[In British Sign Language] Welcome to the Women and Equalities Committee. Thank you for coming today. [The Chair continued in English] This afternoon, we will take evidence on access to British Sign Language. We have a fantastic panel in front of us. Today, we are hearing from Dr Jo Atkinson, clinical neuropsychologist and member of the BSL Advisory Board; Craig Crowley MBE, chief executive officer of Action Deafness and co-chair of the BSL Advisory Board; and Rebecca Mansell, chief executive of the British Deaf Association. Today’s evidence will be given in BSL, spoken via a team of four interpreters.

It is a great pleasure to open the questions today, because as a small part of my career I worked for the RNID. It is great to have you here, and particularly members of the British Deaf Association. My first question is to Rebecca. The British Sign Language Act 2022 was celebrated in the Deaf community, but there were some sceptics. What is the community’s attitude towards the Act three years later? Have the sceptics been won over?

[In British Sign Language] Absolutely. The BSL Act was worthwhile. The legislation itself—the ratification and recognition of our sign language and of our culture—was extremely valuable. We feel that finally our language and culture are recognised. It had never been done before: this was the first time ever that our language had been recognised by law. We know that we have a long way to go. There is different legislation, with the BSL Act and the British Sign Language (Scotland) Act 2015. The Scottish Act is more robust. There is also the ongoing potential of the British Sign Language (Wales) Bill and the Sign Language Bill in Northern Ireland. Those two Bills will also be more robust than the BSL Act that was passed here. I would not say that the legislation itself solves everything. This is just the start. We need to win the hearts and minds of the public. For our language to be truly recognised, that is crucial: that will start to open the doors for people to see our community, who have been here for over 500 years, and our language, which has been here for as long as that. We appreciate being here today. Thank you.

My next question is to Jo. The 2022 Act does not provide any additional rights to Deaf signers. Is this a weakness in the legislation?

[In British Sign Language] The BSL Act 2022 was a vital legal step forward, and it was an important recognition. It was designed to work with the AIS and the Equality Act, so it was an important part of that framework. Of course, there remain gaps in access and there remain weaknesses in the enforcement of all those Acts. It does not always work well for us, as members of the Deaf population. You may be aware that there is an additional burden on Deaf and disabled people, who are left still having to fight for their rights. One of the challenges is that Deaf people cannot use BSL to make complaints or to raise legal challenges. Our role on the advisory board is to consider or highlight where the legislative framework is not working or not being enforced, and to make recommendations for change. For example, in November we will be launching the health and social care report. In that report, we are highlighting the lack of enforcement and implementation of the accessible information standard in health and social care. We have a health and social care sub-group, and we have been communicating with NHS England and the Department of Health and Social Care. There are other situations where there is not sufficient legal structure to support Deaf and deafblind people and the interpreters that we require. Very often, we are unable to access interpreting services, because the legislative rights are not there. For example, if I attend a funeral, I have no right to an interpreter; if I want to converse with my neighbours, I have no right to communication support. We, as a board, hope that our recommendations will be attended to and implemented so that enforcement will improve. To answer your question: yes, there is a lack of enforcement, but we as a board will continue to highlight that until changes are made. However, the BSL Act itself is a landmark piece of legislation and, as a community, we are delighted that it has given us a foundation upon which we can build for the future. It is incredible that Deaf people like us are here at Westminster, in conversation with politicians. We now have much more visibility and equity. We can only hope that the Government will use our recommendations to enact change that will consequently improve the lives of the Deaf population and their access to justice, healthcare and other services.

Craig, do you feel that that there is a need for additional legislation to provide equal rights to Government information?

[In British Sign Language] Yes. First of all, I think it is important for me to say that having the BSL Act enacted was a landmark occasion. It is important to say that because, as Rebecca said, it is the first ever recognition of the language, and it is properly recognised by the Government, but it needs to be embedded in policy and practice, and that is obviously going to take some time. We do recognise it as a first step, and we know that there will be obstacles along the way, but it is the first time that we have taken these steps. It has been three years since the start of legislation. Some people were uncertain whether it would work, or whether it would work well, but it has been mostly positive over that time. It has raised positive awareness and it is creating momentum. It has brought BSL to the public and political conversations, which had not happened previously. The sceptics have been reassured, but understandably there are frustrations about the pace of change, as Jo has already explained. The BSL Act 2022, which has received Royal Assent, recognises BSL as a language of England, Scotland and Wales but not Northern Ireland, because equality law is devolved in Northern Ireland. As my colleagues have said, the legislation is there and is starting its journey—it has only been three years.

[In British Sign Language] I absolutely agree with Craig here. I believe that more progress is needed in this area. It is not just about a stronger piece of legislation; it is about what Deaf signers are contributing to society. We know that we could strengthen the Act—of course, all in good time—but we want the world to see our contribution as Deaf people, like Rose Ayling-Ellis on “Strictly Come Dancing” and afterwards, with her skills and her influence. There are Deaf CEOs, like me and Craig. We have Deaf academics working in universities. We have amazing researchers. We have Deaf people in top jobs across the country. We do not have these jobs because we are Deaf; it is because we are skilled and talented, like everybody else. We want the world to see us as contributing to society. We bring a visual perspective to this world. The legislation certainly helps, but we want society to understand that we are the same as all of you. We are all human beings; we just use a different language. BSL is an indigenous language of the United Kingdom. There is evidence of signing going back 500 years in our country. This history—this element—is really misunderstood, and we really want to change mainstream attitudes towards that. We want to show that we can contribute to society and believe that that is the way forward.

[In British Sign Language] May I add something, to answer the question whether additional legislation is needed? On the BSL Advisory Board, we are currently focused on taking the opportunity to make the most of the current Act and advising Government on that, but of course there are certain weaknesses that we hope will be improved. We hope that this Act will be a springboard for enhancements in the future.

[In British Sign Language] To reinforce what Jo said, the key is that the role of the board is to influence on issues within Government Departments. The legislation helps our influence from within, and that is why we are delighted to have the BSL Advisory Board in place. That helps to start the ball rolling.

That link between culture and language is so important, so thank you for explaining that.

Scotland has already been mentioned, so I will pass over to my colleague Christine.

Rebecca, you have already mentioned Scotland, as Sarah said, but I wonder how the 2022 Act and its impact compare with the British Sign Language Act (Scotland) 2015 and its effect in Scotland.

[In British Sign Language] It is clear that the Scottish legislation is much stronger than the BSL Act 2022. For example, it places requirements on the Scottish Government to distribute a national plan. The BSL national plan means that the different bodies, such as councils and NHS services across Scotland, have to include a national plan. Equally, the Senedd in Wales and the Northern Ireland Assembly are both in discussions about creating their own potential legislation for these languages. Their legislation will be much stronger than the BSL Act passed here. They are focused on promoting the language. I would like to really praise the BSL Advisory Board and Craig’s leadership. They have only been involved for three years, and the impact that they have made has been transformational already. Going forward, with the continued support of the BSL Advisory Board to the Government, we know that we can make a robust and clear change into the future.

To what extent do you think that the Scottish Act facilitated the Contact Scotland BSL service? Have the UK Government considered a similar Britain-wide service?

[In British Sign Language] Absolutely. Contact Scotland was set up 10 years ago, at the same time as the British Sign Language Act (Scotland) 2015. It has been in place now for over 10 years and is an incredible service. It has been fully resourced and funded so that people across Scotland can contact health services without barriers, but it is important that it continues to be promoted. There needs to be awareness out there in wider society that it is available. If we look back, during the covid-19 pandemic BSL Health Access was launched across England and Wales by the Deaf health charity SignHealth. For the first time, Deaf people in England and Wales could access signed communication with their GP, with their consultant and with any health professional. That, in itself, was groundbreaking. At that time, we had to wear masks, and communication was extremely difficult. To have an interpreter in your pocket that you could use for communication was incredible. For example, I ended up being in hospital with my son, who had fallen over. Usually, I would have difficulty communicating with the emergency services but back then, through the pandemic, we had that service and were able to access communication. But once the pandemic was over, we were back to square one. I can no longer so easily communicate with a health professional; I have to wait two weeks for an interpreter when I need an urgent appointment immediately. The service in Scotland is available 24/7, and we need the same here. We need a similar model rolled out so the barriers can be broken down for us. I would be extremely interested in the Government looking into this.

So it was available during covid-19 in England and Wales, but not now?

[In British Sign Language] Yes, that is correct.

How confident are you that it would be available again in an emergency situation? Is that enough? Should it not be available all the time, as it is in Scotland?

[In British Sign Language] I think it should be available 24/7. The Government recently agreed to provide 999 BSL, an amazing initiative whereby we can contact the emergency services at the touch of a button, but then when the ambulance arrives, that communication stops. It does not facilitate communication with the paramedics or the medical staff. You arrive in hospital and you still do not have that communication. We need continuity, so the ambulance arrives and we still have an interpreter available for us to facilitate communication all the way through to the hospital. It should not stop upon arrival of the ambulance.

Does anyone else want to comment?

[In British Sign Language] Contact Scotland was funded and supported via the BSL Act. It was the Act that provided the framework to allow that to be established. We do not have a similar thing in England and Wales, so we would certainly like to see that being established in England and Wales. We would suggest a trial. We have suggested a trial in health and social care in a specific locality, and then that it be rolled out. We were speaking just this morning with a director in the Department of Health and Social Care, Tabitha Jay, who attended our board meeting, and we received a very positive response from her. We already have very good evidence from the NHS’s own research that was commissioned in 2021—the rapid review of interpreting services for healthcare, which was a post-pandemic review—and we have evidence from 999 BSL, which has had fantastic take-up, so there is evidence available. You asked about emergency services. At the moment, we cannot call the gas, the water or the electricity; we cannot contact hospitals or the council; we cannot report safeguarding issues if we have concerns about children or young adults. These services need to be national as soon as possible.

Craig?

[In British Sign Language] I think Jo has covered all I want to say. Thank you.

Can I thank the witnesses for their time today? My first question is to Craig. The third annual BSL Act progress report was published in July. To what extent has the experience of accessing Government information improved over the last three years, and how confident are you that it will continue to improve?

[In British Sign Language] The report published in July reflected a fall in numbers of BSL communications since the previous report, but the numbers are still high—higher than the first year. It is a shame that there has been a drop since the previous years, and that the increase has not continued, but we do recognise that there are a number of reasons for this drop. There was a pause in reporting due to the general election last year, and some items that were produced in 2024 remain in use and continue to provide service to users. For example, the Home Office published guidance to support victims of domestic abuse and violence, enforced marriage and coercive behaviour, and those items are still used. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office have also provided BSL for the first time, which is an achievement. The BSL Advisory Board is delighted. The Government confirmed their commitment to the annual BSL report until 2027, which is a five-year period. That exceeds the requirement of the BSL Act. In summary, yes, we are keen as an advisory board to seek a marked improvement in the next report, which is due in July 2026. We welcome the publication of Departments’ BSL five-year plans. That should help to focus Departments on their delivery, because they will be obliged to update their plans. The board is conscious that we need to go further. We welcome opportunities to work with other Departments in the future so that they can deliver on their plans.

[In British Sign Language] Thank you, Craig. It is important that information is available to the public in British Sign Language, but the most important thing is Deaf empowerment. We want our community to be included in things that are meaningful to us, and for people not to think that translation in itself is sufficient. The answer is Deaf leadership. We need Deaf signers to work with Government and to inform them what works for us, so that they can then understand what the community needs. The community would therefore contribute to policy creation, implementation and evaluation of what works for us. For example, the Welsh Government—and I praise them for it—have a BSL stakeholder group, and its working language is British Sign Language. Everybody uses British Sign Language, and that is fabulous. It is co-chaired by the Welsh Government and the BDA. My colleague in the room with us today is co-chair. That is an incredible professional space, where discussions can be had and contributions made. That makes a more meaningful impact. That is what we would like to see.

This question is for Jo. You already mentioned the worrying difficulty of accessing certain services, for example communicating with the gas board to report safety concerns. Will you elaborate on what you think needs to change? Can you also set out which Government Departments are leading the way, and those that need to do more?

[In British Sign Language] Can I clarify whether you are talking specifically about emergency planning, or about access to services more generally?

Ideally I am talking about both, if there is time to cover them briefly.

[In British Sign Language] The board has not yet done a lot of specific work on emergency planning. We have not yet engaged with that topic. However, I think that fits into the broader question of access to services and to society. I lead on the health and social care sub-group. It is exciting that in Parliament, on 27 November, we will be launching a substantial report of 130 pages, which is a fully scoped review of the experiences of Deaf and deafblind people of access to healthcare and social care from cradle to grave. That is from the front door of the NHS to highly specialist services. It is a hugely ambitious report, with several specific, achievable recommendations for Government policymakers. We really hope that it will be well received and that there will be a clear action plan. We, as a board, have discussed this at length and created the solutions that the Government need. We now need politicians to come behind us to provide the action to implement the solution and the vision that we have given, so that our lives can be improved. The report was written over the last two years, in consultation with over 60 different Deaf and deafblind organisations, experts, healthcare and social care providers, professional networks and frontline staff, as well as academics. It is an incredibly thorough and deep dive into this area of inaccessibility. We only meet four times a year and we are all volunteers, so the board has needed its three years. What we are trying to do is set up the foundations to provide the best possible evidence to Government but also to include our lived experience. That is how we intend to address some of the issues that you are raising, so that politicians know what we need.

[In British Sign Language] What the BSL Advisory Board has done in the last three years is truly remarkable. I applaud them. They are all Deaf sign language users who are using their influence on Government. We can do more. The British Deaf Association, as a member-led organisation representing signers across the UK, is extremely keen to support and work with the BSL Advisory Board to make sure that its influence on Government is stronger and stronger. To answer your question, we are very happy to be involved in these discussions and to bring the community forward to contribute and address these barriers.

Thank you. That was very helpful.

We have already heard from Rebecca Mansell about the fantastic difference that the BSL Advisory Board is making. The next question is to Craig first. How would you describe your experience of being part of the BSL Advisory Board and what has been your approach to engaging with Government Departments?

[In British Sign Language] For me, the experience has been interesting. I think the journey itself is quite impactful, because there is the experience of being on the board. The board members know full well that there is a mandate from the BSL Act, but we also recognise that it just scratches the surface. It is one piece of paper. It is about starting the process through our three-year term. The members are very diverse. As Jo has said, they have lived experience of deafness and it is crucial to have that variety of individuals on the board: Deaf BSL users, parents and teachers of Deaf children, and representatives of Deaf organisations. It is about having that collective and the opportunity to work with Government Departments, and about getting that dovetailing throughout the process, so that we can gather the issues, make proposals and raise awareness of BSL accessibility. My experience to date has been worth while, because of our collective lived experience and our representation. The board has brought the British Deaf Association and other organisations together around one table to share the issues. There are bound to be more contentious issues—that is to be expected, because it is all part and parcel of what this is—but it has been very positive and has shown the amount of work that needs to be done. We have just started scratching the surface, but in an exciting way.

[In British Sign Language] First of all, I think it is really exciting to be able to provide Government with that advice from within. I am an academic and clinician, so providing evidence-based advice is really important to me. Of course, we are able to provide that evidence as well as the lived experience of Deaf and deafblind people. One of the things that I am most proud of, and that perhaps has already had the biggest impact, is the work that we have done with the deafblind community. I do not know if you are familiar with this, but deafblind people who use BSL as well use it in a different way. They may do something called visual frame, where they are signing in a smaller space, or hands-on, where they have to put their hands on someone else who is signing. When we started the BSL board, the deafblind community were really 30 years behind the Deaf community. We have seen developments in the Deaf community that have not been matched for deafblind people in their community, so we set up a working group to focus on the issues of importance. It is really exciting work. We have already improved the number of deafblind interpreters available on the register. Originally, there were only eight deafblind interpreters available across the UK, which created huge difficulties and barriers for deafblind people, for example with hospital appointments, where they could not find a hands-on interpreter for months. Finally, they would arrive at hospital—this is a real situation—and the doctor would say, “Well, your eyesight has got worse over the last five years. We could have helped you, but now it’s too late.” That is purely because interpreters could not be sought because of the limited number on the register. There are a lot of stories that have been given to us about that. We have been able to increase the number of interpreters on the register, and have been working with the NRCPD—the regulator—and the qualification body, Signature. They have jointly agreed that they will allow new people to register in a rapid way, either by accredited prior learning or on an immersion weekend to catch up with the registration requirements. We are also looking at communicator guides, who are professionals who support deafblind people with everyday communication and being guided around an environment. At the moment there is no regulation or professional register of that job, so we are looking at rolling out protactile sign language, which is a naturally evolving American deafblind sign language that is fully tactile; it is not an adaptation of BSL. It is a fully tactile language that really meets deafblind people’s needs. It is utterly incredible, but in the UK we have not had that at all, so the deafblind community here is desperate to see that implemented. We are looking at training interpreters and deafblind people themselves in using protactile. In partnership with the BDA and NRCPD, we are looking at providing training, and developing the capacity of the workforce to provide training, for deafblind people to lead this work in the future. I am really proud of the work that we have done in the deafblind sub-group on the board.

Jo, that is amazing. Do you have any other suggestions about how the board could become more effective, so we could see more examples of that fantastic work?

[In British Sign Language] I think we need strong deafblind voices on the board. We currently have two deafblind members and a member who works as a deafblind interpreter; the three of us together have already achieved a lot. We will have a new board starting from December, and we are hopeful that we will continue to have deafblind representation on the board. Craig has been brilliant at including deafblind people, but we want to see that continue and grow.

Rebecca, the Government recently ran a recruitment campaign for new board members. How effectively was that communicated to the Deaf signing community and any underrepresented groups?

[In British Sign Language] We have been very pleased to see the Government recruitment drive rolled out, and I hope the Cabinet Office has received a good number of applications—fingers crossed. I cannot tell you how effective it is from those numbers, but fingers crossed they are sufficient. On the BSL Advisory Board over the last three years, and looking to develop further into the future, I would like to see their work receiving a higher profile, because it is so important. We can see that they are making a big impact in Government changes and influencing, which is amazing. But at the same time, if we take a step back, this is not an elite group. We really need to think about how we systematically include the wider BSL community in order for them to work together effectively. So far, from what I have seen, recruitment is good for this.

Craig and Rebecca, is there any group from which you would like to see more applicants and more representation on the boards?

[In British Sign Language] Basically, if you remember when the BSL Act was first passed and it started to be rolled out, the group raised a lot of useful learning points. We have had the three-year tenure, and the disability unit has been the secretariat for the advisory board and is able to make it more open. We had a webinar for the Deaf community about co-chairing applications. We had a series of meetings to discuss with members of the Deaf community. At the BDA conference in July, Minister Timms announced the applications being open for recruitment. If you compare that with three years ago, there was very little then. It was just starting, but now we are much more open and much more public. As Rebecca said, the process itself is going to be managed by the Cabinet Office, but I am quietly optimistic that we will have a very good turnout of applications and applicants ready for the second cohort of the BSL Advisory Board.

[In British Sign Language] What is so interesting about our community is how diverse we are. We are truly intersectional. We see ourselves using BSL from different intersectionalities, and I really hope to see the new board being reflective of this diversity and showing all intersectionalities within our community—fingers crossed.

[In British Sign Language] Thank you for your question, David. That is quite a challenging one. My question would be, “From your perspective on the Committee, do you think Parliament is accessible?” I see shaking heads. Aha! Me too. We have many Deaf community members who would love to become MPs themselves, who have struggled and faced barriers. You might know the former chair of the BDA, David Buxton. He himself has been trying to stand for election, but the challenges he faces in obtaining interpreters, having to speak to voters and not being able to communicate creates a real barrier, so I think Parliament could do more to support the potential Deaf MPs out there. Parliament does a lot of things well, but it could do more. If your Parliament could include more diverse and intersectional Deaf people and also appreciate what we contribute, that would be amazing. That has never been considered before, and that in itself makes it hard to imagine how Parliament could adjust to this to include BSL signers. But look at the example we are seeing today—how fabulous of you to accommodate us here. This is the first of many sessions, we hope. We hope our voices will continue to be heard and contributed and maybe influence Deaf people to become MPs—not me, but maybe Craig! Hopefully there are people out there willing to contribute to our great country and make improvements in the process.

[In British Sign Language] If I may come in before Craig, I am chair of the health and social care sub-group on one of the Government’s own advisory boards, and yet I watch health debates in Parliament that I cannot access. That might answer your question. To tie into Rebecca’s point about Deaf people standing for election, there have previously been funds available to potential Members of Parliament who require reasonable adjustments in order to stand for election, but those funds have been closed. We would very much like to see the reopening of them, because that is our democratic right.

[In British Sign Language] As you are talking about access, I have just made some quick notes. The BSL Advisory Board has influenced and offered guidance, advice and encouragement to Departments. I would welcome Parliament creating its own five-year plan for building in BSL access. We have seen good progress with 18 ministerial Departments that have published their plans. I do not feel that Parliament should be an exception, so maybe that is a place to start. I think that a strong plan would set clear, measurable commitments to ensure that BSL access is available in all parliamentary business, including recruitment of BSL staff, in order to allow engagement in the democratic process. Parliament should lead by example, and send a powerful message outside of the Government to BSL users so that we feel we are equal citizens, and have the right to access information and services on an equal basis.

[In British Sign Language] If I may add one more thing on Parliament, let us think about the parties. Let us go back to the start: the party membership. How the parties liaise and build relationships needs to be improved, in Labour and all the parties. I think that we need to go back to the beginning and create those stepping stones for us to obtain access there.

[In British Sign Language] I think that everything you do is great, but you can go further. Subtitles are effective. However, we have to recognise English and British Sign Language as two separate languages. In BSL, you will see the nuances and tone in the visual language, which is lacking in the subtitles: you are just taking the English at face value, with no nuance. When you see the interpretation and the expression, that denotes the tone of voice. Whether or not you can hear an angry tone of voice, you would see it reflected in the sign language through facial expression, but with English subtitles you are unable to see the tone. We have many, varied members of our Deaf community who have different levels of English access. Deafness is a real spectrum. Some people are able to lip-read and understand English in that way. Some people refuse to wear hearing aids and purely use sign language. I can read English, but I need sign language to feel fully involved and feel that I have true access.

[In British Sign Language] The British Deaf Association is truly proud of the establishment of the APPG on BSL. This group will focus thoroughly upon our language, and we are thrilled that it has been set up. It is now time to roll up our sleeves and really ensure that this is not about access any more, but about promoting our language so that it can thrive. I pay huge respect to Jen Craft MP, the chair of our APPG on BSL. To have her in place, with her leadership and promotion of sign language, is hugely appreciated, so huge thanks to Jen. As the BDA secretariat of the APPG, we are really excited to continue our work with them in influencing attitudes towards BSL further in Parliament. This is just the beginning. We very much look forward to seeing how this develops into the future.

[In British Sign Language] I wonder if I could come in, because we have been talking about access issues, with regard to subtitles and BSL, and it is important to mention that right now there is no interpreting service provided for announcements, press conferences or briefings from No. 10. The Deaf community have been lobbying. They want to have access to information at the same time as members of the hearing population. That is the only way to give us equity and to show respect for us as people and respect for our language. Sometimes, there are national emergencies such as covid lockdowns, as we saw not that long ago. People want these vital pieces of lifesaving information immediately, rather than having to wait and get them after a delay, or having to rely on other people to pass on that information. These are national emergencies that we are talking about. We want to see interpreters next to the Prime Minister. We want to see this going out on social media at the same time as everyone else gets it. This is something that has been mentioned time and again to us, as members of the advisory board, and we really hope that it will be seriously taken into consideration in the future.

[In British Sign Language] I agree with Rebecca and Jo. If you had asked me the question five years ago, I think the answer from the BSL Advisory Board’s perspective would have been: “Disastrous.” There is always improvement, and it is ongoing improvement, but we need more work on improving subtitling and BSL access. On Jo’s comments about No. 10 announcements, it is a positive step that we are having a dialogue about how we can improve subtitling and envision BSL in emergency announcements, but we need to see it as mainstream rather than separately on the BBC Parliament channel. It needs to be seen on mainstream access for all, especially with events like covid, given the experience that we, as the Deaf community, had.

[In British Sign Language] I can start, if that is okay. I have already mentioned it briefly; I think the important thing is that Parliament should have a five-year plan. As I said earlier, we have worked with 18 ministerial Departments, so I think the UK Parliament should not be an exception. The Scottish Parliament has done it for 10 years, and all praise to them—they are already ahead. They have gone down a number of avenues, and in the UK Parliament we have not even started that yet. I think that is something we seriously need to consider doing now.

[In British Sign Language] I would love to see a long-term, in-depth plan. I would love to see Parliament working with the Deaf community to co-produce and co-create this plan, so that it is fundamentally from the community in the first instance, and so that it is for the community to take ownership of its language development and how and what that looks like. I would love to see that.

[In British Sign Language] I would like to see interpreters provided for parliamentary debates, so I would like to see access on the Floor. Hansard is inaccessible, so the parliamentary records are not currently accessible to the Deaf population. I would like to see interpreter provision, and I would like Parliament to have its own specialised team of BSL interpreters. This is one of our nation’s indigenous languages, and it should have a presence in Parliament. One of the issues is that in Parliament we cannot give commentary in BSL, because Hansard cannot record in BSL. We cannot deliver something that goes on the record in our own language. That is also why we need interpreters; it is not just to make access for us, but so that we can contribute in our own language as well.

We have already mentioned one of our fantastic colleagues, Jen Craft, but there have also been some others along the way who have helped to push us forward, even though we have plenty of progress to make, including Rosie Cooper, Maria Eagle and Vicky Foxcroft. I think Vicky was one of the first to use BSL from the Floor of the Chamber, so thank you to them. I will hand over now to Alex.

Thank you very much, everyone, for coming in. I want to ask Rebecca a question first: what is it like for families of Deaf children trying to learn BSL from a very young age, and how much support is available for children and their parents?

[In British Sign Language] Thank you for your question. I think that looking back on my own personal journey will help us to understand this a little bit better. I became deaf at the age of four, so we are talking about 48 years ago, if my maths is correct. At the age of four, I became deaf, and later my parents decided to learn BSL. At the time, they went to our local Deaf club and learned some sign language. Then, one day, they went to an audiology appointment with me. They were having a conversation with the professional, and my mum said to the audiologist, “Oh, I’m learning some sign language for Rebecca,” and the audiologist said, “No, don’t—it will affect her speech.” My parents believed this completely, dropped out of the course and no longer paid for any tuition in sign language. Now, 48 years later, have things changed? I am sorry to say no. Nothing has changed, and the same advice is being given. Many parents now tell me or the BDA that they are spending thousands of pounds to learn sign language just to communicate with their Deaf child. They say that they are receiving conflicting information from the professionals they meet, with some saying to use sign language, and others saying, “No, no, it will affect their speech development.” The parents then read on the internet that research shows very positive benefits of using sign language for their child, and they get extremely confused. At the same time, across the UK, we have hearing aids and cochlear implementation available free, yet our parents have to pay for sign language. This is a structural inequality. How can our families access both? There are a lot of misconceptions. People think that hearing aids and cochlear implants are the cure for deafness, and that sign language is not necessary, but that is simply untrue. Hearing aids and cochlear implants are just a tool like glasses. If I take my glasses off, I still cannot see. It is the same thing when you remove the technology: it is not a cure for hearing loss. Of course, there is amazing technology out there, and it benefits so many people, but it does not work for everybody. It is like a gamble: “You don’t need to sign. Hearing aids and cochlear implants—that’ll do for you.” But then later they don’t work, so they then need sign language, but they have already fallen behind. The British Deaf Association recently commissioned an early years evidence review. We commissioned SORD, the Deaf research department at the University of Manchester, which did a thorough literature review of more than 3,000 different papers. It got the research together to understand what was best for Deaf children. The research showed that bilingual, bimodal and bi-method communication has the best outcome for Deaf children. Families should not have to go through the trauma or the dilemma of thinking it is either/or. It should be both, given free, equally.

[In British Sign Language] I would absolutely support everything that Rebecca has said. The board has focused on education as an issue, and we have done a lot of work on that. I will summarise some of what we have looked at. In terms of early years education, we had a summit where we started to look at language development in Deaf children from the very earliest years. We had evidence from policymakers and experts about the issues and solutions. What they said was really clear. First of all, Deaf children are currently arriving at school without language. They are not ready for the most basic level of nursery education, reception or year 1. They are already far behind with their language. What we are seeing is language deprivation. BSL Board representatives on the education sub-group met with Minister Morgan, and they had an excellent conversation about the BSL curriculum. This morning, I was delighted to be told that the Early Years Foundation Stage Profile Handbook, which is the framework used to assess all children on arrival at school and provide a benchmark for expected outcomes and achievements over their school career, previously only assessed English and speech but is now also able to assess their sign language skills. That is an incredible milestone, so that is amazing news that we found out this morning. We have had discussions with the Minister and, as Rebecca has mentioned, we would like to see parents being able to attend BSL courses to learn BSL from the diagnosis of the child as Deaf. We would like to see that provided free, because otherwise it is a barrier to entry. The courses should be focused on children’s and families’ needs, not on a standard BSL curriculum where people are learning topics that are not relevant to a baby or a young child in the family. Secondly, there needs to be an improved funding stream for people to become teachers of the Deaf. That is the education sub-group. In the health and social care sub-group’s imminent report, which will be launched in November, we have a section that focuses on the language deprivation that I mentioned earlier. We have clear evidence of the lifelong consequences of this language deprivation: it has a devastating impact on mental and physical health and employment opportunities, and it leads to a real attainment gap. It is expensive for Government not to address this. Many of the recommendations in the report are around stopping this language deprivation from continuing. What we would like to see, as Rebecca has said, is that on the day of diagnosis, when audiologists are providing this information, parents are given information about BSL; and that NICE guidance is created so that clinicians have a clear understanding of best practice for providing information to parents of newly diagnosed Deaf children about the bimodal and bilingual approach, because that is of key importance, but also providing access to BSL, because technology, as Rebecca has said, may well break down. For children who have not been given both languages, when the technology fails they have no language. That is real trauma. For families with newly diagnosed Deaf children, it does not matter what range of hearing loss it is. Because many Deaf children will have decreased hearing over the years, they should be given access to BSL if they want, free of charge. The cheapest way to deliver this might be online. It is not expensive, but it would potentially save the Government huge amounts of money on the impact of language deprivation in people’s lives and over their lifespan.

[In British Sign Language] I mentioned that the BDA commissioned a piece of research, but there is also a secondary piece of research that we commissioned, based on the recommendation of Chloe Smith, the former disability Minister. She advised us that if we really want the state to roll out a national BSL framework for recognised Deaf children, it is going to be expensive, so what is the return on our investment if this is what we pay for? We commissioned research from RAND, the economic think-tank. It was able to show the results of its research at the BSL conference that we held in July: for every £1 that the state spends, it will get £4 back. Based on what Jo recently delivered to this Committee, I think that it is important for you to look at this evidence and to really implement this as a matter of urgency for access for our Deaf children. We know it is important to remember that the current sign language courses, however amazing and available they are, are adult-centric: they are based on adults learning the language. We need family-centred learning in the home. If you have a newly diagnosed deaf baby, you do not want to go to college to learn formal, structured British Sign Language. You want a Deaf teacher to come and visit you in your home, so you can see a Deaf adult—a role model for your child—and you can ask them questions about how to communicate with your baby. The sort of sign language really depends on the age of the child; you can change your register as they develop and get older. You can also enable families to see the different Deaf people in their lives and have a Deaf person in the home, relating to the family. We did a pilot scheme on this in England and Wales, where we offered free family sign language in the home at the BDA. The results were amazing. The families fed back to us, saying, “This is so important. We can get an auntie, an uncle, a grandparent or a neighbour round here, with all of us learning together as a community around the child, to ensure that that child has access to communication from all the people around them from the start.”

Thank you very much—that is very interesting. My experience prior to being elected was running a charity for children with Down syndrome and their families. Down syndrome has high associations with hearing impairment, so here are the two signs that I know: “Thank you” and “Santa”. But that is not my question. My question is: do you think that introducing British Sign Language in early years education would help children with Down syndrome and a range of other disabilities or communication challenges? Would it help to integrate both them and Deaf children into mainstream education and therefore mainstream society?

[In British Sign Language] Yes. This is my area of work as a neuropsychologist, and the short answer is yes. We currently have separated educational systems for Deaf children and Deaf children with additional needs such as learning disabilities. We should have a BSL-first approach. Why should Deaf children with additional needs not have access to fluent language models? Of course, there are forms like Makaton, which can be useful for some groups, but those are used in conjunction with speech, and they are not BSL. Deaf children and children with other disabilities should have access to BSL, because that is available for everybody. I think it is a human rights issue.

Rebecca, do you share the National Deaf Children’s Society’s disappointment that the implementation of a BSL GCSE has been delayed?

[In British Sign Language] Absolutely, yes. We feel exactly the same as the NDCS. We work very closely with the charity and, with Signature, we wanted to really bolster and encourage the development of the BSL GCSE. It was such an exciting prospect to have our language on the national curriculum—what an incredible opportunity—but we know that BSL also needs to be taught well. The best guarantee of that is to ensure that we have Deaf tutors in place. Imagine the opportunities that would present for us! There is a real opportunity to empower our Deaf people to become long-term leaders in the development of a BSL GCSE, and potentially to be part of the professional workforce and have a career. We are very, very excited for our Deaf people about that, but that will not happen without careful planning, so we are ready to bolster, support and move forward with the Government on this.

The Department for Education first committed to introducing the GCSE in 2018. Do you know why it has taken so long to come to fruition?

[In British Sign Language] There have been a few complications. Because BSL is a language in its own right, it is not as straightforward as English word-for-word translation. It is not “What is your name?” No: in BSL it is “Name, what?” The structure is very different, so the complications of the examination and assessment process came to the fore. Also, we have regional variations in sign language, like accents. I have to take my hat off to Ofqual for taking on the challenge. I believe that they are getting there. They recently had a consultation with the community, and I am looking forward to reading the feedback in order to strengthen and further develop the BSL GCSE.

[In British Sign Language] What Rebecca said is excellent. The BSL Advisory Board definitely welcomes the introduction of the BSL GCSE. Yes, what Rebecca said is brilliant: it is about raising awareness of the richness of the language, but it also gives support to more people to learn BSL. Hopefully, it will open up different routes and make communication accessible for the Deaf community. The BSL Advisory Board recently hosted a webinar with Ofqual to support their call for contributions and consultation, with education experts and the wider general public meeting together. Ofqual have been very helpful in enabling and supporting, and their level of interest has been incredible. Ofqual have been assessing the findings and have considered what they will publish in autumn, when the findings are due. The delay has not been ideal, but we know that there is a way to go before the qualification is ready for students. We understand that a lot of work needs to be put into bringing in a new qualification. That is live, and we would rather that it be delivered in the right way, rather than being rushed through just to get it done but then not be fit for purpose. We are encouraged that the consultation has been open and Ofqual have engaged closely with us, so we are confident that the Department for Education and Ofqual have taken our perspectives on board, alongside those of the BDA and other Deaf organisations, and have listened to the concerns of the Deaf community. Hopefully, this will mean a smoother path forward for the BSL GCSE to be delivered.

[In British Sign Language] I think Craig is right on this point. The BSL GCSE must be delivered well. The delays have happened in order for the delivery to be got right, and I think it is the right thing to do. The Department for Education is really keen at looking at the workforce and its expansion, so we are very much looking forward to the delivery. We believe that the delays are correct and are the right thing to do.

We have about 20 minutes left and we have two more sections to cover, so hopefully we can give them 10 minutes each. Samantha?

[In British Sign Language: “Thank you and good afternoon.”] Did I say that right? You have really got me thinking today, for a couple of reasons. One is that my dad started to lose his hearing in, I think, his early 50s, because of a condition involving fluid in the ears. Over the years, he became increasingly isolated, with technology not always doing the best it could. My question is about technology. I feel ashamed of myself for putting out any comms that do not have BSL on them, because of what you have said today, so I thank you for that. But I would be incredibly nervous about relying on certain tools to interpret something, because I do not speak British Sign Language, so any recommendations on that would be great. That leads me nicely to my question. I have a background in technology, and I am very keen on this stuff. I wonder whether you could talk about the potential benefits of AI-generated BSL for accessibility. We might say that they are huge, but you might think that they are not. Where might we see the greatest positive impact? In your answer, could you address the key risks of AI-generated BSL, both to signers and to BSL as a language? How might we manage those risks? What steps can the Government take to help in this area? That was a very long question!

[In British Sign Language] There are huge potential benefits from AI when it comes to BSL access. Clearly, this is potentially huge. AI can give us a good example of what we call Deaf gain, because if AI tools are produced that can cope with movements such as those that we see in BSL, they will benefit many more people than just the Deaf population. If this technology is created, it could have far-reaching effects, such as for sports coaching, physiotherapy and gesture recognition. These technological advances are incredibly exciting, and we would welcome advances being made with BSL as quickly as possible. This would require quite significant funding. However, some members of the Deaf population do not share the same level of excitement. Historically, if we look back, we must observe a note of caution. Alexander Graham Bell was attempting to improve technology to help Deaf people when he inadvertently invented the telephone, thereby creating a fresh barrier for the Deaf population, which held them back for many, many decades. Many Deaf people are fearful that new barriers will be created with the advancements of AI. We do not want new technology if it only creates new barriers. We do not want to rush to implement it and then realise too late that those barriers have emerged. What is vital is for those who are creating these new technologies to work with the Deaf population. Deaf people need to have input. They need to have a voice at the developmental stages so that such barriers do not emerge. Deaf people and deafblind people need to have choices. They need reasonable adjustments to be made to allow their accessibility as a human, and not to be forced to use technology if they do not wish to do so. We have seen this across the mainstream world: we now have driverless cars, but they will only be accepted when the population is ready for them. We cannot be forced to adopt new technology if we do not feel ready. The technology needs to be able to cope with natural language. If the technology produces sign language, it needs to be intelligible and accurate. I think that what is required is a Government-level framework to force technology companies to respect the community and the language. For example, machine translation needs to be respectful of BSL. The input—the data—that is used for machine learning needs to be fluent natural data and to take into account the spectrum in the Deaf community, because Deaf people use language at different levels. As we have heard, there are also regional variations, so we do not want AI to be London-centric, for example. It needs to take into account regional variations. It also needs to account for different physicalities, because people have their own idiosyncratic use of language depending on their physical capabilities. So it needs to be both fluent and accurate. It also needs to be safe, because when you are using people’s bodies, you encounter safeguarding issues. It needs also to be inclusive, so I would say that it needs not to be rushed, and it needs to be launched in a wider sense only with the agreement and approval of the Deaf population. Our board has begun looking at this in depth and consulting industry experts, which I am sure Craig can talk about more. We are establishing some measure of foundational research, so that in the future we can establish some guidelines. I am sure that, under the next iteration of the board, there will be further collaboration, hopefully with Government Departments, in order that this evolution can take the appropriate course. I think there are two things. The first is that this must not be introduced just as a cost-cutting measure by Government. It needs to be introduced as something that is of genuine benefit. Secondly, the quality of AI avatars at the moment is not sufficient. Although it may look as if it is, to hearing people who look at it, it is currently not in fact usable, so it should not be being deployed at the moment.

[In British Sign Language] Thank you, Jo, for your contribution. It was very valuable. Millions of pounds have been invested in different grants through UKRI and Innovate UK and distributed to develop AI BSL. The BDA receives many requests for partnership in this area, and at first glance—this was about a year ago—we thought, “Oh, really interesting. Let’s meet these people.” We had a video call, and they said, “Oh, we’ve got this product for AI on BSL. It’s going to resolve all your communication issues.” But they could not sign. The people developing this technology had no knowledge about BSL, Deaf culture or Deaf history. They were completely naive as to our language. They are telling us that they have these amazing gloves, but they know nothing about the language that they are designed to replicate, so how do they design the AI? They are thinking about the potential from that funding in order to commodify our language, essentially, and that is taxpayers’ money wasted on these companies who know nothing about our language. We need to seriously go back and be careful to have the right processes in place when you decide on an investment. With AI, on BSL, the Deaf community need to be involved and part of the decision-making process. It should not be with those people who know nothing about our language and culture. At Cambridge University, they have an organisation called Minderoo, who are looking at ethics in AI. They were recently involved in a few of our meetings at the BSL Alliance. We have 64 different partners, BSL-led organisations across the UK, around the table having discussions about the issues we face with regard to AI on BSL. They produced a report called “BSL is Not for Sale”, which was launched last Thursday. It is truly incredible. I am so grateful for their observations on the struggles that we are facing in this market as BSL signers. I very much recommend that the Committee reads through that Minderoo report. They talk about the procurement process as one element. Deaf signers need to be involved in the co-design and co-creation so that we can contribute what works for us to those who do not know, who do not respect our language and who just want to commission on our behalf.

Samantha, do you have any further questions?

I think that has pretty much covered everything. Thank you.

[In British Sign Language] May I come in on one point? I want to pick up on something that Jo and Rebecca mentioned. It is important to say that the BSL Advisory Board has implemented a technology sub-group. The whole purpose of that is to gather findings and information, look at reports and research, and make collaborations with the companies, developers and designers who are working on this technology. Minister Timms has really wanted to see some AI developments on the basis that Deaf people are in the driving seat, at the forefront. Jo also pointed out that the group’s aim is to establish a framework. Rebecca talked about ethics, which is so important; it has to be co-produced and co-designed. That is important. The BSL Advisory Board’s role is to ensure that the framework is in place and that all parties are supported in working together in a collaborative way.

[In British Sign Language] It is important that we have clear principles in place to guide policymakers so that we can create ethical frameworks, because they are not yet in place. This needs to be addressed urgently, so I encourage you to work with Minderoo to develop this.

My first question is for Craig—we are moving on to sport. Could you explain why there are no Deaf or hard-of-hearing categories in the Paralympic games, and whether Deaf people tend to prefer to have their own international sporting event, the Deaflympics?

[In British Sign Language] First of all, I want to talk about the Deaflympics itself, which has been officially recognised by the International Olympic Committee since 1955. The UK Government stopped the funding, but since then UK Deaf Sport and athletes have continued to struggle for recognition and for financial support. I should declare my background. I am a Deaflympian myself and was a silver medal winner a long time ago. [Interruption.] Thank you! It was a long time ago. I was also the founding chair of UK Deaf Sport 20-odd years ago, and I was president of the International Committee of Sports for the Deaf and the Deaflympics for four years. Deaf athletes are not part of the Paralympics, because there is no classification system for hearing loss within that movement. In the Deaflympics, there is only one category, and that is having hearing loss to 55 dB in both ears. That allows athletes to compete. What many people do not realise is that Deaf athletes have created their own games. The Deaflympics was established in 1924. It is the world’s oldest disability sports movement. The UK was one of the founding members of that new organisation. Deaf athletes prefer their own Olympics—well, many do—because it is a genuine level playing field, and because of shared communication, language and culture. It is competition at a high level. In the UK, the Deaflympics still lacks recognition and funding. It is not like it is with Olympic and Paralympic athletes. The key barriers to Deaf athletes are being able to reach that elite level and gain recognition, as well as visibility and, therefore, funding. Alongside that, it is about the accessibility of coaching and tournaments, but the recognition of the Deaflympics is absolutely essential to allowing Deaf athletes to thrive. As co-chair of the BSL Advisory Board, I should emphasise that it should not be directed at the board. I respectfully suggest that the UK Deaf Sport chair and its CEO, Chris Ratcliffe, along with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the British Paralympic Association, are the best people to provide more detailed answers and solutions going forward.

[In British Sign Language] I have great admiration for UK Deaf Sport—thank you for founding it so many years ago, Craig. We contributed an athlete from the BDA in 1924. I was reading about the history of our place in the Deaflympics: we have been involved for nearly 100 years, a long history. But what is disappointing is that our athletes have to fundraise themselves. To go to the Deaflympics in Japan this year, they have had to raise over £4,000 each just to go and compete. They want to represent their country. They want to represent Great Britain on the grand stage. It is a real honour to have that place, as you did yourself, Craig. We understand that the withdrawal of funding is due to the “no compromise” policy, which focuses on medal winners, but the athletes still went and won medals: at the last Deaflympics, we won three gold, one silver and five bronze. That is just from funds raised by the athletes themselves. With more investment, they would be able to win more medals. When they are there, they have a shared culture that goes back 100 years. It is really important that DCMS recognises this as the intangible cultural heritage of our Deaf people—being among people who are same-minded. No other athletes are part of that sort of community. In races, you would use visual cues—no whistles. That is a unique aspect of the Deaflympics. It needs to be promoted and celebrated. In this country, we have so many amazing athletes we want to spotlight. It is wonderful to see the Paralympics on TV and to see that sort of recognition. However, the Deaflympics is not at the same level as the Paralympics, especially with regard to investment. Why has ours been withdrawn? We want to be invested in at an equal level, to bolster, encourage and grow our Deaf athletes, and to grow that area of professionalism in our community.

It comes back to the point you made earlier about role models, doesn’t it, Rebecca? Having that visual representation and having those role models available is hugely important. You have mentioned funding issues, and I want to touch on funding a bit more. Does the BSL Advisory Board have a view on funding for Deaf sport? Have any representations been made to Ministers on this issue? Has there been any progress?

[In British Sign Language] I can answer that. Some progress has been made. Minister Timms has written to the DCMS and arranged a meeting, inviting the DCMS to the BSL Advisory Board and also inviting UK Deaf Sport representatives to those discussions. The BSL Advisory Board recommend that we enable the DCMS to talk to UK Deaf Sport directly and continue to have those discussions. We have explained the importance of recognition and visibility. As Rebecca rightly said, that is crucial. I think the funding was cut in 2008, and we have been waiting for this ever since. You can’t believe how long it has been without any funding at all and with athletes having to raise funds themselves. The BSL Advisory Board are not in a position to put any pressure on, but we want to pass on and promote the importance of recognition for Deaf sport and Deaf athletes to the DCMS, and the DCMS need to look closely into that with UK Deaf Sport.

I have one more question, which is about health. We are doing an inquiry on young people’s reproductive health, and we will be hearing from young women suffering with endometriosis. It would be really great if there is anybody you know who would like to take part in a roundtable that we are having and who is experiencing difficulties with diagnosis, treatment or just being heard and listened to by their doctors.

[In British Sign Language] Absolutely. In our work on the board, we have already facilitated a number of roundtables. For example, the Department of Health and Social Care have a strategy with regard to men’s health, and we facilitated a roundtable that we joined; we took a bilingual approach to that. We facilitated that alongside the Department of Health and Social Care, and we prepared a document submission, which was welcomed by them. That was a very important piece of work, because we already know that Deaf men are more vulnerable to abuse, sadly, and that needs to be addressed immediately. We have mentioned intersectionality. Councils do have a level of funding to address health, domestic violence and so on, and that can often be focused on women because you tick two intersectional boxes with women, and therefore Deaf men are often neglected when it comes to funds and funding their needs. Yes, we would love to engage with you on this specific topic.

[In British Sign Language] Absolutely. I would encourage you to talk to our friends at SignHealth, the national Deaf health charity—they support a wide range of health issues for Deaf sign language users—and then Deaf-initely Women, focusing on the diversity of our female Deaf signers. They hold workshops, and potentially you could meet them to discuss women’s issues. I would like to reinforce the point that, overall, Deaf mental health is worse than that of the general population, because of the issues that we incur in access to information, resources and advice, delays in consultation and so on. You know this because we have spoken about it. I think a Deaf person is twice or three times as likely to have diabetes. There is also heart disease and obesity—there are a range of things. On endometriosis itself, yes, working with SignHealth and Deaf-initely Women would support you to answer your questions in this Committee, definitely.

That is great. Thank you so much. On behalf of all members of the Committee, I thank our fantastic panel of experts. This has been truly enlightening—I know I am going to be googling regional BSL accents at some stage. I thank the team here very much as well. I just want to say a massive thank you, because this has been one of the most engaging and enlightening sessions that we have had, and I want to continue that relationship between us and you.