A new interpretation and translation policy has been introduced by Barnet Council, which stipulates that documents should no longer be automatically translated into the most commonly spoken languages in the borough.

Instead, every service will be required to judge each situation on its merits, and decide whether a translation or interpretation is necessary and/or desirable.

Documents will no longer have a language card attached to them, and decisions on translation will be linked to a comprehensive assessment of how and why information is being communicated.

In line with the recent Home Office policy announcement that all non-EU skilled immigrants will now have to have a decent knowledge of English before coming to the country, the council has said that its intention behind the new measures is to help social cohesion and integration.

Goverment statistics seem to back this up: immigrants who speak English competently are far more likely to succeed in the UK labour market than those who do not, with estimates suggesting that the likely earnings of migrant workers who speak English are around 20 per cent higher than those who do not.

Of course, this is a vicious circle, as the more immigrants there are who speak good English, the less English will be a determining factor in snaring the good jobs. But there are also other factors to consider, such as the decreased burden on schools: one in 20 have a minority of children with English as their first language, and teachers' unions estimate that educating a single non-English-speaking pupil could cost as much as £30,000 a year.

It is strange to think that ten years ago this sort of "British first" policy would have seemed unthinkable, but a combination of the terrorist threat and immigration "crisis" has created a renewed nationalistic spirit among Guardian and Daily Mail readers alike.

In Barnet, few seem to deny that the new translation policy is a good idea: the Hindu Cultural Society president Prem Modgil said it would be a "good incentive for people to make the effort to join the British community" and "stop burdening the tax payer".

As I see it, encouraging the speaking of English is a positive move - for all the very practical reasons outlined above, and because it prevents people being exploited and discriminated against. As a journalist, I often come across people who have difficulty with the language, and being able to untangle the details of their story is often a frustrating and fruitless process, with patience being stretched on both sides of the equation.

But having said that, there are other factors to consider. Who is to fund this learning? How available are lessons going to be? If the council wants its residents to be proficient English speakers, surely some provision should be made to help them become so. Otherwise, in the worst case scenario, you simply have a generation of immigrants who are even more alienated from society than they were before.

The new translation policy does contain a large amount of flexibility, with services basically being asked to use their common sense. But learning a language takes time, commitment and money - something none of us has very much of at the best of times, let alone when trying to navigate the intimidating highways and byways of a new life in a foreign land.

It also might be productive to look at the issue from the reverse perspective: if we are insisting that everyone speaks our language and abides by our values, perhaps we could improve our own understanding and knowledge of others' languages and cultures too. The ignorance of British citizens of foreign languages is more than an embarrassment (giving the French great ammunition for spite and ridicule - which should in itself be reason enough to remedy it). And perceptions of Islam have been so battered by Osama-inspired prejudice that it seems almost beyond repair.

With over a quarter of its population belonging to a minority ethnic community, Barnet could perhaps start to lead the way in smoothing over some of the cultural cracks, whether with funding or simple support and advocacy services - and help our country maintain the precarious but fundamental balance between diversity and cohesion on which it so prides itself.