At present, the EU institutions have three working languages – French, German and English – with the interpretation or translation of most meetings and documents into all 24 official languages.
The cost of this is over €1 billion a year and will increase as the EU takes in new members. At a time when all European governments are having to make painful budget cuts, EU institutions should do likewise.
As a first step, English should become the only official language for internal EU business.
This means doing away with interpretation at press conferences, working groups and commissioners’ meetings. Few would miss it and, anyway, it’s hard to see how you can be an effective commissioner, correspondent or diplomat in Brussels without speaking the language most people communicate in.
The Commission could also save money – and trees – by reducing the 2.3 million pages it translates every year. Draft proposals and EU legislation should continue to be translated into all official languages, of course. But does every discussion paper, video on Europarl TV, crummy kids’ comic book and Eurobarometer report?
Most Europeans think not, with over half agreeing that EU institutions should adopt a common language when communicating with citizens.
Quatremer believes using English gives native speakers an unfair advantage.
If it did, there would be more British than French officials in the EU institutions and the most popular blogger about EU affairs would have a name like John Fourseas. Neither is bad English the root cause of the tortured texts coming out of the Commission.
Native English speakers are quite capable of producing bureaucratic gobbledygook in their own tongue.
Finally, there is no evidence that the French language – or any other one – is being destroyed because French people can increasingly speak English. As the German President Joachim Gauck said two years ago, it is perfectly possible to be in favour of multilingualism and English as the EU’s common language.
Flix Translations, translation agency.