Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome those from the deaf community and the Irish Deaf Society, the students and the interpreters here today and use the occasion to compliment Senator Mark Daly for his wonderful, although long and difficult, work on this legislation. I thank Senators for their wonderful contributions and their sincere and heartfelt views. If I have the opportunity, I would love to respond to all the points raised by the Senators.

As I listened to the Senators' contributions and heard their passion for and commitment to human rights and the great sense of social justice, I thought of Martin Naughton, the great disability rights campaigner, whose funeral I attended last Saturday in Baldoyle and who was buried in An Spidéal in County Galway. I had recently appointed that great Galway man, who fought for many years for the rights of all people with disabilities, to the task force dealing with disability issues. It is relevant that people such as Martin are remembered on days like this one. May he rest in peace. The battle for disability rights goes on and the Seanad did that ethos proud today.

I am happy to have the opportunity to join in the debate on the Recognition of Irish Sign Language for the Deaf Community Bill 2016. There are approximately 5,000 users - although I suspect the number is much higher - of Irish Sign Language in the State and it is fair that public services provide them with interpretation services at no cost to the user when questions of statutory entitlement are at issue. I will not oppose this Bill and, when I raised it, there was no opposition to it at Cabinet yesterday. It is important to let people know that as well.

The sponsors of the Bill, including Senator Mark Daly, have done a valuable public service by putting the need to cater for the rights of users of Irish Sign Language on our agenda in the Oireachtas. I look forward to continuing the discussion on the Bill once it has completed the necessary pre-legislative scrutiny phase. Our discussion is particularly appropriate as we move toward ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, something which was touched on by many Senators today. As Members will be aware, the Government is committed to ratification of the convention and we are working on finalising the details of the necessary legislation to remove the final legislative barriers to that ratification. Government hopes to be in a position to publish this Bill in the very near future. We also intend to ratify the convention’s optional protocol at the same time as the convention itself is ratified. I have set my heart strongly on that.

Members will know that interpretation services for deaf people on a State-wide basis are provided by the Sign Language Interpreting Service, SLIS, which was established by the Citizens Information Board in 2007. The SLIS is a limited company with a board of directors comprising representatives of key stakeholders such as the Citizens Information Board, Deaf Hear and the deaf community. SLIS receives State funding directly from the Citizens Information Board. In 2016 it has an allocation of €275,000. It is generally acknowledged that the SLIS does superb work in its provision of an extensive range of services. That it intends to build on its current capacity is clear from its statement of strategy document for 2015 to 2020. In particular, the service intends to increase availability of interpreting services in key areas of daily life, particularly where deaf people are exercising their rights or entitlements. We need to move on that.

I have to flag a number of questions about specific provisions in the Bill, which I am sure will be examined carefully in the pre-legislative scrutiny process. While the central principle of the Bill is sound, it seems to take a perhaps disproportionate approach to the provision of services for users of Irish Sign Language. Even prior to the publication of this Bill, I had approved a draft of the new national disability inclusion strategy, which we are working on. It proposes the following action for public consultation: “We will propose legislation to ensure that all public bodies provide Irish Sign Language (ISL) users with free ... interpretation when availing of their statutory [entitlements]”. More work will be needed - and I take on board the Senator's points in the debate today - to tease out the detail of how this will operate but, in principle, we need an approach focused directly on statutory entitlements.We know from our experience of the Irish language and the Official Languages Act that what is really important is developing the capacity to provide services in the language of the customer's choice and that enacting legislation or a constitutional protection will not resolve the practical service delivery issues that need to be planned for. This matter needs to be examined closely. We need a pragmatic and feasible approach backed up by statutory recognition of the rights of users of Irish Sign Language but also to ensure we can guarantee the service can be delivered in practice. A number of Senators spoke about the importance of delivery and the provision of resources. I got the message.

The following are elements of the Bill at which we need to look. The preambles are not a feature of how we draft primary legislation and do not seem to be necessary. I am not sure anything useful would come from the proposal to impose an obligation on public bodies to develop three-year action plans for Irish Sign Language, as provided for in section 9. The establishment of a new public body to be named the sign language interpreting service by the Citizens Information Board rather than allowing the board to continue to develop an ISL service, as it has been doing, does not seem to be necessary.

Section 18 includes a provision to offer the annual accounts of the new body for sale. It is usual practice to publish accounts online and it is difficult to see how this provision is necessary.

Section 19 provides for borrowing by the public body to be established under section 12. Allowing an Exchequer-funded public body to borrow money is manifestly not a good idea. Of particular concern is how the loans would be controlled and repaid.

Section 29 provides for a sentence of 12 months imprisonment for either offering interpretation services or teaching Irish Sign Language on a commercial basis without being registered. I accept that there is a need for proper standards, but this approach is unnecessarily punitive and will do nothing to address the real issue - the need to develop the availability of Irish Sign Language interpreters.

The Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment has considered the proposed amendment of section 43 of the Broadcasting Act 2009 as set out in Part 4 of the Bill in consultation with the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, BAI, and makes the point that the proposed approach would remove an important part of the broadcasting regulatory framework from its natural and appropriate statutory focus, namely, the Broadcasting Act 2009. Section 43 of the Broadcasting Act 2009 provides for the preparation of statutory rules by the BAI which place a range of statutory obligations on broadcasters. In the case of persons who are deaf or have a hearing impairment, persons who are blind or partially sighted and persons who have a hearing impairment and are partially sighted, the BAI has adopted access rules which contain specific target percentage ranges in regard to, inter alia, sign language and subtitling with which broadcasters are required to comply. These are revised by the BAI from time to time in accordance with the provisions of the Act. In addition, sections 53 to 55, inclusive, of the Act provide for an investigation and potential enforcement action in circumstances where there has been an apparent breach of a broadcasting rule. It is noted that this latter aspect is not provided for in the proposed Bill. Furthermore, section 43(6) of the Broadcasting Act 2009 provides for biennial reviews of the access rules to be undertaken by the BAI, thereby allowing for potential revisions to be made to the rules. In Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the proposed Bill, however, it is proposed to incorporate a number of percentage targets for the period 2017 tjo 2019 which appear to have been taken from the current access rules. The Bill makes no provision for any review or potential revision of these targets. As such, the Schedule would become outdated every two years, which is a matter to be reflected on.

It should also be noted that Part 1 of Schedule 1, as proposed, omits certain services such as Oireachtas TV, Irish language TV and UTV Ireland. Following on from the BAl's extensive and ongoing consultations with user groups, it is evident that the quality and reliability of access service provision is as, if not more, important than the achievement of targets which are only a quantitative measure as such. The BAI's regulatory approach facilitates a far more flexible and consultative approach that takes account of improvements in the quality, reliability and range of access service provision, for example, increased live subtitling, subtitled Irish content, etc., rather than just quantitative targets as envisaged in the proposed Bill, thereby providing a regulatory approach that delivers in a more comprehensive and nuanced way on the wishes of users and intended beneficiaries of the services.

All of these points will need to be considered carefully as the examination of the Bill moves forward in the Houses. I am happy that the Bill will move to the pre-legislative scrutiny stage and that in due course, in the light of the assessment by the Oireachtas of the Bill’s proposals, we can work together to see what amendments are needed to create the focused right to interpretation which I would welcome and to remove some of the other elements that do not seem to be appropriate, as mentioned.

The new national disability inclusion strategy I mentioned is relevant. The strategy which it is intended will be in place before the end of 2016 includes, as I stated, a specific action to create a statutory right for a person to receive free Irish Sign Language interpretation services when availing of statutory services. In taking this approach we will still need to tease out in detail several issues, including how statutory services are to be defined and whether advance booking of the service would be required. This approach will provide a more fruitful way forward in that rather than the overly elaborate approach provided for in the Bill, it will be focused on meeting real needs in a pragmatic and cost-effective way. One of the issues Senators might consider is whether it would be better to build on the existing supports provided for the provision of interpretation services by the Citizens Information Board or to establish a new pubic body, as proposed in the Bill.

I welcome the contributions of all Senators to the debate, during which some very serious issues were raised. I share the sentiments expressed by Senators Lorraine Clifford-Lee and Mark Daly about the tragic deaths in Dublin of the McCarthy brothers. We need to focus our attention not only on the issue of isolation but also on the need for change in broader sections of society. As Minister of State with responsibility for people with disabilities, I have met approximately 3,000 people with physical, intellectual and other disabilities, as well as service providers, from whom the message is that broader society has to change and that the mindset has to change in dealing with this issue and, in that context, this legislation.

As I said, I am not opposing the Bill. For me, it is about equality and respect, but it is also about citizens' participation. I take the opportunity to thank Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin for his work on this issue. As the Deputy is not a Member of this House, perhaps his Sinn Féin colleagues who are Members of this House might bring that message to him.

Senator Billy Lawless raised the important issue of employment and also referred to the justice system. Senator Victor Boyhan spoke about the urgent need not only for the enactment of legislation but also about the provision of resources to back it up. Employment of members of the deaf community is a huge issue. There are many talented deaf people, with many of whom I have engaged. The unemployment rate among members of the deaf community is too high.

Senator Niall Ó Donnghaile spoke about the important issue of rights and equality. Senator Gabrielle McFadden has made the very good point that we must ensure we will not pay lip-service to this issue. While, in this instance, we are speaking about the needs of the deaf community, meeting the needs of all people with disabilities is an important issue. Language is important in the context of inclusion and respect within broader society.

Senator Jerry Buttimer, a former teacher, mentioned that we should look at Cork Deaf Enterprises.This is something I would like to visit as part of my portfolio. Senator Frances Black spoke about the UN convention and the five articles, and I am trying to do something about this. Senator Lynn Ruane dealt with the issue of discrimination. She also dealt with the employment issue whereby unemployment is too high among the deaf community, which is crazy for any society when we have a lot of skilled people out there. Senator Ó Ríordáin dealt with the issue of empowerment and commented, as did many of us, on the campaign by the students and the Irish Deaf Society.

Senators Terry Leyden and David Norris dealt with the importance of this House. When I was in opposition and an Independent Deputy, I supported the campaign to save the Seanad.