Interpreters ask MPs to support a debate in Parliament on failures of FWA with Capita
13 May 2013
Dear Ms Featherstone
My sincere thanks for your swift response to my email. I appreciate your following up on this matter. I do believe the situation is becoming increasingly desperate and that we may soon (at last) get a debate in the House on the lamentable state of affairs regarding arrangements for interpretation services in court and other areas of the CJS. Unless those defending the FWA are wilfully ignoring the evidence presented to them from so many fronts - judges and other lawyers, as well as professional court interpreters - they cannot, in all, conscience fail to see that the service procured from ALS/Capita is dangerously and expensively inadequate. The sooner they have the courage to admit the mistakes they have made, the sooner we will once again have an interpreting service in the justice system that is fit for purpose and worthy of the name.
May I once again ask you to state what your personal position is on this matter, now that you have seen the fresh evidence of Capita's failings?
Kindest regards
John McCarthy NRPSI 11945
---
13 May 2013
Dear John,
Thank you for your further email.
From my records it would appear that I have not yet received a response to my email sent to Helen Grant on the 9th April.
I have therefore now chased a response to this, adding in the additional queries you have raised in the below correspondence. I will of course get back to you as soon as I receive a response. In the meantime, please don’t hesitate to contact me if I can be of further assistance in this or any other matter.
Kind regards,
Lynne Featherstone
Member of Parliament for Hornsey and Wood Green
---
11 May 2013
Dear Ms Featherstone
You might remember that I have written to you in the past about my concerns over the Framework Agreement between the Government and Capita (previously and only briefly ALS) for the provision of interpreting services to the courts and other areas of the criminal justice system.
I believe you have previously endorsed the minister Helen Grant's claim that the new arrangements for procuring interpreting services represented an improvement over the previous system and that tax payers' money was being saved. In the light of the many failings of Capita - of which the instance described below is but one example, albeit a very serious one - I wonder whether you remain of that opinion.
I would be most interested to hear your thoughts on the matter. Perhaps you might ask your colleague Ms Grant what further evidence she would require in order to admit that she and the MOJ have made a hopeless blunder and, rather than saving money and improving things, have brought about the exact opposite, on both counts, as well as driving dedicated professional interpreters away from work within the CJS.
Thank you once again for taking an interest in this very worrying state of affairs.
Kind regards
John McCarthy NRPSI 11945
