The word on the street

The issue over the amount and ‘value’ of Government-funded translation services in the UK became a political hot potato in June this year. Ruth Kelly, in her position as Communities Secretary (prior to the recent cabinet re-shuffle under Gordon Brown), was speaking in relation to the Commission on Integration and Cohesion report which will recommend that local authorities divert resources from translation towards the provision of English language lessons instead. In addition, Government departments came under criticism for issuing information in other languages as a matter of course and without sufficient consideration of the possible negative consequences. The argument being that, if someone arrives into the UK to find materials routinely translated into their native language, they will never have the incentive to learn English. The Conservatives responded with an accusation of Labour stealing their thunder on these proposals.

According to a BBC report, more than £100 million of public money was spent on translation services in the UK last year. Local council spend was estimated at £25 million a year; NHS trusts £55 million and court interpreting £31 million. In addition to Whitehall and local Government, around 3,000 quangos and Government-funded bodies, such as housing associations, spend public money on translation services.

Councils will be encouraged to think twice about having documents translated into foreign languages that support community groups serving a single ethnic minority. They should examine whether the provision of translation services is, in fact, just a crutch - do these services help ethnic minority communities to integrate into British society or do they, in reality, deter migrants from learning English and engender further isolation?

However, for new arrivals to the country one could argue that more, not less information should be available to them: to encourage integration and give them access to and raise awareness of essential social issues, services and assistance available to them. This would also act as a transition while learning both the language and customs of their new home.

Can the fact that migrants are not incentivised to learn English be linked to the current translation/interpreting support system in place? Many would say that the lack of freely available, good quality English language lessons is at fault, where demand severely outweighs availability. Given the Government belief in the importance of learning English as quickly as possible, inadequate language class provision should perhaps be the focus of the debate rather than the over-provision of translation services.

Councils, including Westminster and in Buckinghamshire, now have street signs in Polish. This has been questioned as a bad use of funds. The fact that the Department of Health issues information in community languages for young mothers has also been considered badly thought-out, given that the majority of the target audience are likely to be English-speakers anyway. Many councils also translate information on electoral registration and other services into several foreign languages, and again this is viewed as an inefficient method of assistance. Other frequently translated material includes refuse collection guidelines, information on smoking cessation and Driving Standards Agency test papers.

These Government proposals on translation cuts do however send a message to society in general, and to employers who rely on these migrants to fill labour market shortages in particular. Should employers be encouraged to cap their translation services budget by the same token? Or, should employers taking on Polish staff, for example, for their skills or for reasons of economy, be obliged to offer adequate support to their workers in their own language: training manuals, health and safety manuals, machinery operation procedures, contracts, complaints procedures etc. It could be argued that translation of such material can only been seen as funds well spent, as a level of translation quality can be assured (if professionally undertaken), where reading, writing and oral levels of English language ability amongst migrant staff will fluctuate, irrespective of their efforts to learn English or the language skills they already possess. For safety and well-being in the workplace and to encourage integration, there is surely a benefit to all workers singing from the same hymnbook.