Officials ignored experts’ warning on interpreting contract
Senior procurement officials at the Ministry of Justice did not read a consultants’ report warning of the risks in a £42m contract to provide courtroom interpreters, it emerged at a parliamentary hearing yesterday.
The House of Commons Public Accounts Committee was taking evidence on the procurement and implementation of the courts contract with Applied Language Solutions, now Capita Translation and Interpreting. The hearing follows a National Audit Office report which described the company’s initial contract performance as ‘wholly inadequate’.
Three senior officials, including head of procurement Ann Beasley, admitted that they had not read a report from a financial data company advising them not to do business worth more than £1m with Applied.
Margaret Hodge, the committee’s chair, described the admission as ‘shocking evidence’ and said the three had ignored a ‘very obvious and basic bit of due diligence’. She told Beasley: ‘You are in charge of procurement and I do not think you understand what you are procuring’. Hodge questioned how the MoJ would be able to do a better job negotiating larger private sector contracts if it made mistakes on this relatively small one.
Committee members accused officials of having had the ‘wool pulled over your eyes’ by Applied, which it said had at best ‘misrepresented’ its readiness to be able to deliver the service.
Conservative member Stewart Jackson said the lack of sanctions taken against Applied for its alleged failures signaled to other companies that they could ‘take a punt’ on MoJ contracts that they might not be able to fulfil in the knowledge that they would face no sanction.
Chief executive of HM Courts and Tribunal Service Peter Handcock said that lessons had been learned and that with hindsight, ‘a whole load of things’ could have been done better. But Hodge described as ‘astonishing’ the fact that, even with hindsight, the three officials maintained that they had not been wrong to pursue the contract with Applied.
Beasley said that the service being provided by Applied is improving, but admitted that it is ‘not yet in a good enough place’. Hodge told the Gazette after the session: ‘This is one of the worst contracts I’ve seen. The scary thing is that it exemplifies the problems and challenges the government faces as it contracts more with the private sector.’
The contractor, which did not attend yesterday’s hearing, has been summoned to give evidence to the committee on 29 October.
Comments
I wonder when the 3 can
I wonder when the 3 can expect to collect their Knighthoods OBEs or whatever?!
OBE's should be in the
OBE's should be in the pipeline in a year or two. Knighthoods are a little more difficult. Your man has to prove his intelligence by setting up a rival company to the one he already runs and then getting the Gov to strip the existing contract and award it to the new company that he also set up whilst also writing off the money spent on the old provider and recognising that the new company will cost more to run the contract. That my friend is called Business Acumen...
Flexible Court Pilots
Perhaps these 3 also designed the Flexible Court pilot, so they will get a Knighthood for wasting even more money.
Flexible courts pillots
I was Court Duty the other Saturday and the police as ever had not booked an interpreter we were told. So as the defendant clearly couldn't understand sufficient for the Court's purpose he was remanded for "lack of information" to the Monday. From next week Birmingham will be operating a Sunday Court. That Court unlike the Saturday Court will be staffed by admin people. So if my case had happened next Saturday would he have been remanded to the Sunday. On which day no doubt once again there would be no interpreter as it's now the Court's responsibility to arrange one.
Interestingly the interpreter who appeared on Monday afternoon told me he had been contacted on the Saturday but had turned down the job and ALS had not looked for anyone else. Also the Court clerk on the Monday once they found out there was no interpreter on the Monday but one in the Court building in the afternoon had simply put the case over to the afternoon. He didn't bother telling the Court admin so the interpreter who turned up in the afternoon didn't know. He had been wrongly booked & so went without dealing with my chap.
All very amusing save that i am stood around waiting for all this to develop and no personal details for my Rep Order application so not knowing whether i would get paid or not for helping this man with no pre cons and a good defence it transpired once the interpreter did arrive.
Flexible Court Pilots
How would the Interpreter know what ALS had or had not done - they don't work for ALS?
Another fine mess
Yet again the powers that be have failed to spend money wisely. I am setting up a company which will provide solicitors to all courts and police stations in the country. All I require if £950 million and six months to get it together. I believe this figure will be saving LSC a significant sum. Please don't worry if the company fails to deliver I will be laughing all the way to the bank... just like Capita!
Interpreters in the dock
I have had some terrible experiences with interpreters recently. It is clear to me that some of these so called professionals have no concept of what is required in the process. This includes arriving at the listed time of the hearing and leaving at the end of the hearing without making themselves avail to discuss what has happened with the client.
I really am hoping for some improvement.
I used to work for courts and
I used to work for courts and police in the old days before ALS took over as Slovak and Czech interpreter for 10 years. I was called directly and always attended assignments. I never failed to turn up and always got to the job within an hour when called at last minute, mostly police station cases.. There were never complains about interpreters and not like these days you hear stories every single day e.g. interpreter not turning up, interpreter turning up late or even when turning up the competence and the language skill of the interpreter is very low. Obviously I am not registered with this new agency ALS for various reasons. I feel sorry for not only the victims and defendants for not getting fair hearings / trials but also for solicitors and barristers as they can't do their work properly because of the interpreters not turning up or not speaking the language properly. I hope the Government will realise that no money is being saved at all and will get rid off ALS or shall I say Capita for good, admit they made a mistake and use interpreters directly without a middle man being involved.
Worse than the Olympic security contract?
Asking single companies to run these enormous contracts is asking for trouble, they are simply overstretching themselves. The "least cost" solution is not always, or even often, the best solution. When is the government going to learn?
MoJ Procurment: Applied Language Solutions
Yet again tWhitehall's hapless amateurs blunder on wasting public money by the bucketload. When will Sir Humphrey's useless jobsworths get their comeuppance? Why has nobaody been sacked?
Least-cost
Least-cost language interpretation is like least-cost life assurance. You can make it as cheap as you want if it only has to pay you a pound after your decease.
reply to Peter "Why has
reply to Peter "Why has nobody been sacked?"
If you look carefully, you may notice that someone walked recently.
In any event, Osmotherly rules make it clear that civil servants aren't directly accountable to Parliamentary Select Committees. They do the bidding of their ministers.
New on Parliament.uk: Court Language Services Forum
The House of Commons Justice Committee invites anonymous feedback from those with experience of ALS:
http://forums.parliament.uk/court-language-services/index.php?list,1
"The Justice Committee has heard that some stakeholders may be reticent to provide formal written evidence. These may include: court and tribunal service staff; members of the judiciary and magistracy; legal practitioners and other practitioners; defendants in criminal cases and parties in civil and family cases and interpreters providing services on behalf of ALS. We would encourage these individuals to submit their experiences through this web forum using an anonymous user name.
The Justice Committee would like to hear from individuals with direct experience of the provision of interpreting and translation services by Applied Language Solutions (ALS). The Justice Committee would particularly like to hear about direct examples of recent performance issues (during September and October 2012) surrounding the operation of the Framework Agreement between the Ministry of Justice and ALS."
Interpreters
Last time I had a case involving a foreigner (civil RTA case), I engaged a delightful lady who (literally) rolled into court to tell the Judge what our chap was saying. The fact that our client was a headmaster and I suspected spoke better English than any reader of these columns is another issue. Hilarious from start to finish. She had a look at the papers so she knew what it was all about (i.e. not sex crime) and said shortly what we had tried to tell his Dutch Insurers in politer terms, "Donkey, you cannot drive AND you are playing away from home!" Unfair to the Judge who was scrupulously fair but came gently to the inevitable conclusion.
The situation is mad.
1. Our lawyers in the Mags Ct are hobbled by the lack of interpreters when they are needed. Then I guess they are not paid for wasted time. That from the paymasters is both unmannerly and professionally illiterate. For Treasury misery over the years, look at Hornblower era books and real stories about the Navy treasurers' meanness. Nowt's changed.
2. When are interpreters needed? For a foreign accused who can speak perfect english who is playing the system? He wants the 'Harold Wilson' thinking time while he stuffs and relights his pipe? Are we fettered by the 'Uman Rites if we say get yer own - and then will we get a pack of pre-agreed lies anyway?? How many of them know how to claim benefits?
3. If this stupidity must continue, may I suggest that (eg) Urdu speaking solicitors in the Mags Ct are sworn as interpreters in their cases and then translate their (eg) Urdu client's evidence and are then paid DOUBLE Legal Aid rate for their services?
4 before the illusory images of Access to Justice and Law & Order fade away further, why not go back to what I am told was not broken? Fings as Wot they Were?
Court interpreting shambles
Experienced professional interpreters don't behave as Bill Ryan describes. I know - I have done a lot of court interpreting. Of course, I refuse to work for ALS or Capita.
Nils Fort:
Who is it who walked?
I applaud the Committee, but it's ironic (to say the least) that Hodge permits herself these expressions without blushing. We still remember her time in Islington.
Pool of providers
I am a translator and interpreter myself, and recently set up my own company. I have always been shocked that the contract was outsourced to one sole provider. In my professional opinion, there should be a pool of professional agencies and freelancers who can be called upon as and when required. I understand that budgets needed to be cut, but this has cost the country more money in the long run. Fact of the matter is, translation and interpretation are intellectual services, which require years of practice and studies to master. No wonder there have been such issues when the interpreters were not being paid fairly.