British Sign Language Bill

Vicky Foxcroft Excerpts

3rd reading
Friday 18th March 2022 Commons Chamber

[Vicky Foxcroft (Lewisham, Deptford) (Lab)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire (Rosie Cooper) on all her work in this area. We heard her speak so eloquently today, on Second Reading and in the Bill Committee about her deeply personal connection with British Sign Language. As I said in Committee, she should be proud of the Bill and the progress that has been made in this area, which will support many young people who shoulder responsibilities well beyond their years.

I also place on record my thanks to the BSL Act Now! campaign and the many disabled people, disabled people’s organisations and charities involved for their tireless work and commitment to this campaign. We all know that getting a private Member’s Bill through Parliament, let alone after being No. 20 on the list, takes resourcefulness, dedication, passion and perhaps some table-thumping sometimes. We can all agree that those qualities have all been shown by my hon. Friend and all those involved. She said that she will not get an Oscar soon, but many people would say that she deserves one.

As we all know, British Sign Language is a primary form of communication for approximately 90,000 UK residents, with around 150,000 users in total. Its vocabulary and syntax do not replicate spoken English and many deaf citizens have a much lower reading age than the general population. Sadly, too many deaf people in the UK continue to face barriers to communication, which affect employment, education and access to healthcare. The Bill will begin to tackle some of those significant issues.

If the Bill becomes law, it will achieve legal status for British Sign Language as a primary language of the deaf community in the United Kingdom. Achieving legal recognition of BSL through an Act of Parliament would be a huge step forward in improving deaf people’s quality of life, their inclusion and autonomy in British society, educational and professional opportunities and even their health outcomes.

I strongly welcome the fact that the Bill also contains provisions for Government Departments and certain public service providers to publish and adhere to guidance, setting out the steps that need to be taken to meet the needs of BSL users. I believe this guidance will include the delivery of many public services and help BSL users overcome the current limitations of the Equality Act that sadly mean that many providers do not know how to make “reasonable adjustments” for them, as so eloquently put by my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire.

As I said, while I welcome the positive strides that this Bill makes, I know many of my colleagues will, like me, see it as something to build on. As my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire said, it is not a silver bullet for everything, so I want to retouch on a few crucial areas that I hope we can explore further in the future. I would appreciate it if the Minister outlined whether she agrees with them.

The first issue is around data. As it stands, the Government do not capture sufficient data to give us a clear picture of the deaf community. Current statistics capture people based on terms such as “difficulty in hearing” and “hearing impairment”. The use of the word “impairment” is itself unhelpful and outdated and may impact negatively on how BSL users respond. In short, the Government need to know how many deaf people use BSL. This is concerning as the Government use this data as their evidence base for making decisions about how to support BSL users—a group of people who we all know face some of the biggest barriers in society, whether in employment, education, health, wellbeing or other areas.

Secondly, I wish to focus on the non-statutory board of British Sign Language users and associated persons that will advise the Secretary of State. While I warmly welcome the commitment to consult deaf people, why is the body advising on such an important issue a non-statutory board? Does that mean Ministers do not have to listen to or act upon its recommendations? Ministers also need to be clear about how the body will be recruited. It is my sincere hope that it should be made up largely of disabled people and disabled people’s organisations. I cannot stress enough that the experts by experience must have a clear line to the Secretary of State. It is also vital that that body is fully transparent and that it communicates clearly with the deaf community. Will the minutes and recommendations of the body be made public?

Finally, I hope to see improvements in strengthening the interaction a future BSL Act will have with other legislation and Government strategies. Hon. Members will know the Government’s national disability strategy was recently found to be unlawful by the High Court, as the consultation process failed to engage correctly. As my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire said, we had no BSL interpretation at important press conferences, as I raised with the Prime Minister on several occasions. Sadly, at times the Government have a poor record when it comes to doing the right thing by disabled people, so it would be remiss of us not to consider strengthening Bills with adequate checks and balances.

As I have said before, when I read the draft Bill I noted with concern that clause 1(2) states:

“Subsection (1) does not affect the operation of any enactment or rule of law.”

Trust in this Government is low among disabled people and provisions such as this will not fill the deaf community with hope. Future improvements must strengthen the Act and give it more power.

In conclusion, I once again congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire and the BSL Act Now! campaign on the progression of the Bill. It is a good start, but I hope the Minister will agree that we can and should go further in the future.

Draft Scotland Act 2016 (Social Security) (Adult Disability Payment and Child Disability Payment) (Amendment) Regulations 2022

Vicky Foxcroft Excerpts

Monday 7th March 2022 General Committees

[Vicky Foxcroft (Lewisham, Deptford) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairpersonship, Mr Hollobone.

I thank the Minister for presenting the statutory instrument. It is not a controversial one for Labour, but I do have a few quick questions. The purpose of the SI is to ensure that attendance allowance, disability living allowance, personal independence payment and armed forces independence payment cannot be paid if adult disability payment or child disability payment is also in payment. It will also ensure that if individuals move from Scotland to another part of the UK, they will not be considered as satisfying the residence requirements for AA, DLA and PIP while they are in receipt of the 13-week ADP or CDP run-on payment. It is therefore crucial that the roll-out of ADP and CDP happens as quickly and smoothly as possible.

Disabled people have been hit hard by the pandemic and are now facing huge increases in the cost of living. It is no exaggeration to say that any disruption to their income could leave many in dire straits. Will the Minister therefore please confirm what discussions she has had with the Scottish Government to ensure that her Department works closely with Scottish colleagues to prevent delays or disruption? In theory, the 13-week ADP or CDP run-on payment will allow those who move away from Scotland time to make a claim for other relevant benefits before their ADP or CDP is stopped. What assurances can the Minister give that this will be sufficient in absolutely all cases, and what contingencies are in place should the new claim be delayed? Has she had any discussions with Scottish Ministers about why it has taken so long for the Scottish Government to use their devolved benefits powers?

[David Linden (Glasgow East) (SNP)]

Which of the powers that the Scottish Government recently acquired and are using does the hon. Lady have a dispute about? Is it the doubling of the game-changing Scottish child payment to £20 a week when charities were originally calling for £5 a week? Is that the kind of delay she is talking about?

[Vicky Foxcroft]

I thank the hon. Member for his point. He will be aware that the Scottish Government have a number of benefits powers that they really have not used in a timely fashion.

Given that political disputes have inhibited joint working between the UK and Scottish Governments in the past, is the Minister confident that the two can now work together effectively to administer this process and ensure that all necessary data has been shared? I appreciate the Minister laying this SI before Parliament. As I said at the start, it is one that we support, in the hope that adult disability payment and child disability payment can be rolled out in a timely and efficient manner to those who need it.

British Sign Language Bill

Vicky Foxcroft Excerpts

Committee stage
Wednesday 23rd February 2022 Public Bill Committees

[Marion Fellows (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP)]

It truly is a delight to serve under your chairmanship on this important Bill, Mrs Miller. I, too, congratulate the hon. Member for West Lancashire and, surprisingly for me, the Minister. They have worked so closely together to make this happen, and I think deaf people across the UK, including in Scotland, will be extremely pleased about the Bill. It was very important that the hon. Member for West Lancashire said that this is the first step, which it is.

The hon. Member for Waveney talked about qualifications. In Scotland, we have a Scottish Qualifications Authority qualification in BSL from level 3 to quite high up—I cannot quite figure out how high it goes, but it is there and is happening. In Scotland, we have lots of public presentations where signage is just there—it is not unusual—and it is really good that this is happening across the UK.

I will not take up much more time, but I know deaf folk in Motherwell and Wishaw, especially those in the Lanarkshire Deaf Club, will be absolutely delighted about the Bill, which is a first step. Let us keep going, and let us keep the pressure on, on behalf of folk who are deaf.

[Vicky Foxcroft (Lewisham, Deptford) (Lab)]

It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Miller, and on such an important Bill, which will have a positive impact on so many people. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire on all her work in this area. We heard her speak so eloquently on Second Reading about her deeply personal connection with British Sign Language and, as a child of deaf parents, she spoke about how so many children who support their loved ones are forced to grow up too fast. She should be proud of the Bill and the future progress made in this area, which will support so many young people who shoulder responsibilities well beyond their years.

I would like to place on the record my thanks to the BSL Act Now! campaign and the many disabled people, disabled people’s organisations and charities involved for their tireless work and commitment to the campaign. We all know that getting a private Member’s Bill through takes resourcefulness, dedication and passion—qualities that we can all agree those involved have shown. I commend them all.

As we all know, British Sign Language is the primary form of communication for approximately 90,000 residents of the UK, with around 150,000 users in total. Its vocabulary and syntax do not replicate spoken English, and many deaf citizens have a much lower reading age than the general population. Sadly, too many deaf people in the UK continue to face barriers to communication, which affects employment, education and access to healthcare. The Bill will begin to tackle some of those significant issues. If it becomes law, the Bill will achieve legal status for British Sign Language as the primary language of the deaf community in the United Kingdom. Achieving legal recognition of BSL through an Act of Parliament would be a huge step forward in improving deaf people’s quality of life, their inclusion and autonomy in British society, their educational and professional opportunities, and even their health outcomes.

I strongly welcome the fact that the Bill also contains provisions for Government Departments and certain public service providers to publish and adhere to the guidance, setting out the steps that need to be taken to meet the needs of BSL users. I believe such guidance will improve the delivery of many public services and help BSL users to overcome the current limitations of the Equality Act 2010, which sadly mean that many providers do not know how to make reasonable adjustments for them.

Although I welcome the positive strides the Bill will enable, I know that, like me, many of my colleagues will see it as something that we must build on, and I want to touch briefly on a few crucial areas that I hope we can explore further in the future. The first is on data. As it stands, the Government do not capture sufficient data to give us a clear picture of the deaf community. Current statistics capture people based on terms such as “difficulty in hearing” and “hearing impairment”. The use of “impairment” is unhelpful and outdated, and may have a negative impact on how BSL users respond. In short, the Government do not really know how many deaf people use BSL. That is concerning given they use that data as the evidence base for making decisions about how to support BSL users, a group of people who face some of the biggest barriers in society, whether in employment, education, health, wellbeing or other areas.

Oral Answers to Questions

Vicky Foxcroft Excerpts

Monday 7th February 2022 Commons Chamber

[Chloe Smith]

I am afraid the hon. Lady has simply misread things. What she is referring to in the spending review is our intention to create extra support for the most severely disabled. She needs to read it again.

[Vicky Foxcroft (Lewisham, Deptford) (Lab)]

I asked the Minister if she would publish the NatCen report into disabled people’s experiences of the benefits system. She said no. The Work and Pensions Committee used its powers to publish the report instead. Having reviewed this research, it is crystal clear what the Government were hiding. Disabled people are struggling on a day-to-day basis. Does she agree that the money disabled people receive is not enough to cover their additional living costs? If she does agree, why has her Department not done anything to address it?

[Chloe Smith]

I fear we have some serial misreading going on here. As the research shows, health and disability benefits, alongside other income streams, such as passporting and the Motability scheme, help to meet almost all identified areas of additional need.

Disability Benefits Assessments

Vicky Foxcroft Excerpts

Tuesday 1st February 2022 Westminster Hall

[Vicky Foxcroft (Lewisham, Deptford) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Gary. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Battersea (Marsha De Cordova) on securing this important debate and thank her for all her work in this area. She powerfully put forward why the assessment system is not working and the devastating impact that has on disabled people.

Many Members have outlined serious constituent concerns. That includes those so powerfully put forward by my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough (Andy McDonald), and I hope the Minister will look into the cases he raised. There are numerous concerns about the health and disability Green Paper, including, as many Members said, about the lack of proper consultation and co-production with disabled people. Having spoken to disabled people across the country, a running theme has been the tokenism with which the consultation has been undertaken. They asked me, “Why is the DWP so reluctant to engage with those who have been through the assessment process?”

As my right hon. Friend the Member for East Ham (Stephen Timms) outlined, it is deeply concerning that the Department has not taken onboard the recommendations of the independent Social Security Advisory Committee about the way it involves disabled people in the design and evaluation of policies that affect them. The committee recommended co-production with disabled people. The Green Paper’s consultation has, sadly, fallen short of that. Worse still, the DWP has not undertaken any proactive engagement with disabled people and their organisations—the experts by experience who have been through this process and would enhance this paper.

My hon. Friend the Member for Vauxhall (Florence Eshalomi) talked eloquently about how she had had a roundtable with the former Minister, and powerfully said how that had stayed with her and why co-production is absolutely key to building the trust of disabled people. What possible justification does the Minister have for not doing that? The Government need to learn from last week’s court judgment, which ruled that the national disabilities strategy consultation was unlawful. As many Members have said, a defence of “not set out to consult” fails to build trust with disabled people. The DWP must ensure that future engagement is far more robust and must urgently publish a plan for consulting with disabled people on the White Paper. It should allocate enough Government time for debate, ensuring that robust discourse can take place.

The next area that many Members mentioned is the adequacy of the benefits system. Even before the pandemic, disabled people were struggling to survive. As my hon. Friend the Member for Newport West (Ruth Jones) said, the number of disabled people living in poverty has risen by over a million since 2010. According to new analysis from the New Economics Foundation, single parents, pensioners and families with one or more disabled people are more likely to be the hardest hit by the rise in energy bills.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Cynon Valley (Beth Winter) said, people are worried that this Green Paper could be the start of a cost-cutting exercise. The Government must show that it is not. My hon. Friend the Member for Bolton South East (Yasmin Qureshi) articulated the problems and unfairness when people were moved from DLA to PIP. The House of Commons Library statistics show that, of the 1.5 million disabled people who were previously in receipt of DLA and who were reassessed for PIP, nearly half have seen their entitlement reduced or disallowed completely. While the Government might attempt to claim that that is positive, the high levels of mandatory reconsiderations and appeals tell another story.

We have a system that all too often places disabled people in extreme financial hardship. We know that the DWP has data on this. The Prime Minister committed to releasing the NatCen research it commissioned on the adequacy of benefits. What is the delay? Or is this something else he forgot? I welcome the fact that the Chair of the Work and Pensions Committee, my right hon. Friend the Member for East Ham, will see that research. I really hope it can be published, but as he rightly said, it is disappointing that the Government must always be pushed into doing these things.

The other area Members focused on was employment. There is no mention of the kind of work that disabled people have. Are these good or sustainable jobs? Do people get good incomes, or are they on unstable, zero-hours contracts with poverty wages? Sadly, evidence has shown that disabled people tend to be in lower-paid and unstable work, yet there is no acknowledgment of that in the Green Paper. Why does it put forward only a consultation on disability employment and pay gap reporting? The Minister could do that tomorrow. Will she? Perhaps she can give an answer in her response.

The Green Paper talks a lot about sickness management, but there is nothing on improving statutory sick pay. We need to support people who need short periods off work for sickness, so that they can return stronger and without fear of financial hardship.

[Jim Shannon]

I mentioned in my contribution the responsibility of employers towards employees. Does the hon. Lady feel that there is a role for an administrator to play to ensure that employers look after their employees the way they should be looked after?

[Vicky Foxcroft]

Absolutely. I completely agree with the hon. Member and I think that is really important. I was just coming on to that point.

Will the guidelines the Government are going to produce be fit for purpose? Surely the Minister should recognise now that co-producing these with disabled people and disabled people’s organisations is the best way of ensuring that they work and deliver a more diverse workplace where the talents of disabled people are fully realised.

Disabled people have said that they often struggle to access their rights in the workplace and that employers do not always follow guidance. It is hard for disabled people to challenge that, and the legal process is expensive, especially for those who are not in trade unions. Where is the support for disabled people to ensure that they can access tribunals to hold their employers to account? I ask the Minister: why not provide additional support to disabled people’s organisations and charities and to trades unions, which offer vital support?

To conclude, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Battersea once again for securing this vital debate, and other Members for taking part. I thank the many disabled people’s organisations, charities and trade unions that work tirelessly to support disabled people. As all Opposition Members have said, co-production is key. The Minister should start listening to disabled people, who are experts by experience.

Oral Answers to Questions

Vicky Foxcroft Excerpts

Monday 13th December 2021 Commons Chamber

[Chloe Smith]

It would be difficult for me to comment on the hon. Member’s constituent’s precise circumstances, although I am happy to look at the case if she wants to write to me with details. As a general point, to support claimants previously entitled to the severe disability premium who moved to universal credit after a change of circumstances, there are transitional payments protections in place.

[Vicky Foxcroft (Lewisham, Deptford) (Lab)]

The DWP commissioned NatCen to undertake research on the uses of health and disability benefits. As my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford South (Judith Cummins) eloquently outlined, that research, which assesses the adequacy of benefits for disabled people, is vital. Several requests have been made for the report to be made public, including by the Chair of the Work and Pensions Committee, but they have all been refused. Will the Minister release the report? If not, can she explain what the Government are hiding?

[Chloe Smith]

The short answer is no. The longer answer was given by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to the Work and Pensions Committee only last week.

Oral Answers to Questions

Vicky Foxcroft Excerpts

Monday 8th November 2021 Commons Chamber

[Vicky Foxcroft (Lewisham, Deptford) (Lab)]

I would like to welcome the Minister to her new role. She will be aware that the disability pay and employment gap remains far too large. The figures might appear to show a narrowing in recent years, but academics believe that this has been offset by an increase in the number of people identifying as disabled. Today, on the 26th anniversary of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, it is clear that urgent action is required. The Government’s strategy for disabled people offers only a consultation on mandatory reporting. Will she be bolder than her predecessor and bring in mandatory reporting now?

[Chloe Smith]

I look forward to working with the hon. Lady on these vital issues. She is right that our national disability strategy demonstrates our intention to consult on workforce reporting. She asked an additional question about pay gap reporting, but those are two slightly different things. Pay gaps are, of course, caused by a range of factors, and to address them we must ensure that everybody has equal access to opportunities. That will be my passion in this role. I hope she welcomed the disability employment statistics out only last week; they show that some progress is being made, but there is a heck of a lot more to do, and I will be there doing it.

[Vicky Foxcroft]

I gave the Minister a straightforward policy ask with no additional financial commitment, so it is regrettable that she cannot do it straight away. However, clearly money is required to deliver a fully inclusive society. Can she confirm that the spending review contained no extra funding linked to the strategy, other than for education and employment? Does she have plans to speak to the Chancellor about further funding, and will she now push for a full debate to show disabled people that her Government are giving the strategy the attention it rightly deserves?

[Chloe Smith]

That strategy and its implementation will be one of my utmost priorities; I look forward to discussing it in a constructive manner with the hon. Lady and everybody else here today, but I think she may have misread the £1.1 billion in targeted support for those with disabilities that was in the Budget and the spending review last week, which covers access to work, more work coaches and the Work and Health programme.

Oral Answers to Questions

Vicky Foxcroft Excerpts

Monday 13th September 2021 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work (Justin Tomlinson)]

We are committed to seeing more disabled people becoming elected representatives. In addition to political parties doing more, the national disability strategy sets out the Minister for the Constitution’s work to bring forward a new scheme in 2022 to support candidates and, importantly, those already elected to public office.

[Vicky Foxcroft (Lewisham, Deptford) (Lab)]

It was disappointing that the Government chose to sneak out their disability strategy over the summer recess, meaning that we had no opportunity to question the Minister on its failure to address barriers to employment for disabled people. Why are his Government not introducing mandatory reporting on the disability employment and pay gaps? Why does the strategy contain no proposals to work with trade unions? Most importantly, can he explain why no parliamentary time has been given over to the scrutiny of this strategy?

Draft Scotland Act 2016 (Social Security) (Consequential provision) (Miscellaneous amendment) regulations 2021

Vicky Foxcroft Excerpts

Wednesday 30th June 2021 General Committees

[Vicky Foxcroft (Lewisham, Deptford) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairpersonship, Mr Twigg.

As the Minister rightly outlined, the change in legislation simple removes the potential for any overlap between the disability living allowance and the new Scottish equivalent, CDP. As colleagues may be aware, CDP is due to be piloted in Scotland in Dundee city, Perth and Kinross and the Western Isles for families of children with a disability or long-term health condition. Applications open on 26 July and families in need of financial support should apply to the new Scottish system from that date. It is the first application-based disability benefit to be introduced by the Scottish Government since the transfer of those powers in 2016. The pilot is due to followed by full national roll-out in the autumn. The payments will be managed by Social Security Scotland. CDP will replace the disability living allowance for children, which is currently delivered by the DWP.

The three-area pilot has been designed to provide a further opportunity for feedback and analysis, to ensure that CDP meets the needs of disabled children and their families before its national expansion. Although the Opposition support the payment, my Scottish colleagues and I are concerned that little is being proposed to improve the lives of disabled people. Scottish Labour is of the view that, much like the broader disability allowance, alongside implementation and the transfer of claimants to the new Scottish payment, there should be a review of how the system operates, what eligibility criteria are used and so on. The Scottish Government’s intention, however, is to finish the transfer process first, and then begin a review, which is not likely to take place until at least 2023.

The lower rate of the mobility component should be reviewed and revisions made for children in specific impairment groups, such as those with autism, learning difficulties and/or mental health issues. It is also disappointing to note that there is no deviation from the current benefit rates. A full assessment should be made of what level of financial support people need to ensure that they can lead fulfilling lives.

The Scottish Government should take this opportunity to improve the system rather than just replicating existing arrangements and simply moving the administration to Scotland. However, if the administration of the benefit is seen to be easier and more compassionate as a result of bringing it in-house, I want to know what are the Government’s plans to learn from that?

Labour will not oppose the SI, but we place on record our desire to have a benefits system that meets the needs of disabled people fully and reflects the increased cost of living that many face. It should also treat disabled people with dignity, allow them to have fulfilling lives and enable them to reach their full potential.

Oral Answers to Questions

Vicky Foxcroft Excerpts

Monday 28th June 2021 Commons Chamber

[Vicky Foxcroft (Lewisham, Deptford) (Lab)]

Like the review of the special rules for terminal illness, the Government’s disability strategy has been much delayed. After two long years, we are told to expect it “soon”. Disabled people are hoping for radical policies that will improve their lives. However, many fear it will contain warm words and platitudes but no real action. Can the Minister convince us that his strategy will be published with a fanfare and not just a whimper?

[Justin Tomlinson]

Absolutely. I am grateful to all the stakeholders and those with real-lived experience, including disabled people themselves, who have been working with the Department on: the proposed changes to SRTI; our forthcoming health and disability Green Paper, which will look at both disability benefits and support and disability employment, of which we have delivered record amounts; and our national strategy for disabled people, which has the Prime Minister’s personal support and will, for the first time, bring genuine cross-Government focus to create more inclusivity and remove barriers. All of those are due very soon, and I am confident that they will be well received.