![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
House of Lords debating deaf people without us/them
This evening the House of Lords have had a debate about SignHealth's Sick of It report which is specifically about British Sign Language (BSL) using deaf people's lack of access to appropriate healthcare and healthcare information. This report specifically talks about the need for BSL information.
Several deaf people emailed about this and got a stock reply saying there would be no verbatim subtitling - they didn't respond about real-time BSL interpretation or access to BSL interpretation of the post-debate transcript.
The hearing ally called the House of Lords phoneline and escalated this issue to a named manager who agreed it was ironic, inaccessible, insulting etc and recommended complaints were made.
So lets do that then. Complaints ahoy! Make our voices and signs heard and seen!
The content of your complaint will differ depending on your circumstances so jump to the appropriate complaint wording with the links below.
1) You are deaf and use sign language so rely on or prefer BSL interpretation.
2) You are deaf or hard of hearing and don't sign so rely on subtitling.
3) You are a hearing ally who wishes to support your D/deaf/HOH friends.
BSL using deaf people template complaint
To whom it may concern.
On Friday a charity for British Sign Language (BSL) using deaf people announced that there would be a debate in the House of Lords today on Monday 31st March 2014 about their recently released report about the shockingly poor state of health many BSL using deaf people have. http://www.signhealth.org.uk/press-release-lords-to-debate-the-health-of-deaf-people-following-shocking-report-by-signhealth/
House of Lords debates are broadcast live but usually without real-time BSL interpretation or verbatim subtitles.
Earlier today several deaf people emailed HLInfo@parliament.uk to ask whether this debate about BSL using deaf people would have live sign language interpretation or have subtitles. A hearing ally telephoned in order to get faster information.
According to the House of Lords Information Office stock email response the debate about Sick of It will not be subtitled. Information about BSL was not supplied by email despite several requests asking about it. We know there is no BSL because of the hearing people who telephoned.
There will be a transcript and summary provided afterwards but only in English, there appears to be no plan to have this provided in BSL for people like me to access and understand.
I would now like to raise a formal complaint with the House of Lords.
I am a disabled person within the ambit and meaning of Section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. I am deaf and British Sign Language (BSL) is my primary and preferred language. I cannot hear spoken content and rely on BSL to understand what is being communicated to me. I have used template wording for this complaint composed by someone else.
The debate about the Signhealth "Sick of It" report is specifically about British Sign Language (BSL) using deaf people in the UK. Disability and deafness campaigners believe strongly in the principle of "Nothing about us without us". This debate is happening without us.
The Sick of It report also highlights the issues with not providing real-time and other access to information in BSL yet the debate fails on exactly these things that are being debated and discussed.
The House of Lords is also subject to the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 which states
In summary, those subject to the equality
duty must, in the exercise of
their functions, have due regard to the need to:
* Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act.
* Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected
characteristic and those who do not.
* Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.
It is my belief that the House of Lords has failed on all 3 areas of the PSED cited above.
1) Failure to provide general real-time access to House of Lords debates in the form of BSL interpretation for deaf people or subtitles for D/deaf and HOH people. This could be failure to make reasonable adjustment or indirect discrimination by policy criteria or practice.
2) By debating a subject specifically about BSL using deaf people without providing real-time access in BSL; without providing verbatim subtitles and only providing a written transcript after the broadcast is is not promoting equality of opportunity. The House of Lords is perpetuating common discriminatory practice and inequality of opportunity of deaf BSL users' and deaf and HOH people's access to government compared to non deaf people.
3) By debating BSL and deafness related issues without even making a special one off effort to be inclusive this frustrates deaf people such as myself who already feel government does not include us or recognise our issues.
So in summary I am alleging fault of the House of Lords on the following points:
1) Failure to make reasonable adjustments by not providing real-time BSL interpretation or verbatim subtitling of this debate about deaf people as a specific one off as well as a general failure of access on all House of Lords debates.
Failure to ensure an appropriate format of the post-debate text is available in BSL for those whom it most matters.
2) Indirect discrimination by policy, criteria or practice where there is no agreed policy to ensure that deaf people have generalised access to House of Lords debates in general, or specifically when deaf people's issues are discussed. This is unlikely to be justified and therefore constitutes discrimination.
3) Failure to comply with the PSED in promoting equality of opportunity and fostering good relations with deaf communities in the UK.
Disclosure
In the event that you deny any allegation, I expect you to provide documents which you rely upon in support of your denial.
What I would like to achieve from this complaint
a) A written apology;
b) Reasonable adjustments as highlighted above for all future debates, and more immediately any debates about deafness issues.
Next actions
Unless I hear from you within the next 21 days I will take action to protect my position because of the limitation period in Equality Act cases which requires that proceedings must be commenced within 6 months of the date of the failures which I have highlighted.
I am happy to engage with you to explore alternative way to resolve this dispute, but invite you to bear in mind the time constraints and my communication needs set out above.
If I do not hear from you, or if you deny that you are in breach of the Equality Act then I will instruct Solicitors to assist. I am aware that Unity Law are specialists in cases of this nature and offer No Win No Fee assistance.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours
SIGNOFF
D/deaf or Hard of Hearing (HOH) and don't use sign language
To whom it may concern.
On Friday a charity for British Sign Language (BSL) using deaf people announced that there would be a debate in the House of Lords today on Monday 31st March 2014 about their recently released report about the shockingly poor state of health many BSL using deaf people have. http://www.signhealth.org.uk/press-release-lords-to-debate-the-health-of-deaf-people-following-shocking-report-by-signhealth/
House of Lords debates are broadcast live but usually without real-time BSL interpretation or verbatim subtitles.
Earlier today several deaf people emailed HLInfo@parliament.uk to ask whether this debate about BSL using deaf people would have live sign language interpretation or have subtitles. A hearing ally telephoned in order to get faster information.
According to the House of Lords Information Office stock email response the debate about Sick of It will not be subtitled. Information about BSL was not supplied by email despite several requests asking about it. We know there is no BSL because of the hearing people who telephoned.
There will be a transcript and summary provided afterwards but only in English, there appears to be no plan to have this provided in BSL for people like me to access and understand.
I would now like to raise a formal complaint with the House of Lords.
I am a disabled person witin the ambit and meaning of Section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. I am deaf. I cannot hear well enough to follow televised material without verbatim subtitles.
The debate about the Signhealth "Sick of It" report is specifically about British Sign Language (BSL) using deaf people in the UK but also highlights many issues which also affect non-signing deaf people, hard of hearing, deafened and deaf-blind people. Disability and deafness campaigners believe strongly in the principle of "Nothing about us without us". This debate is happening without us.
The Sick of It report also highlights the issues with not providing real-time and other access to information in BSL yet the debate fails on exactly these things that are being debated and discussed.
The House of Lords is also subject to the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 which states
In summary, those subject to the equality
duty must, in the exercise of
their functions, have due regard to the need to:
* Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act.
* Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected
characteristic and those who do not.
* Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.
It is my belief that the House of Lords has failed on all 3 areas of the PSED cited above.
1) Failure to provide general real-time access to House of Lords debates in the form of BSL interpretation for deaf people or subtitles for D/deaf and HOH people. This could be failure to make reasonable adjustment or indirect discrimination by policy criteria or practice.
2) By debating a subject specifically about BSL using deaf people without providing real-time access in BSL; without providing verbatim subtitles and only providing a written transcript after the broadcast is is not promoting equality of opportunity. The House of Lords is perpetuating common discriminatory practice and inequality of opportunity of deaf BSL users' and deaf and HOH people's access to government compared to non deaf people.
3) By debating BSL and deafness related issues without even making a special one off effort to be inclusive this frustrates deaf people such as myself who already feel government does not include us or recognise our issues.
So in summary I am alleging fault of the House of Lords on the following points:
1) Failure to make reasonable adjustments by not providing real-time BSL interpretation or verbatim subtitling of this debate about deaf people as a specific one off as well as a general failure of access on all House of Lords debates.
Failure to ensure an appropriate format of the post-debate text is available in BSL for those whom it most matters.
2) Indirect discrimination by policy, criteria or practice where there is no agreed policy to ensure that deaf people have generalised access to House of Lords debates in general, or specifically when deaf people's issues are discussed. This is unlikely to be justified and therefore constitutes discrimination.
3) Failure to comply with the PSED in promoting equality of opportunity and fostering good relations with deaf communities in the UK.
Disclosure
In the event that you deny any allegation, I expect you to provide documents which you rely upon in support of your denial.
What I would like to achieve from this complaint
a) A written apology;
b) Reasonable adjustments as highlighted above for all future debates, and more immediately any debates about deafness issues.
Next actions
Unless I hear from you within the next 21 days I will take action to protect my position because of the limitation period in Equality Act cases which requires that proceedings must be commenced within 6 months of the date of the failures which I have highlighted.
I am happy to engage with you to explore alternative way to resolve this dispute, but invite you to bear in mind the time constraints and my communication needs set out above.
If I do not hear from you, or if you deny that you are in breach of the Equality Act then I will instruct Solicitors to assist. I am aware that Unity Law are specialists in cases of this nature and offer No Win No Fee assistance.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours
SIGNOFF
You are a hearing ally who would like to complain to the HoL about poor deaf access
To whom it may concern.
On Friday a charity for British Sign Language (BSL) using deaf people announced that there would be a debate in the House of Lords today on Monday 31st March 2014 about their recently released report about the shockingly poor state of health many BSL using deaf people have. http://www.signhealth.org.uk/press-release-lords-to-debate-the-health-of-deaf-people-following-shocking-report-by-signhealth/
House of Lords debates are broadcast live but usually without real-time BSL interpretation or verbatim subtitles.
Earlier today several deaf people emailed HLInfo@parliament.uk to ask whether this debate about BSL using deaf people would have live sign language interpretation or have subtitles. A hearing person telephoned in order to get faster information.
According to the House of Lords Information Office stock email response the debate about Sick of It will not be subtitled. Information about BSL was not supplied by email despite several requests asking about it. We know there is no BSL because of the hearing people who telephoned.
There will be a transcript and summary provided afterwards but only in English, there appears to be no plan to have this provided in BSL for people who cannot easily access written English to understand.
I would now like to raise a formal complaint with the House of Lords.
The debate about the Signhealth "Sick of It" report is specifically about British Sign Language (BSL) using deaf people in the UK but also highlights many issues which also affect non-signing deaf people, hard of hearing, deafened and deaf-blind people. Disability and deafness campaigners believe strongly in the principle of "Nothing about us without us". This debate is happening without deaf people being included!
The Sick of It report also highlights the issues with not providing real-time and other access to information in BSL yet the debate fails on exactly these things that are being debated and discussed.
I am not permitted to raise an Equality Act 2010 complaint for discrimination as I myself am not deaf or hard of hearing. However I would like to remind you that The House of Lords is also subject to the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 which states
In summary, those subject to the equality
duty must, in the exercise of
their functions, have due regard to the need to:
* Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act.
* Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected
characteristic and those who do not.
* Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.
It is my belief that the House of Lords has failed on all 3 areas of the PSED cited above.
1) Failure to provide general real-time access to House of Lords debates in the form of BSL interpretation for deaf people or subtitles for D/deaf and HOH people. This could be failure to make reasonable adjustment or indirect discrimination by policy criteria or practice.
2) By debating a subject specifically about BSL using deaf people without providing real-time access in BSL; without providing verbatim subtitles and only providing a written transcript after the broadcast is is not promoting equality of opportunity. The House of Lords is perpetuating common discriminatory practice and inequality of opportunity of deaf BSL users' and deaf and HOH people's access to government compared to non deaf people.
3) By debating BSL and deafness related issues without even making a special one off effort to be inclusive this frustrates deaf people who already feel government does not include us or recognise their issues.
I hope that the House of Lords will
1) Make a public apology in English and BSL to all the deaf people excluded from this debate;
2) Ensure that debates about deafness issues are made accessible in realtime via BSL interpretation and verbatim subtitles and that post-debate materials are available in BSL as well.
3) Ensure that all debates are made more accessible in realtime for deaf users via verbatim subtitling.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours
SIGNOFF
Stock reply from HoL
*From: House of Lords Enquiry Service
*Received: 31/03/2014 16:19
*To: natalya.dell@gmail.com
*Subject: Access for D/deaf & HOH ppl to
House of Lords Information Office wrote:
Thank you for your email.
This debate will not be subtitled during the live broadcast.
It will be available to read online three hours after the debate here:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/hansard/lords/todays-lords-debates/Read/
The edited text will be published in Hansard tomorrow:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/hansard/lords/by-date/#session=73895&year=2014&month=2&day=28
We will pass on your email for consideration.
I trust this information is of use.
You can find out more about the House of Lords by ordering or downloading free publications
http://www.lordspublications.parliament.uk/.
Kind regards,
Information Office
House of Lords
London SW1A 0PW
Tel: 020 7219 3107
www.parliament.uk/lords
Sign up for our _weekly what’s on newsletter http://lords-subscriptions.parliament.uk
Follow us on Twitter _@UKHouseofLords
https://twitter.com/UKHouseofLords>, Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/UKHouseofLords> and YouTube_
http://www.youtube.com/user/ukhouseoflords
Several deaf people emailed about this and got a stock reply saying there would be no verbatim subtitling - they didn't respond about real-time BSL interpretation or access to BSL interpretation of the post-debate transcript.
The hearing ally called the House of Lords phoneline and escalated this issue to a named manager who agreed it was ironic, inaccessible, insulting etc and recommended complaints were made.
So lets do that then. Complaints ahoy! Make our voices and signs heard and seen!
The content of your complaint will differ depending on your circumstances so jump to the appropriate complaint wording with the links below.
1) You are deaf and use sign language so rely on or prefer BSL interpretation.
2) You are deaf or hard of hearing and don't sign so rely on subtitling.
3) You are a hearing ally who wishes to support your D/deaf/HOH friends.
BSL using deaf people template complaint
To whom it may concern.
On Friday a charity for British Sign Language (BSL) using deaf people announced that there would be a debate in the House of Lords today on Monday 31st March 2014 about their recently released report about the shockingly poor state of health many BSL using deaf people have. http://www.signhealth.org.uk/press-release-lords-to-debate-the-health-of-deaf-people-following-shocking-report-by-signhealth/
House of Lords debates are broadcast live but usually without real-time BSL interpretation or verbatim subtitles.
Earlier today several deaf people emailed HLInfo@parliament.uk to ask whether this debate about BSL using deaf people would have live sign language interpretation or have subtitles. A hearing ally telephoned in order to get faster information.
According to the House of Lords Information Office stock email response the debate about Sick of It will not be subtitled. Information about BSL was not supplied by email despite several requests asking about it. We know there is no BSL because of the hearing people who telephoned.
There will be a transcript and summary provided afterwards but only in English, there appears to be no plan to have this provided in BSL for people like me to access and understand.
I would now like to raise a formal complaint with the House of Lords.
I am a disabled person within the ambit and meaning of Section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. I am deaf and British Sign Language (BSL) is my primary and preferred language. I cannot hear spoken content and rely on BSL to understand what is being communicated to me. I have used template wording for this complaint composed by someone else.
The debate about the Signhealth "Sick of It" report is specifically about British Sign Language (BSL) using deaf people in the UK. Disability and deafness campaigners believe strongly in the principle of "Nothing about us without us". This debate is happening without us.
The Sick of It report also highlights the issues with not providing real-time and other access to information in BSL yet the debate fails on exactly these things that are being debated and discussed.
The House of Lords is also subject to the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 which states
In summary, those subject to the equality
duty must, in the exercise of
their functions, have due regard to the need to:
* Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act.
* Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected
characteristic and those who do not.
* Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.
It is my belief that the House of Lords has failed on all 3 areas of the PSED cited above.
1) Failure to provide general real-time access to House of Lords debates in the form of BSL interpretation for deaf people or subtitles for D/deaf and HOH people. This could be failure to make reasonable adjustment or indirect discrimination by policy criteria or practice.
2) By debating a subject specifically about BSL using deaf people without providing real-time access in BSL; without providing verbatim subtitles and only providing a written transcript after the broadcast is is not promoting equality of opportunity. The House of Lords is perpetuating common discriminatory practice and inequality of opportunity of deaf BSL users' and deaf and HOH people's access to government compared to non deaf people.
3) By debating BSL and deafness related issues without even making a special one off effort to be inclusive this frustrates deaf people such as myself who already feel government does not include us or recognise our issues.
So in summary I am alleging fault of the House of Lords on the following points:
1) Failure to make reasonable adjustments by not providing real-time BSL interpretation or verbatim subtitling of this debate about deaf people as a specific one off as well as a general failure of access on all House of Lords debates.
Failure to ensure an appropriate format of the post-debate text is available in BSL for those whom it most matters.
2) Indirect discrimination by policy, criteria or practice where there is no agreed policy to ensure that deaf people have generalised access to House of Lords debates in general, or specifically when deaf people's issues are discussed. This is unlikely to be justified and therefore constitutes discrimination.
3) Failure to comply with the PSED in promoting equality of opportunity and fostering good relations with deaf communities in the UK.
Disclosure
In the event that you deny any allegation, I expect you to provide documents which you rely upon in support of your denial.
What I would like to achieve from this complaint
a) A written apology;
b) Reasonable adjustments as highlighted above for all future debates, and more immediately any debates about deafness issues.
Next actions
Unless I hear from you within the next 21 days I will take action to protect my position because of the limitation period in Equality Act cases which requires that proceedings must be commenced within 6 months of the date of the failures which I have highlighted.
I am happy to engage with you to explore alternative way to resolve this dispute, but invite you to bear in mind the time constraints and my communication needs set out above.
If I do not hear from you, or if you deny that you are in breach of the Equality Act then I will instruct Solicitors to assist. I am aware that Unity Law are specialists in cases of this nature and offer No Win No Fee assistance.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours
SIGNOFF
D/deaf or Hard of Hearing (HOH) and don't use sign language
To whom it may concern.
On Friday a charity for British Sign Language (BSL) using deaf people announced that there would be a debate in the House of Lords today on Monday 31st March 2014 about their recently released report about the shockingly poor state of health many BSL using deaf people have. http://www.signhealth.org.uk/press-release-lords-to-debate-the-health-of-deaf-people-following-shocking-report-by-signhealth/
House of Lords debates are broadcast live but usually without real-time BSL interpretation or verbatim subtitles.
Earlier today several deaf people emailed HLInfo@parliament.uk to ask whether this debate about BSL using deaf people would have live sign language interpretation or have subtitles. A hearing ally telephoned in order to get faster information.
According to the House of Lords Information Office stock email response the debate about Sick of It will not be subtitled. Information about BSL was not supplied by email despite several requests asking about it. We know there is no BSL because of the hearing people who telephoned.
There will be a transcript and summary provided afterwards but only in English, there appears to be no plan to have this provided in BSL for people like me to access and understand.
I would now like to raise a formal complaint with the House of Lords.
I am a disabled person witin the ambit and meaning of Section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. I am deaf. I cannot hear well enough to follow televised material without verbatim subtitles.
The debate about the Signhealth "Sick of It" report is specifically about British Sign Language (BSL) using deaf people in the UK but also highlights many issues which also affect non-signing deaf people, hard of hearing, deafened and deaf-blind people. Disability and deafness campaigners believe strongly in the principle of "Nothing about us without us". This debate is happening without us.
The Sick of It report also highlights the issues with not providing real-time and other access to information in BSL yet the debate fails on exactly these things that are being debated and discussed.
The House of Lords is also subject to the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 which states
In summary, those subject to the equality
duty must, in the exercise of
their functions, have due regard to the need to:
* Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act.
* Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected
characteristic and those who do not.
* Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.
It is my belief that the House of Lords has failed on all 3 areas of the PSED cited above.
1) Failure to provide general real-time access to House of Lords debates in the form of BSL interpretation for deaf people or subtitles for D/deaf and HOH people. This could be failure to make reasonable adjustment or indirect discrimination by policy criteria or practice.
2) By debating a subject specifically about BSL using deaf people without providing real-time access in BSL; without providing verbatim subtitles and only providing a written transcript after the broadcast is is not promoting equality of opportunity. The House of Lords is perpetuating common discriminatory practice and inequality of opportunity of deaf BSL users' and deaf and HOH people's access to government compared to non deaf people.
3) By debating BSL and deafness related issues without even making a special one off effort to be inclusive this frustrates deaf people such as myself who already feel government does not include us or recognise our issues.
So in summary I am alleging fault of the House of Lords on the following points:
1) Failure to make reasonable adjustments by not providing real-time BSL interpretation or verbatim subtitling of this debate about deaf people as a specific one off as well as a general failure of access on all House of Lords debates.
Failure to ensure an appropriate format of the post-debate text is available in BSL for those whom it most matters.
2) Indirect discrimination by policy, criteria or practice where there is no agreed policy to ensure that deaf people have generalised access to House of Lords debates in general, or specifically when deaf people's issues are discussed. This is unlikely to be justified and therefore constitutes discrimination.
3) Failure to comply with the PSED in promoting equality of opportunity and fostering good relations with deaf communities in the UK.
Disclosure
In the event that you deny any allegation, I expect you to provide documents which you rely upon in support of your denial.
What I would like to achieve from this complaint
a) A written apology;
b) Reasonable adjustments as highlighted above for all future debates, and more immediately any debates about deafness issues.
Next actions
Unless I hear from you within the next 21 days I will take action to protect my position because of the limitation period in Equality Act cases which requires that proceedings must be commenced within 6 months of the date of the failures which I have highlighted.
I am happy to engage with you to explore alternative way to resolve this dispute, but invite you to bear in mind the time constraints and my communication needs set out above.
If I do not hear from you, or if you deny that you are in breach of the Equality Act then I will instruct Solicitors to assist. I am aware that Unity Law are specialists in cases of this nature and offer No Win No Fee assistance.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours
SIGNOFF
You are a hearing ally who would like to complain to the HoL about poor deaf access
To whom it may concern.
On Friday a charity for British Sign Language (BSL) using deaf people announced that there would be a debate in the House of Lords today on Monday 31st March 2014 about their recently released report about the shockingly poor state of health many BSL using deaf people have. http://www.signhealth.org.uk/press-release-lords-to-debate-the-health-of-deaf-people-following-shocking-report-by-signhealth/
House of Lords debates are broadcast live but usually without real-time BSL interpretation or verbatim subtitles.
Earlier today several deaf people emailed HLInfo@parliament.uk to ask whether this debate about BSL using deaf people would have live sign language interpretation or have subtitles. A hearing person telephoned in order to get faster information.
According to the House of Lords Information Office stock email response the debate about Sick of It will not be subtitled. Information about BSL was not supplied by email despite several requests asking about it. We know there is no BSL because of the hearing people who telephoned.
There will be a transcript and summary provided afterwards but only in English, there appears to be no plan to have this provided in BSL for people who cannot easily access written English to understand.
I would now like to raise a formal complaint with the House of Lords.
The debate about the Signhealth "Sick of It" report is specifically about British Sign Language (BSL) using deaf people in the UK but also highlights many issues which also affect non-signing deaf people, hard of hearing, deafened and deaf-blind people. Disability and deafness campaigners believe strongly in the principle of "Nothing about us without us". This debate is happening without deaf people being included!
The Sick of It report also highlights the issues with not providing real-time and other access to information in BSL yet the debate fails on exactly these things that are being debated and discussed.
I am not permitted to raise an Equality Act 2010 complaint for discrimination as I myself am not deaf or hard of hearing. However I would like to remind you that The House of Lords is also subject to the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 which states
In summary, those subject to the equality
duty must, in the exercise of
their functions, have due regard to the need to:
* Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act.
* Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected
characteristic and those who do not.
* Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.
It is my belief that the House of Lords has failed on all 3 areas of the PSED cited above.
1) Failure to provide general real-time access to House of Lords debates in the form of BSL interpretation for deaf people or subtitles for D/deaf and HOH people. This could be failure to make reasonable adjustment or indirect discrimination by policy criteria or practice.
2) By debating a subject specifically about BSL using deaf people without providing real-time access in BSL; without providing verbatim subtitles and only providing a written transcript after the broadcast is is not promoting equality of opportunity. The House of Lords is perpetuating common discriminatory practice and inequality of opportunity of deaf BSL users' and deaf and HOH people's access to government compared to non deaf people.
3) By debating BSL and deafness related issues without even making a special one off effort to be inclusive this frustrates deaf people who already feel government does not include us or recognise their issues.
I hope that the House of Lords will
1) Make a public apology in English and BSL to all the deaf people excluded from this debate;
2) Ensure that debates about deafness issues are made accessible in realtime via BSL interpretation and verbatim subtitles and that post-debate materials are available in BSL as well.
3) Ensure that all debates are made more accessible in realtime for deaf users via verbatim subtitling.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours
SIGNOFF
Stock reply from HoL
*From: House of Lords Enquiry Service
*Received: 31/03/2014 16:19
*To: natalya.dell@gmail.com
*Subject: Access for D/deaf & HOH ppl to
House of Lords Information Office wrote:
Thank you for your email.
This debate will not be subtitled during the live broadcast.
It will be available to read online three hours after the debate here:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/hansard/lords/todays-lords-debates/Read/
The edited text will be published in Hansard tomorrow:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/hansard/lords/by-date/#session=73895&year=2014&month=2&day=28
We will pass on your email for consideration.
I trust this information is of use.
You can find out more about the House of Lords by ordering or downloading free publications
http://www.lordspublications.parliament.uk/.
Kind regards,
Information Office
House of Lords
London SW1A 0PW
Tel: 020 7219 3107
www.parliament.uk/lords
Sign up for our _weekly what’s on newsletter http://lords-subscriptions.parliament.uk
Follow us on Twitter _@UKHouseofLords
https://twitter.com/UKHouseofLords>, Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/UKHouseofLords> and YouTube_
http://www.youtube.com/user/ukhouseoflords