Member

The points that other noble Lords made are absolutely correct. The issue about costs is a question of weighing up the balance between not providing these services and facing the costs of potential appeals and challenges later on. It would be useful for the Home Office to speak to colleagues in the MoJ about its independent review of the qualifications and experience for court interpreters and the costs involved in adjourned cases needing to be reheard because an interpreter, or the correct interpreter with the correct language, has been absent. That might be useful for building the case here.