Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I welcome Iain Greenway, director of culture; Tommy McAuley, acting head of the sign language policy and legislation branch; and Gerard Flynn, policy and legislation officer in the sign language policy and legislation branch.

Iain, before I invite you to make a brief opening statement, I want to let you and your team know that the Committee appreciates your preparation and time here today. We believe that we will be seeing a lot of each other over the next period. It is important to say at the outset that not all the Committee members were on the Committee when you may have set out a lot of background and detail on the preparation that had been made. In that sense, do not always take it as read that members are aware of all the detail. There will be queries from members, because they will want to satisfy themselves that they are up to date and familiar with everything. We are very keen to get as much background information as possible today. Once the Bill is referred to the Committee for scrutiny, we will plan the Committee Stage, how the call for views should be managed and how stakeholders can be properly and fully involved. This legislation is going to impact on people with particular challenges in relation to information. We have already facilitated a session to set the process out to that sector, but we are very clear that, as we move through the Bill, we will have to be cognisant of those additional barriers and challenges and speak to that sector of the population in a way that meets its needs. I am sure that we are all of one mind that that is a challenge that we are up for. I know that we will be doing that to the best of our ability.

The purpose of today's meeting is to get as much information as possible to all MLAs, not just Committee members, to enable them to play an active part in the Second Stage debate on the principles of the Bill, which, I note, is scheduled for Tuesday 18 February. That is imminent. Iain, will you start off with your overview? We will then move on to questions from members.

Mr Kingston: Chair, sorry to interrupt, but this is a technical matter. I notice that the Bill's Second Stage is on Tuesday 18 February. Has the Bill been introduced, or is that to happen this week? It is not in the Order Paper. Maybe we could chase that up.

Ms K Armstrong: It will happen next week.

The Committee Clerk: I will double-check that.

Mr Kingston: It is not in the Order Paper. I know that it will take only a couple of minutes to introduce it, but it should be in the Order Paper.

The Committee Clerk: I will check that.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): That is a fair point, Brian; I appreciate that. Iain, you can go ahead with your briefing, and then we will get to members' questions.

Mr Iain Greenway (Department for Communities): Thank you very much, Chair, and I thank the Committee for the opportunity to brief it on the sign language Bill. The Department for Communities is the Executive's policy lead for British Sign Language (BSL) and Irish Sign Language (ISL). The functions fall under our cultural and linguistic policy remit and are the responsibility of the sign language policy and legislation branch in the Department's culture division, which, in turn, forms part of the engaged communities group.

Over the past number of years, branch officials have engaged with the deaf community and Departments throughout the policy development stage of the Bill. Tommy, Gerard and their colleague Patricia Leeper have been responsible for engagement with the Office of the Legislative Counsel (OLC) for the drafting of the clauses. As you mentioned, Chair, we have provided you with a detailed written briefing and an in-confidence copy of the Bill ahead of its introduction. We will follow up Mr Kingston's comments and make sure that we have not blinked and missed the Bill's introduction. It is our understanding that it will introduced next Monday.

The Committee Clerk: I am following up on that.

Mr Greenway: I will provide the Committee with additional information on the rationale for the Bill and the work that the Department has taken forward to support the future legislation. Some of that work had its roots in the COVID emergency.

Some might ask why deaf people need sign language legislation when they have redress through the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, as amended by the Disability Discrimination (Northern Ireland) Order 2006; the Special Educational Needs and Disability (Northern Ireland) Order 2005; and the statutory obligations arising from section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.The deaf community advises us that disability legislation is not the appropriate vehicle to ensure access to information and services through linguistic and cultural recognition. The sign language Bill will do that. The deaf community advises that disability legislation does not support the promotion of rights for the deaf community to develop deaf culture. The sign language Bill will do that. The deaf community advises that disability legislation does not, through the promotion of BSL and ISL, provide for classes for deaf children and their families. The sign language Bill will do that.

The social exclusion of sign language users is a pervasive issue that affects their ability to participate fully in society. Despite sign language being a legitimate and rich form of communication — it is a language — many deaf individuals continue to face significant barriers that hinder their involvement in everyday activity. A primary source of that exclusion can be attributed to the lack of accessibility of information and services due to inadequate sign language interpretation. Deaf individuals may struggle to access information and essential services, which not only leads to feelings of isolation and frustration but risks people's well-being, as witnessed, for instance, during the COVID pandemic. Moreover, societal attitudes often contribute to the exclusion of sign language users. Misconceptions about deafness and sign language can lead to discrimination, stigmatisation and a lack of awareness of the capabilities and contributions of deaf individuals. That can result in limited opportunities in the workforce and hinder people's overall social integration. In summary, the social exclusion of sign language users is a multifaceted issue that is rooted in accessibility barriers, communication challenges and societal attitudes. In order to foster an inclusive society, it is essential to address those challenges by promoting awareness, providing resources and ensuring that sign language is recognised and valued as an integral mode of communication. The sign language Bill will do that.

The team in the Department worked with the Health and Social Care Board (HSCB) to set up a new, free, remote interpreting service for BSL and ISL users that would allow deaf people to access an interpreter using their mobile phone and other devices. As the policy lead for BSL/ISL, during the COVID emergency, the Department had initially agreed to fund that temporary service, which was to be commissioned and monitored by the Health and Social Care Board. The Department of Health provided the majority of the funding, and the service is now a permanent resource for deaf people across all health and social care services.

The Department has funded remote, accredited BSL/ISL courses, with a view to increasing the pool of qualified deaf and hearing students who can follow a pathway to qualification and registration as interpreters and translators to support future legislation. The funding has evolved and increased to support a BSL/ISL interpreter training programme that is to be delivered by the Foyle Deaf Association, and successful students are due to register as accredited interpreters in the near future. In addition, the Department has developed, provided funding for and launched a two-year Master of Arts (MA) in sign language interpreting at Queen's University Belfast, comprising BSL and ISL students, both deaf and hard of hearing. That will provide an additional increase in capacity to address the current pressures for interpreters and contribute to the expected increase in demand arising from the legislation.

The team has worked closely with deaf organisations that specialise in the delivery of early years family sign language courses to ensure that funded courses will move fully online with full support for deaf tutors. Those courses have now reverted to being face to face, with the option of online support and resources. The Department's funding supports learning from signed play for babies and toddlers to accredited qualifications ranging from NVQ level 1 for beginners to degree-equivalent level 6 for parents of deaf children to provide them with the linguistic skill set to help their deaf children acquire signing in the family home just as hearing children acquire spoken language in the family environment. At a Queen's University sign language conference, 'The Facts of Deafness: Perception, Representation, Visibility', in March 2024, the chief executive of the British Deaf Association acknowledged the Department's Northern Ireland family signing programme as the best of its kind across the UK.

I will turn to the Bill, without seeking to replicate the briefing that has been provided. The Bill provides for the Department for Communities to be the lead Department and provides it with various enabling powers. The Department's presence and profile, as well as its long-standing support for the deaf community and sector has ensured that it has the confidence of the deaf community in this lead policy role.

The Bill will ensure that there is greater accessibility of information and services for sign language users, supported by the investment that I have spoken about to increase the number of professionally trained and accredited interpreters.

In welcoming the Minister's announcement about Executive agreement to the introduction of the sign language Bill to the Assembly, the British Deaf Association released a statement acknowledging the significant role that members of the deaf community played in collaboration with deaf organisations and Departments in the preparation of the Bill.

The Department will continue to engage with and support the deaf community and Executive colleagues through its lead role in the sign language partnership group. It will continue to bring its many years of experience and expertise in the sign language field, as well as its resources, and will expect and encourage other stakeholders to continue to do likewise.

The Bill tells us that British Sign Language and Irish Sign Language are languages. When we accept that, we can foster an inclusive society to ensure that sign language users can fully participate in society and address the feelings of isolation and frustration that I referenced. Moreover, the societal attitudes that often contribute to the exclusion of sign language users through misconceptions about deafness and sign language can be eradicated.

Thank you for your time. We are, of course, happy to answer your questions.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Thank you very much. I absolutely welcome the Bill. As I mentioned at the Committee's event in the Long Gallery, I see this provision as a fundamental human right, which it is. The atmosphere and the positivity in the Long Gallery that day were really inspiring and salutary. The simple reality of our moving to provide basic cover was so welcomed because it was previously so absent. That is to be noted as part of the work that we are doing.

What level of co-design was there in the preparation of the Bill with those who use British Sign Language and Irish Sign Language?

Mr Greenway: I will ask Tommy to answer that, because I have been at this for a year. He has been at this for probably 20 years, and I think that he had hair when he started. [Laughter.]

I will pass that to Tommy, if I may.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Absolutely. Thank you, Tommy.

Mr Tommy McAuley (Department for Communities): Thank you. The roots of this go way back. The sign language partnership group, which we co-chair and provide the secretariat for, was founded around 2008 with what, at that point, was a mission to improve access to services for sign language users. Departments and the deaf community are represented on that group.

The roots of the sign language Bill are in the sign language framework from back in 2015. The framework objectives, of which objective 1 is to have legislation, were fully co-designed with representatives of the deaf community on the group. In addition, as work on the Bill has evolved, we have run a series of roadshows throughout Northern Ireland, and we have funded a sign language network at Queen's University Belfast. We brought in on secondment the manager of the British Deaf Association Northern Ireland, Majella McAteer, so that we had real-time input into policy development as we got closer to the Bill. At every stage along the way, as Iain said in his opening statement, we have had a really close relationship with the deaf community not just at group or organisation level but individually in the community.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK. Thank you. The Bill's coming forward is welcome, but the real test will be its impact. What is your assessment of the tangible impact that the Bill, if passed, would have on the life of people who use sign language?

Mr Greenway: I talked about the generality of destigmatisation in my opening statement — I thank my colleagues for giving me long, multi-syllable words throughout that statement — but, in practical terms, which is, I think, where you are going with your question, it is about people's ability to access public services and not assuming that writing along the bottom of a screen meets their needs. All the evidence says that it does not. We need to meet their needs in such a way that means that there is no extra disruption for them, whether that be somebody who is in the background coming on to a call when they are talking to their GP, or whatever it may be.

Of course, we have to balance that with cost and practicality, and the Bill talks about public bodies taking "all reasonable steps". I anticipate that that could well be one of a number of things that are homed in on at Committee Stage. There is drafting around what that means. For me, the way that we find the right balance starts with fully respecting the rights of everyone in this place to access the services that they need or that improve their well-being and life. We cannot exclude people who rely on sign language. Some of the detail is on how we can do that in a practical way, and statutory rules will bring those provisions — the enabling powers — into practice. Given that the journey has been so extensive, we are keen to try to work on some of those statutory rules in parallel with the passage of the Bill so that we do not have too long a wait to get to that practical difference.

Mr McAuley: To add to what Iain said, part of the Bill will be on developing best practice in the statutory guidance. Referring back to your question on co-design, we are already in that space by co-designing that best practice and guidance. The British Deaf Association is leading on that, and it will report back to the sign language partnership group. That will then involve the evolution of the regulations for the Bill.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Finally from me before I go to members, you have brought us on to this nicely, but will the outworking of the Bill mean that we will need more interpreters than we have? Is that work ongoing in parallel? How many more interpreters are we likely to need to bring the Bill to tangible fruition? Is work on training for that under way? Can that start now? Is it being considered? How is that being managed?

Mr Greenway: I will answer the second part and perhaps pass the numbers question to Tommy. Yes. I visited the Foyle Deaf Association before Christmas, and I saw some of its interpreting classes. It is busy training people in BSL and ISL. ISL is particularly challenging as it has a very small number — there is a single handful — of interpreters in this jurisdiction and not that many more, to be honest, in the neighbouring jurisdiction. We now have the MA in sign language at Queen's. That has a cohort of 20 students. We are doing a number of things. For instance, we have been working with the BBC on how to give greater resilience to its signing on its news programmes, where it was relying on quite a small number of people. How can we give those students more experience while widening that pool? I will defer to Tommy on the numbers.

Mr McAuley: There are approximately 39 sign language interpreters in Northern Ireland. We hope that Foyle Deaf Association will bring four more interpreters on board in the near future. As Iain mentioned, we linked up with Queen's recently to launch the MA. That cohort has a blend of hearing, deaf, BSL and ISL students. In addition, we found during COVID that there were many funding support streams. We used ours to provide gainful employment for tutors to move online to provide free, at that point, accredited qualifications in BSL and ISL, ranging from level 1 for beginners to level 6, which is degree equivalent. That cohort is now making its way through Foyle Deaf Association and Queen's University, and we will press repeat on that because we are conscious that, as with every profession, there is natural wastage. That is an awful term, I know, but, hopefully, you will appreciate what I mean. At some point, the current cohort of interpreters will retire. Learning lessons from when other jurisdictions brought in their sign language legislation, we know that there was no supported throughput or pathway. We are unique in that we are supporting students from level 1 through to level 6, which is the degree equivalent, and then through to the interpreter training programme, which not only qualifies interpreters but registers them with the registration boards. Learning the lessons from other jurisdictions, I am very conscious that the Bill may well increase demand.

Mr Greenway: To pick up that strand from Tommy, clause 10 of the Bill talks about accreditation of teachers and interpreters. We do not want there to be a Wild West out there. We have to have accreditation. We do not envisage setting up our own accreditation scheme for those 39 or that two-figure sum. We envisage docking it with other accreditation schemes for operational efficiency, if nothing else, but it will be a requirement of the Bill that we can say, "You are a properly accredited signer".

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): That is important too. You mentioned the BBC, and I need to pick up on that. We, as a Committee, have been very disappointed that the BBC, in the past year, has dropped the interpreter from its prime lunchtime news slot. We raised that with the BBC. I am not putting this to you as a question, because I know that it is outside your remit, but I hope that the passage of the Bill will ensure that that is reinstated and that further steps are taken to provide and normalise the service. That was a really disappointing step by the BBC.

Mr Greenway: I am not here, Chair, to be an advocate for the BBC, but we have also talked to it about that. It made a genuine and, I believe, quite strong, case — this is for others to consider — that the provision of signing of news programmes at BBC Northern Ireland is now better than it was when it was restricted to that one programme at lunchtime. That is the case that it would make. I am not here to advocate for it; I am just saying that it may be a broader issue than it appears to be.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I recognise that there is certainly a benefit in the BBC increasing signing. My feeling was that that was one time of the day when people saw sign language as a normal part of the process. You are right in the sense that they are not only languages but beautiful languages. When time allowed, I always watched that second section just to absorb it. We will not dwell overly on that point, but I would like to see an increase in signing's visibility, and, hopefully, the Bill will achieve some of that.

Ms K Armstrong: I absolutely welcome the sign language Bill. To my absolute disgrace, although I am a member of the deaf community, I do not sign, because my hearing loss came on later in life.

Although the Bill is not yet at Committee Stage, I have a couple of questions for my own clarification. The Bill states that "prescribed organisations" — obviously, they are not proscribed organisations

— will be Departments, including the Department for Communities. Will those prescribed organisations be listed in the explanatory notes or elsewhere? If it means just Departments, I would be worried that health trusts or GP surgeries or whoever may not be included. Is there a definition for what those prescribed organisations are?

Mr Greenway: I am going to pass that to Gerard, because that is more about the Bill.

Mr Gerard Flynn (Department for Communities): All public bodies will be listed. That will include councils, arm's-length bodies (ALBs) and all Departments. There are exceptions in clause 7 in that some public bodies, but not Departments, can be exempted from their duties under clause 3. We will consult with all public bodies, make regulations and list those bodies. The basis of that list, however, will be whether you are defined as a public body.

Ms K Armstrong: I am worried about that. For example, is a school a public body? It depends on its status, I suppose.

Mr Flynn: The school would be under the administration of the Education Authority (EA), and the Education Authority falls under the definition of a public body. Those details in how we —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I just want to address a couple of wee technical points. The reason why the Bill's introduction is not in the Order Paper is because the Speaker is still completing his competency checks. I want to flag that this is not a scrutiny session; we will get to that. This is more an information session. I want to delineate that, in fairness to the panel.

Mr Greenway: If it helps us to understand what may come along at Committee Stage, it has served a purpose, and we will certainly take that up.

Ms K Armstrong: I think that the prescribed bodies will be voluntary grammars or grant-maintained integrated schools. They may not come under the EA, as their management bodies are different. I just want to understand that, because I want to make sure that we can get that applied to as many people as possible.

I love the fact that there is a concentration in the Bill on children. From my point of view, however, the deaf community is expanded by the number of older people who have hearing loss later in life and who we know are isolated and excluded from society because of the lack of communication that they have. Is there any opportunity under clause 2(2) to expand the provision of classes to adults? The definition of who is the deaf community is very wide, which is great, but clause 2 takes signing to children in particular, which is, of course, important. I am a bit worried, as there should be something there, because training for front-line staff and adults would be key.

Mr McAuley: I will take you back to COVID and then come back to now. During COVID, we all experienced social exclusion, and it brought into stark focus what the deaf community had been experiencing.

We launched a number of initiatives, including having interpreters sign the daily ministerial briefings. We had a lot of information on mainstream news that had previously not been available to the deaf community. We supported then, and continue to support, Northern Ireland Deaf News, which takes news and other things that are of interest to the deaf community and translates them into BSL and ISL. Every language evolves, however. When they were alive, my parents would not have understood some of the concepts that are around now. The older generation of deaf people uses a more nuanced type of signing, in which finger spelling is ingrained, so it was not picking up on the evolution of language, such as when the term "coronavirus" evolved into "COVID".

We were approached by an organisation called Deaf OAP, which made that point to us. It told us that what we were doing was fantastic and asked for access to it through its style of signing. We continue to support Deaf OAP. The classes that I referred to — from level 1 for beginners up to level 6 — are open to all. For example, deaf people who have left school and want a qualification in their language and who may or may not be interested in a professional career can and do have access to obtaining a qualification. Those classes, even though they are referred to as level 2, are live at the moment. They may not be universally available at this point, but the Department funds classes from introduction level through levels 1 to 6, and they are open to hearing people of any age. There are tailored signing classes for families that teach signage that is heavily ingrained in everyday family life. The older generation of deaf people can access those courses as part of the accredited scheme.

Ms K Armstrong: That, however, is not set out in the legislation, which specifically provides classes for children.

Mr McAuley: Yes, a heavy emphasis is placed on children. During the co-design process for the Bill, we recognised that, as with any language, if there are not new users, the language will die out. At that stage, there is a terminal velocity, after which point the language is gone and cannot be saved. Research done on the beneficial effects of family signing shows that it offsets behavioural problems. Following consultation with the deaf community, we have gone heavy on the increased mental health issues that kids who do not have access to sign language experience in later life.

Ms K Armstrong: I was concerned that, although it is right that the Bill concentrate on children, older adults — adults of pensionable age and adults in late middle age — and the front-line staff who work with them do not have access.

Mr McAuley: During COVID, we reached out to care homes to those deaf people who were isolated, as well as to front-line support staff. Likewise, for the children and family signing, there is a support network that includes crèche workers, classroom assistants and teachers. We are in regular contact with Deaf OAP and are informed by its advice.

Mr Bradley: Thanks very much for the presentation. This is long-awaited legislation. We have talked mainly about British Sign Language and Irish Sign Language. Is there a co-designed standardised sign language? Some 96% of the population speak English and about 5% or 6% speak Irish, but there are also Lithuanian, Polish, Portuguese, Mandarin, Arabic and Romanian speakers in Northern Ireland now. I know that it is a big ask, but has having a co-designed standardised sign language, where one sign language would fit all, been explored?

Mr McAuley: There is a simple answer to that. You will be familiar with Esperanto, which is a mythical language —.

Mr Greenway: I once knew a lady who was fluent in Esperanto. It is not mythical. It does exist.

Mr McAuley: Yes, but the concept of Esperanto was that everybody would be able to understand it. There is Gestuno, which is the international sign language that is used for sign language conferences. Very few people know it. If you are a deaf professional who attends such conferences, you will see on the stage BSL, ISL and Gestuno used. Hopefully, the key message for society from the legislation will be that sign languages, or signed languages — the problem may be the use of the noun "sign" — should be viewed the same as spoken languages. There are multiple sign languages, dialects and patois. For example, in the north-west, where BSL and ISL mingle, we see an intertwining and evolution of bespoke languages. I am not aware of any plan, project or programme throughout the world to standardise sign language. We are making the case for deaf culture, which is very much ingrained in people's language, be it BSL, ISL, Portuguese Sign Language or Libras, which is Brazilian Sign Language. Every community is proud of its language. The short answer to your question is therefore no.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Maurice, have you anything further to ask on that?

Mr Bradley: It was just a thought that we could bring Irish Sign Language and British Sign Language together into some sort of standardised local sign language that is specific to Northern Ireland. The Bill is welcome, but I just thought that we could consider that idea in the future. I am happy enough. I understand the need for all the different sign languages.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I get that. For me, it is more a case of "Vive la différence", given the rich tapestry of languages that we have. It is crucial that, from the very start, we consider sign language to be language in that sense and recognise that it brings its own value. It is important that we ensure that people who do not speak either language are included. There is a real point in what you said, Maurice. We will look at all the issues in greater detail as we proceed.

Sian, we have your indication. We will come to you, but I will now bring in to Maolíosa.

Mr McHugh: Fáilte romhaibh uilig anseo inniu.

Having looked at the draft legislation and even at the paper on sign language, it brings home to me how language in itself is no threat to anyone. It is a means of communication. In that respect, it should be person-centred. It is good to see that you have taken on board both Irish Sign Language and British Sign Language. The draft Bill reflects that. I wish that the same attitude were applied to all languages in every other respect.

You have stated that the prime objective of the draft legislation is to enable deaf people to communicate with statutory authorities, such as Departments. When the Chair asked earlier about the financial implications and about the number of people whom, say, different Departments would make available, you responded that the draft Bill talks about their taking "all reasonable steps". Does the word "reasonable" concern you? If that is to be decided by Departments, could that word then be used as a cop-out?

Mr Greenway: In all of life, there is a balance to be struck. These people are excluded very badly. The average deaf person will leave school with little to no qualifications and a reading age — not an intellectual age but an outworking of that age — that is below that of a teenager. If you read books that have been written by the deaf community, you should read one that I passed around the team. People are driven to suicide and all sorts of other things. They are horrendously excluded. Behaviour is discriminatory. They are mocked. All those things happen.

I would therefore argue very hard for a decent amount of funding to be provided. I will give the Committee a feel of the scale of funding. Currently, for the programmes that Tommy mentioned, funding stands at around half a million pounds a year. In the grand scheme of things, not very much money is needed to make a profound difference to the lives of some of the people who live here.

We cannot, however, do anything in complete ignorance of where we are financially. Small amounts of money will make a profound difference. If we do not put in the word "reasonable", the courts would construe the meaning of "steps" anyways and form their own judgements. We are therefore trying to be upfront and open rather than leave it to be decided by case law. I am sure that we will return to the issue at Committee Stage when you do clause-by-clause scrutiny.

Mr McHugh: I hope that you get the service that you deserve. I have every respect for the deaf community and for both British Sign Language and Irish Sign Language.

Mr McAuley: May I add to that?

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Go ahead.

Mr McAuley: We have already helped set up the regional communication support service with health and social care services, as Iain mentioned, and we are represented on its board. The service evolved out of the COVID emergency intervention to become a remote and face-to-face interpreting service. It also takes on board lip-reading and note-taking. The service helps deaf people access all health and social care services. There is therefore already a model at which we can look. The reference in the Bill to "reasonable steps" goes on to state:

Part of the work that we will therefore do through the sign language partnership group, with our colleagues and partners in the deaf community, and by following best practice and statutory guidance, is to look at what is reasonable. Is it access-all-areas? The feedback that we have received so far indicates no: it is for the key services. Through following the guidance and best practice, we will be able to create the best model and establish the likely costs.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Thank you. A few more members have indicated to speak, so bear in mind the time. I will bring in Nicola, who is our new Deputy Chair, then Brian and then Sian.

Miss Brogan: Thank you for your briefing. As the Chair said, this is my first time attending a meeting of the Committee. This is my introduction to the draft Bill, so I appreciate the update on it. If the Bill is enacted, there will be a statutory requirement placed on public bodies to provide access to information and services through sign language. Can you indicate what that will look like when implemented? How do you propose to monitor and evaluate success and determine whether changes need to be made down the line?

Mr Greenway: I will start and then hand over to Gerard to answer the harder bit. The Bill will set out the public bodies that are required under statute to follow the process. That does not mean that others cannot, but those that will have to are the "prescribed" bodies, as Kellie said earlier. The Department will produce statutory guidance that will be consulted on. Subordinate legislation on what that guidance means will then come to the Committee and the Assembly. It will incorporate best practice and the reasonableness test, but it will set out what is to be done. Gerard can add to what I have said and speak about the monitoring piece.

Mr Flynn: I cannot add much more to that, Iain. The statutory guidance will set out for public bodies the steps that they should take. They must have regard to the statutory guidance, which will be fully consulted on with the deaf community, the Committee and all other interested bodies. Whether something is reasonable will be determined on a case-by-case basis by following the guidance and the legislation.

Mr Greenway: Do you want to pick up on the monitoring piece?

Mr Flynn: We will publish a report every five years. That is also in the Bill. We are obliged to do that.

Miss Brogan: Will the report be done in conjunction with the deaf community?

Mr Flynn: Everything that we do will be done in conjunction with the deaf community, because it is the main stakeholder. We will not take a step forward without consulting the deaf community.

Mr Greenway: The duty to consult the deaf community is protected in the Bill as drafted. The current situation is that there are some contracts in place across the public service for the video remote service, which allows deaf people to have an app on their phone to dial in and sign, and the service will then make a phone call on their behalf. Other public bodies provide face-to-face interpreting. That is the current model, and it is what should happen under the Disability Discrimination Act adjustment. Whether it does is another matter. I referred to how Health and Social Care currently provides support for the sign language community.

Miss Brogan: I have one final question. The legislation is really important for the deaf community, and they have been arguing for it a long time. There is, however, a stigma attached to being deaf, and I imagine that people have experienced issues over the years. Is there anything in the draft Bill about educating people of hearing ability in the community? Do you expect to see an increase in the number of people in the rest of the community, using sign language because of the Bill?

Mr Greenway: If we can make inroads on destigmatising being deaf, and not just through the legislation, that will hopefully be a catalyst for there being wider societal understanding. I anticipate that people who may be able to sign but do not will choose to do it, and other people may want to learn sign language. As a result, there will be osmosis through the process. If you look at language models — the Fishman model or whatever — they are about visibility and normalisation of that visibility. Sign language is particularly visible. It is not just on the walls but in front of you. If we can normalise sign language, and if the Bill can take us a step on that journey, that will be a really important step.

Miss Brogan: That is important. Thank you, and hopefully the legislation will encourage others to use sign language.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): For many years, I have tried several times to get on a course. My local college, the South West College (SWC), has offered a course. Every time that I have applied, however, it has been oversubscribed, so I have never managed to get on it. I intend to try again, but that just shows that the demand is out there.

Mr Kingston: Thanks for your attendance today. From reading the Bill, I recognise that it is only the start of your role. The Department for Communities, as the lead Department, will have an ongoing responsibility. I have been looking through the clauses on issuing guidance, on best practice, on making regulations and on the five-yearly reports. What resource will the Department be committing to its role when it takes on the enabling powers to evaluate and promote what public bodies have done?

Mr Greenway: It is fair to say that we are working through the detail. Currently, the team includes Tommy, Gerard and a job-share partner, Patricia, whom I mentioned earlier. There are two other members of the team who are more focused on outreach, training and support rather than on the Bill. As the Bill moves through its legislative stages, the work on it will reduce, while the follow-up work that you mentioned, Mr Kingston, will grow. For example, whether there will be a central service provided for signing or whether it will be part of the translation hub etc needs to be worked through to determine where the different resource lines will sit across the Department. We are working through how sign language will connect with our other linguistic and cultural duties. It is not something that we have lost sight of, but I do not envisage there being a vast increase in overall resource. I think that some of the legislative duties will change to being consequential duties. Alongside that, we will continue to support the deaf community, as well as the training and accreditation pieces.

Mr McAuley: If I may add to that, we already have the vehicle in place to do that through the sign language partnership group, which we chair and provide the secretariat for. Bear in mind that the Bill is cross-cutting. It will therefore be not just the Department for Communities that will have obligations or that will need to provide resources. We have already done work on that. We have outlined some of the various projects and programmes that we support. Moreover, we have bridged the gap to the Committee in order to try to ready the Assembly for the Bill. We have a pretty wide network of partners that we collaborate with to promote sign language. As has been said, the health and social care contract happened at our instigation. At the start of COVID, we promoted the service. There are therefore ways and means, and we expect other partners to come on board.

Mr Kingston: As with all Bills that are cross-cutting, although all Departments will have to take action, it is important that one Department maintain the lead role and have the resource.

Mr Greenway: That is set out in the Bill.

Mr Kingston: Yes, I see that.

You may have already referred to some of this, but can you say a bit more about how you see greater provision of sign language interpreting being delivered in practice? Some public bodies may be able to have staff present as interpreters on occasion or regularly. You also referred to online, technological support. Can you say a wee bit more about how that might be rolled out?

Mr Greenway: As in all things, technology, whether we like it or loathe it, will play a growing part. For example, deaf people can often schedule a conversation — sometimes a more urgent conversation is required — with their GP by having an app on their phone. They can push a button that calls in a signer in BSL or ISL. In the background, GPs have the same thing on their phone. I suspect that that will be a route that will be gone down more so than having people traipse to their local surgery, as complexities are involved there. What that technology will look like, how far it will go and how far, dare I say, AI and other things will play their part is yet to be fully worked through. I envisage, however, that, based on demand, there will be access that is free at the point of use to signing in the required sign language. That is why we have to have enough interpreters on call. As Tommy said, in the health and social care setting, that is already centralised for the various trusts, so I foresee there probably being a model that has that centralised for all public bodies. There may be some public bodies, as you suggested, Mr Kingston, that may have a sufficient call on that to have their own facility and be able to manage peaks and troughs.

I think that quite a lot will be centralised in our Department. One of the main calls on the translation hub is how it benefits front-of-office colleagues. I anticipate there being a big call on the signing service as well, just from the sheer volumes involved. Having that technology available will mean that people will not have to go to the Bangor jobs and benefits office, or to the Enniskillen jobs and benefits office. I would not like to say how AI and other things will play out in that space. I am too old to have fully worked through all the technological pieces.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Thank you, Iain, for that reference to Enniskillen, because it will be crucial that services reach the more rural areas. We have already touched on other measures of deprivation in such areas, so that is another important feature —.

Mr Greenway: There are other constituencies, but I chose one not at random, Chair, yes.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Thank you.

Sian, please be as succinct as possible.

We may not have Sian online. I will give it another second or two.

The Committee Clerk: The microphone is on now.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Your microphone is on, Sian. Go ahead. We cannot see you. but perhaps we can hear you.

We can see you now, Sian, but we still cannot hear you.

Ms Mulholland: Sorry, I think that my internet dropped out.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Go ahead, Sian. We can hear you now.

Ms Mulholland: The Deputy Chair covered the crux of my first question, which was on the monitoring and evaluation of the statutory obligations. My second question is about future budget allocations. How refreshing it is to hear sign language being not just talked about in disability terms but referred to as a beautiful language and a culture. That is important. [Inaudible.]

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Thank you. You were breaking up quite badly there at the end, Sian, but I believe that we got the sense of what you said, so I will go back to Iain.

Mr Greenway: Yes, in response to what I heard Ms Mulholland say, we have talked about monitoring and budgets. We are supporting the different programmes with around half a million pounds of funding at the moment. That may give a sense of the scale. We are still trying to work through things, however. It is proving difficult to be anywhere near definitive about how many Irish Sign Language users and how many British Sign Language users there are. Different studies have been done, some of which are referenced in the paper that we provided. In the census, people can self-declare that they use sign language. It is a self-declaration, from the tiniest usage to their being at level 6. We have struggled to determine definitive numbers, even after all our stakeholder work, and that also makes it slightly difficult to determine budget numbers. Doing that will be part of the journey through the next stages of the process.

Mr McAuley: Part of the analysis that we are carrying out is on learning lessons across the piece. The Department of Health's regional communication support service offers a rich vein of information on the volume of callers using the service, and that will give us some insight. We know that everyone across society will at some stage need to access healthcare, so the health service will be the largest user, and probably by a considerable distance. In addition, information from the benefits system, councils and the Housing Executive will give us some sort of baseline from which to try to extrapolate figures. Again, once the work on best practice and statutory guidance that we are doing with the British Deaf Association and the sign language partnership group is completed, we will have an even better picture of what services are to be provided for sign language interpreting or translation, and to what level.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Thank you. As I said, the draft Bill is a significant and very welcome piece of work. I appreciate the start that we have made today through getting information from you. As Sian noted, it comes across to us that you have a drive and a passion to treat sign language as a language. It is an asset to all of us and part of our rich culture. For now, thank you. We will see you again soon.

Mr Greenway: Thank you very much.