Barnett Tim: New Zealand Sign Language Bill — Second Reading 
Barnett Tim: New Zealand Sign Language Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:629;Page:1469] 
TIM BARNETT (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 This is a proud day for people who are deaf and hard of hearing in New Zealand for those who lobbied for years to give real status to New Zealand Sign Language and also for my colleague Ruth Dyson who has been the all-too-important voice inside the tent as Minister for Disability Issues. 
Reported back from the Justice and Electoral Committee which I chaired when this bill went through public submission and subsequent detailed consideration and some amendment the bill is now starting the last lap of its complicated journey from idea to law. As previous chairperson of the committee I want to highlight some of the issues raised in the committee’s report. One hundred and ninety-five public submissions were received and over a period of 8½ hours we heard 26 of them. They were the people who told us that they wanted to talk further. 
I say “heard” nervously as among the numerous profound effects that our work on the bill had on our committee members was a careful examination of the everyday language that we used. Maybe National’s PC eradicator could learn a lesson from the fact that some language that we in the hearing community regard as normal is far from normal or acceptable to some. Not often could I say that Parliament has through its select committee process released voices that were just wanting to cry out but this was certainly one occasion when that was happening. All 11 members of the committee went through an intense awareness-raising process and became quite gripped by trying to work through the implications of the proposed law. One of the great things about select committees is that they offer that direct contact with ordinary New Zealanders with something to say and also something to challenge. 
The bill is fairly short and straightforward but as we tried to see how it would work in a variety of public services and contexts the full implications and the inevitable difficulties became very obvious. For example we considered whether the New Zealand Sign Language used by Maori who are fluent in te reo required a separate recognition. On repeated advice we concluded that it did not. We considered the establishment of an equivalent to the Maori Language Commission to nurture and promote the development of New Zealand Sign Language. After much thought we decided that although the function was important more basic challenges such as the shortages of signers were more urgent. We looked at the range of public services that might develop detailed plans and even separate regulations or laws relating to New Zealand Sign Language. We were pleased that working-groups involving people from various Government departments and the Deaf community itself were working on four particular areas: health education employment and public broadcasting. These were stated in the select committee hearings by people from the Deaf community to be the most important areas. Add to that the justice-focused rights that are explicit in the bill. We were gratified to see that the issues raised by submitters were the issues that the system was already starting to address. 
Communication is at the heart of the bill. The Justice and Electoral Committee members did not have skills in sign language and even tuition by experts who are present today in the Gallery did not help very much. The lead adviser to the committee and a team of signers did much to open our eyes both to the barriers presented by our world to people who are deaf and also to the liberation offered by sign language. I thank them and the committee staff who took us along that journey. 
This bill generates but a modest cost to the State in order to implement and I believe we have a moral and a legal duty to do that. I find it extraordinary that some put the issue of resources before the issue of fundamental rights for people who are deaf particularly in a situation where we are moving towards universal rights—United Nations - instituted rights—for people with disabilities. I find it amazing that someone would deny even the modest rights contained in this legislation. I commend the bill to the House. It is historic it is a first for New Zealand and it is the proper thing to do.