Select committee: Public Services Committee
Conclusion 10
2nd Report - Lost in translation? Interpreting services in the courts
Published 24 Mar 2025
Paragraph 69
Public Services Committee Interpreting and translation services in the courts All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗
Conclusion (the committee's words)
Problems with interpreting in the courts can present potentially damaging risks. They can delay cases, present a significant yet unknown cost to the taxpayer, cause people to be detained beyond what courts view as necessary, and undermine trust in the justice system. Ultimately, poor interpreting risks miscarriages of justice.
From: Public Services Committee, 2nd Report - Lost in translation? Interpreting services in the courts, paragraph 69, 24 March 2025
Government response
The government responded to the whole report on 3 June 2025 (deadline 24 May 2025).
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.The Ministry of Justice welcomes the report and says it is "committed to providing an effective and high-quality interpreting service", accepting some recommendations while expressly disagreeing with others.
- On data, the MoJ "accepts" that its published interpreting data can be restructured, and will create a single publication for it "within a 6-month period". It says it is "not in the position" to publish assessment data by the next quarterly release and "cannot commit" to more data until further discussions have taken place.
- The MoJ "disagrees" with the Committee's conclusion that current provision is not acceptable and presents a significant risk to the administration of justice, citing a 96% success rate in Q4 2024.
- On pay, the MoJ "disagrees" with the recommendations on minimum pay rates, longer minimum booking times and travel pay, though it says the Consumer Price Index "will be applied to the new contracts in October 2026 and annually thereafter".
- The MoJ does not require all interpreters to hold level 6 qualifications, and "disagrees" with a single independent register. It says the Ann Carlisle review recommendations have been "fully accepted" and incorporated into the new contract specifications.