UK Council on Deafness

Letter to the Minister for Disabled People - 30th April 2002

Maria Eagle MP
Minister for Disabled People
Department for Work and Pensions
Richmond House
79 Whitehall
London
SW1A 2NS

Dear Ms Eagle,

Official Recognition of British Sign Language

I am writing further to our meeting of 31 January 2002 attended by the British Deaf Association, Federation of Deaf People, National Deaf Children's Society, Royal Association for Deaf People, Royal National Institute for Deaf People, Sign and the UK Council on Deafness. We were grateful for the opportunity to meet with you in person and set out our case for the official recognition of BSL.

We agreed that we would write to you with more details of our position and the benefits that we believe recognition of BSL would bring. I attach a briefing paper summarising the views we set out in our meeting with you and our recommendations for immediate steps that the government could take to progress this matter.

I would have written sooner, but we were waiting for a response to the British Deaf Association from the UK's representative on the Committee of Experts overseeing the Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, to clarify whether deaf organisations can make representations to the Committee on the issue of BSL recognition as you have suggested. It seems that the Committee cannot, in fact, consider representations from deaf organisations, unless these are made during an "on-the-spot" visit by Committee representatives to the UK.

This confirms the point that we made at our meeting with you: namely that it is not for deaf organisations to take up with the Committee of Experts the question of whether BSL can be accommodated within the terms of the Charter, but the UK government's. We are aware of the government's view that the Charter may not be applicable to sign languages, but we believe that BSL clearly meets the definition of a "non-territorial language" . It is our view that the only way of establishing this one way or the other is for the government to specify BSL and see what the Committee's response is.

We would therefore, once again, ask the government to specify BSL as a non-territorial minority language to which it wishes the provisions of part III of the Charter to apply. We are at a loss to understand why the government will not do so, especially since it has specified Welsh, Gaelic and Irish under the Charter.

I hope that you find the attached information useful and look forward to your reply at your earliest convenience.

Yours sincerely,

Jonathan Isaac
Director
UK Council on Deafness

ENC: BSL Recognition - Next Steps

Cc: Alex Maxwell, Disability Unit

BSL Recognition - Next Steps

1. Introduction

This paper has been prepared by the UK Council on Deafness in partnership with the British Deaf Association, Federation of Deaf People, National Deaf Children's Society, Royal Association for Deaf People, Royal National Institute for Deaf People and SIGN. It sets out our views of the benefits that official recognition of British Sign Language would bring and possible routes to recognition.

2. Background

The government has acknowledged the strength of feeling in the Deaf community on the subject of BSL recognition and there has been widespread political support for recognition.

The Scottish Parliament debated the issue of BSL recognition on 16 February 2000. The debate was well attended by Members of the Scottish Parliament representing all political parties, many of whom spoke in support of the motion urging official recognition of BSL. A similar debate took place in the National Assembly for Wales in 1999, after a Statement of Opinion was raised. This debate also attracted widespread cross-party support for the principle of official recognition. Tom Levitt introduced an adjournment debate on BSL in the House of Commons on 5 April 2000. In reply to this debate, the then Minister for Disabled People, Margaret Hodge, promised that she would consider the issue of recognition of BSL under the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages and that "the government will explore the matter with other parties in Europe, once we have ratified the charter" .

In May 2000, the government asked the Disability Rights Commission (DRC) to provide advice on how the issue of official recognition might be taken forward. The DRC in turn sought advice from the UK Council on Deafness - an umbrella organisation of d/Deaf organisations and charities which made a submission to the DRC calling for the establishment of a national BSL taskforce and for official recognition of BSL under the European Charter. Other organisations made similar representations.

The DRC made the following recommendations:

• The government should recognise BSL through inclusion in the Council of Europe's Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, if necessary through post ratification.
• The Commission should produce, in conjunction with the Government, specific DDA guidance to clarify in which situations the provision of BSL interpretation by a fully qualified interpreter should be regarded as a reasonable adjustment. The guidance is necessary to support the Charter recognition.
• The Government should increase the funding available for the development of interpreter services. In addition, the government should work with the Council for the Advancement of Communication with Deaf People (CACDP), the Association of Sign Language Interpreters and the Scottish Association of Sign Language Interpreters to develop a system of regulation to ensure that interpreter services are delivered to professional standards.
• The Government should commission an independent study on the demography of the BSL community and numbers of BSL users. The study should also examine the costs associated with the proposed inclusion of BSL within the Charter and what level of interpreter provision is needed. There should be a small working group to manage this study and a wider reference group; membership of both groups must include BSL users and representatives of the Deaf Community.
• The government should build in a review process three years after the ratification under the Charter to determine whether there is a need for a BSL Act or other legislative action to secure the rights of Deaf people.

The RNID and British Deaf Association are currently working with the DRC to advance the second of these recommendations on guidance for use of BSL/English interpreters. However, as the Chair of the DRC, Bert Massie complained in his letter to the Minister for Disabled people of 7 August 2001, there has been little or no progress on the other recommendations.

3. Benefits of Official Recognition

There are many practical benefits that would flow from official recognition of British Sign Language. Although current domestic legislation affords some protection for the rights of Deaf people (principally the Disability Discrimination Act 1995) there are clearly areas where the DDA does not apply. These areas concern the rights of Deaf people as minority language users, rather than disabled people, and consequently a legal instrument that specifically addresses these rights, affords better protection. An example of such an instrument would be the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages.

The following are examples of some of the difficulties facing the Deaf community, and where official recognition would make a difference:

• Under guidance issued by the Lord Chancellor's department, the courts are required to provide interpreters in criminal proceedings where the defendant or witnesses are Deaf. However, there is no so such provision in civil cases. A recent example of such a situation occurred in January 2002, when the charity Sign brought a civil action involving 5 deaf people. The courts would not pay the interpreter costs because it was a civil case. Recognition of BSL would afford Deaf people the right to make submissions to public and judicial authorities in their own language - this is one of the provisions in part III of the European Charter (Article 9).
• The DDA requires that a BSL/English interpreter be provided if this is necessary to ensure that a Deaf person is not treated less favourably in accessing a public service. Yet there is a chronic shortage of interpreters, and a key reason for this is the lack of BSL tutors to provide the language training at the intermediate and advanced levels that are the precursor to interpreter training. DDA is of no use in tackling this shortage. Official recognition would actively promote the teaching of the language. For instance, Article 8 of the European Charter makes provision to "encourage or provide teaching in or of the regional or minority language at all the appropriate stages of education" .
• Parents of d/Deaf children often do not receive adequate information about communication options and provision, including BSL. This is crucial if they are to make informed choices about the options available to their children, especially in the light of universal neo-natal screening. The policies of local education authorities regarding the provision of information about communication options and subsequent provision are frequently determined by the Head of the Hearing Impaired Service's own views. Official recognition of BSL would put an end to this type of lottery for parents and encourage the provision of information to hearing parents of d/Deaf children.
• A Deaf person providing a statement to the police may make their statement in BSL, but are required to place their signature on a written copy of that statement in English, even though they may not understand that written version. Article 9 paragraph (a) of the European Charter would require that requests or evidence "shall not be considered inadmissible solely because they are formulated in a regional or minority language" . This might enable, for example, a videotape of the Deaf person signing to be treated as their submitted statement.
• Deaf children in mainstream schools often do not have the opportunity to learn BSL or access to information about Deaf history or culture, which may be important to their personal and social development. Article 8 of the Charter makes provision to extend education in the relevant regional or minority languages and "ensure the teaching of the history and the culture which is reflected by the regional or minority language" . Specifying BSL under part III of the Charter would also promote the teaching in schools of BSL as a language option for hearing children.

Clearly, such issues could be addressed in isolation in an ad hoc way. However, we believe that such a piecemeal approach would fall short of what is required. Official recognition, and in the first instance recognition under the European Charter, would provide a systematic framework for addressing the social exclusion of Deaf people. It would also be of symbolic importance in signalling the government's acceptance of and support for the fact that Deaf people in the UK see themselves primarily as a linguistic minority.

4. Routes to official recognition of BSL

As the major deaf organisations set out at our meeting with the Minister on 31 January 2002, there are a number of routes to official recognition of BSL. These include:

a/. European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages

In signing up to the Charter, a country undertakes to apply all of the provisions of Part II of the Charter to the regional or minority languages spoken in its territory. These provisions concern general measures to promote and protect the languages, to ensure that they can be studied and are properly taught, and to promote academic research into the languages. These are clearly areas where the UK's Disability Discrimination Act 1995 would not apply and where recognition under the Charter would bring tangible benefits in promoting and protecting British Sign Language.

Signatories are also required to specify each minority or regional language to which the more detailed provisions of the Charter contained in Part III shall apply. These concern areas such as education, justice, public services, culture, economic and social life, and the media. Signatories can choose a minimum number of paragraphs from Part III to implement. There is, therefore some degree of flexibility in the way a country meets its obligations under the Charter. Again, recognition in this form would bring practical benefits, for example in promoting the "teaching of the history and the culture which is reflected by the regional or minority language" (Article 8), or by encouraging cultural activity specific to the specified minority languages (Article 12).

It is our view that British Sign Language clearly constitutes a "non territorial language" as specified in Article 1 of the Charter, which defines "non-territorial languages" as those "used by nationals of the State which differ from the language or languages used by the rest of the States population but which, although traditionally used within the territory of the State, cannot be identified with a particular area thereof" . BSL clearly meets these criteria. The Council of Europe's Explanatory Report on the Charter makes clear that, while it may be easier to apply Part II of the Charter to non-territorial languages, they are not precluded from recognition under Part III as well (Explanatory Report, paragraph 37). There is, therefore, no obvious reason why British Sign Language should not be specified as one of the languages to which provisions in Part III of the Charter shall apply.

To date, the government has refused to specify BSL under the Charter, claiming that deaf organisations are free to make representations to the Committee of Experts with responsibility for the Charter, to explore the issue of whether the Charter can accommodate sign as opposed to spoken languages. In fact, our understanding is that deaf organisations are not able to make representations to the Committee, except during any “on-the-spot” visits by the Committee to the UK.

This confirms our view that it is for the government to specify BSL as a minority language to which it wishes provisions in part III of the Charter to apply, and await the Committee of Experts' response.

b/. Domestic policy initiatives/legislation

Many of the examples given in section three above, could be addressed through domestic policy initiatives or legislation. For example, issues such as the shortage of BSL/English interpreters, and suitably trained and qualified BSL tutors, would clearly need to be addressed at a UK level. Such measures would also follow from any obligations the government entered into in specifying BSL as a language to which provisions of the European Charter should apply.

5. Summary of recommendations

In conclusion, we believe that the government should adopt the following recommendations:

Specify BSL as minority language to which part III of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages shall apply.

Establish a taskforce to monitor progress and advise on implementation of the relevant provisions within the Charter and to determine what policy initiatives or legislative action is required to ensure the rights of Deaf people.

[Back to Promoting the use of British Sign Language Campaign Page]

UK Council on Deafness, Registered Charity Number 1038448

Your use of this site is in accordance with our Privacy Statement

© UK Council on Deafness, 2003-5.