6 February 2013
MPs publish report on interpreting and translation services and the
Applied Language Solutions contract
The
Ministry of Justice (MoJ) pushed ahead with outsourcing court interpreter
services despite warnings that the quality of court language services would be
reduced, an inquiry by the Justice Committee has found.
- Report: Interpreting and translation services and the Applied Language Solutions Contract (HTML)
- Report: Interpreting and translation services and the Applied Language Solutions Contract (PDF)
- Inquiry: Interpreting and tranlastion services and the Applied Language Solutions Contract
- Justice Committee
The Chair
of the Committee, Sir Alan Beith MP, said:
“The
Ministry of Justice’s handling of the outsourcing of court interpreting
services has been nothing short of shambolic. It did not have an adequate
understanding of the needs of courts, it failed to heed warnings from the
professionals concerned, and it did not put sufficient safeguards in place to
prevent interruptions in the provision of quality interpreting services to
courts.”
Evidence
strongly suggests that the MoJ did not have a sufficient understanding of the
complexities of court interpreting work, according to the MPs. Significant concern
was revealed in the MoJ’s consultation process that quality standards could be
diminished by the imposition of a tiered system to enable a wider pool of
interpreters, and by the introduction of lower levels of pay. However, the
Department pushed ahead with the contract and failed to properly anticipate or
address the potential for problems with Applied Language Solutions’ (ALS) capacity
to deliver on its promises.
Sir Alan
Beith MP added:
“The
evidence shows that Capita-ALS failed to deliver on many aspects of the
Agreement and did not implement appropriate safeguards to ensure that the
interpreters it provided were of sufficient standard.”
When
Capita (which acquired ALS for £7.5m in December 2011) began delivering
interpreting and translation services to HM Courts and Tribunals Service
(HMCTS) in January 2012, it faced immediate operational difficulties. ALS and
more recently Capita have been unable to recruit qualified and experienced
interpreters in sufficient numbers, leading to an inadequate volume and quality
of interpreting services being available to courts and tribunals.
Professional
interpreters have largely boycotted the new arrangements; contributing to the
difficulties in levels of fulfilment, but not entirely explaining them
according to the report. Capita-ALS clearly needed significantly more resources
than it had at its disposal to deliver the service levels required. The company
also paid lip service to the regulatory duties accepted under the Framework
Agreement, yet did not have the capacity to cope with complaints or to
implement basic vetting procedures.
Performance
has undoubtedly improved markedly but this has taken a long time to achieve and
Capita is not yet being asked to supply interpreters to meet the full demand of
HMCTS. The MoJ has had to monitor Capita-ALS very closely to secure the level
of improvement necessary to make the Agreement workable, and continues to do
so. The existing arrangements may not be financially sustainable as Capita is
propping up the continuation of the Agreement, which mean that the Department’s
savings, originally projected to be £15million, are effectively being secured
at the company’s expense.
The most
important priority is for the MoJ and Capita to prove that the Framework
Agreement is capable of attracting, retaining and deploying an adequate number
of qualified and competent interpreters to meet the requirements of the courts
and other justice agencies.
The
Committee has also condemned the actions taken by MoJ which had the effect of
hampering the inquiry. HMCTS issued an edict to its staff instructing them not
to participate in the Committee’s online consultation, established to invite
direct observations from frontline staff of the performance of ALS. The
Committee considers that the actions of the Ministry in this case may have
constituted a contempt of the House, but as it received sufficient evidence
from other sources to make a reliable judgement, it has not asked the House to
take further action on this matter.
Sir Alan
Beith MP said:
“We have
made use of online forums in the past to obtain the views and experiences of
staff in probation and prison services, without any obstruction by the
Ministry. We received an abundance of evidence from other sources about the
quality of court interpreting services, so we are confident in the conclusions
we have reached, but we deplore the Ministry’s ill-advised actions and there
should be no repetition of them in the future.”
Justice Committee -
Sixth Report
Interpreting and
translation services and the Applied Language Solutions contract
No comments:
Post a Comment