Speaking up for Spoken Word Interpreting Standards

?It doesn’t make it right, just because the Ministry of Justice allows it, for a native bilingual speaker who has only enrolled on a GCSE Pass course to act as an interpreter in bail hearings, first hearings and case management sessions. Worse is when NHS Trusts and doctors’ surgeries engage with untrained family and friends and other bilingual speakers in life-threatening consultations; get the interpreting wrong and someone could die.

Faced with decision-making by public sector organisations which puts the public at risk, we desperately need a UK-wide system of professional registration and regulation for spoken word public service interpreting that is both independent and transparent to ensure the public is protected. The processes of registration, regulation and accrediting fitness to practice must not be hidden behind closed doors, where public sector organisations and private companies actively block them from public review.

?Currently, the National Register of Public Service Interpreters (NRPSI) is often obstructed from carrying out its mandate to uphold public service interpreting professional standards to protect the public by other organisations in the language services ecosystem with very different objectives and priorities. Some public sector organisations are more concerned with expediency than matters of principle to protect the public; specifically focused on supply targets and cost controls, while contracted commercial language suppliers are focused on profit generation, dividends for owners and building shareholder value. NRPSI remains focused on matters of principle; protecting the public, professionalism in public sector settings and giving effective voice to the voiceless.

?Commercial considerations are often quoted as reasons for not sharing information about what is really occurring in public service interpreting processes. These commercial considerations are undoubtedly the driving factors which have led to non-qualified, non-registered, ersatz interpreters being engaged to work in court settings as well as in NHS environments. They have also led to devolving regulation to commercial language agencies, which, as already mentioned, have other concerns which are actually in direct conflict with any regulatory responsibility.

?In NRPSI’s opinion, this situation is unacceptable. It cannot be right to allow unregulated and unregistered, poorly qualified and inexperienced spoken language pseudo interpreters to hold such positions of trust, when they are the only party to understand what the other two parties are saying in highly complex situations such as bail hearings, first hearings and case management sessions - not to mention doctors' consulting rooms. Neither can it be appropriate for contracted private agencies to set and regulate their own standards when their complaints and disciplinary processes are not transparent.

Those registered and regulated interpreters on the National Register not only possess the highest level of professional public service interpreting qualification (Level 6 / first degree equivalent) and 400 hours of relevant interpreting experience but also adhere to enshrined professional standards. In other words, they are prepared to be accountable for their work.

?This last point is particularly important and worthy of elaboration.

At a time when there is a trend towards abandoning professional attributes such as transparency, responsibility and accountability by certain organisations and individuals in the public sector, registered public service interpreters are upholding them.

?Registered and regulated interpreters choose to have their professional credentials independently verified and made public, and to sign up to a publicly available code of professional conduct against which their actions are measured. The code they adhere to is underpinned by a transparent complaints and disciplinary process. Individuals are committed to professional standards and their preservation, and to offering the level of professional service the public, and indeed public sector workers, deserve.

?If a non-English speaker needs an expertly qualified public service interpreter while attending court, then they will need an independently registered and regulated interpreter.

If a non-English speaker needs an expertly qualified public service interpreter while in a medical consultation, then they will need an independently registered and regulated interpreter.

Interpreters engaged to work in public service settings need the same level of independent registration and regulation from their regulator as do legal professionals and medical professionals. This equivalence ought to be a matter of principle; a standard in itself.

What matters is the independent registration and regulation of professionals, whatever their field of practice. Any granular tactical issues, such as supply or cost, cannot get in the way of trust in the public service and the quality of its language provision; an independent focus on quality must trump supply and cost issues.

Thankfully, there are those that recognise how vital independent registration and regulation of spoken word interpreters is to ensuring the public receive the quality of language services they should and the reputations of public organisations are protected. The London’s Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) is one example. MPS understands the invaluable role that registered and regulated interpreters have in maintaining the integrity and credibility of the criminal justice system. To start with, evidence collected via registered and regulated interpreters is less open to challenge by defence lawyers. And the rest of the police service, through the Police Approved Interpreters and Translators (PAIT) scheme, is also focusing on the need for the highest levels of qualifications linked with measured, accountable and relevant experience.

?NRPSI would like to see all public sector organisations taking a similar approach and end the undermining of public service spoken word interpreting standards. All members of the public, in need of a spoken word interpreter to access public services, should be assigned an independently regulated and registered interpreting professional. Furthermore, there should be an agreed consistent standard and full transparency of registration and regulation. This is something that can only be provided by a body that sits outside of, and is independent from, the public sector organisations and commercial agencies in the ecosystem.