Lost in translation? Lords Committee says significant issues must be addressed to provide effective Interpreting services in courts

Today, the House of Lords Public Services Committee publishes its report, Lost in translation? Interpreting in the courts. The report concludes that while only a small number of court cases require the need for an interpreter, the issues identified show that the current state of interpreting services in courts is unacceptable and presents a significant risk to the administration of justice in these cases and places undue demand on an already overburdened court system. There is a clear disconnect between what the Government hopes is happening, what the companies contracted to deliver the services believe is happening, and what frontline staff report is happening. Lack of an effective complaints system, unreliable performance data and inadequate remuneration for interpreters are some of the issues identified.

Key conclusions and recommendations from the report include:

Performance data - There is conflict between reports of poor-quality interpreting in courts and the data produced by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). This suggests that significant issues with the quality of these services, and the impact this might have on the delivery of justice, are being missed. The Government should take steps to improve the quality and consistency of the data gathered relating to interpreting in the courts and should publish further data on its performance. This should include data on the number and proportion of cases which are delayed due to problems in interpreting services.

Quality assurance - The current assessment process is unsuitable for use in whispered interpreting in courts or in closed courts such as family courts. This means that assessment data may miss interpreter errors in these settings. Alongside this, little information is published about the number of problems identified by quality assurance work, and how this may have affected judgements. The MoJ should ensure that assessments regularly take place in ‘closed' settings and capture whispered interpreting. The MoJ should publish more information about how many problems in interpreting have been identified, how bad the problems are, and the number of cases where judges took further actions after problems were raised.  

Complaints - The data on complaints about interpreting services significantly underrepresents the number of problems seen in the courts. This is due to poor communication of the complaints system, low awareness of how it operates, and language barriers, which mean the people that most need to complain find the process inaccessible. Government must make improvements including taking urgent steps to improve awareness of the complaints systems, clarifying where responsibility sits for submitting complaints about interpreting services in courts, and making the complaints process more accessible for non-English speakers.

Interpreter Pay/Terms and Conditions - The lack of significant pay increases has led to more interpreters leaving the profession or choosing to work off-contract. This has led to greater burden on the court system, and less assurance over the quality of interpreters. Both interpreters and language companies have advocated for minimum pay rates. Without minimum pay rates, interpreters cannot guarantee their take-home pay for assignments and companies squeeze pay to compete for MoJ contracts. To ensure sustainability of the interpreter workforce the Government should take steps to improve pay for interpreters, including the introduction of minimum pay and commensurate cancellation rates to address cases cancelled at short notice. The report also has additional recommendations on increasing travel pay and ensuring interpreters have the highest level of qualifications to provide court services. It also asks for guidance to be providedto courts to ensure interpreters are treated as professional court staff and kept up to date with court and case logistics, so they can adequately prepare for any hearing.

Technology and interpreting - The lack of adequate court infrastructure hampers interpreters' ability to interpret remotely, or to allow for more transparent and improved interpreting through better audio technology. The Government should use their court refurbishment project to ensure that the court estate infrastructure is suitable for remote interpreting, including appropriate audio-visual equipment, sound booths and portable equipment for un-refurbished courts.  In addition, court infrastructure is not equipped to embrace imminent future technological advances such as AI. The MOJ should develop and publish a funded roadmap for the introduction of AI tools for interpreting in public services, in line with the Government's AI Opportunities Action Plan. Engagement with AI companies, language companies and interpreters should also inform the roadmap.

The Government is expected to respond to this report by May 2025 and the Committee have requested progress reports on the implementation of its recommendations from September 2025 onwards.

Baroness Morris of Yardley, Chair of the Public Services Committee said:

“There are many vital components to the justice system but fundamental to the entire process is the ability of a person to comprehend any allegations put to them and any subsequent court proceedings. However, we have found that significant problems across the end-to-end process of the provision of interpreting services in courts mean that the current system is ineffective and presents a significant risk of people suffering disadvantages during hearings because of language barriers, thus rendering the term lost in translation an unfortunate reality. 

“Omissions in data published by the Ministry of Justice means there can be no proper assessment of how well or badly interpreting services are being delivered. The same is true of the complaints procedure which is not advertised and inaccessible to non-English speakers and has clearly resulted in under-reporting of problems. Other issues like low remuneration mean people are less willing to be interpreters and the lack of technology in the courts means more innovative and alternative methods cannot be explored.  

“All these problems are solvable, and this is why we have called on the Government to address these issues by implementing our recommendations. The MoJ is currently in the process of negotiating a new contract for these services. It must use the opportunity to reform the profession so that it becomes a desirable career for highly skilled, well-respected and adequately remunerated interpreters.  

“We've asked the Government to update us regularly on its progress with implementing our recommendations and look forward to receiving these and a comprehensive response to this report.”