICATRICE : Sylvain?

2545   M. GÉLINAS (interprété): Gélinas.

2546   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Gélinas.

2547   M. GÉLINAS (interprété): Et je suis le propriétaire de la compagnie.

2548   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Excellent. La technologie nous aide de plus en plus de faire des affaires autrement. Tout ce qui se faisait souvent par voix orale se fait par courriel.

2549   Est-ce que... et déjà il y a des intervenants qui s'interrogent sur les avantages de ce service-là, si on tient compte qu'à court ou presque à moyen terme il risque d'y avoir des changements technologiques qui risquent de rendre ce service moins utile, désuet.

2550   Quel est votre point de vue sur comment la technologie peut changer le terrain qui nous préoccupe aujourd'hui?

2551   M. BOUCHER (interprété): Par exemple, lorsqu'ici on regarde on regarde au niveau de l'ATS, on devait poser une question et, ensuite, avoir la réponse. La même chose au niveau des courriels, là. On envoie une question, par exemple, et il y a un délai avant de recevoir la réponse. C'est la même chose avec le Service Relais de Texte Écrit. Donc, on doit attendre entre chacune des interventions.

2552   Par contre, si on utilise le Service Relais Visuel, tout se fait de façon instantanée. Donc, si jamais j'arrivais en retard, bien je peux envoyer un courriel à mon rendez-vous, mais s'il n'a pas de cellulaire, comment je peux faire pour le rejoindre?

2553   S'il est à son bureau, par exemple, bien je pourrais utiliser le Service Relais Visuel. C'est un exemple qui pourrait être utile pour nous.

2554   Ensuite, il y a parfois des mots que je ne comprends pas. Le français, ce n'est pas ma langue première, donc je vais être obligé de demander un synonyme ou une explication du mot qu'il m'a écrit parce que je ne comprends pas.

2555   J'ai l'impression parfois qu'on niaise -- excusez l'expression -- avec les mots.

2556   Donc, si je peux utiliser ma langue, c'est vraiment différent. Je peux m'exprimer correctement.

2557   Donc, la question que vous me demandiez, c'était dans le futur, là, qu'est-ce qu'on pense qui pourrait arriver au niveau de la technologie. Est-ce que ça pourrait changer ou est-ce que la technologie du service visuel pourrait être désuète? On ne le sait pas vraiment.

2558   Mais comme on expliquait tout à l'heure, on a eu, bon, l'envoi des courriels qui était une avancée pour nous, mais qui est quand même encore limitatif. Donc, peut-être qu'on va s'apercevoir que sans le service visuel on va avoir moins accès.

2559   Donc, c'est certain qu'il faut travailler fort puis il faut mettre les procédures en marche. Peut-être que la technologie va faire en sorte que le SRV va être encore plus efficace plutôt que désuet; on ne le sait pas.

2560   Il va y avoir des liens qui vont se créer entre les compagnies, entre les services et, donc, peut-être qu'il va y avoir des gens qui vont innover. Peut-être que ça va être encore mieux; on ne sait pas.

2561   Lorsqu'on parle avec les entendants, ils ont plusieurs choix de communications. Ça peut être les textos, les courriels. Ils peuvent utiliser SKYPE, donc...

2562   Mais, nous, on a quoi? On a les courriels, les textos. On ne peut pas utiliser la voix, donc on ne peut pas utiliser notre langue et notre langue des signes, où est-ce qu'on peut l'utiliser? On ne peut pas l'utiliser. C'est notre langue première pour communiquer.

2563   Donc, où est notre possibilité d'écrire une culture? Ça ne s'écrit pas un culture. Ça se signe et ça se voit.

2564   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Merci, très bien.

2565   M. GÉLINAS (interprété): Ça représente notre culture. Si vous me permettez de vous donner un exemple. Si vous regardez la Liste des différentes entreprises que nous avons répertoriées, on n'a pas répertorié toutes les entreprises au Canada, mais celles du Québec, on a vraiment un plus grand... On est rendu à 66 compagnies, des petites entreprises qui sont gérées par des personnes sourdes.

2566   Il y a 30 nouvelles entreprises par les jeunes. Ce sont des jeunes, 30 sur 66 qui viennent de commencer. On en veut de plus en plus. Ces 30 jeunes compagnies-là, elles attendent d'avoir le Service Relais Visuel pour être capables de se développer.

2567   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Merci. Je comprends. Dernière question.

2568   Le représentant de la Maison des femmes sourdes nous disait ce matin ou en début d'après-midi, devrais-je dire, que 85 pour cent de leur clientèle ne se sentait pas à l'aise ni en anglais ni en français.

2569   Quel pourcentage de la communauté d'affaires sourde ou malentendante vit un malaise semblable, une difficulté de réussite?

2570   M. GÉLINAS (interprété): Pour vous répondre, moi, je suis analphabète moi-même, j'ai de la difficulté à lire et à écrire, mais pourtant je suis quelqu'un de débrouillard. Je suis chef d'entreprise puis je ne suis pas tout seul dans cette situation.

2571   Quand vous me parlez de pourcentage, ça dépend des services, s'ils sont adaptés ou pas. Est-ce que c'est, par exemple, un vidéo qui se traduit du français à la LSQ? Si on a accès à ça, bien là on peut comprendre.

2572   Il y a environ 65 pour cent de gens qui sont analphabètes qui, eux, utilisent les adaptations de façon générale au niveau... les adaptations écrites en LSQ. Ce matin, on parlait de 85 pour cent. Ce sont les clients de leur établissement.

2573   J'ajouterai, lorsqu'on parle d'analphabétisme au niveau éducatif, il faut regarder l'histoire. Il y a une différence avec l'éducation pour les entendants et celle pour les sourds. Actuellement, la qualité de l'éducation est supérieure à ce que, nous, nous avons reçu.

2574   Donc, j'imagine que le problème pour les futurs jeunes entrepreneurs va diminuer étant donné qu'ils vont avoir plus de possibilités de lecture et d'écriture.

2575   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Merci beaucoup. Ça complète pour moi, monsieur le président. Merci beaucoup, messieurs.

2576   LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci beaucoup.

2577   M. GÉLINAS (interprété): Merci beaucoup de votre attention. Merci.

2578   THE SECRETARY: I would now ask Rogers Communications, Cogeco Cable Inc., Quebecor Media Inc. on behalf of its affiliate Videotron G.P. and Bragg Communications Inc., carrying on business as Eastlink and Shaw Communications Inc. to come to the presentation table.

--- Pause

2579   THE CHAIRPERSON: We will just take a quick two-minute break or three-minute break here and we are not going anywhere, but we will be right back.

--- Pause

2580   THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Madam Secretary, I think we're back in.

2581   THE SECRETARY: Please introduce yourself and your colleagues and you have 20 minutes for your presentation.

PRÉSENTATION

2582   M. BÉLAND: Monsieur le vice-président, conseillers et personnel du Conseil, bonjour.

2583   Mon nom est Dennis Béland et je suis vice-président, Affaires réglementaires Télécommunications chez Quebecor Media. Je présente aujourd'hui les intérêts du câblodistributeur Videotron.

2584   Representing the other cable carriers and appearing with me on the panel today are: On my left from Shaw Communications, Paul Cowling, Senior Director, Regulatory Affairs; next to Paul, from Eastlink, Natalie MacDonald, Vice President, Regulatory; next to Natalie, de Cogeco Câble, Michel Messier, Directeur Affaires réglementaires Télécommunications. On my right, from Rogers Communications, David Watt, Vice President Regulatory Economics and next to David is Andrew Briggs, President of AG Briggs Consulting Inc.

2585   Le Conseil, dans son Avis de Consultation, a sollicité des observations à l'égard du Service de Relais Vidéo, SRV ou VRS en anglais, et sur la façon de l'implanter s'il est accepté.

2586   Or, le SRV suscite un certain nombre de questions importantes relativement à ses coûts, son financement, son administration, les défis reliés aux interprètes, la technologie, la prestation des services, la compensation pour les fournisseurs de SRV, sa faisabilité et le suivi approprié à lui donner.

2587   Les câblodistributeurs apprécient l'opportunité de comparaître aujourd'hui devant le Conseil afin de livrer nos commentaires sur ces questions importantes.

2588   Le Conseil possède une longue feuille de route dans l'établissement de politiques visant à favoriser l'accès aux services de télécommunications pour les Canadiens sourds, malentendants ou souffrant d'un trouble de la parole.

2589   Ces politiques exigent, notamment, des fournisseurs de services de télécommunications, SST ou TSP en anglais, d'offrir l'accès au Service de Relais par téléscripteur, TTY, ou par protocole Internet. Dans les deux cas il est question d'un service basé uniquement sur du texte.

2590   Le SRV est un troisième Service de Relais qui existe dans certaines autres juridictions. Ce service permet de communiquer avec un opérateur Relais en utilisant le langage des signes à travers un appareil connecté à l'Internet. Les opérateurs qui fournissent un tel service ont besoin de personnel qualifié et spécialisé dans le langage gestuel.

2591   De manière générale, le SRV n'est pas fourni par les mêmes opérateurs qui fournissent les services traditionnels de relais par TTY et par protocole Internet.

2592   La décision de rendre le SRV obligatoire ou non au Canada relève de la politique publique. Avant de la prendre, il est impératif d'évaluer soigneusement les coûts et bénéfices de ce service en regard de l'utilisation potentielle des ressources pour d'autres services à la population.

2593   MR. WATT: The cable companies listened carefully to the various parties yesterday and understand that the implementation of VRS would be beneficial for deaf, hard of hearing and speak impaired Canadians by making voice telecommunications more accessible and having value to the communication.

2594   Parties representing the interest of potential users appearing before the Commission this week are in a much better position to speak to the social and economic benefits of VRS than we are since they are experts in the field.

2595   While the Commission sought information on the cost of providing VRS, vastly different estimates of the annual costs of providing VRS have been placed on the record of the proceeding.

2596   This range highlights that VRS is a complex service that can be provided in a number of ways over various platforms.

2597   The Mission Report provided a cost estimate of approximately 32 million dollars per year. This estimate includes the provision of VRS on a 24-7 basis as well as the administration costs. The Mission Report contemplates that VRS provided by independent providers chosen to a biding process.

2598   Sorenson Communications projected an annual cost of 104 million dollars per year by the fifth year of implementation. This does not include administration costs and is based on their own proprietary service offering.

2599   The cable carriers submit that the range of projected VRS costs from 32 million to 104 million per year to support up to 25,000 users is concerning as it reflects a lack of consensus regarding the potential costs to offer VRS.

2600   Depending on how VRS is funded, this highlights the potential for the provision of VRS to be costly for Canadian consumers. If the Commission chooses to pay for this service to the National Contribution Fund, TSPs will be subject to increases of 22 per cent with a 32 million dollar cost, 70 per cent with the 104 million dollar cost in a revenue fee currently required to support the provision of local telephone service in high cost serving areas to the Fund.

2601   The current Fund revenue is approximately 143 million dollars per year and is used to subsidize the provision of local telephone service to over 615,000 residential customers in high cost serving areas.

2602   We believe VRS should be offered as a social service and funded through Government general tax revenues. This is an approach that is used either entirely or partially in a number of other countries.

2603   Regardless of the funding basis, we all must recognize that the service would cause real costs that must be paid.

2604   If after considering all the associated costs and benefits of VRS the Commission is of the opinion that VRS should be mandated and funded to telecommunications revenues, our position is that funding should be handled through the National Contribution Fund framework.

2605   Utilizing the existing Fund processes and procedures would enable efficient implementation of funding VRS by minimizing the duplication of reporting and collection processes and by keeping start-up administrative costs low.

2606   MS MacDONALD: Some parties have argued that since VRS requires the use of an Internet connection for the delivery of service, then retail Internet revenues should be included in a contribution pool of telecommunication service revenue to be used for funding of VRS.

2607   The cable carriers oppose the expansion of the contribution pool to include Internet revenues. The purpose of VRS is to provide deaf, hard of hearing and speech impaired communities with the service that is functionally equivalent to voice telephone services accessible by hearing persons.

2608   It enables persons to complete voice telephony calls in a manner similar to how telephone calls occur between hearing persons.

2609   The existing National Contribution Fund supports the provision of local telephone service in high cost serving areas. If mandated, VRS would provide a functionally equivalent service to the deaf, hard of hearing and speech impaired communities. As such, it would be logical and appropriate to extend the existing National Contribution Fund, including its current funding formula to fund VRS.

2610   The cable carriers submit it would be unfair to require Internet users to contribute to the funding of VRS, which is a service designed to be functionally equivalent to voice telephony service.

2611   MR. COWLING: VRS is a specialized language interpreter service. TSPs are not equipped to provide VRS as they do not have relevant expertise in specialized sign language training and qualifications.

2612   As a result, there is widespread agreements among the TSPs that should the Commission mandate the provision of VRS, it should not be provided by TSPs, instead, it should be provided by a qualified VRS provider.

2613   When we look at international comparisons, it is rarely the TSP that provides VRS. Third parties who specialize in Relay Services are selected based on their expertise and on the service requirements and other criteria set out in a competitive bidding process.

2614   Canada can gain valuable insight by looking at these processes used in other countries when introducing its VRS. For example, Australia recently announced the completion of a multi year VRS trial and the establishment of a National VRS Service.

2615   Australia's VRS product uses a SKYPE platform which is an interface familiar to many users, using existing and flexible platforms that are not proprietary may help to significantly reduce costs. We know that the Australian National Relay Service has a budget of 18 million Australian dollars per year, which includes traditional MRS, IT Relay and VRS.

2616   While we believe that VRS should be provided by a third party with relevant expertise, this does not mean that VRS providers should have a blank cheque. In order to best meet the needs of customers that use the service, VRS must be cost effective and flexible.

2617   To this end, we suggest that any service provider must be selected through a competitive biding process with rigorous objective criteria. We can use our knowledge of service offerings in other countries like the one in Australia to design VRS in Canada that is versatile enough to take into account technological advancements, flexible enough to allow for the use of multiple devices and cost effective.

2618   To do any less will run the risk of sending us down the path of inflated costs, proprietary services and potential fraud as we have seen in the U.S.

2619   M. MESSIER: Dans la vie publique de consultation, le Conseil a sollicité des observations sur la pertinence d'exiger un forfait Internet de base pour la SRV qui répondrait aux exigences minimales relatives à la vitesse de téléchargement nécessaire pour offrir un SRV fiable.

2620   Sorenson Communications a indiqué que les exigences minimales relatives à la vitesse de téléchargement pour son offre de SRV sont de 256 kbts par seconde avec une préférence de 1.5 mgts par seconde ou plus, pour une meilleure qualité de l'image de l'interprète.

2621   Ceci est cohérent avec l'expérience de Telus relative à son essai du SRV auquel Sorenson Communications a participé où les utilisateurs du SRV utilisaient une connexion Internet haute vitesse minimale fournie par Telus, ayant une bande passante en amont et en aval de 256 kbts par seconde.

2622   Or, selon le récent Rapport de surveillance des communications, presque tous les Canadiens ont présentement accès à un service Internet à large bande ayant une vitesse de téléchargement de 1.5 mgts par seconde et 94 pour cent des Canadiens ont accès à la vitesse de téléchargement cible de cinq mgts par seconde.

2623   Les câblodistributeurs soumettent conséquemment qu'il n'est pas nécessaire de rendre obligatoire l'offre d'un service Internet de base pour le SRV puisque presque tous les forfaits d'accès Internet disponibles sur le marché répondent déjà aux exigences minimales de vitesse pour le SRV.

2624   MR. BELAND: If the Commission determines that VRS should be mandated in terms of implementation the cable carriers support:

2625   (1), establishing a third party administrator to oversee the implementation and management of VRS in Canada with a balanced Board of Directors consisting of representatives from industry, accessibility groups and outside independent experts with a strong background in governments and administration;

2626   (2) a phased implementation approach to VRS along the lines put forward in the Mission Report including most notably an initial research phase to allow the parameters of the service to be more clearly defined and to allow a ramp-up and the availability of Canadian translators proficient in ASL and LSQ;

2627   (3) the use of non-proprietary technologies only, whether in terms of an user equipment or in terms of the central platform for the provision of VRS in Canada;

2628   (4) the use of a first competitive biding process to select the central technology platform provider and a second competitive biding process to select one or more provider interpretation services, both processes to be overseen by the third party administrator; and

2629   (5) a Commission approved funding cap on a provision of VRS both in an initial research phase as well as in an eventual fold deployment phase. A funding cap is a reasonable measure to ensure VRS will be deployed efficiently and to control the risk of cost escalation beyond the level considered reasonable by interested parties and the Commission.

2630   Il est important pour les câblodistributeurs que tous nos services de communications, y compris nos services adaptés aux besoins des personnes sourdes, malentendantes et souffrant d'un trouble de la parole soient fournis avec efficience et le plus efficacement possible.

2631   Le SRV, s'il est rendu obligatoire, ne doit pas faire exception.

2632   Nous avons prêté une attention particulière aux observations des parties intéressées et au Rapport d'expert versé au dossier de cette instance.

2633   Nous avons également pris soin de noter les leçons apprises à l'étranger, elles sont précieuses pour le Canada. Nous avons mis de l'avant plusieurs propositions qui, à notre sens, permettront au SRV, s'il est rendu obligatoire, d'être fourni de manière efficace et économiquement optimale, tout en maximisant les avantages pour les Canadiens.

2634   We thank you and we would be pleased to respond to any questions you may have.

2635   THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. And may I say what a pleasure it is to see you all sitting together as one big happy family.

2636   Vice Chair Pentefountas will do the questioning.

2637   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

2638   Alors, oui, ça fait un contraste entre ce que nous avons entendu ce matin... bien, oui, ce matin, de la part de Telus.

2639   I wasn't even trying to be funny there, but --

2640   Écoute, je veux juste commencer avec cette question-là parce que vous avez parlé des plate-formes puis je comprends que ça ressemble, d'après vos dires, à la téléphonie traditionnelle, mais les plate-formes, toutes les plate-formes, et vous êtes impliqués dans plusieurs plate-formes, vont être appelées au service dans le cadre d'une SRV et de partager les coûts et la recherche potentielle d'un tel service parmi tous les utilisateurs, qu'ils soient téléphonie, terrestre, la ligne terrestre, sans fil, Internet.

2641   Est-ce que vous ne pensez pas que ça sera une manière, la manière la plus appropriée de financer ce service?

2642   M. BÉLAND: Je vais faire deux commentaires puis Natalie va peut-être vouloir enchaîner.

2643   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Merci, monsieur Béland.

2644   M. BÉLAND: Le premier point c'est le Service de Relais Vidéo. C'est un substitut pour le service téléphonique de voix, c'est le but même de l'exercice de donner aux personnes sourdes un service qui ressemble le plus à...

2645   CONSEILLER PENTEFOUNTAS: Bien, mettons pour la base, oui.

2646   M. BÉLAND : Et donc, on voit une certaine logique à ce que les gens de la population générale qui sont appelés à contribuer à ce service-là, qui est un substitut pour leur service téléphonique de voix, ce soit justement les abonnés canadiens en général des services téléphoniques de voix. Il nous paraît qu'il y a une logique inhérente à cette suggestion-là.

2647   Deuxième commentaire, c'est cette notion qu'en fixant une base plus large de contributeurs que, dans un sens, les gens vont payer moins, mais tout ce qu'on arrive à faire, c'est de faire en sorte que les individus, les foyers canadiens payent à plusieurs reprises. Ils ne vont pas payer moins, ils vont payer à plusieurs reprises.

2648   Natalie, je ne sais pas si vous voulez ajouter quelque chose.

2649   MS MACDONALD: I think Dennis covered it well. At the outset we just want to clarify that the cable carriers absolutely will be contributing, as all other TSPs do. So our comments in this regard are really specific to from what pool should this be funded, and many of the intervenors had already proposed that the National Contribution Fund, or a model like it, apply.

2650   Because we're speaking here about -- so, for example, customers of Internet services today already have the functionality of video streaming and applications that allow for video. The significant portion of the costs for the VRS service relate to the interpretation services, which are the core to bringing the functionality of the call to the equivalent of a voice telephone call.

2651   Because the Contribution Fund model is for serving high-cost serving areas with basic telephone service, and we see this as also a functional equivalent to telephone service that is at a much higher cost because of the translation costs, we saw it as a logical conclusion that, if we're applying the National Contribution Fund model, that we would apply the same funding pool.

2652   That's it.

2653   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: You created a comparable with the NCF in that $143 million would serve 615,000 residential customers, and in this case we have 25,000 people serviced, and the cost could potentially be well north of $100 million.

2654   Do you want to add something to that sort of thinking?

2655   MR. BÉLAND: It's one of the reasons that we suggest that in an ideal world this is a service that should be funded by general tax revenues, because the amounts potentially involved are very, very substantial. And one of the things we've questioned is whether yourselves or ourselves are really the ones who are in a position to decide whether this is the place that society at large would choose to dedicated these resources, versus other needs for disabled groups or versus other social objectives.

2656   It may well be the place to invest that money. There clearly is a need for the service. But that higher level judgment, societal judgment, we question whether we are the ones to make that, and whether that's not something that's more appropriate for a more senior level of government.

2657   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Is that the consensus position? Okay.

2658   There are some leftover funds -- leftover, I think over the last five years there was a $75-million surplus in the MRS Fund.

2659   Do you have some thoughts as to whether or not you'd like that rolled into a potential SRV Fund?

2660   MR. BÉLAND: This notion of surplus in the MRS Fund --

2661   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Yes.

2662   MR. BÉLAND: -- only exists to the extent that parties charge their customers for MRS --

2663   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Yes.

2664   MR. BÉLAND: -- and in most cases here we don't. So the concept of a surplus doesn't exist. It's a service we finance, yet do not charge an explicit fee for, so we really don't have a comment on that issue.

2665   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: People are not, well, in a sense, being overcharged for that service, given that there's a surplus?

2666   MR. BÉLAND: If you're asking whether it be interesting to us that you initiate a study of whether the fees for that service are --

2667   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Well, there are two options. One, we could --

2668   MR. BÉLAND: -- currently excessive --

2669   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Yeah.

2670   MR. BÉLAND: -- it's something that would be fine, from our perspective, but again, we --

2671   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Well, there are two questions.

2672   One, obviously, would be: should those funds be used to help défrayer, offset the costs of this service? If so, fine. If not, your opinion on adjustments going forward.

2673   MR. BÉLAND: Maybe the bigger issue is the point that TELUS made this morning, whether you've -- you know, they, I should say, have got the costing and the pricing bang on.

2674   The bigger issue is probably the realization that MRS and video replay are services that are going to continue to be required in the future.

2675   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: M'hmm.

2676   MR. BÉLAND: They will continue to need funding, need dedication of resources.

2677   That's probably the most significant statement we can make to you. We think those services will continue to be required, will continue to be used. In fact, there are sub-segments of deaf and hard-of-hearing groups that cannot use VRS, and that's maybe the best input we can give you on that point.

2678   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: That's great.

2679   You introduced the idea of sort of two competitive bidding processes: one a technology platform and the other on the interpretation services. Both services would require a third-party administrator.

2680   What would that third-party administrator's relationship be with the CFA Fund?

2681   MR. BÉLAND: Very glad you asked that question because we had a healthy debate about this at lunchtime --

2682   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Okay.

2683   MR. BÉLAND: -- after the TELUS presentation, if fact. I know the Commission likes it when parties draw distinctions between themselves, so we'll do that now for you.

2684   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: I think you've done a pretty good job thus far already.

--- Rires

2685   MR. BÉLAND: Some of the ideas we heard this morning, we believe, have it perfectly backward.

2686   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Okay.

2687   MR. BÉLAND: We could be hard on TELUS; we could also be hard on the Commission Staff, who put forward the question that was asked this morning.

2688   Let's take, first of all, this notion that what we need is a new consortium that resembles the portable contribution consortium. We do not. The portable contribution consortium already exists; it already does a very good job of raising funds; it has existing forms, procedures, verifications. Commission Staff is intensely involved in reviewing the data filed by TSPs and making sure that it's in coherence with the accounting procedures and so on.

2689   We do not need a second portable contribution consortium. Let's use the one we have.

2690   That's point number one.

2691   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: M'hmm.

2692   MR. BÉLAND: What we do need, however, is an independent administrator for VRS, and that independent administrator needs to be structured so that it is able to run something. The contribution consortium doesn't run anything, it just raises money. We need an organization that can run something.

2693   So if you're asking us what the model would be from our perspective, look more to something like the CCTS. Okay? The CCTS is providing something akin to a public service, a complaints resolution service. It requires a delicate balance of stakeholders, consumer groups, TSPs who are footing the bill and -- in fact, if you look at the composition of the board of the CCTS --

2694   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Yeah.

2695   MR. BÉLAND: -- we strongly recommend something along those lines. Because what it has is it has a minority of TSPs, a minority of consumer reps -- in this case it could be VRS user reps -- and then the balance of power is held by independent, you know, management, governance, you know well-recognized experts.

2696   I, myself, am a member of the board of the CCTS. I think the dynamic works extremely well for an organization that delivers that form of service in that balance between stakeholders.

2697   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Well, given that, I won't even ask you another one of Staff's questions, being whether or not carriers would be able to absorb the cost of VRS. I think we got your answer earlier on.

2698   I just want to bring you on sort of briefly on this train of undue hardship. We haven't spoken about figures and numbers, but at what rate, if we were to apply the TELUS model, where all subscribers would be responsible for the cost of VRS, at what point do we reach that idea of sort of undue hardship? Just how much is too much?

2699   And if you want to give me a number for the entirety of the system, that's great. Or if you want to limit it specifically to telephony, that's another option.

2700   But I give you the floor on that.

2701   MR. WATT: Okay.

2702   Again, we had a busy lunch, so when we listened this morning, we thought, What is the best way to come at this particular issue? Let us try this, picking up on the point that Dennis made that, you know, people have talked about the dollars being collected from access lines or wireless users, et cetera, but bear in mind that many of those people are paying twice.

2703   So the way we thought about it was there are 12-and-a-half million households in Canada.

2704   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Right.

2705   MR. WATT: If we take the $32-million number from the Mission Report --

2706   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: The low-end number.

2707   MR. WATT: The low-end number -- you're effectively looking -- when you do the dividing --

2708   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: The math, yeah.

2709   MR. WATT: -- through and divide by 12, you get 21 cents a month per household. If you go to the $104 -- I'm sorry, I'll slow down -- the $104-million figure of the Sorenson study or proposal, submission, that works out to approximately 70 cents per month per household.

2710   Now those are simply numbers. So if the range, the 21 cents, 70 cents, really, depending on how many Canadians you spoke to, you'd get a lot of different opinions as to whether that was onerous, affordable, whether they would be in favour or not. You have the 20 to 70 cents on the one side from the households. You have, in that context, 15,000 to 25,000 users receiving a very good service from that collection of funds.

2711   But as Dennis said, it really is a societal issue as to whether that is where you think those resources should best be directed.

2712   As we say, we're not in a position to say, really, whether the 20 cents is onerous or the 70 cents is onerous. Various people, some families, will think 20 cents is onerous. Many won't.

2713   At the upper end, I think, again, many more people would think it was onerous, but you would probably still find some who would say they would be very happy to pay that amount.

2714   I don't know if that's helpful or not, but that is the way we have --

2715   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Well, it's helpful. I'm almost sort of sorry to be asking the question, but it is at the core, potentially, of what the Commission may have to decide upon.

2716   You mentioned that you thought the service should be paid for by the general tax pool.

2717   Would that, in effect, exclude a surcharge for users should that be envisaged?

2718   MR. WATT: In the context of a surcharge for users -- and we discussed this -- we thought, really, in the context --

2719   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Not over lunch again.

2720   MR. WATT: No, no, we did this last night, actually, and actually prior to that.

2721   One of the issues you're going to probably address, even in the context of what I just spoke about, is to achieve the $32-million cost figure, it's very possible that there will have to be a rationing of the service, and how would you propose to do that?

2722   Dennis can clean up the items that I missed, but we though you could restrict the hours of use.

2723   You could, I guess, administratively, say users have a certain number of minutes per month. But that may be, we thought, fairly administratively difficult, or more difficult.

2724   Third, some foreign jurisdictions have simply limited demand by limiting supply quite significantly. In some cases they'll need two, three interpreters at a time.

2725   And then there's the fourth option being the possibility of a surcharge, so that a partial payment, partial recovery of the costs made by the people using the service. There are pros and cons to this. It prevents frivolous -- probably prevents.

2726   I'm not suggesting there's any frivolous use. I think back in history. At one time I worked for Unitel. Our marketing people had a brilliant idea of having free long distance at a certain period of time: early Saturday mornings. What they found is, quickly early Saturday mornings became the peak period for the network because there were apocryphal stories of people setting up baby monitors through their long distance because it was free.

--- Rires

2727   MR. WATT: So standard economics: a charge will cause people to weigh their utility versus the cost, so...

2728   But, again, I don't have great insight into where that would rank on that list of governing options.

2729   Dennis?

2730   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: I think you've answered a lot of the questions we had following the initial document you submitted earlier this spring, but I just want to bring you briefly on the idea of the tier system that has been put into place in the U.S., where you've got a tier 1, a tier 2 and a tier 3 rate, and, depending on how much traffic the operator has, the rate changes.

2731   Just for the record, would you be in favour of -- and I'll be suggestive -- that we start off with the lower rate, and not sort of move towards that lower rate as our neighbours south of the border have done?

2732   MR. BÉLAND: In terms of the structure of the compensation of the operators --

2733   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Yes.

2734   MR. BÉLAND: -- overall, I think it's important for us to point out a couple of things first before I get directly at your question.

2735   One of the points we made in our presentation -- and again it's a clear distinction between ourselves and TELUS -- is we strongly recommend that the administrator -- who will be under your instructions -- we strongly recommend that the administrator separate the RFP for the underlying technology platform from the RFP for the translation services.

2736   We think that doing otherwise, combining the two, would open the door to abuses of the sort we see in the United States, open it wide, in fact.

2737   Now, assuming that you've separated -- or we've separated those two RFPs, we now have a situation where the administrator puts out an RFP for the platform, gets all sorts of ideas back -- the ideas will go from maybe somebody wants to suggest something that's proprietary, somebody else wants to suggest Skype, and there's everything in between -- and they all explain to us how their platforms are going to support as many devices as possible, and we pick the best one.

2738   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Yeah.

2739   MR. BÉLAND: That's done.

2740   And the price of that platform will simply be the result of that RFP process.

2741   We may not choose the cheapest one. Maybe with all the stakeholders together we say this, "There's one more expensive, but it's got enough functionality that that's what we want."

2742   That's done.

2743   Now we have a period of a few years where there's a ramp-up in training and a partial offering on that platform. Once we've had a few years of experience, we put out -- "we" the administrator -- puts out an RFP for the translation services.

2744   For the record, we believe that it is possible that one entity comes in and puts in the best bid and wins the whole contract for Canada. We believe it's possible that regional entities will collectively be the best option. Who knows?

2745   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Right.

2746   MR. BÉLAND: Same thing with the price: let's see what the RFP process leads to in terms of translator pricing based on some standards that you and/or the administrator, perhaps working together, have established for the service.

2747   So we wouldn't prejudge what --

2748   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Yeah.

2749   MR. BÉLAND: -- would be the pricing.

2750   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Certainly critical and central to your proposal is that we separate the platform from the interpreters.

2751   MR. BÉLAND: Absolutely.

2752   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: I mean that's key. In terms of governance, that would be at the core of this service.

2753   You may or may not -- and it goes back to a point we made earlier in terms of rationing or controlling supply -- but, you know, Sorenson had an estimate that 60 conversation minutes per month and Mission had 37, and the trial brought us up to 109.

2754   From what you've seen, what would be an end number and what would be appropriate or fair as a quota, if you were to establish one?

2755   MR. BÉLAND: Again, none of our companies have done trials, none of us have expertise in VRS, so we really are looking at the same numbers that you are.

2756   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Yeah.

2757   MR. BÉLAND: I don't know if we are ready to say what would be a quota or a top limit, but we do feel that the issue would probably need to be addressed by the administrator.

2758   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Right.

2759   MR. BÉLAND: The risk of a small number of VRS users using it so intently that it compromises the availability for everybody else, we think that is a risk and that it's probably the sort of thing that a well-constructed stakeholder board of an independent administrator could -- you know, reasonable people, I think, could discuss that and arrive a solution if the problem presents itself.

2760   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Again, this service is not in the field of your expertise, but we had representatives from the business community, just before you I think it was, and would you think it possible -- and I guess this would also fall under the purview of the administrator -- to create a distinction between commercial use and personal or residential use?

2761   Was that workable, potentially, that you have a two-tier pricing?

2762   Bet you didn't think about that over lunch.

2763   MR. BÉLAND: Sorry?

2764   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: I bet you didn't think about that over lunch.

2765   MR. BÉLAND: Well, it's difficult.

2766   Two-tier pricing, to the extent it's been discussed over the last two days, it's been discussed, my impression is, in the sense that residential users maybe pay $30 a month for voice phone service and maybe a business user pays $60, and is it reasonable that a residential user of VRS would pay $30 and a business user of VRS would pay $60?

2767   Probably that's reasonable, and I think you've heard from the user groups that they "seem" to agree with something along that line, but it doesn't really get at that issue we were discussing just a moment ago --

2768   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Yeah.

2769   MR. BÉLAND: -- which is if there are huge users, consuming enormous amounts of VRS time, you may -- I don't want to prejudge it -- but you may need some sort of mechanism for dealing with that.

2770   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: That's what came to mind in listening to you talk about some people sort of massively consuming the service and not making it available for others, and an imbalance created as a consequence of that.

2771   Again, I suppose a lot of these you would send off to the administrator to deal with.

2772   The question of markups: what would be an appropriate markup for the operators and the providers of this service?

2773   MR. WATT: I think that's one of the reasons we think a competitive RFP process is definitely the way to proceed. Then you don't have to get into questions as to the appropriate markup. They will decide themselves when they put their quotes in, and the administrator will be able to pick the best one from -- having regard to all the parameters it...

2774   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Briefly, Mr. Bland, on the wireless front, in terms of having capacity, we heard the possibility this morning from your colleagues at TELUS that the traffic may post some difficulties.

2775   With respect to your network, and potentially in Quebec, and potentially feeling an overconsumption of the service, how would that work on the wireless front?

2776   MR. BÉLAND: As you know, the wireless market and wireless networks are evolving very rapidly.

2777   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: To meet demand, obviously --

2778   MR. BÉLAND: Yes.

2779   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Yeah.

2780   MR. BÉLAND: We think the marketplace will take care of that issue, in the sense that -- in fact, in wireline and in wireless, there are already multiple offerings of different speeds and different caps and so on. Even Internet traffic management, there is some in Canada, there's not a lot, and the Commission has already required parties to publicly divulge those practices.

2781   So you put all that together, the multiplicity of offerings, on the wireless front specifically the rapid advancement in speeds and capacity, let me put it this way, we think you, at the Commission, have a lot to consider in getting this service off the ground. That's probably one of the things you don't need to worry --

2782   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Capacity's not one of them.

2783   MR. BÉLAND: -- too much about. There are sufficient offerings in the marketplace for users of VRS to get a service that meets their personal requirements.

2784   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Much has been said about the models, the financing models. I understand your position, but, for the record, we'd still sort of like your opinion on the models that have been put forth.

2785   I understand, in terms of financing, that you'd rather have it coming out of the general tax pool. My colleague sort of gave the long hybrid model question earlier this morning.

2786   When you look at the models, is there one that seems more efficient than the other, given your experience?

--- Pause

2787   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Will there be a centralized fund? Should we impose the collection of that fund on the carriers, and all the different combinations that come forward?

2788   MS MACDONALD: Yeah.

2789   So I think, as we had said, we do support the National Contribution Fund.

2790   The hybrid model, as I understand it, is one where the telecom service providers would --

2791   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Contribute to the NCF?

2792   MS MACDONALD: Okay, yeah.

2793   So we absolutely support that, in the case of a contribution to the National Contribution Fund, that all TSBs would contribute to it. But as we had said before, consistent with the current model for the Contribution Fund and the ultimate purpose of this service, that it would be the telephone services and not the Internet service.

2794   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: No, that --

2795   MS MACDONALD: Yeah.

2796   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: You made that clear.

2797   MR. BÉLAND: I might just add --

2798   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Please.

2799   MR. BÉLAND: -- because there's some confusion about the use of the word "hybrid."

2800   If it's used in a financial sense, Natalie has responded to that. But we've also had the impression that "hybrid" is used to refer also to the idea that the Commission might mandate TSPs to provide the VRS themselves, and this is an area where we agree with what TELUS said this morning.

2801   We would see that as pure inefficiency, in the sense that you're just setting up a middleman.

2802   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Yeah.

2803   MR. BÉLAND: If we were mandated to provide this service, we would turn around and contract it to someone.

2804   Why don't you go straight to the point and have a national administrator equip itself to make the service available to Canadians?

2805   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: There's a consensus, I think, amongst --

2806   MR. BÉLAND: Yeah.

2807   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: -- be they telcos, cablecos, whatever one wants to call themselves, service providers of all kinds, that you not be involved in that aspect of VRS potentially.

2808    MR. WATT: I think you definitely want to have a third-party administrator that is focused entirely on this particular service. That focus brings a lot of benefits in and of itself, and, in addition, you clearly will get economies of scale and scope.

2809   You wouldn't want to have separate companies choosing different platforms, potentially choosing different suppliers, for whatever reason. I think you will be able, presumably, to get a lower cost by having the largest scale --

2810   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Yeah.

2811   MR. WATT: -- made available to a particular company of interpreters.

2812   Now having said that, recognize the two languages and recognize the regions. But, again, I think that really is why a competitive bidding process under one collective umbrella of an administrator would be by far the most efficient process.

2813   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: I understand your position. It's very clear.

2814   Notwithstanding your position, if the Commission were, under the model that we just spoke of, were to obligate you, what would you consider to be an appropriate markup, given the social benefit of the service?

2815   I can throw a number out, but we leave it up to you. If the Commission were to put an obligation the carriers, what would be an appropriate markup?

--- Pause

2816   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Notwithstanding the fact that you don't want to offer the service, I understand that, but for the record.

2817   MR. BÉLAND: It is clearly a social good service, and the Commission, historically, has allowed rather low markups on social good services, and I think I would limit myself to that.

2818   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Okay.

2819   In terms of platforms, just briefly, you mentioned it earlier, the idea of multiple platforms or a common platform for VRS service, potentially.

2820   You would, in your opinion, feel that sort of the multiple-platform approach would be most appropriate?

2821   MR. BÉLAND: Thank you.

2822   This is another opportunity to resolve, potentially, some confusion.

2823   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: Yeah, just to clarify.

2824   MR. BÉLAND: The vision we have is of a single, non-proprietary, open platform to which a multiplicity of devices can be connected. I'm saying this in this way because I've heard the word "platform" used to refer to Android versus Apple, et cetera. Those are just the devices that are connecting to this one non-proprietary open platform. That's the vision that we espouse.

2825   COMMISSIONER PENTEFOUNTAS: I think you position's clear. I think we sort of did the tour of things we'd like to sort of get on the record. My colleagues may have some questions and there may be cleanup and follow-up on behalf of the legals.

2826   Thank you.

2827   THE CHAIRMAN: Commissioner Duncan.

2828   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Yes.

2829   So I'm probably going to be repetitive because we're getting down, I think, to sort of the crunch of the big issues here, but I understand that and you mentioned repeatedly that you felt that it was a government responsibility.

2830   What I didn't hear you say was that -- or maybe I should say: do you agree that the CRTC has an obligation to go forward with this? Are you prepared to set out any regulations or requirements that would say that we couldn't?

2831   MR. BÉLAND: We believe you have the power to go forward with that --

2832   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: That's my question.

2833   MR. BÉLAND: I wouldn't say you have the obligation to. That's what you're studying here. Yeah.

2834   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: But you don't have any argument to make that we don't have the obligation? I haven't heard you make it.

2835   MR. BÉLAND: No, what we've attempted to say is we believe the stakes are high enough and the resources involved are large enough that, ideally, this decision would be made at a higher level by the general government.

2836   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: So if it was our obligation to impose the service up to the point of undue hardship, would you agree with that, or do you have any opinion on that?

2837   MR. BÉLAND: Again, you have the tools in the act to mandate creation of this service.

2838   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: But I don't hear you coming forward with an amount that you would consider would constitute undue hardship either for the TSPs or for individual Canadians.

2839   MR. WATT: Well, I may not fully understand the question, but I think our position is that you're going to decide what is the appropriate balance, the costs versus the accommodation, and you will make the decision.

2840   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Okay.

2841   As far as the administrator, and I know you've suggested that we use a CCTS model, I'm just wondering in that model what control the Commission would have over the administrator if things went array. If we saw the prices escalating, like they do in the U.S., like, would we be able to dictate that the hours of service be cut back, or would we just simply say, "No more money from the Contribution Fund"?

2842   MR. COWLING: I think in the constitution of the administrator you'd build in a certain reporting and accounting mechanism so there would be a balance of influence between the Commission and the administrator.

2843   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Okay.

2844   Yeah, that's good.

2845   MR. BÉLAND: If I may add, I think, again, the CCTS is a model for that.

2846   The CCTS board operates with quite a degree of independence. A lot of the aspects of that organization are decided by the board in discussion amongst the stakeholders.

2847   But the Commission isn't entirely hands off. The Commission has set some of the larger parameters, some of the most important parameters, but hasn't necessarily gone in and then micromanaged every aspect of that organization, and I think conceptually that would be a model for you here.

2848   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Okay. Thank you.

2849   The Ontario Association of the Deaf has suggested a 20-cent increase might be an onerous increase. I'd have to go back and check the record to confirm that.

2850   But your calculation, Mr. Watt, of $32 million equating to 21 cents a month would mean that we'd be right at that limit at this point, if we followed the Mission model.

2851   MR. WATT: If you were look at it on a household basis, yes, you would. If you put those two pieces together, the $32 million, from the Mission Report, and then the 20-cent figure from the association, then, yeah, that's the conclusion.

2852   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Okay.

2853   MR. WATT: One thing, and maybe not to go back but just with respect to your last question, the Commission also, in regard to the CCTS, I believe there was a review proceeding after three years.

2854   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Yes, there was.

2855   MR. WATT: I think it was three.

2856   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Yes, yeah.

2857   MR. WATT: So, again, not that you want to review everything frequently, but that's another option that could be applied if you were concerned.

2858   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Okay.

2859   I'm just going to have a look at this here.

--- Pause

2860   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: This has to do with the markup on the service.

2861   In the National Contribution Fund for the high-cost areas, there is a markup on the service, right?

2862   MR. BÉLAND: The compensation that goes to the incumbent carriers per customer in high-cost serving areas is based on the difference between the cost to serve those customers and the revenue, the monthly fee. If I'm not mistaken, yes, there is a markup there, but I'm sure the incumbents could confirm that for you much better than we could.

2863   COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Okay, thank you.

2864   I think those are my questions, Mr. Chairman.

2865   Thanks you.

2866   THE CHAIRMAN: Commissioner Shoan.

2867   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Hello, just a couple of questions.

2868   I'm interested in the differences between your proposals and those of TELUS. It's very interesting.

2869   You said it would be unfair to require Internet users to contribute to the funding of VRS given that it's a service designed to be functionally equivalent to voice telephony. It's a service, essentially, that you really just need Internet access for, not necessarily a voice service, and I think TELUS made that point.

2870   Could you elaborate on that? I find it an interesting distinction: the insistence on the fact that it's functionally equivalent to voice telephony, but, in reality, it's a video service, which really only requires Internet access.

2871   So what are your thoughts on that?

2872   MS MACDONALD: Yeah, so -- and I think it can be, and it has been confusing, to hear throughout the whole week that this is a service that uses the Internet.

2873   Where we're coming from is that the Internet is already paid for, it's a monthly subscription, and the functionality that we're talking about that this service relies on, the video streaming functionality, is already there and paid for in the Internet subscription.

2874   But when you really look at the purpose of the service, it is to create the functional equivalent of what a hearing user experiences on a telephone call, and that has been stated time and again throughout the proceeding.

2875   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Right.

2876   MS MACDONALD: So when we look at the high-cost serving areas to provide local telephone service, and this is a functional equivalent, I know I've stated this before, but, you know, that's really where we're coming from.

2877   It has to do with the fact that, if we include the Internet -- I think TELUS was probably proposing to include Internet on the basis that they saw that as an expansion of the subscriber base to which the fund will be paid. But, really, many, many of our customers, they're the same customer.

2878   So whether they be an Internet customer or a phone customer, you're simply charging that customer for two services instead of the one. So it was just a logical conclusion for us that it should be coming from the telephone revenues.

2879   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay, that's fair. Thank you.

2880   Some LECs have a separate MRS territory and the excess profits make up the $75 million over the last five years, the number we quoted earlier. We can have a discussion on whether or not that's actually the correct number or whether people charge rate. However, all LECs have an MRS obligation. The LECs without a separate MRS rate, pay for MRS out of general revenues.

2881   Bell has argued that excess MRS profit should not be assigned to reduce the cost of VRS because the other LECs could also be making excess profits even without a separate MRS charge.

2882   Sorry, interpreters, I'm going too quickly.

2883   To help assess Bell's argument, we'd like to know the following:

2884   I understand that many cable companies don't charge a specific MRS rate to their end customers. How are the cable companies recovering their cost for providing MRS? Is it from the margins for other services offered by the companies or is it implicitly included in setting the monthly rate for their local service?

2885   MR. WATT: Well, I will start, because Rogers is, I think, probably the simplest case.

2886   We, for our wireline service, do have an MRS charge, so we collect it explicitly. We do not have an MRS charge for our wireless service.

2887   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Any others?

2888   M. MESSIER : Dans le cas de Cogeco, ce coût est vraiment un coût qu'on absorbe dans notre offre de service téléphonique. Donc, c'est simplement un coût. Il n'y a pas de ligne spécifique, de charge qui est appliqué au consommateur. Ça fait partie de notre coût d'offrir le service téléphonique, étant donné que c'est une obligation aussi.

2889   CONSEILLER SHOAN : Merci.

2890   MS MACDONALD: At EastLink, I would tend to agree with the same approach that Michel referred to, in that it's the cost of the phone service and it's simply -- you know, we charge our customers the overall cost of the services.

2891   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

2892   Mr. Cowling.

2893   MR. COWLING: And the same is true with Shaw's approach.

2894   MR. BÉLAND: At Vidéotron, as well, we have no MRS-specific fees, so our overall subscription rate covers the totality of our costs, including the cost of providing MRS.

2895   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

2896   Those are my questions. Thank you for being here today.

2897   THE CHAIRMAN: I just want to follow up on that.

2898   Do you have view on whether, because you mentioned, what I understood you to say anyway, that in Australia they moved the MRS service into the same administrator for this.

2899   Do you have a view on whether it wouldn't make more sense, if we were going this way, and if we did go for a VRS, to actually combine the services for the deaf and hard-of-hearing under one administrator and review the current MRS structure, perhaps coincidental with a review of this in three years, rather than have -- because one of the issues with MRS, where it's explicitly funded through a tariff, as TELUS mentioned, is that those revenues are declining because it's wireline, and that's an issue. Why wouldn't we just move -- it makes sense, if you're talking about efficiency, to bundle it all together.

2900   MR. COWLING: The answer is actually yes and no.

2901   THE CHAIRMAN: That's such a regulatory hearing answer.

2902   MR. COWLING: Yes, yes.

--- Rires

2903   MR. COWLING: I'll begin with the no.

2904   To combine those services under one administrator, if it's motivated by the vision that the same people provide those two services, then the answer is no, because I think everybody needs to understand that MRS, IP Relay, on one side, and VRS on another side, are different services, provided by different skilled people.

2905   The answer could be yes, however, in the sense that, as we've already stated, we believe that MRS and IP Relay will need to continue to exist even with VRS.

2906   We also believe that there's a potential for a nice equilibrium between the services, in the sense that there will be calls where you need that VRS functional equivalency, you need to express the emotion. There are probably other calls that that is less important, and a text-based communication, which is much less costly, could be used.

2907   If there's almost an unwritten protocol, even an educational element, that, you know, accentuates the fact that one of these services is expensive and valuable, the other is maybe a good service to use for less emotional or crucial needs, maybe a single administrator could work that together and arrive at an overall cost efficiency that's optimal.

2908   So in that sort of world, we could see maybe one entity managing the two, but, again, we wouldn't call it a necessity.

2909   THE CHAIRMAN: Good. Thank you. You're good to go.

2910   We'll take a 10-minute break.

--- Suspension à 1551

--- Reprise à 1600

2911   THE SECRETARY: We will now hear the last presenter of the day, the Association of Visual Language Interpreters of Canada. Please introduce yourselves and you have 20 minutes to make your presentation.

2912   Thank you. Please turn on your mike. Thank you.

PRÉSENTATION

2913   MS REAUME: Thank you.

2914   Mr. Chairman, Commissioners and CRTC staff, thank you for the opportunity to speak today.

2915   To my esteemed associates from deaf organizations, VRS advocacy groups, service providers and individual stakeholders who have or will be presenting throughout the week, thank you too for your time and efforts towards our shared goal of establishing video relay service in Canada.

2916   I am Christie Reaume and seated to my right is Jocelyn Mark Blanchet. We are here to represent the Association of Visual Language Interpreters of Canada, also known by the acronym AVLIC. I am AVLIC's elected President for the 2010 to 2014 terms and Jocelyn is AVLIC's first Vice President, also for the 2010 to 2014 terms.

2917   AVLIC is the only national, non-profit, professional association for interpreters whose working languages include a sign language. Currently, we represent over 700 professional American Sign Language-English or otherwise known as ASL-English interpreters and la langue des signes québécoise-Français or LSQ-French interpreters in Canada.

2918   Our membership also includes 30 deaf interpreters and almost 100 student interpreters who are currently pursuing studies at an Interpreter Education Program.

2919   AVLIC was incorporated in 1979 and currently has eight affiliate chapters across the country.

2920   AVLIC and our members uphold the highest standards of professional integrity, competence and ethics.

2921   We are the only certifying body for ASL-English interpreters in Canada through the means of our Canadian evaluation system.

2922   Our members are required to adhere to the AVLIC Code of Ethics and Guidelines for Professional Conduct.

2923   We offer a dispute resolution process to maintain quality and accountability to the field of interpreting;

2924   We have a health and safety committee to address concerns related to the occupational health and safety of interpreters.

2925   And our governing bylaws are formally recognized by Corporations Canada or Industry Canada.

2926   I should mention that citations for references I make within our presentation today are also included in the footnotes of the printed copies that were given to Ms Roy for distribution and will be available on the AVLIC website for the public to view.

2927   With the formalities of who we are aside, Jocelyn and I hope to provide reasons to support the implementation of video relay services in Canada; including areas specific to the role of a sign language interpreter.

2928   Our goal will be to address questions raised through the CRTC website, but details outside of AVLIC's scope will not be addressed in our presentation and we will respectfully defer them to others with the necessary expertise.

2929   While we do not represent the VRS consumers, special interest groups or service providers, we do represent one of the key players in the provision of video relay services which is the skilled interpreters required to operate a successful video relay service. We appreciate the opportunity to present our perspectives on this important issue.

2930   The goal in any communication interaction is to be understood through ideas and thoughts conveyed. For some deaf and hard of hearing people who struggle with literacy in English or French, the ability to present oneself as articulate may not be afforded through the current text-based relay service, which was introduced in 1985 over 28 years ago.

2931   Since the relay service operator is not able to take into account proficiency in ASL or LSQ nor literacy skills or cultural context into consideration, it can leave the deaf or hard of hearing person looking foolish, as noted in the personal account by Ms Mari Klassen in intervention number 3304.

2932   The role of a trained sign language interpreter is to take not only linguistic information into consideration, but also to take into account the cultures of those involved in the interaction. Additionally, an interpreter must bear in mind environmental factors, emotional context, appropriate register and social norms for different types of communication; for example, norms for a legal phone call versus norms for a conversation with your mother.

2933   The culmination of these skills, according to Dr. Marty Taylor in her 2005 VRS Task Analysis Report for the DO IT Center:

"...require[s] interpreters to be extremely sensitive and display a high level of competence both interpersonally and linguistically."

2934   Members of AVLIC are well-trained, qualified, professional sign language interpreters, the type of interpreters supported by the Canadian Association of the Deaf, as noted on their website, and have a skillset that is able to adapt appropriately to the video relay service environment.

2935   These skills noted in Dr. Taylor's VRS Task Analysis Report, include being able to:

"...multi-task linguistically, physically, and mechanically; work as linguistic and cultural mediators while at the same time switching between two additional roles, that of an 'operator' and 'customer service representative'; quickly [gleaning] information, often from subtle nuances, and [making] quick decisions to match the intent of each call."

2936   It is clear from yesterday's presentations, the thousands of interventions and the combined effort of Deaf and hard of hearing citizens, interpreters and service providers alike, that a national sustainable VRS is warranted.

2937   We are here to address any concerns raised by the Commission regarding the provision of interpreting services for the implementation of VRS. In the notice for this consultation, there were three specific concerns outlined. They are:

2938   Number one, the drain on the pool of qualified interpreters from community and educational settings;

2939   Number two, the occupational health and safety issues for the interpreters working in the VRS centres;

2940   And number three, impact on VRS if there are not sufficient numbers of trained interpreters to fill staffing needs.

2941   It is our belief that the interpreting community, the deaf and hard of hearing community and the VRS service providers can work together on resolutions for each of these matters. Our hope is these will not be barriers to the implementation of VRS in Canada.

2942   Some resolutions to these issues recently noted are:

2943   For number one, the drain on the pool of qualified interpreters from community and educational settings:

2944   Yes, there have been concerns noted about Canadian interpreters providing services for the benefit of American consumers. Our hope is that these concerns will be greatly alleviated if the benefactors of the video relay services are Canadian consumers.

2945   There are many situations that could be handled through VRS instead of booking an interpreter to appear onsite. With the establishment of VRS in Canada, we would see Canadian interpreters working to provide services that benefit Canadian callers.

2946   In the VRS Task Analysis Report it notes:

"...many, not all, interpreters interviewed stated they also continue to accept community assignments."

2947   While there may be an impact felt in the more immediate timeframe after implementation of VRS in Canada, the well-established Interpreter Education Programs already operating in Canada may be able to entice more students to enrol given increased and tangible job prospects in settings with self-regulated schedules afforded through VRS call centres.

2948   A sustainable VRS would allow interpreters to work fulltime in the profession and possibly entice those who have left to return to attractive employment prospects.

2949   For the occupational health and safety issues for the interpreters working in the VRS centres there are preventative measures that can be taken by the interpreters themselves, including adaptation of sign production through movement fluency, joint angle and force of movements and of resting arms between utterances or while processing the source message utterances, as outlined in the Occupational Health and Safety for Sign Language Interpreters Guide. This document was prepared by Dr. Kathryn Woodcock and Dr. Steven Fischer.

2950   Another recommendation by Dr. Woodcock and Dr. Fischer is to:

"....negotiate multiple or frequent breaks...when agreeing to terms and conditions of service provision."

2951   Further to that, prevention of injury is more possible in an "interpreter-friendly" environment compared to freelance work where the interpreter has to self-advocate. With VRS centres relying on their workforce to be able to complete the necessary shifts to provide service, it is in their best interests to support, encourage and take affirmative action to ensure ergonomic factors are a primary interest.

2952   Policies would need to be put in place to ensure the interpreter is not sitting for an extended period of time, is able to adjust their direct line of sight, has the opportunity to stand to interpret if that is more comfortable, and is accommodated in any way ergonomically to prevent injury.

2953   And number three, for impact on VRS if there is not sufficient numbers of trained interpreters to fill staffing needs:

2954   We believe supply and demand principles will naturally occur. However, in the beginning when demand exceeds supply we would expect a phased-in model that would provide Canadians access to a scaled-down version of ultimate goal of 24/7 VRS.

2955   Gainful employment will also attract more applicants to Interpreter Education Programs thus increasing the pool of trained interpreters.

2956   And if the CRTC were to implement VRS in Canada, our members could readily provide services.

2957   MS BLANCHET: To this point, we've focused our efforts on the interpreting aspects of implementing VRS in Canada. That is our area of expertise and I believe the primary reason the CRTC graciously granted our request to present today.

2958   However, as an association with very strong ties to the deaf and hard of hearing community, we must use this national forum to echo the incredible impact that video relay services would have towards the betterment of the lives of all Canadians.

2959   Not only deaf and hard of hearing people will be using VRS. The service is provided for the benefit of all Canadians, including the general population who might need to communicate with deaf and hard of hearing individuals. These people include businesses, family members, friends, teachers, community groups just to name just a few.

2960   This is not a service for 15 to 20,000 deaf and hard of hearing Canadians as mentioned in the notice for this hearing, but a service again for all Canadians.

2961   As outlined in our original intervention, number 1319, as well as part of the comments shared by the over 3,000 submissions received by the CRTC, the reasons for implementation of VRS in Canada, without further delay, include the following:

2962   - One being the adherence to the Canadian Constitutional Act of 1982, Part I: Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

2963   The Charter guarantees:

"Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability."

2964   With advances in telecommunications' technology over the past 28 years, the current text-based relay service is no longer an equitable system as is afforded to the general public. It is an antiquated system, relegating many members of the deaf and hard of hearing community to second-class citizens.

2965   Other countries have had video relay services in operation for as many as 17 years. As noted in the Canadian Hearing Society's position paper on national VRS, and I quote:

"Canada is one of only two countries in the G8 that does not have VRS."

2966   As a leader in human rights and as a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, we should not be subjecting deaf and hard of hearing people to what is defined by the UN as:

"...attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinders...full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others."

2967   - Number two, the elimination of barriers related to the use of a second language:

2968   Current text-based relay services available are laborious and excessively time-consuming, as described in Mr. John Warren's intervention, number 3276.

2969   In the 2009 report on VRS commissioned by the CRTC it was noted that text-based relay services are:

"...not very demonstrative, because non-verbal cues are not transmitted. Conversely, a video relay service would bring more fluidity and emotion to communications."

2970   For many deaf and hard of hearing people in Canada, English or French is a second language. Innate with second-language issues is the level of fluency, particularly in written form. As a result, for some deaf and hard of hearing Canadians the current text-based relay service is prohibitive. Deaf and hard of hearing people have the right to, as prescribed by the UN:

"...recognition and support of their specific cultural and linguistic identity, including sign languages and deaf culture."

2971   Requiring all calls to be made in a second language, and in a text-based form, creates barriers that can be eliminated by establishing VRS.

2972   - Thirdly, greater access to 9-1-1 services:

2973   Further to the idea just presented, for deaf and hard of hearing people in Canada whose fluency in written English or French may be marginal, the idea of accessing emergency services via 9-1-1 may not be an option. If, at the best of times, communicating through a text-based relay service is considered a barrier, adding in the inherent panic and fear when placing a 9-1-1 call to an operator through the current system creates an increased barrier to this vital service.

2974   Additionally, a text-based relay call can take up to three times as long as a video relay call and, in an emergency situation, those minutes can mean the difference between life and death.

2975   In the 1997 Eldridge v. British Columbia case, the Supreme Court of Canada handed down the decision that, quote:

"Failure to provide sign language interpreters - who are, in fact, necessary for effective communication for the procurement of medical services - is a violation of equality rights under section 15(1) of the Charter..."

2976   In that case the ruling further outlined that:

"...any health care service, facility, or good that receives federal funding, whether directly or indirectly, must provide accessibility to those services, facilities, and goods for people who are deaf, hard of hearing, or otherwise disabled or handicapped."

2977   By extension, for those using 9-1-1 services, federally funded through the CRTC, for medical issues, not having access to a VRS operator, a trained signed language interpreter; that is, could be seen as a violation of this Charter.

2978   Further to that, access to any government phone service receiving federal funding could be seen as inaccessible to those whose written language skills are insufficient to hold a text-based conversation.

2979   - Improved employment opportunities:

2980   The Canadian Association of the Deaf notes:

"VRS is an investment that will generate the full, productive participation of deaf Canadians in social, economic, political and cultural aspects of this country. VRS is crucial for breaking down employment barriers and enhancing access to all services for deaf and hard of hearing people."

2981   In Dr. Taylor's 2005 VRS Task Analysis Report, she provides empirical evidence of this, by reporting, and I quote:

"[Deaf and hard of hearing people] can advance in their careers because they are able to make daily contact with non-deaf individuals and conduct business freely through video relay services. One example of this was a deaf individual who worked for the same company for several years without a raise or promotion, after only a couple of months using VRS this individual received a promotion and [not one but] TWO raises."

2982   Increasing telecommunication access will have a correlative effect on the employment opportunities because deaf and hard of hearing individuals could be more readily placed in positions where telephone calls are routinely required. With the current text-based relay services, such positions are not an option for most deaf and hard of hearing workers.

2983   Lastly, equality for deaf and hard of hearing children:

2984   An important and often forgotten group is the argument for deaf and hard of hearing children. The discussions focus on equality for adults, but for children, those whose language skills in English or in French are still developing, access to current text-based relay services are out of reach.

2985   The ability to make a 9-1-1 call would not be an option for many deaf and hard of hearing children, despite being available to the majority of children in Canada. And non-emergency calls such as to children's help lines or to family and friends are likewise unavailable to many deaf and hard of hearing children.

2986   The UN recommends:

"Children with disabilities should have full enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms on an equal basis with other children..."

2987   As a result of the current text-based relay system in Canada, deaf and hard of hearing children are often not afforded the same right to communication as the majority of Canadian children.

2988   As a non-profit, volunteer-run association, AVLIC understands as much as anyone the need for collaborative thorough research. We appreciate that the CRTC has made efforts to do exhaustive investigation on the feasibility of implementing VRS in Canada.

2989   AVLIC thanks the CRTC for your efforts to operate a VRS trial in B.C. and Alberta, and then seek the public feedback through interventions and finally through this hearing.

2990   We hope you'll listen to the overwhelming evidence from experts and from the personal stories shared with you by prospective VRS users that video relay services are needed in Canada now.

2991   Denial of this well-established telecommunication service is unwarranted in Canada. Please support the immediate implementation of video relay services in Canada.

2992   Thank you.

2993   THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Commissioner Shoan will begin the questioning.

2994   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Good afternoon. Thank you for being here today. So my first question is a general information question. Do you have any information with respect to the approximate percentage of deaf or hard of hearing Canadians who are not fluent in either English or French?

2995   MS REAUME: No, we do not have access to any information about how many deaf Canadians are not fluent in English or French.

2996   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. Thank you.

2997   My next question is a three-part question. You answered, you alluded to it, in a sense, in your oral presentation but I'd like you to flesh it out a little bit further. So the question is is there a sufficient number of ASL interpreters to, a. support a 24/7 service; b. support multiple VRS providers, and c. if yes, under what conditions in terms of a restricted schedule or other aspects?

2998   MS REAUME: Okay. I'll start with your first question.

2999   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

3000   MS REAUME: I think one thing that needs to be clarified, something that we've noticed has been discussed several times during previous presentations is the number of interpreters in Canada and that will directly answer your question as to whether or not there are enough interpreters to provide service. So, for AVLIC we have over 700 members; however, in Canada it's not a requirement to be a member of your national professional organization in order to work. So there are a number of interpreters that work within Canada that are not members of Canada -- excuse me, of AVLIC for whatever reason, and so we don't have access to those numbers, but we do know that there are many interpreters out there who are not currently members of AVLIC.

3001   So, I think your second question relates to ...

3002   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: So just to close the loop --

3003   MS REAUME: Sure.

3004   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: -- on your first answer.

3005   MS REAUME: M'hmm.

3006   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: So given that there may be interpreters out there who aren't members of AVLIC, do you feel that given the number of your members and the number of non-member interpreters, do you think amongst that body of interpreters there are sufficient numbers to have a 24/7 service right off the bat?

3007   MS REAUME: I do think that that relates to the second part of your question --

3008   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

3009   MS REAUME: -- which talks about multiple service providers.

3010   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Great.

3011   MS REAUME: I think that the way to do this is something that all of you have alluded to in the past -- in the previous presentations, is ensuring that there are service providers or call centres throughout Canada and not just within one city or in just certain areas because it would drain the pool of qualified interpreters within that area. So we do believe that if there were several call centres or if there were more than one service provider, that there would be able -- there would be enough interpreters to fill the need across Canada as long as it was distributed fairly, so that the pool of qualified interpreters within the community was not drained.

3012   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. Thank you.

3013   From your knowledge of the interpreter market, would you say there are enough interpreters in both languages to permit a simultaneous launch of VRS and ASL and LSQ available for the same number of hours?

3014   MS REAUME: Unfortunately because we currently only represent a very few number of LSQ French interpreters but we do know that there are several LSQ interpreters who work within Ontario and Québec specifically that are not members of AVLIC, we do know that there are many of them out there, we don't know how many of them there are, though. So I would like to respectfully defer that question to -- if you could ask that question of the representatives from UQAM and SIVET tomorrow because I think that they'll have a better understanding of who works within their area and how many interpreters there are, and how many qualified interpreters there are in their area.

3015   But we do know that -- there was someone in their presentation yesterday that said that, "If you build it, they will come," --

3016   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Mm-hmm.

3017   MS REAUME: -- and I think that we feel the same way. That if there was sustainable employment for LSQ French interpreters working in a VRS setting, I think that some interpreters who have since left the profession may come back. I think that we would see an increased pool in the registration for the UQAM program. So I do think that in the future we would see an increased pool that would be able to take care of the demand and supply that happens in a VRS call centre.

3018   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. Fair enough. And I certainly will ask that question of UQAM tomorrow, but --

3019   MS REAUME: Thank you.

3020   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: -- if I'm reading between the lines, you're saying not at present, but, "If you build it, they will come," it will happen in fairly short order?

3021   MS REAUME: We would -- we would believe that that would be the case, yes.

3022   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. Thank you.

3023   So I was on your website and I noticed the number one objective your strategic plan was to increase the number of your interpreters achieving the Certificate of Interpretation, and I noticed that your evaluation system has four phases. And I was reviewing the four phases of certification in the context of reading Mission Consulting's report, and their suggestion that there be a phased-in approach for VRS, and during that preliminary phase that there be grants given to interpreter agencies and schools to increase the body, the number and the skills. Basically the number of interpreters in Canada available for VRS interpreting. Obviously there would likely be some discussion about quality of service, certification standards of which AVLIC's probably would come up. Do you think, given that body -- given that opportunity for extra funding to increase the body of interpreters to provide VRS services, that you would be able -- you would be able to accelerate your certification process, perhaps provide more opportunities to certify more quickly in order to increase the pool of interpreters on a more rapid basis?

3024   MS REAUME: That's an excellent question. And if I can step back just a bit just to do a little bit of clarification about our certification system as well. Our profession is unlike other professions. I think that the expectation of most professions is that somebody would go through secondary education, some kind of an apprenticeship or an internship, and then would be involved in some kind of test taking or skill-based test taking, and then they would be granted certification in order to work. Our profession is different. Students go through the Interpreter Education Program, and upon graduation they can become members of AVLIC and they can work immediately. So certification is something that our members strive towards but it's not required in order to work. So we would be looking at increasing our general pool of members and general pool of trained interpreters in order to provide a variety of services which would include video relay services.

3025   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Would you say your certified interpreters are the most active, most employable?

3026   MS REAUME: I would not say that ... How do I answer that? I would --

3027   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Let me rephrase. Let me --

3028   MS REAUME: Thank you.

3029   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: -- rephrase that. Would you say that your certified interpreters are the most qualified interpreters to provide a VRS-type service?

3030   MS REAUME: I think that there are a wide variety of our members who could provide video relay services.

3031   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

3032   MS REAUME: I don't think that certification is required for that. However, having said that, certification definitely is something that all of our members strive towards. And so, people who have gone through our certification process and have been granted their certification definitely have shown that they have the skill in order to do a wide variety of -- of settings.

3033   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. Thank you.

3034   MS REAUME: You're welcome.

3035   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: With respect to Interpreter Education Programs, I was reviewing that section of your website as well, the first thing I wanted to do was confirm the programs that you had listed on your website in terms of whether they were still functioning and they were still providing interpreters. I just want to make sure it's up to date and accurate. You've listed I believe there was six. There was Douglas College in British Columbia; Lakeland College in Alberta; Red River College in Manitoba; George Brown College in Ontario; Université du Québec à Montréal in Québec, and the Nova Scotia Community College in Nova Scotia. Are those all accurate and funct-- and --

3036   MS REAUME: Yes, they are.

3037   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. Fantastic.

3038   I also noticed that there was a separate section entitled "Interpreter Education Programs Recognized by AVLIC". So, I guess my question is what distinguishes this second list of programs from that initial list of six, and is there any possibility that the subsequent list on your website, which I won't read off, perhaps we could add it to the record later, is there any possibility that those additional programs could, in fact, be elevated to the -- sort of the more -- the ones that you generally promote as interpreter programs for interpreters to enrol in?

3039   MS REAUME: That's also an excellent question and actually I've never looked at our website in that way and I think we might change the way that it's listed so that people don't have that perspective of them when they look at the list.

3040   So what has happened is the programs that are listed there are all the ones that are currently running in Canada.

3041   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: That's the first list?

3042   MS REAUME: The first list, yes, the list of six that you -- that you named. So, the list below is of programs that have since closed or programs that -- for example, our membership criteria right now indicates that an interpreter who applies must have graduated from an Interpreter Education Program. And it may be a program from -- just, say, for example, from the United States --

3043   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: M'hmm.

3044   MS REAUME: -- where we're not familiar with that program and we don't know what their curriculum looks like, we don't know much about the program. So what we've done is we have a -- somewhat of a committee that goes through and looks through that curriculum and says, yes, students that graduate from that program most likely are graduating with a similar skill set as the interpreters who are graduating from our six current programs. And so we would deem them as qualified for applying for membership and they would be approved for membership based on that list. So we've added that list to the -- to the website for people who have graduated from those programs. They wouldn't have to submit their program and have it go through a review. It's just if you've graduated from that program, you would automatically qualify for membership.

3045   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay, understood. So potentially the list of actual interpreter programs or interpreters graduating from a program is greater than the actual six that's listed -- that's on your website, the pool could actually be quite a bit bigger?

3046   MS REAUME: That's correct.

3047   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. That's great to know. Thank you.

3048   Some parties have submitted that the introduction of VRS call centres in Canada has put upwards pressure on interpreter wages. Has AVLIC witnessed increases in its member wage rates?

3049   MS REAUME: Unfortunately wage rates is not something that AVLIC tracks of its members. It's -- I think it's been a conversation that has been a long time coming.

3050   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

3051   MS REAUME: We do know that there are wage discrepancies across Canada. What that range is we're not entirely sure, but I can't say for sure whether or not VRS coming to Canada has --

3052   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Has had an impact on that.

3053   MS REAUME: Right.

3054   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. And so if I was to ask what the average wage rate of an AVLIC COI interpreter was, you wouldn't have that information?

3055   MS REAUME: It would vary.

3056   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. Great. Thank you.

3057   When TELUS performed this 18 month trial in Vancouver, Calgary, and Edmonton, approximately how many of AVLIC's members were employed in VRS and how did this impact AVLIC's daily operations? In -- that is, did AVLIC experience any shortage of interpreters, and if so, was there an increase in AVLIC's no fill rate?

3058   MS REAUME: Well, AVLIC actually doesn't provide interpreting services. We're not an interpreting referral agency. So we represent the interpreters that work within Canada. So, we provide things like support for interpreters, making sure that if they need support with their employer related to health and safety concerns, we would support them in that. We try and make sure that we're guiding the profession and moving it forward, but we're not actually an interpreter referral agency --

3059   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

3060   MS REAUME: -- so we don't keep track of where it is that our interpreters work, so unfortunately I'm not able to tell you how many interpreters moved into the VRS call centres once they were established in Canada.

3061   MS BLANCHET: Just in addition to -- as we are not an interpreter referring agency, we advance the profession through our membership through our Code of Ethics and Guidelines for Professional Conduct, as well as we have a dispute resolution process that upholds our Code of Ethics.

3062   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

3063   MS BLANCHET: So just to add that just to give you a better understanding as to what exactly our scope is.

3064   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. Thank you very much.

3065   If VRS is implemented in Canada, could AVLIC represent its members and offer a comprehensive, i.e. technology and interpreters' ASL offering? For example, bidding on a potential contract, or would AVLIC want to take on that sort of leadership role with respect to VRS?

3066   MS REAUME: I'm sorry, could you repeat the question?

3067   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Sure. If VRS was to be implemented in Canada, could AVLIC represent its members and offer a comprehensive ASL offering for VRS in the sense of bidding for a potential contract? Would you envision the role of AVLIC expanding to encompass that role?

3068   MS REAUME: If I'm understanding your question correctly, do you mean would AVLIC consider bidding and being one of the administrative -- being part of that administrative role --

3069   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Right.

3070   MS REAUME: -- in providing video relay services?

3071   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: That's correct.

3072   MS REAUME: Ah, thank you. No, that's not something that -- that AVLIC would be capable of doing and it's also not something that is part of our objectives. We're just -- we're here to represent the interpreters and advancing the profession.

3073   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. So how aware would you say deaf and hard of hearing Canadians are of VRS? I'm asking from the context of education and outreach in the event if the decision is made to implement VRS in Canada. What sort of education and outreach and awareness would need to be made to increase the profile of VRS and whether you have any experience in terms of discussions with your interpreters about whether or not there is an awareness amongst the deaf community.

3074   MS REAUME: I believe that at this point with everything that's been going on since 2008 with the feasibility studies and the TELUS trial, I think that there is generally an increased awareness amongst deaf and hard of hearing people about video relay services. And I think that one of the things that we would like to leave everyone here with today is that because we have this momentum now and we have the attention of the deaf and hard of hearing committee -- community, excuse me, that this would be the time to move forward and making sure that the service is provided sometime in the near future.

3075   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

3076   What would you say is the biggest barrier in consumer adoption of VRS if it were to be implemented?

3077   MS BLANCHET: Sorry, might I just clarify? "Consumer", just who specifically would you be referring to in that?

3078   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: The biggest barrier in consumer adoption of VRS. In the event that it was decided that a VRS service should be implemented in Canada, what would be the greatest obstacles for its ubiquitous adoption by the deaf and hard of hearing community? If you don't have a perspective, that's fine, you can say that.

3079   MS BLANCHET: I think that would just be best referred to -- to other deaf advocacy and video relay --

3080   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

3081   MS BLANCHET: -- service advocacy organizations. They would have a better perspective and scope on that.

3082   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. Great. Thanks.

3083   Does a common privacy and confidentiality standard exist for all sign language interpreters and/or interpreter organizations? What are your privacy and confidentiality standards for interpreters?

3084   MS REAUME: AVLIC has a Code of Ethics and Guidelines for Professional Conduct, which all members must adhere to. And I think that that's -- if that's something that -- a document that you would like for us to send to you before, I believe, the November 15th deadline, we would be happy to do so. So all members of AVLIC are required to adhere to this Code of Ethics, and within that Code of Ethics is quite a bit of discussion around confidentiality. And so, I know that some companies are insistent on supplying their own policies related to confidentiality and that would be fine as well, but all AVLIC members do have a Code of Ethics that they adhere to.

3085   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay, that's great. Thank you.

3086   In that vein, one submission suggested, for example, that it would be acceptable to breach the confidentiality between a VRS operator and caller if a caller was planning a crime or discussing suicide with other than a mental health administrator or counsellor. What are your views on that insofar as your confidentiality and privacy policy?

3087   MS BLANCHET: As an interpreter when we are engaged in the interpreting process, that information would be relayed through the interpretation to the other party involved in the interpretation.

3088   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Would you get a little bit closer to your mike?

3089   MS BLANCHET: I'm sorry.

3090   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: No, that's fine.

3091   MS BLANCHET: When we're engaged in the interpreting process, should somebody divulge that they wish to commit a crime or harm themselves in some way, that information we would be interpreting, and so that -- the other party involved in the communication would be privy to that information as well and they could follow up on any actions necessary to divulge that to the police or any other officials.

3092   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. That's great. If you could file your Code of Ethics with us by the deadline, that would be great. I think it would be a useful document for the people participating in this proceeding to review.

Engagement

3093   MS BLANCHET: I'd be happy to.

3094   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: All right. Okay.

3095   Have you reviewed the -- the University of Québec à Montréal and SIVET proposed model for LSQ/VRS work in the ALS market? Are you familiar with that proposal?

3096   MS REAUME: No, I'm sorry, I'm not.

3097   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. That's fine.

3098   MS BLANCHET: We're aware that the proposal exists, but unfortunately just linguistic barriers we --

3099   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. No problem. That's fine.

3100   MS BLANCHET: -- unfortunately weren't able to access it.

3101   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Just give me one more moment.

3102   Going back to wages for a moment. Would you be able to provide us with a range of typical wages for your membership?

3103   MS REAUME: The wage across Canada varies greatly. We've been informed, not officially --

3104   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: M'hmm.

3105   MS REAUME: -- but through conversation and through meeting other interpreters, possibly at conferences or from interpreters who have contacted us asking for support, we've heard wages as low as $15 an hour --

3106   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: M'hmm.

3107   MS REAUME: -- and we've also heard of wages as high as $75 an hour. It depends on the location in Canada. It depends on the skill of the interpreter. It depends on experience. So, it varies greatly.

3108   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

3109   There have been some submission throughout this process about the typical number of hours an interpreter works weekly, and the ranges have varied between 10 to 15 hours a week. In your experience or based on whatever knowledge or expertise or anecdotal evidence you may have heard, how often does an interpreter work on a weekly basis?

3110   MS REAUME: That can also vary. So it depends on the situation. When interpreters work in educational settings, they'll typically have literally hands on more interpreting hours than somebody who might work in the community because the community interpreter is required to travel to several of their appointments. And so, a lot of their time is eaten up by their travel to -- to and from each appointment.

3111   There is also the consideration of community interpreters that are booked for possibly an all week event, such as the interpreters that are here today. This week they may work well more -- excuse me, many more hours than they would have last week or next week. So it all depends on the kind of appointments that are coming through and it's a -- kind of a -- it depends on what the need is in the community.

3112   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay. And as a follow-up question to that then, given that interpreting for a VRS service potentially would mean no travel, do you think it would be more appealing for interpreters than, for example, their typical contracts that would require quite a bit of travel?

3113   MS REAUME: I -- we do -- we have had that discussion recently. We think that there are a lot of members who would see the benefit in working for a video relay centre. Some of those benefits would include not having to travel to and from each appointment. It would include a set schedule. It would include a set pay rate. So they would be getting the same amount, you know, every week or every two weeks depending on if they're working full time or part time.

3114   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Right.

3115   MS REAUME: There's also considerations to be made in terms of benefits, pension.

3116   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: Okay.

3117   MS REAUME: There's lots of reasons why many of our members might consider working at a video relay service centre would be very attractive.

3118   COMMISSIONER SHOAN: That's great. Those are my questions. Thank you very much.

3119   MS REAUME: You're welcome. Thank you.

3120   THE CHAIRPERSON: Commissioner Simpson.

3121   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Thank you very much.

3122   I would like to take an opportunity to try and understand a little more about what goes on in your world, and I will tell you why, because we are looking at -- and we are late into the game in VRS, we have heard that, so there's nothing to stop us from trying to be last best, but my question to you is this: What makes someone want to become an interpreter?

3123   MS REAUME: That's a very loaded question.

3124   There's lots of reasons why people become interpreters and there's lots of reasons why people stay -- remain being an interpreter and lots of reasons why people are no longer interpreters.

3125   I don't know that I can speak for our entire membership for that, but if I may I can speak personally.

3126   When I became an interpreter I became entrenched in the deaf community and it was a community like no other I had ever even been introduced to, let alone been involved in. I think that people who are interpreters, whether they be visual language interpreters or spoken language interpreters, we have a goal of seeing communities come together to understand each other. I think that's probably one of the most important things.

3127   When it comes to someone who is a visual language interpreter, I think that it is even more entrenched in who we are, because we see miscommunication happen so often between people who are not deaf and people who are deaf and hard of hearing, that we want to be part of that process in making sure that everyone in the room understands each other and that everybody is heard. It's not just about understanding each other, but it really is about being heard.

3128   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: This may sound impertinent, but I have worked enough with members of the deaf community to -- and I say this in a positive light, that it's a very political community -- in a small "P" sense -- it's a very smart community, it's very engaged, very aware and operates almost in a parallel dimension sometimes I feel, so what you are saying is you tap into that.

3129   So is it then why interpreters and their customers have such a unique face-to-face relationship and perhaps why interpreters haven't embraced a technology that has been around for 10 years and realized that their business model is changing and could have perhaps put technology to work even before government had to intervene?

3130   That's a loaded question.

3131   MS BLANCHET: It is.

3132   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: How do you get to be green? I'm always red.

3133   MS BLANCHET: Excuse me. Thank you.

3134   I think that you really tapped into something in terms of unique relationship. Interpreters are mentored, fostered, taught by deaf people, by the community, and they give so much of themselves to us and to our work that it would be impossible just to give that back in terms of solely providing a service. That face-to-face relationship, the involvement in the deaf community is just entrenched, like Christie said, in who we are as interpreters and it is so important to us.

3135   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: But even nurses get paid. And I understand that we all have bills to pay, I mean does it really tear you up a little bit to have to render a bill to someone or would you rather have that bill go somewhere else? I mean it's not an ethics question, but it's a bit of a moral compass question. You do this because you like to, but you also have to get paid.

3136   MS REAUME: Typically, our bill goes to the service provider or the business, so we don't -- usually we are able to use our voices to explain to those service providers why there is a need to hire a qualified interpreter. So usually that's a part of our job where we actually get to advocate on behalf of our profession, which then leads to everybody understanding each other. We get to advocate to service providers as to why a qualified interpreter is so important.

3137   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: I'm just wondering why somebody hasn't been in front of a Dragon's Den by now. After 10 years of such pent up demand that someone hasn't come forward and said, "I have a great idea, why don't I get myself and nine others like me and put a Skype unit in a little office somewhere and start making some money.

3138   Why hasn't that happened? Is it -- well, I will let you answer that. Why hasn't it happened before now?

3139   MS REAUME: We are deferring to each other.

--- Rires

3140   MS BLANCHET: I can't say that it hasn't happened. I don't personally have any knowledge of it happening, but I can't be left to assume that it hasn't happened in terms of using programs, et cetera, that we have to our resource to use right now, while it may not be the best services and, you know, freezing issues and all that kind of thing when we are using technology. I can't say that it hasn't happened, I think that there have been efforts made to do this.

3141   And I think that it goes without saying that this has also been a long time coming just in the process of leading us here today.

3142   MS BLANCHET: Please...?

3143   MS REAUME: If I could just add, I do believe that the relationship amongst the deaf and hard of hearing community and in the interpreting community, while sometimes it's tense, I think that ultimately all of us want the same equitable service for everyone. So if, for example, I were interested in setting up a video relay service in my home, but I was only able to employ 10 other people, I can't provide it for all deaf Canadians. So I think the goal is that everyone gets the same service.

3144   So in that particular instance I think people are willing to wait to have the right service for everyone, as opposed to some people having the service.

3145   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: That's not what they have been saying. They have been very impatient -- very eloquent, very polite, but impatient -- which is why I'm asking this question, because your relationship is so close to the community and opportunity recognition is something that always preoccupies me.

3146   But is interpreting a full time occupation, I mean as a general statement? Is it full-time/part-time?

3147   MS REAUME: I think it depends on where the interpreter lives. Personally, I do work full-time, I work staff for an interpreting agency and so yes, for me it's full-time.

3148   In some cities an interpreter can work freelance and still have full-time hours because of the demand in that area.

3149   Then there are some cities that, even though there is a large deaf population and a large interpreting population, the majority of the appointments come at the same time of day so interpreters might only get two or three appointments throughout the day and they wouldn't be able to consider that full time, they would consider themselves part-time.

3150   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Yes. As an organization that has preoccupied itself with quality and consistency training and promoting the need to be more into the interpreter community, if you were a business person, how comfortable would you be, given the answer you gave to Commissioner Shoan earlier about would you be willing to contract or provide, be a supplier of some kind -- how comfortable would you be being on the other end where we are asking large organizations, cable companies, telcos, and so on, to put their commitment forward and government to put their resources around an infrastructure that relies largely on individual full and part-time relationships?

3151   MS REAUME: I'm sorry, I missed the last part, individual...?

3152   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: That relies on individual and full and part-time relationship? I mean like General Motors is building a factory, but it doesn't have control of the workers. Is that a business model that you are comfortable with or do you feel you need to step up as interpreters to a different level here?

3153   MS REAUME: Are you going to take the question?

3154   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: I'm asking you this because you sort of represent the collective, although you can't speak for it, but try.

3155   MS REAUME: We try.

3156   I think we might need you to repeat your question, because both of us have a different understanding of where it is that you are coming from.

3157   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: We are sitting here trying to figure out what a system would look like from a technology standpoint, because it's technology that is driving the ability to provide, but that technology as an infrastructure is going to cost somewhere between eight and nine figures, from what we are hearing, and if that system gets built, is it reasonable to assume that the money and the effort should be spent if there isn't even a knowledge of an adequate supply at this point of the individuals that will make this system work, apparently an organization such as yourself, who is not willing to bring forward a supply that can make this whole thing work and run effectively?

3158   MS REAUME: Yes. Let me just clarify, I'm sorry. It's not that we are not willing to put forth a bid, it's that we are not a business, we are not-for-profit organization that represents interpreters.

3159   So we don't hire interpreters or refer them to other agencies for employment. That's just not what our mandate is. It's not what our mission is.

3160   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: That's kind of why I was asking the question early, is an interpreter really seeing themselves as a business or as a friend with some financial benefits?

3161   MS REAUME: Yes, understood.

3162   MS BLANCHET: Absolutely -- you alluded to it as well -- we need to put food on our tables and we need to provide for our families, so it absolutely a business and we do need to run ourselves like that.

3163   We understand the scope and magnitude of the funds that are required to put into this and we believe that the benefits in terms of communication and equitable services for all Canadians outweighs what the cost is.

3164   Does that sort of -- sorry, I'm not sure if I'm --

3165   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Well, let's put it this way: We have jurisdiction over the technology side and those who provide it and we would have certain expectations on quality --

3166   MS BLANCHET: Absolutely.

3167   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: -- and that sort of thing, but I'm a little worried that we are building a bridge out of toothpicks when it comes to the supply line of what the service is really all about, which is the provision of individual interpreters.

3168   Now, I'm not an expert on what is going on in other countries, you are in the business on a quasi level representing the individuals, but I'm trying to understand whether the system we build will be able to deliver the goods, because while everyone has the best of intentions and the best of hopes, there is no one that we as a Commission can point to and say, "And there is the entity that we turn to for that part of the puzzle", which are the interpreters. They are all individual, full and part-time, they move into the system, they are out of the system, some are sanctified with the authority to -- because you have qualified them, others are not.

3169   How do we make sure that we can fill this system with interpreters if no one is willing to be the provider, nobody takes the contract. In Australia there is a company in Melbourne that has a contract with the government to provide the services.

3170   I guess I'm asking a rhetorical question here because you are looking at me and I'm looking at you and we are getting nowhere here.

3171   MS REAUME: I don't think that we ever put any thought into there not being any bids to provide the service, but I think as long as there are deaf people and there is a seen need for VRS services, then there will always be interpreters.

3172   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: I guess my message is, the need has been around for at least a decade now and I feel the burden a bit being on our shoulders but I'm trying to transfer some of that back to the community that makes it work.

3173   Let me just get to the last questions because, I'm sorry, I was not trying to be on a soapbox here but I'm really asking some social policy questions that I think have to be asked.

3174   Have you had a look at the Sorensen TELUS trial? Did you have a look at the report they generated?

3175   The question I have is, on a ratio of the number of interpreters required to satisfy a constituency of 306 people -- mind you, this is a trial and there weren't a lot of efficiencies, but from what you know about your business, are those two figures in terms of their relationship to each other a ratio of about one interpreter to three clients, is there a sweet spot where things start to level off or is it going to be that kind of a ratio as we get up to 25,000 VRS subscribers, do we need 9,000 interpreters?

3176   MS BLANCHET: I think that is very contingent on a number of factors, you know, whether it's time of day or anything like that. I don't think it's reasonable to say that we would need 9,000 interpreters by no means to be able to offer the service.

3177   There are many interpreting agencies across Canada that are very successful in providing services. As we mentioned in our presentation, there are a number -- a percentage of our membership that is already providing VRS services -- while unfortunate not to Canadian citizens -- so we do believe that there is the supply for it.

3178   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Yes.

3179   MS BLANCHET: We see the supply increasing with the job prospects, not going the opposite way.

3180   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Thank you.

3181   MS BLANCHET: That's what you were looking for?

3182   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Yes. We will all be learning, but I was just curious if you had any wisdom in looking at the numbers.

3183   Last question -- it's only 5:05: We had heard that there is obviously a difference in supply of ASL to LSQ interpreters, but from what you know of the available numbers, do you think that there is any reason why we couldn't simultaneously launch both ASL and LSQ? Is there any reason why we couldn't?

3184   MS REAUME: Even though we are unaware of the exact number of LSQ and French interpreters in the Ontario and Quebec area, there are other options in providing interpreting services. So there is the opportunity of hiring deaf interpreters so that the interpretation could still happen between French and LSQ and somebody who is ASL and English. So we do have another pool of interpreters that we could pull from and that number of deaf interpreters within our membership has been growing.

3185   There has been some training that has been happening and I do foresee that in the near future there will be even more training that will be happening because we have seen a huge benefit in having deaf interpreters working amongst us. So I see that pool increasing as well. So there are other ways that we can provide interpreting services to LSQ French.

3186   COMMISSIONER SIMPSON: Thank you. Thank you very much.

3187   MS REAUME: You're welcome.

3188   THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. You have, as everybody else today and yesterday, articulated yourself clearly and efficiently.

3189   We will have one question from legal -- two.

3190   MS POPE: One question just briefly to clarify something that you had said earlier on the subject of confidentiality.

3191   When you said that an interpreter is in a conversation with another person -- sorry, when a deaf person is in a conversation interpreted to another person that they would look after dealing with the planning of the crime or the suicide. By the "they", did you mean the interpreter or the second person?

3192   MS BLANCHET: Sorry, thank you for the opportunity to clarify. I did not mean the interpreter to take any action.

3193   MS POPE: Okay.

3194   MS BLANCHET: Yes.

3195   MS POPE: Perfect.

3196   And just to confirm the undertaking to file the Code of Ethics and Guidelines for Professional Conduct, would it be possible for you to do that by next Monday, the 28th?

3197   Great. Thank you very much.

3198   THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

3199   Oh, one more thing.

3200   THE SECRETARY: One small thing and it's just a procedural thing.

3201   I would just like to mention that tomorrow Kathern Lawrence will not be appearing at the hearing in Dartmouth. That's it.

3202   THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much everyone.

3203   We will adjourn for the day and resume promptly at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow morning.

--- L'audience est ajournée à 1707 pour reprendre le mercredi 23 octobre 2013 à 0900

STÉNOGRAPHES

Kristin Johansson

Madeleine Matte

Carmen Delisle

Monique Mahoney

Jean Desaulniers

Sharon Millett

Date de modification :

2013-10-22