DISABILITY rights campaigners have accused the BBC and STV of “failing” deaf people by not providing British Sign Language interpreters on the Holyrood leaders’ debates.
They said the decision was especially disappointing following the passing of legislation last year placing obligations on public organisations to promote BSL.
Activists also claimed it was also an editorial shortcoming given the prominence of disability issues following the resignation this month of Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith over disability benefits cuts.
Deaf people said they felt excluded from the two televised events, which were broadcast on STV on Tuesday night and on the BBC last Thursday, as the subtitles provided were not as good as having a BSL practitioner.
“The British Sign Language Bill became an Act last year, yet interpreters are still not being provided on important programmes such as the BBC and STV leaders’ debates,” said campaigner Toby Dawson.
“We are really disappointed to see BBC Scotland and STV failing deaf BSL users when it comes to their programmes.”
Dawson pointed out that the BBC did provide a BSL translation for a repeat of the head-to-head between Alex Salmond and Alistair Darling during the independence referendum campaign.
“If the BBC managed to make the Alex Salmond versus Alistair Darling debate accessible for deaf BSL users, why can’t they carry on doing the same? We all are citizens like anyone else,” he added.
“We hope the final debate on BBC Scotland on 1 May will finally include a BSL interpreter.”
Campaigners also highlighted the cross-party One in Five campaign, which seeks to get a higher level of representation among people with disabilities.
One in five people has a disability and the campaign would like to see this also being the proportion among the country’s political represent- atives. In the 2011 to 2015 Scottish Parliament, which dissolved last week, just six of the 129 MSPs identified as being disabled.
Last night, Jamie Szymkowiak, who founded the One in Five campaign, backed Dawson’s comments.
“It would be good to see BSL interpreters being used and I hope they will be in the final debate. I would call on the BBC to ensure they have a live BSL interpreter in their studio on May 1,” he said.
“Anyone who has used subtitles knows they are not always accurate and that there is often a significant time delay. Why should someone who has a hearing impairment face having either inaccurate or delayed information? BSL is a recognised language in Scotland and our broadcasters should be maximising the number of viewers who want to follow their programmes.”
He added: “There is a high-profile discussion taking place about welfare and social security. Disabled people need to be a part of that, and these discussions [must be] accessible to everybody.”
Avril Hepner, of the British Deaf Association Scotland, added: “It is important for the BSL community to have full access to the leaders’ debates, especially since the BSL (Scotland) Act was enacted.
“We are also citizens and should have equal access to the debates in our first and preferred language – BSL, just like everyone else. This must be addressed so that all citizens are fully included in the democratic process.”
Delia Henry, director of Action on Hearing Loss Scotland, said: “We have been campaigning for signed interpretation to be provided on televised head-to-head political debates in Scotland. This allows BSL users to make informed decisions about issues that affect them.”
A spokesman for BBC Scotland said: “We are producing timely and accurate subtitling for all of our coverage of this year’s Scottish Parliament election campaigns and results. Sub- titling will be available for the second televised debate, as it was for the first.
“There are significant challenges around providing accurate, high-quality BSL translations of fast-moving and sometimes overlapping verbal exchanges on a live programme.
“During the referendum on Scottish independence, we did not have sign language during our live debate between Alistair Darling and Alex Salmond. However, there was a sign language translation for a repeat of the programme the following day on the BBC Parliament Channel after BSL translators had been given the time needed to provide a suitably high-quality and accurate service.
“We are looking into the possibility of showing a repeat of the forth- coming second debate with a BSL translation.”
An STV spokesman said: “Making STV programmes accessible and enjoyable for everyone is a priority for STV, and we continually review ways in which we can provide access [to] services while considering the resources available.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here