Debate contribution: Sign Language Bill: Further Consideration Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Gordon Lyons on 20 April 2026.

MLA

Mr Gordon Lyons

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

20 April 2026

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Sign Language Bill: Further Consideration Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5493856

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank everybody for their comments today and for their commitment to the aims of the Bill. Throughout the progression of the legislation, the tone of debate and scrutiny has been collaborative. Even though we had a divergence of views at Consideration Stage, it was done in a respectful way, which reflects the importance of the issues that we are discussing. The Bill was developed through co-design with members of the deaf community to improve their lives and ensure access to public services. However, through dialogue with the community, I realised that it is actually more than that. Sign language is how members of the deaf community interact within their own community; how they interact with a largely hearing society; and how they socialise, work, laugh, learn and mourn. By recognising their languages — British Sign Language and Irish Sign Language — we finally get what that community has, for decades, been telling anyone who would listen: these are languages of need. It is not simply one of a number of options that are available to them for communication. Recognising and promoting BSL, ISL and their culture — deaf culture — is our way of saying, "You matter, and you are equal to your hearing peers". Promoting their languages and their culture is also a way for the deaf community to share their rich heritage and fascinating history, one that often featured systemic unfairness. Many deaf people will know of the infamous Milan conference in 1880 that outlawed the teaching of sign languages in schools across Europe and the US. They will tell you that that was a decision taken by a hearing establishment. Therein lie the roots of the establishment of the British Deaf Association and, from that, many organisations for the deaf in Northern Ireland: the Foyle Deaf Association, Action Deaf Youth and Hands That Talk, to name a few. I am conscious that this place is viewed by the deaf community as a largely hearing establishment. I am also certain that, due to the progress of the Sign Language Bill and the progress made across many Assembly processes through its embracing of the use and facilitation of BSL and ISL, it is now viewed as a more welcoming place for the deaf community. Although I recognise the concerns across the deaf community about the change that was made at Consideration Stage to the definition of "deaf community" in clause 12, which now includes people who have hearing loss who wish to learn sign language, a change that I opposed, I am sure that it was not Kellie Armstrong's intention to cause offence or concern. As a result of the amendments that we make today, however, I think that we can confirm that the deaf community encompasses deaf people who use sign language as well as accommodate the amendment to include those who become deaf and wish to learn sign language. It is important that we make that distinction and that we understand that the experience of someone who has progressive hearing loss is very different from that of other members of the deaf community. There are additional needs involved. There is a different culture in place. There are not the options that are available to others. Indeed, there are not the languages that are available to others, and that has been highlighted during the debate. The two are therefore not the same. Sign language is not simply signed English or signed Irish. Rather, BSL and ISL are separate languages altogether, and there needs to be respect for them. I agree with Mr Allen. I fear that the changes that have been made to the Bill dilute that distinction. That is a concern that members of the deaf community share. We are, however, doing what we can today to resolve some of the issues that the amendments that were made at Consideration Stage created. In doing so, I believe that we will get the Bill to its Final Stage on time, by the end of the month. Doing that has not been easy, and I thank the office —.

Yes, I will give way to the Member.

It would be a great idea if I could leave instructions for the next Minister. I will certainly see what I can do on that score. The legislation will certainly be resourced during my time in office, and I hope that I can establish a precedent that we help those who are most in need and that we support that particular community, which exists because of the unique circumstances in which those people find themselves. That community needs to be protected, but doing that will require resources. I say again that I do not think that it was Kellie Armstrong's intention to cause offence or concern. I think that she tabled the amendment in good faith. I think that she saw her own circumstances and wanted to make sure that they were taken into consideration. I put on record, however, the need to support the deaf community as originally defined and that there are issues with our changing the provision without having given proper consideration to doing so. That is why we have the amendment today. I could give so many examples of how so often in the House we — in good faith, I am sure — vote for things because we think that it is the right thing to do, because it sounds as though it is the right thing to do or because it sounds as though doing so could be positive or popular. The point of being in the Chamber is to scrutinise issues, to explore the arguments that others are making and to take on board what others are saying. I think that it was a mistake to make the amendment at Consideration Stage. We are not able to undo that mistake completely today. I hope, however, that we are able to make a little bit of a distinction. I can assure Mr Allen that I will do what I can to ensure that the funding goes towards the communities that need it most.

1,025 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not qualifying

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:26 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification