UK Council on Deafness

May 2002 Parliamentary Report

Lords Hansard text for 21 May 2002
Ian Stillman

Lord Ashley of Stoke asked Her Majesty's Government: What representations they have made to the Indian authorities about the alleged miscarriage of justice in the case of Ian Stillman.

Baroness Amos: My Lords, the British Government have made repeated representations to the Indian authorities on behalf of Ian Stillman. Our objectives have been to ensure proper conditions for him and a transparent and expeditious judicial process. The judicial process concluded on 6th May this year. We have noted the allegation of a miscarriage of justice and await permission from Mr Stillman and his family to refer the case to a lawyer on our pro bono panel to obtain legal advice on this.

Lord Ashley of Stoke: My Lords, does my noble friend recall that Ian Stillman is an Englishman, who was sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment in India because cannabis was found in a taxi in which he was travelling with other people. Ian Stillman is profoundly deaf and relies upon sign language, yet at his trial he was denied an interpreter, which meant that he could not follow the proceedings. That means that he did not have a fair trial. As my noble friend knows, the organisation Fair Trials Abroad has said that this is the worst miscarriage of justice that it has ever seen. I ask my noble friend whether it is possible for the Government to institute vigorous, urgent and determined action at the highest level, not only in regard to his conditions in gaol, but also on his conviction.

Baroness Amos: My Lords, I am aware of the facts of the case and that Ian Stillman is profoundly deaf. I am also aware of the comments made by Fair Trials Abroad. We have been active in Mr Stillman's case, not only with respect to his welfare, but also, on a number of occasions, in raising this case with the Indian authorities. We have reached the point where the judicial process has come to an end and we are waiting to hear from Mr Stillman's family what next steps they intend to take. On that basis we shall determine the next steps that the Government take. We have to understand what Ian Stillman and his family intend to do next.

Lord Swinfen: My Lords, is Mr Stillman's family being given any advice by the Government?

Baroness Amos: My Lords, Mr Stillman's family is being given advice by the Government about his welfare. The legal aspects of his case are being handled by Mr Stillman's legal representatives. We have offered the use of a lawyer from our pro bono legal panel.

Lord Goodhart: My Lords, I speak as a trustee of Fair Trials Abroad. Does the Minister recognise that this state of affairs does not apply to Mr Stillman alone? In many countries around the world people suffering from deafness, or other disabilities that interfere with their ability to understand what is taking place in a trial, do not receive proper assistance. Will the Government take all steps open to them to ensure that proper practices are observed in foreign trials?

Baroness Amos: My Lords, with respect to Mr Stillman's disability, I am aware that disparaging remarks were made about that at the recent trial. I have asked our High Commissioner in Delhi to take up the matter with the Indian authorities. Of course we shall look at other ways in which we can bring this to the attention of authorities in other countries of the world where this practice is ongoing. We have explained our policy on pardons and clemency pleas to Mr Stillman's family. We consider supporting pleas on a case-by-case basis as a last resort. That is why we await a decision from his family as to the steps they would wish to take next.

Lord Ashley of Stoke: My Lords, I am sorry to come back again, but can my noble friend respond to my points about top-level representation by the Government and making application not only on his prison conditions but on his conviction?

Baroness Amos: My Lords, as I hope I have explained, we support pleas for clemency and on pardons on a case-by-case basis if there is prima facie evidence of a miscarriage of justice. We also support pleas on health grounds if a prisoner is chronically ill or where continued incarceration would endanger or reduce life expectancy. But in order to do that we need a decision from the family and from the individual. With respect to top-level representation, my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary has discussed our concerns with the Indian authorities. Of course we shall continue to think about the most appropriate level at which representations should be made once the next steps have been decided.

House of Commons Hansard Debates for 21 May 2002
Special Educational Needs
(Extracts)

Mr. Roger Gale (North Thanet): During the passage of the Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001, I raised teaching the deaf. I referred to a school in my constituency that had a superb unit for the hearing impaired. Does the Minister seriously believe that it has been effective to dissipate the energy and talent in that school and spread it thinly around a group of less specialist schools in the name of inclusion?

Mr. Timms: Those decisions should be made locally. I shall comment on special schools because the hon. Member for Epping Forest mentioned them in her speech. Support should be provided in a variety of ways, depending on the resources available in each area, and the decisions should be made locally.

.... Mr. David Rendel (Newbury): Let us start with the good news. The good news is that society's growing awareness of special educational needs has, over the past few years, made this a much more civilised country in which to live. ...... I shall illustrate these points by considering some examples. We have-sadly, I should say we did have-several excellent special schools in my constituency, but I want to contrast just three, the first of which is the well-known Mary Hare grammar school for the deaf. Anyone who visits it is struck by the outstanding results that are achieved there by some of Britain's most profoundly deaf youngsters. I have never forgotten my first visit. As I was wandering down a corridor, I suddenly heard, as if from some distant place, the beautiful sound of a solo clarinet. Ignorant as I then was of the fantastic musical abilities of many deaf children, I was amazed to discover that a school for deaf children could not only contain many talented individual musicians, but put together an entire orchestra of musicians, just like any mainstream school. Of course, the teachers need special training and the pupils need special help, and the cost of running the school is such that the local authorities sometimes baulk at the expense. Luckily, its reputation is so high that it can still flourish, but who could blame the local authorities-constantly strapped for cash as they are, thanks to real-terms cutbacks by central Government-for hesitating to spend much more on one Mary Hare pupil than they must spend on a mainstream, comprehensive- educated pupil? That is a real dilemma for the local authorities, and it is up to the Government to help them redress it.

......Mr. Shaun Woodward (St. Helens, South): The Minister has come under something of an attack. I was surprised by that because over the years the subject of special educational needs has been a matter of consensus rather than combat. SEN policies have been criticised before. I shall remind the Minister of a speech in which it was said: "Let me tell the Minister that we need more help in the country now. We need more residential educational facilities, and more respite for parents; we also need to provide more day provision for autistic adults. The Government must begin by reviewing the needs of the forgotten children."-[Official Report, 17 May 1995; Vol. 260, c.310.] That is the sort of speech that the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Mrs. Laing) might have made, but in fact those were the words of the then Member for Finchley. Special educational needs are important. They involve a vulnerable group of people, and the House needs to be cautious when it chooses to use such people as the subject of an Opposition day debate. It is easy to make criticisms that turn vulnerable people into political footballs without providing adequate ideas about how we should deal with the problem. Indeed, we have been dealing with the problem for a long time. The solutions evolve as we learn more about the problems of children with SEN and children with autism. The shadow Leader of the House, when he was an Education Minister in 1992, said: "We hope to establish a consensus and to achieve the greatest possible agreement in order to identify the best ways to serve, help and support the children who deserve every support and help."-[Official Report, 3 July 1992; Vol. 210, c. 1134.] Again, I caution the hon. Member for Epping Forest about the dangers of turning the debate into a combat rather than a matter of consensus. The problem of a shortfall of specialist teachers is not new either. Back in 1994, it was said: "There is a shortfall of available specialist teachers. The number completing courses in teaching pupils with severe learning difficulties fell from 200"- just 200- "in 1989 to 80 in 1993. The number of teachers of hearing-impaired children qualifying has fallen from 150 to 110. The British Association of Teachers of the Deaf reports an average age of more than 40 for new trainees and a serious fall-off in younger teachers. Special schools and support services are having difficulty in filling appointments with qualified people."-[Official Report, 9 May 1994; Vol. 243, c. 38.] We need to be careful of ignoring the fact that the problems are not new. They are continuing and will remain with us for as long as the problems remain with us.

...... Mr. Gale: The hon. Gentleman speaks with some pride of the 2001 Act; but I and some others had some quarrel with it. The Royal School for Deaf Children in Margate, in my constituency, also takes children from his constituency. Is he proud of the fact that, under the Act, the Royal School, which is not a state school, and other members of the national association for special schools, suffer discrimination? Should not they, too, be given the state help that they deserve?

...... Phil Hope (Corby): I welcome the chance to contribute, however briefly, to this debate. The hon. Member for Wealden (Mr. Hendry) made some interesting points about the possible causes of some special educational needs and offered one or two observations about activities that might deal with them. I have to say, however, that this Opposition day debate has been characterised by an absence of Conservative party policy on what we should be doing to meet the needs of children with special educational needs. I want to give a local example of a strategy-not just a one-off contribution that is a particularly good way of responding, but a complete strategy that is in accordance with the Government's policy and demonstrates how to deliver special education in a whole area. I am talking about the county of Northamptonshire, where the Labour county council has a reputation for having a very high quality special education needs policy. Indeed, a recent Ofsted report described the local education authority's strategy on special educational needs as excellent and as reflecting the national agenda, with a key commitment to the principle of inclusion. Interestingly, Opposition Members talked about watchwords of choice and diversity, but failed to use the word "inclusion" as a key principle in approaching the question of developing education for children with special educational needs. The local education authority is in the top quartile of performance indicators for carrying out assessments within 18 weeks, at some 90 per cent. The parent partnership scheme that it funds is well developed and provides valuable support to parents through the education system. The Ofsted report said that the fact that parents were so well assisted by that system contributed to a reduction in the number of appeals having to reach tribunal stage. I have practical experience of the situation in Northamptonshire. Studfall junior school in my constituency has achieved the full integration of children with special educational needs. To pick up a point made by the hon. Member for North Thanet (Mr. Gale), that includes children with hearing impairments. I witnessed fantastic educational opportunities during a Christmas event, when the whole school-a group of deaf children with hearing children-sang "Silent Night" using sign language. That was astonishing, because the hearing children were doing the signing. Both deaf and hearing children benefit from that kind of inclusiveness in our education system. To include is to provide opportunities for all our children, not just those with special educational needs.

........ Alistair Burt (North-East Bedfordshire): This has been an interesting debate, well conducted on both sides. As always, it has been enriched by the personal knowledge of colleagues who take a particular interest in this matter in their constituencies. The hon. Member for Corby (Phil Hope) spoke about the portage service. I pay tribute to that; I had one in my previous constituency, and know how important it was for early diagnosis and early support. He also spoke movingly about children signing. As a Minister who signed at the special Christmas service for the Royal School for the Deaf in St. Margarets, I understand how overwhelmingly significant that is and the way it makes one feel in relation to those who have hearing disabilities. When children sign while they are singing, it is really very special. The hon. Gentleman was right to draw attention to that. My hon. Friend the Member for Fareham (Mr. Hoban) paid tribute to local schools in his constituency, and mentioned conductive education at the Rainbow Centre. In doing so, he made a proper and valid contribution to the debate. I want to pick up on what my right hon. Friend the Member for South-West Norfolk said about further education. We have spent most of our time today talking about special needs in schools, but for two reasons it is terribly important to discuss how they are dealt with in further and higher education. First, we should not forget that knowing that they can leave school and enter further and higher education provides an extraordinary role model for those with disabilities. Secondly, we must pay genuine tribute to those who have worked so hard in further and higher education to enable special needs provision to come on in leaps and bounds in the past decade or so. Further education colleges are proud of their provision. They already cope with a wide variety of students, as the Minister knows full well. The Association of Colleges for Further and Higher Education has produced a toolkit that includes a range of measures to help colleges with the practicalities of providing beneficial places for those with special learning needs. This afternoon, I spoke to Sue Spencer and others at Walsall college, which does particularly well with the deaf and the deaf-blind. I mention this example to give hon. Members a sense of the extent of further education provision for those with disabilities. Walsall college has some 80 students. Four are deaf-blind, and their ages range from 16 to 87. The 87-year-old man, who is deaf-blind, is on a computer course and has already finished courses in mathematics and English. A full range of courses are studied by those with special learning needs. Some go on to university, some to work, and others to different courses. The keys to success include highly qualified teachers who continually top up their skills, good support systems-including educational interpreters who can offer assistance-along with other elements that the Minister might consider at some stage. As she knows, there is an acute national shortage of signers. The implication of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 is that the need for signers, particularly in education, has increased markedly. There is a chronic need to examine that issue, and to consider the way in which British sign language is handled for examination purposes.

Commons Written Answers

House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 23 May 2002
Deaf Young People (Education)

Mrs. Calton: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what proportion of young people who are profoundly deaf went into further and higher education in each of the last three years.

John Healey [holding answer 16 May 2002]: Figures for people entering further or higher education who are profoundly deaf are not available, although we can provide those recorded as having a hearing impairment. The number of people in England registered as deaf or hard of hearing with their local authority, at 31 March 2001, is 194,840. However the true number of people in England with mild, moderate, severe or profound deafness is likely to be much more and was estimated by the Royal National Institute for Deaf People in 1996 to be 7,243,000.

Hearing Aids

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 1. how long the average wait has been to receive an NHS hearing aid in each of the past 10 years; and if he will make a statement;

2. how old the average recipient of an NHS hearing aid has been in each of the past 10 years; and if he will make a statement;

3. how many people have been on a waiting list to receive an NHS hearing aid in each of the past 10 years; and if he will make a statement.

Jacqui Smith: The information requested is not available centrally. However according to the Institute of Hearing Research, the mean age of adults supplied with hearing aids as part of the modernising hearing aid services project is 71 (with a median age of 74). The Department is working in partnership with the Royal National Institute for Deaf People to modernise hearing aid services. The project includes provision of digital hearing aids as part of a modernised service designed to meet the needs of people with hearing impairments. Over £30 million has been invested to support the modernisation project.

[back to top]

[back to Deafness in Parliament]

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.