Ministry Of Justice Framework Agreement Interpreting

In today`s press release, Larry Gould (pictured) states: “[We are] the largest provider of interpretation services in Europe. We have the infrastructure and we have the experience. For more than twenty years, we have been delivering large-scale public procurement. Before the court contract came into force on January 30, 2012, allegedly without moJ`s knowledge, S ALS was acquired by Capita, a public service outsourcing giant. Although Capita has no previous experience in the language sector, Capita TI has since become one of the world`s largest fastest growing LSPs. In the words of Capita TI: “Our framework agreement with the Department of Justice on the provision of language services makes us one of the largest public sector interpretation service providers operating in the UK.” 2014: summarized and commented on interpretation panels: this excellent blog post sums up precisely what happened during the four years of the term of MoJ`s interpretation contract and highlights the risks associated with privatization and interpretation services. The judicial intermeding contract was one of those that, in the March 2014 report of the Parliamentary Committee on Public Finance on the allocation of public services to the private sector, undermined “public confidence in outsourcing”. The report criticized the $2,200 fine imposed on Capita TI for not providing interpreters: “It is not going very well with taking into account the costs of the criminal justice system and the people who were caused by their non-delivery.” He adds: “Some private sector suppliers have experienced considerable growth in recent years, often by buying competitors or other organizations into their supply chain – for example, by purchasing the court interpreter service from Capita. But the government has not directly analyzed the impact on market operations and the delivery of public services.┬áThe report made recommendations to the MoJ, including the simplification of the current 3-step qualification system in two areas and, although not within its scope, it recommended a more important role (at least within the justice system) to the National Registry of Public Service Interpreters (NRPSI) as they could encourage interpreters to acquire the relevant qualifications. .

. . It would also be a positive signal that the MoJ maintains a high value in the interpreter profession and that it shows the will to ensure the regulation of the profession. With regard to the interpretation of the deaf and deaf-mute blind, the NRCD should play a similar role to that of the NRPSI. This is essentially the role that the NRPSI played prior to the introduction of the new system and, although it does not fall within the scope of the review, the regulatory requirement may be an indication of the decline in standards since 2012. It is not uncommon for interpreter services to also be used: with more than 40,000 applications reported in the third quarter of 2014, this represents more than 700 applications per day. Interpretation services are provided in more than 150 foreign languages and a range of interpretation services for the deaf. Most users of the service are taxpayers.

Interpreters are mainly used in criminal matters, but their services are used in all courts and judicial services.

Comments are closed.