#WhereIsTheInterpreter: The story so far

The UK Government is being taken to court tomorrow, in a landmark legal case with the potential to strengthen the rights of Deaf British Sign Language (BSL) users.

The judicial review hearing over Downing Street’s refusal to provide a BSL interpreter for its coronavirus briefings, is the culmination of more than 14 months of campaigning by Deaf activists.

The Limping Chicken has now rounded up the key details of the issue ahead of the session tomorrow, which runs from 10am to 5pm (BST), right from the very beginning.

The campaigners

It began with Deaf presenter Lynn Stewart-Taylor and her one simple question. ‘Where is the interpreter’ became the name of a campaign which would fight to protect the rights of Deaf people to receive accessible public health information.

It was a question asked in unconventional circumstances. A deadly virus first identified in Wuhan, China – a coronavirus – would soon spread worldwide, turning into a public health crisis which would impact every UK citizen.

From March, updates from the UK Government were given daily, in the form of a briefing delivered by a government minister – often accompanied by medical and scientific experts – straight from No 10.

There was, however, no in-person BSL interpreter available – a decision taken by Downing Street and stuck to more than a year later, despite other parts of the UK (Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) all managing to offer access to Deaf people.

The same happened with select ‘data briefings’ delivered by medical professionals, two of which would be the focus of Wednesday’s judicial review hearing. A Deaf actress, Katie Rowley, would end up being the claimant in this case.

Lynn told Ahmed Khalifa’s Hear Me Out [CC] podcast in April: “This is a life and death situation. It’s making me very anxious.”

“I’ve not been able to get full access to information to know how to protect myself and how to protect others.

“We’re really experiencing a lack of access to information on our own language. There are 87,000, possibly more, BSL-using people in the UK and lots of us are experiencing frustrations.

“That’s making our anxieties worse, it’s affecting our mental health.”

Speaking to The Limping Chicken in October, Katie said: “How can I look after not only myself my health problems but my unborn baby as well if I don’t have the information? It’s vital for everyone to have information that affects their health. I feel frightened, stressed which isn’t good in pregnancy.”

The reasoning

A considerable explanation as to why the Government wouldn’t provide an in-person interpreter came in May, when the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) issued its second response to a Parliament petition which had received tens of thousands of signatures.

The petition called on the Government to provide BSL interpreters “for emergency announcements on TV”, but they stood firm on their decision not to have one in the room, citing Public Health England guidelines.

“It is not possible to safely include a physical British Sign Language (BSL) interpreter in the room for daily briefings as this would require additional operations staff such as an additional cameraman to be present.

“At Downing Street the Government is working within the constraints of a historical site with limited space.

“Having an interpreter physically attend, along with any additional staff required to facilitate broadcast of the interpretation, contradicts the PHE guidelines, and potentially puts them and others at risk,” they wrote.

At this point, BSL interpretation was being provided by the BBC News Channel and iPlayer, but this was not sufficient for Deaf campaigners, with Lynn arguing that “not everyone can access this [and] it’s not visible on every platform”.

Their argument that an interpreter could not be provided due to “limited space” was later challenged when Dominic Cummings, a senior advisor to the Prime Minister, gave a press conference about his infamous trip to Barnard Castle in the Rose Garden of Downing Street.

In December, the Cabinet Office confirmed that they would provide BSL access to future coronavirus briefings via its social media accounts.

 The agreement 

A document from November, seen by The Limping Chicken, states that the BBC provided a BSL interpreter on the BBC News channel from 16 March last year. The BBC’s provision has been cited repeatedly by Government as its solution for sign language access to the daily briefings.

Such an agreement, it claimed, came “following discussions between the Prime Minister and the BBC”, but a response obtained by The Limping Chicken in April suggested a different version of events.

“There was no written contract entered into between the Cabinet Office and the BBC.  There was, however, a verbal agreement between a special adviser (who has since left the Cabinet Office) on behalf of the Cabinet Office, and the BBC to share their resources and provide the services,” it reads.

Although this website has seen email correspondence from the BBC outlining its sign language provision for the coronavirus press conferences, the Cabinet Office have said that “there is no single agreement entitled ‘contract’ setting down the terms and conditions”.

All of this means that the reasoning often cited by the Government – that BSL access has been provided by the BBC – is based off of a “verbal agreement” which has not been written down or recorded at all.

The BBC

The BBC’s provision covers the BBC News Channel and iPlayer, but not BBC One, with the broadcaster declining a government request to include it on the channel in May last year.

“Our position remains that signing is available on the news channel and iPlayer,” the email from Paul Oldfield, Controller of Policy at the BBC, read.

They added that they were “pleased” to offer their BSL feed to other broadcasters, though The Limping Chicken was told by ITV that they “do not have a BSL interpreter on our programmes”.

Sky News said at the time that discussions were ongoing, while Channel 4 News did not respond to our request for comment.

In addition to refusing to provide the BSL feed on BBC One, the organisation confirmed in September that they would not offer BSL interpretation for the Government’s scientific briefings, which are the focus of the legal case.

“We do not provide BSL for parliamentary events or other news conferences, but all our live TV news output is subtitled,” a BBC News spokesperson said.

An email released to this website also states that the News Channel will “prioritise delivering the Six O’Clock News” if a briefing goes beyond 5:55pm, meaning the BSL provision will “cease before the press conference concludes”.

This happened during the coronavirus briefing which took place on 23 June last year, and on 14 May 2021, when the interpreter can be seen walking off-camera halfway through the briefing.

The equality impact assessments

Campaigners and their legal representatives – Fry Law – allege that the Government’s refusal to provide a BSL interpreter goes against their obligations under the Equality Act.

The 2010 legislation requires public bodies make “reasonable adjustments” to provide access to services, with the Public Sector Equality Duty stating that public authorities must “eliminate discrimination […] advance equality of opportunity […] and foster good relations” between those with and without ‘protected characteristics’.

Although they are not mandatory, an equality impact assessment (EQIA) can be used to demonstrate that they have met their equality obligations.

Yet, when lawyers asked for a copy of such a document, to see if they had considered the impact of the No 10 briefings on equalities, they were told that releasing it to them would be “disproportionate”.

So “disproportionate”, that when The Limping Chicken asked for a copy under the Freedom of Information Act, we were told that the assessment didn’t actually exist.

This website also went on to reveal that an EQIA wasn’t conducted for the new £2.6 million studio in No 9, either, which was used for coronavirus briefings from March this year. The Government also continued to refuse to provide an in-person BSL interpreter in this new set-up.

The political pressure 

It isn’t just Deaf campaigners who have challenged the Government’s position, with Members of Parliament also speaking out on the issue.

In an interview with Cambridgeshire Deaf Association, published in August, Peterborough MP Paul Bristow described No 10’s refusal to provide an in-person BSL interpreter as a “missed opportunity”.

The politician, who is also Parliamentary champion for the Conservative Disability Group, said: “I think through the best of intentions, there was a push to try and make this a responsibility of the BBC, but that’s not good enough. It should have been owned by Number 10 during this process.

“It’s an assumption that all deaf people or those who need BSL are going to receive their information through the BBC. There are other channels out there that people may be watching or may be viewing.

“To try and make this the responsibility of the broadcasters was a mistake.”

On the other side of the political spectrum, Labour’s Vicky Foxcroft repeatedly confronted the Prime Minister on the issue in the Commons, going as far as to sign a question to Boris Johnson in April.

Signing during Prime Minister’s Questions, the shadow minister for disabled people asked: “Why is there no interpreter in the room for the briefings?

“If the Prime Minister doesn’t understand, imagine those who rely on British Sign Language feel at his press briefings. £2.6 million spent on the new press room, yet still no interpreter.

“What message does he think this sends to disabled people?”

Meanwhile, the Women and Equalities Committee were looking into the issue as part of their inquiry into the “unequal impact” of coronavirus on disabled people. Their report, published in December, stated that the Government’s communications had been “poor from the outset” of the lockdown in March 2020.

“Accessibility should have been baked in from the start. Much of what is being asked for could be simply achieved, often at low cost, and bring considerate benefit to disabled people,” the document reads.

The committee’s chair, Caroline Nokes MP, would later go on to tell Disability Rights Advice TV that she rejects the idea that the Government’s decision not to have an in-person interpreter was down to logistics or timing.

“I have seen BSL interpreters brought in literally at the drop of a hat, when it is considered important enough. I know that they’re available and I know that they want to do this job.

“If it’s about logistics, if it’s really about there not being enough space in the room, go find a bigger room. To me, that’s very straightforward.

“We have a government that has access to a wide range of buildings – the Foreign Office, for example, huge rooms. If it has to be a wood-panelled room, you would find one there.

“We have access to Parliament – massive rooms – so I reject the concept that it’s about logistics,” she said.

When a Westminster Hall debate was held on the report’s findings, several other MPs also criticised the Government’s refusal to provide BSL access to Deaf people. 

Labour’s Tulip Siddiq said: “We eventually got one for the BBC coverage, but despite the hefty 2.6 million price tag for the new flash press suite at Downing Street, no one thought to make provision for a BSL interpreter.”

Marion Fellows MP, disability spokesperson for the Scottish National Party (SNP) added: “Even an easy thing to do like having a BSL signer at No 10 briefings during the pandemic was not in place, whilst in Scotland, the daily briefings by the First Minister were signed from the start.

“Not hard to arrange, but the lack of this basic tool for the deaf community reveals a lack of thought on the best way to communicate directly with deaf members of the population who need to understand what is going on, as they feel cut off at the best of times,” she said.

Towards the end of the debate, Charlotte Nichols MP, Labour’s shadow women and equalities minister, said: “As has been raised by a number of honourable members in today’s debate and raised repeatedly with the government over a number of months, why has the government – not least the Prime Minister – been so resistant to British Sign Language interpreters at their briefings?

“This report is clear how alienating and indeed dangerous this has been for deaf people.”

The judicial review

Permission for the judicial review to go ahead was granted in March, following months of correspondence between lawyers.

Before that, the Government had contested the application from Fry Law on the grounds that it is “unarguable” under the Equality Act and the case “serves no practical purpose”.

However, the Honourable Mr Justice Johnson approved the request and said in an order: “This claim raises an important issue – broadly […] the Government’s compliance with its obligations under the Equality Act 2010 so as to provide health critical information in a form that is accessible by deaf users of BSL.”

The case continues tomorrow in court, with The Limping Chicken’s Liam O’Dell providing live updates on Twitter.

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.