Mind our language

The Maltese rightly rejoiced when their language was granted official status within the European Union. The concession was hard-won by our negotiators during accession talks and it sent a strong message that Malta's identity would not be subdued in the bloc that was expanding from 15 to 25 states.

It could be argued that the practical side of the right to use the Maltese language in EU institutions and of having EU acts translated into Maltese is secondary to its symbolic significance. Maltese MEPs and officials in Brussels can communicate equally well in English and most Maltese interested in reading official EU documents would probably be as comfortable reading them in either language.

But the significance of the achievement - that such a minuscule nation should have its language recognised by the big boys - counts for nothing if the official status is not translated into practice. The other day, Labour MEP Joseph Muscat refused to continue addressing the plenary session of the European Parliament after he was informed there was no interpretation service available at that time.

It was the last straw for Mr Muscat. Maltese MEPs had long been complaining about the lack of interpretation facilities for Maltese at the Parliament. They understood that, due to the lack of trained interpreters, it would perhaps be unreasonable for them to expect the facility to be on offer during group and committee meetings. But they expected it to at least be available in plenary. It seems they were promised as much too.

"What is the use of having it down on paper that Maltese is an official language?" Mr Muscat retorted moments before he stormed out of the hall. How right he is.

Since Malta joined the EU, translation services too have left something to be desired. Only recently the EU failed to produce a Maltese version of a Council regulation despite its obligation to do so.

Mr Muscat has understandably pointed an accusing finger at the EU but the government and its agencies have a lot to answer for too. The EU has found it difficult to recruit a sufficient number of interpreters and translators qualified to its own exacting standards - but training them is the responsibility of the national authorities.

Well ahead of membership, when time was still on its side, the government failed to foresee that a large number of translators and interpreters would be needed, or that not enough of them would be in supply. Once a language is fully integrated, EU institutions need about 80 interpreters per language per day but only a handful of freelance Maltese interpreters have been available so far.

There should be a slightly bigger supply soon: Four students have qualified as conference interpreters in the UK and about 45 others have just completed a translation course started in 2003 by the University of Malta.

Still, the latest development on the language front sends the wrong message. It transpired just days ago that an interpreters' post-graduate diploma course at the university - using money approved by the EU a year ago - may not open because a tender for the supply of booths has not yet been awarded. That this could have happened is already a cardinal sin. That no official declaration/explanation is made/given to the public now that the news is out is proof of the inertia and lack of accountability that exist in this country.

If we expect the EU to respect our language we must first respect it ourselves.