New Zealand Sign Language Bill

Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for Disability Issues) Link to this

I move, That the New Zealand Sign Language Bill be now read a third time. I would like to acknowledge the members of the Deaf community who have travelled from around New Zealand to be part of this important event. This is a historic day.

The parliamentary history of the bill began almost 2 years ago with its first reading on 22 June 2004. It was referred to the Justice and Electoral Committee, which reported back to the House on 18 July last year. The second reading of the bill took place on 23 February this year and the Committee stage on 23 March. Today we have the third and final reading of this bill.

The purpose of the bill is to promote and maintain the use of New Zealand Sign Language by declaring it to be an official language of New Zealand. It provides for the use of New Zealand Sign Language in legal proceedings and enables the making of regulations to set competency standards for interpretation in legal proceedings. It sets out principles to guide Government departments in the use of New Zealand Sign Language. It provides for a review of the operation of the Act 3 years after it comes into force.

This bill is necessary. A lack of recognition of New Zealand Sign Language leads to serious barriers to information and services for deaf people, which leads, therefore, to unacceptable injustices. The bill offers improved access to information and services that hearing people take for granted. It provides acknowledgment of Deaf people’s language and culture.

New Zealand Sign Language is part of our rich cultural diversity. Around 28,000 people, of whom 7,000 are deaf, use it. It is a language native to our country. It has a unique linguistic structure and includes signs that express concepts from Māori culture. Deaf people comprise a distinct and dynamic cultural group within our country. Their language is central to our culture. Language and culture go hand in hand, and by our recognition of New Zealand Sign Language, we give due recognition to Deaf culture.

The first school for deaf children was established in 1880 in Sumner in Christchurch. Sign language was forbidden, as it was at the later schools in Titirangi, Kelston, and Feilding. But the children were desperate to communicate and continued to use sign language, despite the penalty. For the next hundred years the language continued to be suppressed—but it continued to develop.

In the 1970s overseas research began to document the linguistic features of sign languages, and increasingly they were recognised as complete and natural languages in their own right. From the mid-1980s New Zealand Deaf people began to assert their own language on the political stage. Throughout the 1990s the Deaf Association and wider community lobbied hard to have their language recognised. The New Zealand Sign Language Tutors Association was established in 1992, and in 1995 the Auckland University of Technology established the diploma course in interpreting. In 1993, after more than 100 years of formal suppression, New Zealand Sign Language began to be used in our schools for the Deaf. In 1997 the first official dictionary was published.

The passing of the bill will mark a major reversal in the suppression of the Deaf community’s language and culture. It will be a substantial step towards achieving our vision of an inclusive society. The principles of the bill and the related work streams will remove language barriers for Deaf people in the education, health, public broadcasting, and justice sectors. The capacity of the interpreter workforce, beginning with competency standards, is being addressed. The review of the Act will provide an opportunity for us to ensure that it is achieving its stated purpose.

I am pleased that our parliamentary processes have been made accessible to the Deaf community throughout the passage of the bill. It is probably the most involved the Deaf community has ever been in any parliamentary and lawmaking process, and I want to see that participation continue. I wish to thank in particular all the interpreters for their excellent work.

The bill is a monumental milestone for the Deaf community. By declaring New Zealand Sign Language to be an official language of our country, our Parliament is acknowledging the Deaf community’s presence, its rights, and its equal value in our society.

In conclusion, I wish to pay tribute to the persistence and dedication of the Deaf community. Many Deaf people have shared personal stories of being forbidden to use their natural language, of having their hands tied behind their backs, and of being punished for signing. They have endured years of being told that their language is inferior to spoken languages. Yet despite that, New Zealand Sign Language has survived and continues to evolve. This language is about to be recognised as an official language of New Zealand.

Today is cause for celebration. To the Deaf community, I salute you. I commend the bill to the House.

Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Port Waikato) Link to this

The National Party takes great pleasure in supporting the third reading of the historical New Zealand Sign Language Bill in the House. We congratulate and thank all those who have worked so hard to bring it about. This clearly is an example of where the majority of parties in Parliament can work together when they recognise a cause worthy of support. Although I was not personally in the Justice and Electoral Committee, I understand that all 293 submitters supported this bill. It is wonderful to have the gallery filled with representatives of the Deaf community who have come from right around New Zealand to celebrate the passing of this bill. I welcome them to Parliament and thank them for their efforts. It is also great to witness the very competent signer here in the House today.

The genesis of this landmark bill goes back a very long way, and it is a testament to the Deaf community in particular for the long, hard, and consistent work it has done for many years to ensure that New Zealand Sign Language is recognised as an official language here in New Zealand. I know that my parliamentary colleague Ruth Dyson has pushed very hard for this day to come about, and I acknowledge her for those efforts.

However, I am concerned that no fiscal impact report was done on this bill. I see it as inevitable and, in fact, right and proper, that, in time, future provisions will expand signing into health, education, and other areas. It is important, therefore, that the fiscal implications of this bill are taken seriously. The select committee was told that at this stage further spending would have to come from Vote Justice baseline funding. It is therefore vital and fundamental that Vote Justice is adequately prepared and that if, in the future, changes are made, they are well-thought-out so they can be sustained.

I am also concerned that this Labour Government is prone to come out with slightly high-sounding strategies—which include the disability strategy—but when it comes to the reality of service provision, people’s aspirations are frequently dashed. People such as Lorna Sullivan of the New Zealand Assembly of People with Disabilities have said that at present a systemic abandonment and neglect exists throughout the disability sector, and that has to be a significant reality check on the Labour Government. Only today I sent a further letter of request to the Minister of Health, asking for his support to ensure that a working woman who is deaf will be given a date for a cochlear implant. She has been profoundly impaired by deafness, which has limited her ability to continue working in the medical area. She has been waiting for over a year for the operation. Her hopes have risen when she has been told she is of high priority, but they have been dashed several times as the operation has been put off due to financial considerations. The Minister of Health says that the priority for cochlear implants is that they go first to children, and that is understandable. But this adult woman, although she is in the high-priority group, continues to wait anxiously to hear whether she will ever be given a definite date.

It is a worry that the Labour Government often does not support its rhetoric with tangible, practical dollars. I note that Britain uses a slightly different approach to this issue. For instance, within the health system in the United Kingdom the Government provides a budget for translators so they are paid for their work in proportion to the time they devote to it. I would like to hear Minister Dyson stating clearly that a definite budget is available to make this Act operable into the future.

I do thoroughly endorse clause 10A, which requires a review of the operation of the legislation as soon as practicable after 1 March 2009. This requires a report on the operation of the Act from its commencement and on whether any amendments to the scope and contents of it are necessary or desirable.

The Justice and Electoral Committee recommended the inclusion of an explicit statement to confirm that, aside from enforcing the right to use New Zealand Sign Language in any legal proceedings, the bill does not extend rights to the Deaf community beyond those already provided in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, and does not limit those rights in any way.

People have asked: “What is an official language?”. At present New Zealand has two official languages: English and Māori. Māori is official because it has been declared so by statute, and English is official by convention dating back to English law. So there are indeed some inherent assumptions there. It is important to acknowledge that New Zealand Sign Language is a wholly visual language with its own grammatical structure, different from that of English and Māori. It is distinct and differs from the sign language of other countries, such as Australia, America, Canada, and Britain. I am also told that a Deaf person fluent in Māori who has no English, and a Deaf person fluent in English who has no Māori, may equally learn and communicate with New Zealand Sign Language.

The modern history leading up to the third reading of this bill has been more rapid than the long history of obstacles that Deaf people in New Zealand have had to confront since the mid-1850s. As a fifth generation New Zealander myself, I find it hard to believe how far we have come over the last 150 years. I cannot imagine how many whales my great-great-grandfather Captain Daniel Doherty unwittingly lost because his chief harpoonist back in 1833 was partially deaf and sometimes did not hear the order to throw the harpoon.

TIM BARNETT (Labour—Christchurch Central) Link to this

I rise with respect and pride to support the third reading of this excellent bill. I stand with respect for those people from the Deaf community who have fought through the years for the fundamental human rights of recognition, of communication, and of the ability to live in a world free of prejudice—in essence, the struggle for dignity. And I stand with pride that as a Labour member of Parliament I am in a party that, against the cynicism of the National Party and other parties, has promoted disability issues to be matters of ministerial responsibility, and that has generated real action to bring to life the vision of a barrier-free world.

I chaired the Justice and Electoral Committee that dealt with this bill for over a year. We made a few amendments to it, but, as a committee—which at that stage comprised members from six different political parties—we also went on a powerful journey in our personal understanding. We heard from people who had been banned from using sign language at school—one of a number of disturbing parallels with the Māori experience of much of the past century. We learnt that discussion of cochlear implants is important, but that it is not the same thing as giving legal rights and recognition to New Zealand Sign Language. We came to understand signers as being conduits, not as people speaking on behalf of others, and we came, with the bizarre exception of the ACT party, to recognise the importance of this legislation as a symbol, as a bottom-line guarantee, and as a lever for those with energy and vision to use in building the future. And, with the New Zealand Sign Language Bill, that is what we have here today.

This bill, as well as being a reasonably cautious foot in the door, also reaches out to the future. It includes the machinery for other areas of Government policy and Government services, as well as covering the justice issues to be delivered in the future in order to have services and policies designed to meet the needs of people who are deaf. The bill establishes a third official language. Incidentally, as we discovered in the select committee, it was an irony to realise that English is not actually recognised as an official language anywhere in New Zealand law—[Interruption] And some members of the house might actually welcome that! The bill does not set up a sign language commission to parallel the work of the Māori Language Commission, but I think that in time that will be seen as the natural next stage—to nurture, to guard, and to promote New Zealand Sign Language.

Over the past few years in this place I have been very much involved in law reform around fairly tricky issues, particularly prostitution and civil unions. Like this legislation, those reforms were to give a name, a character, and, yes, a recognition to something that had been out in the cold until that point. This legislation does the same. All three bills relating to those reforms have been marked by extraordinary scenes in the gallery of this Parliament.

As my two colleagues have already said, it is great to see people here today who have never been to see our democracy at work so close up. As well, helped by this legislation, surely the time is not far away when one of the 120 of us who occasionally, or regularly, sit down here after being elected to this Parliament, will be deaf, and when somebody sitting today in the gallery will instead be sitting down here in the Chamber, enjoying the benefit of this law, and being treated with dignity—being, indeed, an equal member of our society. I commend this bill.

JACQUI DEAN (National—Otago) Link to this

I have been enjoying the sight of the people in the gallery this afternoon, and it has struck me that there is an awful lot of talking going on up there, the like of which we would never get away with down here. I also notice one of the marvellous things about signing, which is that it carries an awful lot further than the spoken voice. So not only are our guests chatting amongst themselves but they are chatting across the Chamber, as well.

I am very pleased to speak in favour of, and support, this third reading of the New Zealand Sign Language Bill as it passes into law. I also say, as a newly elected member to this House, that it is so nice to have the opportunity to speak on legislation that means so much to so many people—not only those people who will use New Zealand Sign Language but also the members of the Government who have brought this legislation to the House.

The purpose of this bill is to promote and maintain the use of New Zealand Sign Language, which, according to the 2001 census, is used by approximately 28,000 people. The Waitaki District in the South Island, which is where I come from, contains around 28,000 people, so, to me, that is an awful lot of people who use New Zealand Sign Language.

From my background as an actor of some 25 years, communication has always been a very important part of my work and of my life. As I have sat here in the House and listened to the debate on the New Zealand Sign Language Bill, it has caused me to reflect on what communication is and how important communication is in our lives.

Going back to Acting 101, we learnt that communication comprises 14 percent intonation, which is one’s verbal expression, the subtle nuances of tone that one might use, and inflection. All of that is limited or lost to people who are deaf. Six percent of communication comprises the words themselves—the text. Most people can read text, but I would suggest that is not communication.

Eighty percent of what comprises communication is body language. It is our facial expression and our hand gestures. It is our body language—our posture. Whether we mirror the person we are communicating with, or whether we cross our arms and dissociate ourselves from what we are saying, we are using our bodies to communicate. What our bodies do is what we say, and that is communication. Body language brings much to the process of communication, but add to that a recognised system of signing in the absence of words and expression, and one has so much more. That is why I support the New Zealand Sign Language Bill.

Some 20 years ago I worked with a young deaf person with no sign language. That person, who was a so-called failure through the school system, was withdrawn, anti, and angry. It was very difficult for me to communicate with that person, and it is true to say that, for most of the time, that young deaf person was forever playing catch-up—always just a wee bit behind the play and behind others in the team. Members may imagine what happened when that young person committed a stupid, minor crime. If one knows anything about court day, one knows that it is a bit like a factory, and for a young person it is a very scary place. I support the right of every New Zealander in those circumstances to have access to all the assistance that he or she can get. In this instance, the provision of a sign language interpreter would have been of huge benefit.

I support the New Zealand Sign Language Bill because a deaf person appearing before a judge will have a signer by right. I support the New Zealand Sign Language Bill because it removes the language barrier for deaf people. Through this legislation, we acknowledge, value, and make normal the Deaf community’s presence in our community. I stand to support the New Zealand Sign Language Bill.

BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) Link to this

On behalf of New Zealand First, it is with great pleasure that I rise to support the third reading of the New Zealand Sign Language Bill. New Zealand First appreciates that today is an extremely important day for the Deaf community as New Zealand Sign Language is given official recognition. This means that members of the Deaf community will have the right to communicate in their own language in legal situations, in particular, when the need arises.

Approximately 28,000 people use New Zealand Sign Language, and an estimated 7,000 of these people are deaf—a huge number, indeed. Communication is essential for everyone in society, and this bill emphasises that fact.

New Zealand First pays tribute to the dedication, commitment, and leadership of all those involved in promoting and advancing this bill, and we must mention here Minister Dyson. This bill has been a huge step forward in achieving the vision of a fully inclusive New Zealand society. We are very mindful of the fact that there is still work to be done to ensure that New Zealand Sign Language is given equal status with spoken languages. Today is the beginning. From this beginning we want to see other developments. As we said, this bill is only the first step.

We want to see initiatives aimed at increasing the number of interpreters who are available throughout New Zealand, and the number of institutions in New Zealand that offer qualifications in sign language interpreting. Commitment to this is absolutely essential. There is a shortage of fully trained and competent interpreters in New Zealand, as there is worldwide, and it is a matter of urgency to attempt to correct this situation as much as possible.

Communication and access to information are key issues for the Deaf community. All too often, people are not able to participate fully in society because they cannot get the information they need in the form in which they need it. This bill does not determine competency in sign language. New Zealand First believes that competency is a basic requirement for interpreters, as information must be relayed correctly. We are very aware that a lack of competency in this area could have significant consequences for the Deaf, particularly in a health or legal environment. The Deaf community will no doubt monitor this situation carefully, as will other agencies, I am sure.

The recommended review of the Act after 3 years will provide a platform for monitoring the implementation of this bill. We do not want to wait a further 20 years—or even another 3 years—before the next step towards progress is made. New Zealand First is very aware that there are many resource challenges in this legislation that must be met, and we will await this review with great interest.

We encourage local body councils to follow the example of the Wellington City Council and offer a sign language interpreting service to improve communication between the Deaf community and the council. We commend Wellington City Council for that initiative.

In conclusion, we must acknowledge the interpreter in the House today, who is using New Zealand Sign Language. We appreciate her presence in this House. We must thank her too for interpreting our communication today and for sharing a small portion of this unique language with us. We also thank members of the Deaf community for coming to Parliament to support the passing of this legislation. Today is a cause for celebration, and New Zealand First wishes the Deaf community well for the future.

We want to see success with this legislation. It is with great pleasure that we support the third reading of the New Zealand Sign Language Bill.

SUE KEDGLEY (Green) Link to this

Well, this is a red-letter day in our Parliament—a day when the entire Parliament has come together and set aside all its usual political bickering to support, almost unanimously, this bill that will give formal recognition to New Zealand Sign Language for the first time in our history. There has been a long, long struggle to make this bill a reality, and I pay tribute to Ruth Dyson for spearheading that long struggle.

There is no doubt that this legislation marks a significant step forward in the history of how society treats deaf people, and other cultures and their history. In New Zealand, as in other parts of the world, there has been a long and difficult struggle to have sign language understood for what it is: a real and living language that is part of a culture with as much depth and validity as anyone else’s culture. In our country, as in other countries overseas, the mainstream hearing society has discouraged generations of deaf people from using sign language, in the misguided belief that the only way they could survive was by using English. That attitude and belief led to low literacy levels, misunderstanding between deaf and hearing people, and a cycle of disenfranchisement that is still with us today.

As the Deaf community has tried to tell the rest of us over and over again, sign language is a language that is just as real as Māori, English, or any other spoken language around the world. Just as there is a gap in understanding and cultural awareness between people who cannot comprehend or speak each other’s language, the same thing happens when our majority culture is unable to understand and communicate in sign language. As one person told the Justice and Electoral Committee—which I was not part of; my colleague Sue Bradford was—“Stop wanting to cure us; accept us as we are; deafness is part of our identity.” Sign language encapsulates and expresses that identity, and the notion is almost incomprehensible now that those of us who are not deaf have denied those who are deaf the right to the full use of their language.

Sign language is the native language of many deaf people and of their close family members and teachers. It not only helps to define the Deaf community; it allows members of that community better access to all parts of the education system and training—including the ability to learn other languages in schools—access to the justice system, and so forth. Not only will this legislation allow New Zealand Sign Language to become an officially recognised language, with people being able to use it in all court proceedings, but the legislation also lays the way for the setting of new standards to guide Government departments on the use they should make of sign language.

Like New Zealand First, the Green Party is also very interested in what the next steps will be after this bill becomes law, particularly in areas like broadcasting, education, and health. The Green Party believes that a lot more needs to be done to ensure that all deaf people gain the ability to participate fully in our society. The Green Party hopes that the passage of the bill will pave the way for much greater recognition of, and financial support for, the provision of New Zealand Sign Language training for deaf children, for deaf adults who are eager to study New Zealand Sign Language academically, for deaf people who want to learn it for the first time, and for teachers and other professionals who work with deaf children and adults. We hope that the mass media will become more responsible in the provision of translation and captioning, so that deaf adults and children can enjoy and benefit from a much wider range of movies and television programmes. We also hope that the profession of sign language interpreting becomes recognised, supported, and resourced to a much greater extent than at present.

The Green Party looks forward to the day when we see the first member of Parliament from the Deaf community being able to represent his or her sector to the rest of us in this House in sign language, with the same linguistic ease as speakers of Māori and English. At the last election, a member of the Deaf community was very high up on our list, and we hope that that person will become a member of our Parliament in the future.

In conclusion, I reiterate the Green Party’s support for this bill. We acknowledge it could go a lot further and that it will take much more than a simple Act of Parliament to bring about all the changes that are needed, but at least we are on the road to achieving official recognition. Indeed, we now have official recognition, and that is definitely something worthy of celebration.

Dr PITA SHARPLES (Co-Leader—Māori Party) Link to this

Mai i te hinengaro ko te mahara, mai i te mahara ko te whakaaro, mai i te whakaaro ko te kōrero, ā, mā te kōrero ka whakatū ngā tikanga. From the mind comes the stimulation of memory. Memory stimulates thought. From thoughts come words. From words we construct customs. In this House today we are again recognising custom—the custom of ensuring that the language of the world of silence obtains its proper place in Aotearoa New Zealand.

The Māori Party is extremely proud to stand today to herald the arrival of the New Zealand Sign Language Bill. The bill provides for the official recognition of New Zealand Sign Language, with the purpose of giving it proper status, and gives the Deaf access to interpreters for legal proceedings. We are delighted that the bill encompasses the capacity to interpret from Māori and/or English into New Zealand Sign Language.

We come to this bill recognising the vital significance of language as a means of accessing the world. In our world, te reo Māori is the cornerstone of all that is Māori. Accelerating the revival of te reo Māori is therefore an essential focus of the Māori Party. We try to promote and support te reo Māori in all that we do, including activities within this House. We believe that the expression of a people—of their uniqueness and beauty—is portrayed through their own language. It is with that thinking in mind that I was delighted to give the thumbs up to a group of Deaf friends whom I met earlier this week at the Lincoln Green Hotel in Waitakere. We embrace the opportunity for the language of this land to be broadened and enriched with the sounds of silence.

I draw on our association with te reo Māori deliberately, as I am aware that Deaf communities internationally have drawn on the experiences of other minority communities. I believe that the Māori Language Act in Aotearoa provides an excellent resource to assist the Deaf community in identifying possible pathways for mobilising and monitoring its agenda. I am hopeful that the progress we have made with te reo Māori, in terms of language transition and maintenance, will help to strengthen the Deaf community’s pathway forward as a community.

The bill provides that Government departments should go as far as reasonably practicable to consult with the Deaf community on matters affecting their language, and that New Zealand Sign Language should be used to promote Government services and to give information. It is literally about giving voice to the voiceless: kia whai reo te wahangū; to give language to the silent. For Māori Deaf, official recognition increases their likelihood of being able to use sign language at hui, marae, and tangi, and increases their access to te reo Māori, to customs, and to genealogy.

As past-chairman of Hoani Waititi Marae in west Auckland, I am proud of the very long and successful relationship we have enjoyed with the Kelston Deaf Education Centre, and we recognise Rūaumoko Marae as a valuable living part of that school. Indeed, we pioneered signing in te reo Māori on our marae, and at Rūaumoko, as we understood the vital importance of enabling access to cultural knowledge transmitted in te reo Māori. In mentioning Hoani Waititi, Kelston, and Rūaumoko, I want to highlight the significance of Deaf communities receiving the right support they need, to develop their own community initiatives.

I want to point out the crucial need for acknowledging the specific communities of Māori Deaf. The National Audiology Centre report shows that of those children who fit audiometric criteria, a staggering 49 percent are Māori. Audiometric criteria are defined as the criteria evidenced by children under the age of 18 with congenital hearing loss, or with any hearing loss not remediable by medical or surgical means and requiring hearing aids and/or surgical intervention. The acquisition and maintenance of those things for Māori Deaf adults and children and their whānau is therefore essential for their voices to be heard. If we are so overrepresented in the notifications, we must also be well represented by Māori teachers, signers, and interpreters for schools, television, marae, and courts—indeed, for our world. Māori Deaf need Māori signers.

In her speech on the bill’s first reading, my colleague Tariana Turia raised concerns the Māori Party has about the inability of the bill to adequately address the issue of trilingual interpreters, and to recognise trilingual interpretation—from Māori to sign to English. The debate at the first reading stage through to the Committee stage reiterated the concern of most parties in this Chamber about the demand for interpreters outstripping availability. It is a demand that is particularly urgent for Māori communities. There is a desperate need for competent and qualified trilingual interpreters to ensure access for Māori Deaf into Māori communities where te reo Māori is spoken.

This bill must be followed with follow-up actions for the urgent need to recruit, train, and retain Māori student interpreters. Although we fully support the right to use New Zealand Sign Language in court and legal proceedings with a competent and qualified interpreter, we want to see the same support provided for Māori to communicate in the world outside the courtroom. We want to ensure that New Zealand Sign Language is a part of our everyday experience. We know that organisations like Te Roopu Waiora and the Deaf Association, and the Māori Deaf community, will continue to advocate to ensure that Māori Deaf are able to receive that same support. The bill has not addressed the issue of access to services beyond courts, including kaupapa Māori services. Proper access to inclusive social, housing, and health services is critical for the deaf, and it is a huge factor in addressing chronic poverty levels. Let us not just stop at the courtroom—why not have access to the whole world?

There are occasions in this House when the Māori Party has risen to speak on a bill and has found that only one or two submissions has been received. We have questioned, quite logically, what the level of support should be to justify, with any reliability, the Government’s initiating such a change. In the case of this bill, however, a massive 195 submissions were received, and all—100 percent, the whole lot—were in support. Indeed, many thought the bill had not gone far enough.

Finally, the Māori Party wants to congratulate the Minister, the Hon Ruth Dyson, on taking up the challenge of fostering this bill through the House: tēnā koe te tuahine, e Ruth! As those of us in this House who look back fondly to the 1960s will know, Simon and Garfunkel conclude one of their most popular songs with the message:

JUDY TURNER (Deputy Leader—United Future) Link to this

I rise on behalf of United Future to speak in support of the third reading of the New Zealand Sign Language Bill. The passage of this bill is an opportunity to celebrate, and an opportunity for all Government departments and community organisation to embrace the challenge that this presents to them.

But first let us celebrate. Let us celebrate the new official status that is conferred on this language today. Let us celebrate the development to date of resources that promote, support, and teach this vibrant language. And let us celebrate the potential for new and improved opportunities for the Deaf to participate more fully in all that it means to be a New Zealand citizen.

A favourite book of mine is The Politics of Hope by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks. At the beginning of the book, he summarises his motivation for writing it by saying: “A good society is one that offers its members equal access to hope.” In an early chapter entitled “Language and Violence”, he links together the relationship between negative social outcomes and the opportunity language offers us to reverse that. A second chapter is titled “Public Spaces”, and in this the author attempts to tease out what it is that binds us together in society and enables us to form lasting associations. Language is always the starting point. This bill therefore represents more than a step forward for the Deaf community; it is also a step forward for all New Zealanders.

The challenges that the passage of this bill raises are significant, and the buck stops fairly with this Government, and with successive Governments, to fund the capacity-building that must now happen to ensure that a workforce of competent interpreters is built in measurable ways. It is also true that all Government departments need to demonstrate a deliberateness to ensure they consult the Deaf community on issues of inclusiveness, and to ensure that services are developed. I suggest that services could be expanded beyond those outlined in this bill.

This bill is like the starter’s gun going off at the beginning of a race; it starts the journey, but there is a distance to be covered before we can ever claim to have run the race on this issue satisfactorily. However, those who helped get us to the starting-line are to be congratulated. I mention Minister Ruth Dyson in this regard, and all those in the Deaf community who have brought us to this point. The work and the preparation that have led to this moment are fantastic.

United Future members are therefore thrilled to support this third and final reading. We are thrilled to wish all the very best to all those gathered here in Wellington, and around the country, who plan some celebrations tonight. I find sign language wonderfully distracting. I have to say that I did try to second-guess someone who was calling out across the House. It was a young man who I think may have been saying: “I hope they hurry up so we can get something to eat and drink.” United Future is very pleased to support this bill.

HEATHER ROY (Deputy Leader—ACT) Link to this

I rise on behalf of ACT New Zealand to speak to this third reading of the New Zealand Sign Language Bill. As we all know, there are many people from the Deaf community in the gallery today who are here for this third reading. I welcome them.

As those people in the gallery know, it is not easy being a minority group. The ACT party is opposing this bill, and that makes us a minority group in this House today. I ask the Deaf community not to be offended, because we mean no offence. We applaud the intent of this bill, but we fear the wider-reaching implications of it.

After the second reading of this bill, and ACT’s opposition to it, we received several pieces of correspondence. ACT leader Rodney Hide visited the Deaf community in Auckland, and he was very impressed with what he saw. He outlined our position, and he felt that it was very well received.

As we know, the Opposition’s job is to raise concerns about legislation. My good conscience prevents me from voting in favour of this bill when the Government fails to address some very important issues that have been raised.

It does not always take legislation to allow good things to happen. I will explain that statement. The Government proposes to create rights for the Deaf to use New Zealand Sign Language, but has no plan in place to fund the provision of the services that would be necessary for those rights to be met. I ask those people who think that the money will be found to think again. The Government guards its surplus millions very closely. We are yet to see a commitment to the funding that this bill will require.

We have seen legislation like this many times before, with the establishment of rights on paper that do not exist in reality. The absence of any Treasury comment on this bill, or of any regulatory impact statement, implies that nobody in authority has even begun to think about how to pay for the provisions.

Good intentions alone do not automatically translate into good lawmaking. Making New Zealand Sign Language an official language will not in itself achieve very much without proper support and definite funding allocations. As I said, there has been no evidence of this.

One very positive thing that has resulted from this bill is that it has highlighted the issue of communication for the Deaf. The Minister Ruth Dyson may be surprised to hear me say this, but I congratulate her on raising the issue and on the hard work that has obviously gone into this bill. The discussion and debate that the bill has attracted have certainly heightened general awareness of the issue, and that in itself is extremely positive. That is why ACT supported this bill at its first reading, allowing it to progress to the select committee.

I have already said that the intention of the bill is very creditable. ACT members also agree that in legal processes it is essential that a deaf person, like any other New Zealander, be presented with information in a way that is readily understood by him or her. History has many examples of injustices suffered by the deaf because they could not follow proceedings. In this day and age, that is clearly unacceptable.

From my previous career as a health professional, I know that, in the hospital setting, the provision of translation services is a frequent problem. It is a problem for the deaf and for patients who do not speak English. It is usually possible to organise translators, but, when interviewing patients, health professionals are conscious that they are relying on the translator’s goodwill. Translators are expected to provide the service in their own time or, if they are hospital employees, in addition to their usual duties. In this situation, there is a tendency to make use of family members as translators, but this in itself can create problems when sensitive issues are being discussed.

Of course, these obstacles are not confined to just the hospital setting; they also impinge on every facet of life. As the National Party member Dr Hutchison pointed out, perhaps a better approach, and one that is used in Britain, for example, is to provide a budget for translators so that they get paid for their work, and in proportion to the time they devote to it. It is a simple and relatively cheap practical measure that will help people get more accurate diagnosis and better treatment, and it will assist everybody involved.

In Australia, the Deaf community is recognised as a language group. What does this mean? It is now increasingly recognised that signing Deaf people constitute a group like any other English-speaking language group in Australia, with a distinct subculture that is recognised by a shared history, social life, and sense of identity, and united and symbolised by fluency in Auslan, which is the principal means of communication within the Australian Deaf community.

Another issue that should be mentioned is that sign languages differ from country to country. The international sign language, as those people in the gallery will know, is Gestuno. This is used at international conferences and meetings. Previously in this House, I have used the obvious comparison with the world of music. A musical score can be read by those with musical training no matter what their native language is, be it Spanish, Arabic, Cantonese, English, or any other language. To give New Zealand Sign Language official status, as the bill proposes, automatically disadvantages those signing in any other sign language.

We have just had the census, and it will not have escaped anybody’s notice that New Zealand Sign Language was one of the options in the “most commonly used language” category for New Zealanders. The most up-to-date figures we have at the moment are those from the 2001 New Zealand disability survey, which showed that 7,700 partially or completely deaf adults living in households used New Zealand Sign Language and/or signed English, and 51,000 New Zealanders were able to lip-read.

When this bill is passed, I predict that the necessary services to fulfil obligations of organisations will not be in place. Our current Government will then move slowly to fill the gap, hiring full-time translators who will then spend very little of their working day doing the job they were hired for.

One area where the Government could do better is in the treatment of deafness. Waiting lists are very long, and, in some cases, as I think has already been mentioned to this House, people will wait for a very long time and perhaps never receive treatments that could revolutionise their lives, such as cochlear implants. When researching this subject, I discovered that 21 percent of partially or completely deaf adults in households had an unmet need for some type of special equipment or service related to their disability. The most common reason for this unmet need was a financial one. It seems that if Government money is to be spent, then this might well be a very good place to start.

Politics is not confined to just this debating chamber. I am aware that some people in the Deaf community look on lip-reading as the poor relation. Yet it should not be forgotten that 51,000 hearing-impaired Kiwis lip-read.

To conclude, I tell members that the ACT party supports the aspiration of the Deaf community to integrate fully into society, and it accepts that this will quite rightly involve greater use of sign language. We have doubts about the wisdom of making New Zealand Sign Language an official language, and we feel that this bill as it stands will give the appearance of progress but possibly achieve very little—and that outcome would be a travesty.

I understand the excitement and the great sense of achievement after a lot of hard work that is being felt today in our public gallery. I hope, having expressed my fears, and opposing this bill on behalf of the ACT party, that I will be proven wrong.

DAVE HEREORA (Labour) Link to this

Only ACT would oppose the New Zealand Sign Language Bill. I give the audience the assurance that every other party is supporting the bill—only ACT would oppose it. Mr Assistant Speaker, it is not often that I get the opportunity to attract a packed audience to hear me speak, and, through you, I want to acknowledge the presence of our audience. Kia ora tātau.

I take this opportunity to take a very short call in this third reading debate on the New Zealand Sign Language Bill. In doing so, I want to extend some acknowledgements. The first is to my colleague Minister Dyson for introducing the bill, which carries official recognition of the New Zealand Sign Language, and also for fostering the opportunity, the fairness, and, most important, I think, the participation of the culture of the Deaf community in a way that complements its role in our national identity.

I am sure that Justice and Electoral Committee members experienced a unique chance to learn of the many problems, obstacles, and frustrations that have been experienced by our Deaf community, and to learn some sign language. Those members also had the chance not only to realise the difficulties that the Deaf community faces but to appreciate how New Zealand Sign Language has survived and what it has taken for the Deaf community to get to this point. Having been associated with a language that has been suppressed, I, in some small way, understand the implications of that.

I believe that it is necessary to place on record our tribute to the persistence and dedication of the Deaf community. In doing so, I acknowledge the hurt and suffering it has felt. I wonder what the language would be like today, had it not been obstructed or suppressed. As we can all imagine, when a culture is permitted to grow, it manifests the very essence of our national identity.

The bill represents a significant turning point in our history for the Deaf community and for all New Zealanders. It marks a point of acceptance and inclusion, and I say it is about jolly time. Finally, I congratulate our Deaf community, and again thank our Minister and those members of the select committee.