"The neccessary has been done" suggests that they discussed the issue and decided not to consecrate conditionally .
If Mgr Vigano is to be considered a bishop of the "Resistance", then there is no reason to claim that Mgr Huonder isn't a bishop of the SSPX.
This is a strange way to interpret what was said, and surely the very opposite of what was implied.
It is known to all that Bishop Williamson has repeatedly criticised the SSPX for allowing the doubtful Bishop Huonder into the sheepfold and casting doubt over SSPX sacraments. Likewise, he has promoted the study of the NREC by Fr Calderon which concludes that the new consecrations are not certainly valid and must be repeated conditionally to guarantee the validity of the sacraments. He has also stated in a past Eleison Comments that if he were Pope he may well require all new rite ordinations to be conditionally repeated.
If Fr Chazal is saying that Bishop Williamson meets regularly with Archbishop Vigano, and is claiming him as a Resistance bishop, and then says 'the necessary has been done', that could only imply that he has indeed been conditionally consecrated.
No doubt there will be reassurance given to the faithful should it become more public that he is indeed cooperating with the Resistance. Patience! This conference of Fr Chazal was before Archbishop Vigano's latest quasi-sedevacantist conference. Are they still on the same page? Can we expect public cooperation now??? Time will tell.