PQ - 31st January 2011

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2011-01-31c.36560.h

31 Jan 2011

Interpretation and Translation Services

Justice

Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith, Labour)

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the written ministerial statement of 15 September 2010, Official Report, columns 46-47WS, on interpretation and translation services (justice sector),

(1) what steps he plans to take to maintain the quality of translation and interpretation services for defendants under his proposals;

(2) what progress has been made on the procurement of translation and interpretation services for defendants under his proposals;

(3) what estimate he has made of the likely cost saving to his Department of implementation of the proposed changes in each of the next three years;

(4) whether he has consulted (a) the National Register of Public Service Interpreters and (b) the National Register of Communication Professionals working with Deaf and Deafblind people on the proposed changes to procurement of translation and interpretation services for defendants;

(5) what qualifications translators and interpreters for defendants will be required to hold under his proposals;

(6) whether he consulted (a) police forces, (b) HM Courts Service, (c) the National Offender Management Service and (d) the Crown Prosecution Service on his proposed changes to procurement of translation and interpretation services for defendants.

Crispin Blunt (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Prisons and Probation), Justice; Reigate, Conservative)

The project to review the provision of interpretation and translation services was begun under the previous administration which, like the present Government, recognised that there was room for improvement in the existing arrangements.

My officials are now in the final stages of a competitive dialogue procurement process with shortlisted bidders. When the process is at an end Ministers will make a decision whether or not to let a framework arrangement.

We have made it clear throughout that quality must be maintained. Any framework arrangement would specify quality standards. Key performance indicators would be used to ensure that a supplier met their contractual obligations. The qualifications to be required of interpreters and translators are currently being finalised.

Annual spend on interpretation and translation services across the criminal and civil justice sectors is estimated to be around £60million. If we were to let a framework arrangement we would hope to see savings of at least 10%.

Last summer my officials wrote to a wide range of stakeholders including the National Register of Public Service Interpreters and also Signature (who administer the National Register of Communication Professionals working with deaf and deafblind people) to inform them of our plans and to seek their comments.

This work is being taken forward by a project board which includes representatives of the Association of Chief Police Officers, the National Policing Improvement Agency, HM Court Service, the Tribunal Service, the Crown Prosecution Service and the National Offender Management Service.

Private Eye, Issue 1280, 21st January 2011

Speakers cornered

Language interpreters used by four police forces in north-west England are refusing to work for the agency that won the contract and are challenging the contract with a judicial review.

Greater Manchester, Merseyside, Lancashire and Cumbria police outsourced their interpreting services last year in exclusive deals with and agency called Applied Language Solutions (ALS). Previously, the forces had hired interpreters directly whenever they needed to talk to suspects, witnesses or victims who didn’t speak English well enough.

Normal guidelines for the use of interpreters in the Criminal Justice System say foreign-language interpreters working in courts or police stations should be registered on the National register of Public Service Interpreters (NRPSI) to guarantee quality and guard against miscarriages of justice.

But many registered interpreters refuse to work for ALS. They take issue with its pisspoor rates of pay, its record on handling personal data (for which it has been reprimanded by the Information Commissioner) and its use of unqualified workers. As a result, there are no registered interpreters available for languages including Vietnamese, Slovak, Turkish, Thai, Polish, Mandarin and French. Police however have to accept unregistered people sent by the agency (if it can find anyone) or beg their bosses for permission to call NRPSI interpreters at extra expense.

The Professional Interpreters’ Alliance (PIA), formed in response to the outsourcing, has gathered a catalogue of ALS failures since August, mostly uncovered because NRPSI interpreters have been belatedly called to the rescue. These include incidents where suspects have had to be bailed because it has taken ALS so long to find an interpreter; where police and duty solicitors have been unable to understand an interpreter’s poor English; and where interpreters have been supplied for the wrong language (such as a Czech interpreter being sent for an interview with a Slovak-speaking suspect).

As revealed by the Eye in 2009, after Thames Valley Police made a similar deal with agency Language Line, one in fifteen of the interpreters sent to police stations were not properly qualified or registered. In the same year, the use of unqualified foreign students in the Scottish courts sparked serious fears of wrongful convictions and wrongful acquittals. Despite these failings being brought to their attention by interpreters and MPs, the north-west forces pushed ahead with the deal anyway. The application for judicial review is due to be heard in March.

The police forces have told the PIA that there is “no legal requirement” to use registered interpreters. However, the PIA says not to do so runs counter not only to the national guidelines, drawn up in 2001 by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform, but also the recommendations of the Auld report, the Runciman Royal Commission, CPS guidance, Law Society guidance, a recent EU directive, and, ultimately, the Human Rights Act.

Private Eye, Issue 1280, 21st January 2011 - Page 30 (Criminal Justice Roundup)

NICTS - Interpreter and Translation Services

Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunal Service - Interpreter and Translation Services

http://www.courtsni.gov.uk/en-GB/Services/Interpreteration-Services/Pages/default.aspx

Interpreter and Translation Services Quarterly Bulletin

http://www.courtsni.gov.uk/en-GB/Services/Interpreteration-Services/Quarterly-Bulletins/Pages/default.aspx

IAPTI: "Endorsement of the petition to the UK Ministry of Justice"

http://www.aipti.org/eng/speaks-out/art5-endorsement-of-the-petition-to-the-uk-ministry-of-justice.html

 

Endorsement of the petition to the UK Ministry of Justice

The International Association of Professional Translators and Interpreters (IAPTI) has been informed by one of its members in the UK that the Ministry of Justice intends to outsource the provision of interpretation and translation services across the justice system in England and Wales.

We are aware that a new EU Directive on the rights to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings was adopted by the European Commission on 20th October 2010. This Directive states "Member States shall endeavour to establish a register or registers of independent translators and interpreters who are appropriately qualified. Once established, such register or registers shall, where appropriate, be made available to legal counsel and relevant authorities." (Article 5(2), Directive 2110/64/EU on of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Right to Interpretation and Translation in Criminal Proceedings. The UK already has such register (NRPSI) which is currently being reconstituted as an independent regulatory body.

The IAPTI firmly believes that outsourcing and allowing the profession to be regulated by agencies is contrary to the interests of justice and not in the best interest of the profession or those who need interpreting and translation services.

We are also aware that outsourcing in other countries has resulted in a marked worsening in the quality of interpreting services. Freedom of Information requests in the UK regions that have already outsourced show that agencies do not operate in the interest of justice and employ unqualified interpreters to increase their profits. This generates large profits for agencies at the expense of tax payers and interpreters. As a result of this many professionals in the UK are being forced out of the profession and are now seeking alternative employment. This, in turn, will result in shortages of suitably qualified interpreters in the future. It takes several years to become a qualified and competent interpreter and every effort should be made to prevent current qualified interpreters from leaving the profession.

The IAPTI aims to actively promote the ethical practice of translation and interpretation and safeguard the interests of translators and interpreters around the world. Therefore, the IAPTI supports the campaign for the protection of the title and regulation of the legal interpreting profession in the UK, and the fight against exploitation of the profession by agencies. We are against any outsourcing which may lead to exploitation of interpreters and support the fight for better working conditions for interpreters and translators.

Taking all the above into account, we have decided to support the petition below, written by the Professional Interpreters' Alliance (PIA), which will be sent to the UK Ministry of Justice.

Aurora Matilde Humarán

IAPTI - Board of Directors

December 4, 2010

"We, the undersigned, registrants of the National Register of Public Service Interpreters, petition the Ministry of Justice to preserve the National Agreement on Arrangements for the Use of Interpreters, Translators and Language Service Professionals in Investigations and Proceedings within the Criminal Justice System and make it a statutory requirement that every interpreter working in the criminal justice system be chosen from the NRPSI or the following registers: CIOL, ITI, APCI. We further petition the Ministry of Justice not to outsource the provision of interpreters within the criminal justice system to commercial intermediaries.

The petition expresses our concern that the MoJ's proposal to abolish the National Agreement will lead to breaches of Articles 5 and 6 of the ECHR, enacted by HRA 1998, and result in miscarriages of justice and cases being lost at the expense of the taxpayer. Our concerns are supported by data collated through Freedom of Information Requests over a period of several years. We further petition the Ministry of Justice to engage in a meaningful consultation with the interpreting profession and to carry out a full equality impact assessment, in compliance with Section 71 of the Race Relations Act 1976 (amended 2000) to establish the impact of the Ministry of Justice proposals on ethnic minorities, in particular the abolishment of the National Agreement, which was put in place following the 1993 report of the Runciman Commission, and the recommendations of Lord Justice Auld.

We understand the need to cut costs and make the service more cost effective and we petition the Ministry of Justice to enter into a discussion with us so that we can jointly reach a viable and sustainable solution."

Letter from Head of Better Trials Unit - 22 November 2010

Changes to provision of interpretation and translation services 
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0tXqQzbT728MC1GSm41ZEZwTE0

Lincoln Prison handbook's 'execution' error spotted

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-11774367 
17 November 2010

Lincoln Prison handbook's 'execution' error spotted

A translation error at a UK prison labelled an exercise yard as an "execution yard" in the draft of an information booklet for Russian inmates.

An inspection report mentioned the faux pas at Lincoln Prison in a section on foreign prisoners.

The translation was spotted by a member of staff at the proof stage, the Ministry of Justice said.

The report said all translated material "should be verified."

'Not funny'

No other translation errors were noted in the report.

Nick Hardwick, chief inspector of prisons, said: "This is an example where actually making sure prisoners have properly translated material is important.

"You could treat it as a bit of a joke unless you were that prisoner and you didn't understand how the British prison service worked and came from a country that still had execution yards. It wouldn't be a funny thing for him."

The report praised the prison for having a better range of translated information for the 82 foreign national prisoners, but said staff had raised concerns that some translations were not "entirely accurate".

Directive 2010/64/EU

Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20th October 2010 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2010:280:0001:0007:EN:PDF

EU courts must offer interpreting and translation during proceedings

http://www.sofiaecho.com/2010/10/07/972773_eu-courts-must-offer-interpreting-and-translation-during-proceedings
Oct 07 2010

EU courts must offer interpreting and translation during proceedings

The Council of the European Union has adopted rules that will make interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings compulsory, if these services are required.

An agreement has been reached with the European Parliament in first reading. Member states will now have to transpose the directive into national law. The directive is based on an initiative taken by 13 Member States (Belgium, Germany, Estonia, Spain, France, Italy, Luxembourg, Hungary, Austria, Portugal, Romania, Finland and Sweden).

The new directive will substantially enhance the rights for suspected and accused persons. According to the communiqué, under the terms of the directive "they will have the right to interpretation, meaning that a suspected or accused person who does not understand or speak the language of the criminal proceedings concerned will be provided without delay with interpretation during criminal proceedings before investigative and judicial authorities, including during police questioning, during all court hearings and during any necessary interim hearings".

Where necessary for the purpose of ensuring the fairness of the proceedings, interpretation will also be available for communication between the suspected or accused person and his legal counsel in direct connection with any questioning or hearing during the proceedings or with the lodging of an appeal or other procedural applications, such as for bail."

Ministerial Statement - 15th September 2010

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm100915/wmstext/100915m0001.htm#10091520000128

15 Sep 2010

Justice

Interpretation and Translation Services (Justice Sector)

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Mr Crispin Blunt): The Government are proposing to make changes to the provision of interpretation and translation services across the justice sector. We need to reduce waste and cut costs but we shall do so in a way that safeguards quality.

Articles 5 and 6 of the European convention on human rights and fundamental freedoms (ECHR) give the right to interpretation for those who are arrested and who face criminal court proceedings. In addition, we expect the European Union to adopt a directive in the autumn intended to ensure that the rights enshrined in the ECHR are implemented consistently across all member states.

Currently, the non-binding National Agreement on Arrangements for the Use of Interpreters, Translators and Language Service Professionals in Investigations and Proceedings within the Criminal Justice System sets out how criminal justice organisations are expected to source interpreters and translators in England and Wales. The National Agreement gives the National Register of Public Service Interpreters (NRPSI) as the first source for foreign language interpreters and translators and the Council for the Advancement of Communication with Deaf People Directory (now called the National Register of Communication Professionals working with Deaf and Deafblind People (NRCPD)) for British Sign Language and other language services for deaf and deafblind people. The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 codes of practice C and H also require that whenever possible the police should use interpreters from these registers when interviewing suspects.

Members of staff in justice organisations identify interpreters using the registers and then contact them directly. Once the assignment is complete, invoices are processed individually. This is an inefficient, labour-intensive process.

The Ministry of Justice is engaging with the market to explore how interpretation and translation can be delivered more efficiently. The exercise is a "competitive dialogue", which allows us to explore with potential providers the best way for them to meet our requirements. Although we are not able to be certain what the result of this exercise will be, we are anticipating a "framework agreement" with a number of preferred suppliers. This will set out a template or "call-off" contract. Justice organisations will then easily be able to use the "call-off" contract to meet their specific requirements. The quality of interpretation will be ensured through the terms of the contracts.

At this stage, we expect most police forces, Her Majesty's Courts Service, the Tribunal Service, the National Offender Management Service and the Crown Prosecution Service to use the framework. We expect the framework agreement to be signed in early 2011.

A move to contracts will eventually render the National Agreement redundant and we expect to withdraw it in due course. We aim however to retain elements of the agreement as good practice guidance and many of its fundamental principles will form the basis of the agreements with suppliers.

Potential suppliers were invited to lodge an expression of interest in a letter issued on 10 August. A notice was issued in the Official Journal of the European Union on 23 August. The procurement "pre-qualification questionnaire" was made available on 24 August. The deadline for return of the questionnaire was 13 September. The competitive dialogue process with short-listed tenderers will start in October.

The Government are clear that there is scope for greater efficiency in this area of their business and it is important that savings are made. But in taking this work forward it will ensure that the quality of interpretation and translation in police stations, in the courts and elsewhere is maintained.

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wms/?id=2010-09-15d.46WS.5