Deaf News: UK Government contests #WhereIsTheInterpreter, saying legal claim serves ‘no practical purpose’

Lawyers acting on behalf of the UK Government have asked the High Court to reject a judicial review over #WhereIsTheInterpreter, claiming that it is “unarguable” under the Equality Act and “serves no practical purpose”.

The response, filed two minutes before the legal deadline yesterday, is the latest development in the campaign by deaf activists to have a British Sign Language (BSL) interpreter present in-person for the Government’s coronavirus briefings.

However, in a document seen by The Limping Chicken, lawyers from Matrix Chambers write that the claim the Government is continuously breaching equality law by “failing to provide BSL interpreters” for the press conferences is “obviously wrong and illogical”.

“BSL interpreting is provided for all briefings. The specific issue the Claimant [Katie Rowley] identified with the two briefings in question has been resolved,” it reads.

Fry Law filed the application on behalf of Rowley, a Deaf actress from Leeds, in December – following months of pre-action correspondence between the legal firm and Government lawyers.

The case concerns two ‘data’ briefings from last year, chaired by scientists and medical experts, which came without BSL interpretation on the BBC News Channel.

• Related: “Go find a bigger room!’ Women and Equalities chair slams Government’s failure to provide interpreter

While the BBC has shown sign language interpreters for ministerial briefings on COVID-19, the broadcaster revealed to The Limping Chicken in September that they would not provide such access for scientific briefings from Downing Street.

Speaking at the time, a BBC News spokesperson said: “We provided a BSL interpreter for the series of official ministerial and prime ministerial briefings on Covid-19 including the recent statements from the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition.

“We do not provide BSL for parliamentary events or other news conferences but all our live TV news output is subtitled.”

The Government’s document goes on to add that the BBC’s sign language provision “was not a formal contractual arrangement”.

The Limping Chicken submitted a request for a copy of this agreement under the Freedom of Information Act in October, but the information was withheld.

A complaint has since been filed with the Information Commissioner’s Office, with an application for an internal review in November still awaiting a response.

Outlining their reasons why permission for the judicial review should be refused, UK Government lawyers said: “Firstly, the challenge was not brought promptly. Secondly, relatedly, the claim is now academic and serves no practical purpose.

“BSL interpretation is provided in respect of all the Briefings on an ongoing basis.

“Finally, the claim is unarguable under the [Equality] Act on both grounds.”

• Read more: UK Government failed to consider equalities impact for coronavirus briefings

They continue by saying that Fry’s application was filed on the last working day before the three-month period after the first data briefing expired, adding that such a delay has led to the claim being “overtaken by events”.

The lawyers also argue that Rowley’s call for an on-platform interpreter “falls away” because she accepted that ‘in-screen’ interpretation is “sufficient when provided” – something which they said is therefore a “reasonable adjustment”.

Concluding its submissions, the UK Government said: “[It] has taken, and continues to take, various steps to ensure the information provided about the pandemic is accessible to disabled people, including hearing impairments.

“It has continued to respond to the changing circumstances and adapted its provision accordingly.

“In relation to BSL interpretation specifically, the Government has taken steps to ensure the Briefings are always available in BSL and it has also commissioned SignHealth to provide other BSL information.”

The application for permission for a judicial review now rests with a High Court judge, with Fry Law being able to ask the Court for a hearing should the judge choose to reject it.

Photo: Number 10/Flickr.

By Liam O’Dell. Liam is a mildly deaf freelance journalist and campaigner from Bedfordshire. He wears bilateral hearing aids and can be found talking about disability, theatre, politics and more on Twitter and on his website.

---

Update – 09.02.21: In response to the UK Government’s submission, which claims SignHealth was commissioned by them to provide information in British Sign Language (BSL), a spokesperson for the deaf health charity said: “SignHealth has been commissioned by the Department of Health and Social Care to support with the BSL translation of shielding guidance for Clinically Extremely Vulnerable people.

“We are very proud of this, however, we have not been commissioned to provide any other information in BSL.

“More needs to be done to ensure Deaf people have equal access. As an organisation dedicated to improving the health and wellbeing of Deaf people.

“We fully support the Where Is The Interpreter Campaign and the legal action brought forward by Fry Law and urge the government to provide a BSL interpreter at Coronavirus briefings.

“Vital scientific, policy and health guidance should be available at all times to all citizens, including Deaf citizens, especially during a pandemic.”

---

Update – 10.02.21: The above statement from SignHealth was corrected after a spokesperson confirmed the charity was not commissioned by Public Health England as previously stated, but by the Department of Health and Social Care.