Preparations for the inclusion of SA Sign Language: engagement with DSAC, PanSALB; DBE & DOJC&D; with DBE Deputy Minister

Meeting report

The Chairperson welcomed all Members of Parliament (MPs) and delegations from the various departments; and received apologies sent in by some MPs and officials from the represented departments.

She highlighted the season of wins in the sporting industry. She applauded the sports coaches in the country, as well as the performance of the Under-23 Physically Challenged Boys Basketball team and the Netball South Africa team. She thanked Mr Mhlongo, who was physically present at the Netball Games for the second time. Condolences were offered on behalf of the Committee to the families of those involved in the tragedy that occurred over the weekend during the sporting activities.

The main agenda for the meeting was to engage with sister departments: Department of Sport, Arts and Culture (DSAC), Department of Basic Education (DBE) and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DoJC&D) on the importance of languages as an aspect of the human identity, including the Deaf community, which has always been in the back burner, with communities struggling to understand how to recognise and communicate with this community. The DSAC proposed an Amendment Bill to incorporate South African Sign Language (SASL) as the 12th official language of South Africa. Hence, the need for engagement between these sister departments, and the Pan South African Language Board (PanSALB) to discuss timeframes for implementation; roles of sister departments; and budget required for officialising the SASL.

The agenda was adopted by Ms R Adams (ANC) and seconded by Ms D Sibiya (ANC).

Presentation by the Department of Sport, Arts and Culture and PanSALB

Mr Vusumuzi Mkhize, Director-General, DSAC, introduced the delegation from DSAC and PanSALB and noted that language is a carrier of culture and a transmitter of identity from one generation to another. This project was, therefore, one that the Department was happy about seeing that collective effort is being put in ensuring the promotion of sign language, which has excluded approximately 500 000 people in this country who are solely dependent on it. There was also a library for the blind, which has advanced significantly to promote sign language and grant access to partially sighted people.

Dr Cynthia Khumalo, Deputy Director-General (DDG): Arts Culture Promotion and Development, DSAC, informed the Committee that the presentation contained inputs received from the DBE and DoJC&D. She went on to give a detailed background to the project at hand as noted in pages 3 and 4 before handing over to PanSALB for its presentation

According to Mr Julius Dantile, Executive Head of PanSALB, PanSALB started a project of standardising the national anthem, after discovering that there was no standard way to sign the national anthem. Individual interpreters used different signs to interpret the anthem depending on the dialect such interpreter was acquainted with.

The standardisation of signing the national anthem was launched in November 2021 and took about 16 to 18 months of extensive consultations to ensure that the Deaf community was duly represented.
Currently, there are priorities within the sign language system, including town-based priorities. Sign language, in general, is largely influenced by American Sign Language, but the board is working hard to ensure that South African Sign Language (SASL) is adapted.

Workshops have been organised to this effect. In one of such workshops conducted last year, parents of Deaf children lamented the difficulty in communicating with their children. Some parents lamented how their kids in the boarding school did not want to come home during the holidays because that would mean an obstruction in communication with family members. Reports like this prompted the Department to organise workshops that would bring Deaf children and their parents together in a therapeutic way, as well as parents getting taught some basic communication in sign language. This programme was conducted in all seven provinces in the last financial year, except for KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) and Gauteng, which are being consolidated now.

The Department initiated the first phase of the project by sharing the basics of sign language with families for them to understand it and be able to communicate with their children. However, there is a need to move further to provide basic training in sign language to ease communication on a deeper level between families, after which training would be expanded beyond the family environment to enable Deaf children to communicate better within their communities and also feel welcomed.

Production of sign language dictionaries has commenced through the design of an application by an independent stakeholder called the National Institute of the Deaf (NID). Terms produced by the NID have been transferred to the National Language Body (NLB) and have been verified, accepted, and authenticated. The dictionary would be launched on 1 September 2022 in honour of Deaf Awareness Month.

The SASL standardisation programme is a long-term programme that needs to be undertaken to make sign language useable in higher registers such as courts of law, government institutions, and other sectors, not just for interpretation purposes, but also for producing materials in sign language. The Department has consulted with six out of seven universities that either offer SASL courses; are researching sign language, or are providing sign language services to the Deaf community in their institutions. These consultations have been carried out in conjunction with NID and the Sign Language Educational Development (SLED). The Department is trying to formulate a consortium that would push standardisation without leaving anyone behind or without discrimination of any sort.

There is also a SASL Charter that was developed several years ago. The Charter is derived from the Bill of Rights. The Charter is also linked to Section 234 of the Constitution which talks about the Charters of the Rights.

This Charter was developed for communities such as the Deaf community to enable government across boards to have a reference on their responsibilities towards this them to ensure inclusivity. The Charter is due for a review in 2025 and the Department would spearhead public engagement around it. Through the consortium and when the budget becomes available, the Department would establish National Lexicography Unit (NLU) for the SASL. The lexicography unit is responsible for the compilation of the sign language dictionary, within PanSALB. The unit also oversees the development of language across the board.

The DSAC was currently engaging with PanSALB to create awareness around SASL. PanSALB already developed dictionaries with its stakeholders. Once the SASL becomes officialised, the DSAC would amend the Use of Official Languages Act (UOLA), 2012, to align with the Constitution. Various stakeholders including the Deaf and hearing communities, would be consulted in the process of finalising the amendment of the Act. Once this has been done, national government institutions would then be required to review their language policies to include the SASL. The Department together with the DoJC&D, would come up with and circulate the budgetary cost of facilitating the amendment process to all relevant national departments. In the meantime, the DSAC is currently encouraging institutions to include sign language in their communication with the public through sign language interpreters.

The Department would also carry out certain programmes to develop and promote the SASL; programmes such as digitalisation of the SASL; advancement of SASL for 4IR technological development using pace names; translation of recorded documents of SASL video material into all SA official languages; development of SASL terminology using translated video material into all SA official languages; and workshops with Deaf and hearing communities and relevant stakeholders.
All national departments are required to have language practitioners to develop sign language successfully in compliance with the UOLA Act, which states that departments should establish a language unit.

The DBE was showcased as a progressive department that already recognises the SASL as an official language that can be used for teaching and learning according to Section 6(4) of the South African Schools Act (SASA). Since 2014, sign language has been used as a Home Language (HL) within the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) for Grades R to 12. Currently, 47 schools for the Deaf in South Africa are using SASL HL as the language of teaching and learning.

The budgetary implications of developing and promoting the SASL by the DSAC, PanSALB and the DBE were detailed (see pages 13 to 17 of the attached document). PanSALB would need R13.5 million to execute its activities but does not have these funds in its current budget (see page 15 of attached document). Approximately R87 million was required to implement this project in the next financial year.

Timelines for each activity to be carried toward the development and promotion of SASL were outlined (see pages 18 to 19 of the attached document). A few of the projects such as the digitalisation process of SASL; advancement of the SASL for 4IR technological development using place names; workshops with parents and SASL dictionary, were already in progress; while projects like the translation of the national anthem into SASL have been completed and the video is available for free on the PanSALB website to be used whenever the national anthem is being sung.

Presentation by the Department of Basic Education (DBE)

Dr Reginah Mhaule, Deputy Minister (DM) of Basic Education, DBE, noted that sign language was already being used as the 12th official language in the country, but it is hoped that the process of officialising it would be fast-tracked in Parliament, as the inclusiveness of sign language for all gatherings in the country was important.

According to Dr Rufus Poliah, Chief Director: National Assessment and Public Examinations, DBE, the Department was deeply encouraged to be part of the exciting initiative of promoting and incorporating sign language into the South African community as the 12th official language.
 
As highlighted by DSAC, the DBE has already commenced the usage of SASL as a language of learning and teaching as provided for in Section 6(4) of the SASA, which is legislation that already accommodates sign language. The aforementioned provision is reiterated in the Language in Education Policy. For SASL to be taught, the SASL Home Language and CAPS were approved by the Council of Education Ministers on 3 July 2014. Currently, a total of 47 schools for the Deaf offer SASL HL as a home language. There were also Deaf teacher assistants that facilitated learning and teaching in other subjects apart from SASL HL.

The preferred arrangement, particularly in Deaf schools, is that every teacher must be able to use sign language as the language of learning and teaching. For some subjects like science and maths, where the teacher may be qualified in the content but not competent in sign language, a Deaf teacher assistant would be used. In such cases, the teacher assistant would facilitate and mediate through SASL. Even though this was not the preferred arrangement, it should be noted that this is a new area, and the DBE is working on developing its capacity in this regard. It should also be noted that all subjects are mediated through sign language in these 47 schools.

The DBE has developed learning and teaching support material, including a study guide on recording essays and transactional texts; SASL HL subject terminology DVD; ‘Mind the Gap’ study guide developed on prescribed genres of poetry, long stories, and drama. The Department is making good strides and wants to continue to keep the momentum going.

One of the Department’s greatest achievements in promoting sign language is the inclusion of SASL as part of the National Senior Certificate (NSC) examination, for three consecutive years. The DBE administers the SASL as a formal examination in both the June and November examinations. The first SASL HL was administered in 2018, with 52 candidates. However, the NSC examination for 2022 would have 229 candidates taking the SASL HL examinations, which would be administered to 24 schools. This indicates a greater uptake and proof of the efforts made in promoting sign language, yielding results.

Regarding the requirement for learners to offer two languages (one home language and one additional language) to obtain a national senior certificate, the SASL HL is also offered in place of home language and is recognised as a home language for Deaf learners.

Regarding the process used in conducting examinations for Deaf learners, Dr Poliah explained that question papers are set for learners at DBE offices under extremely secure conditions. The questions are first set on paper before getting signed. All procedures are carried out at the DBE offices where all equipment is available, including a recording studio where the question paper gets signed; videos get recorded; and then copied onto DVDs. Those DVDs are then distributed under very secure conditions to all provinces, and only on the morning of the examination would the DVD with the question paper be distributed to the schools that would offer SASL examination.

The DBE has gone a step further to ensure that all learner responses are also signed and recorded with technology and then recorded on a DVD. The learner response DVDs are then collected and secured for distribution to SASHL HL teachers who would mark them. School-Based Assessments (SBA), which are the assessments conducted by teachers and known as oral assessments in other languages, have been added to the SASL HL component of the NSC examinations.

The preparation process and marking procedures of NSC examinations for Deaf learners were detailed (see pages 8 and 9 of the attached document). The marking of SASL HL examinations is centrally done in Pretoria under the direct supervision and management of the DBE. This is done in a bid to ensure a common standard of marking across the whole country.

The numbers of students that have written the SASL from 2018 to 2022, and their performance levels at the examinations were detailed (see page 10 of attached document).


It was pointed out that the examination candidates usually comprise of full-time and part-time candidates, with the latter being those who might have written the examination previously and have come to retake it.

The pass rate has been very encouraging, with over 90% for each year except for part-time candidates in 2020, for which a 85.7% pass rate was achieved. Despite this pass rate, there was still a lot of work to be done.

Dr Poliah indicated that there was an upward adjustment of marks during the standardisation process aimed at ensuring that the performance in SASL was on par with other languages. However, the upward adjustments by Umalusi were on a declining scale, which indicated the need for more improvements from the learners in the future.

Despite the progress made by the DBE, there were certain current challenges facing the Department, namely low teacher capacity in terms of content knowledge, assessment and understanding of CAPS; the limited pool of SASL HL teachers; dialectical differences which have affected standardisation of SASL HL; high cost of equipment; limited literature; and challenges relating to setting question papers for SASL HL examinations. Steps to mitigate each of these challenges were highlighted (see pages 11 and 12 of the attached document).

The cost implication of developing and promoting SASL was also alluded to (see page 13 of the attached document). These costs cover the provision of national, provincial and district personnel; professional development training; Learner Teaching Support Material (LTSM); general Deaf learner support programmes; preparations for examinations for Grade 12. Most of the activities for which costs have been allocated are in progress but it should be noted that all activities are ‘ongoing’, hence, the requirement for annual budgetary provision.

Presentation by the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development

Ms Rego Baloyi, State Law Adviser, DoJ&CD, presented the Constitutional Amendment to Section 6 of the Constitution to include Sign Language as an official language, by taking the Committee through background procedures required to process an amendment to the said provision (see pages 3 and 4 of the attached document); relevant provisions of the Constitution dealing with languages, which is mainly Section 6 of the Constitution (see page 5 of the attached document); proposed amendment clauses to Section 6 in the Bill, with the main amendment being the inclusion of South African Sign Language as an official language, as well as measures to promote the language and cultural rights of people with hearing disabilities (see page 6 of the attached document for details). Steps taken by the DoJ&CD in processing this Amendment Bill, include meeting with other departments to inform them of the proposed amendment for them to begin preparations for implementation; having the office of the Chief State Law Adviser verify and ascertain that the provisions of the Bill were consistent with the Constitution and have been drafted in the form and style that conforms to legislative practice; development of the Bill in joint participation with the DSAC, Department of Tourism, Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA) and the Presidency; and consulting with PanSALB.

As for budgetary implications of the Amendment Bill, it was noted that each implementing department or entity would have financial burdens to bear concerning sourcing sign language practitioners at events, meetings, community engagements and so on. Departments should therefore prioritise the budgetary requirements needed to push the implementation plans, as failure to do so would lead to poor implementation of the recognition of SASL as an official language.

The DoJ&CD aimed to introduce the Amendment Bill on sign language to Parliament in November 2022.

Discussion

The Chairperson called out the DoJC&D for sending their presentation to the Committee very late (a night before the meeting), noting that this was unacceptable and should not be repeated. She urged Members to overlook the lateness of the submission of the presentation and instead focus on the fact that the presentation was informative and straightforward.

Mr T Mhlongo (DA) wanted to raise a point of order on why the Chairperson allowed the presentation to be given audience but restrained himself, seeing that the Chairperson permitted it. Nevertheless, he reiterated that it was not a practice of the Committee to accept presentations submitted by 9:00 pm, which showed that the DoJ&CD had no respect for the Committee.

To this, the Chairperson replied that if he had raised the point of order, she would have supported him.

Mr Mhlongo went on to note that there had been poor public participation on the Bill. The DoJC&D should not expect to achieve effective public participation on a Bill publicised in July with a deadline set at 31 August 2022. He also argued against the submission that the department consulted with the Committee, noting that the first point of contact with the Committee was through the presentation submitted at 9:00 pm the previous night. He asked the Department to explain what effective public participation was, and what mechanism was used in ensuring effective public participation on the Amendment Bill.

He asked PanSALB to confirm if it had the budget of R13.5 million quoted. What joint activities were they partnering with the DSAC over in terms of the different projects? Why did the chairperson of PanSALB resign? And are there any members of the PanSALB Board present at the meeting?
He asked the DBE to give an estimate of the number of language bursaries that have been given to SASL students; to explain what the stance of National Treasury was on the proposed budget to establish the SA Practitioners Council; clarify when the SA Practitioner Council would be established, and confirm whether any consideration has been given to the development and social cohesion programme for interaction between hearing and non-hearing citizens.

Ms D Sibiya (ANC) sought clarity on how communities would benefit from the workshops being organised with parents of children with hearing disabilities.

How would communities be encouraged not to undermine sign language and to understand it in a way that they do not undermine Deaf children? She also wanted to know how PanSALB collaborated with DBE in developing the SASL HL curriculum and assessment policy statement and its continuous development.

Mr M Zondi (ANC) commented on the presentation by DoJ&CD in vernacular to which the Chairperson interjected to clarify that the presentation was only forwarded the night before to every Committee member and the Committee officials also had a hard time extracting the document from the means it was sent by. Hence, the problem was not only faced by him.

She apologised to members who could not access the document as well. The technical difficulties leading to accessing the document were another reason why the Committee objected to the late submission of presentations.

Mr Zondi continued by concurring with Mr Mhlongo’s comments. He wanted to know how the DSAC would ensure that all public and private sector adapt their language policies to include SASL.
In the Department’s 2022/23 Annual Performance Plan presentation to the Committee, it was noted that the Department embarked on a project to digitalise SASL. This development of an online SASL dictionary and interpreting system will cease the current non-encompassing status quo. He commended the project noting that it would facilitate the communication between the hearing and non-hearing persons of South Africa.

Ms V Van Dyk (DA) wanted to know how the Department would ensure the provision of greater opportunities for cultural workers and language practitioners. What is the pro action from the Department to appoint these sign language practitioners and how many language practitioners need to be appointed according to the research that was done?

In line with Mr Mhlongo’s question, she also wanted to know if PanSALB awarded any bursaries. She also asked how PanSALB will ensure that sign language takes its rightful place amongst the other 11 languages.

She raised concerns about the information going around in the media about indigenous languages, and she had specifically asked the chairperson of PanSALB to respond to why the board did not step in to clarify the issue and take a stand as the Minister had agreed to it.

She also asked how much money had been set aside by the Department to develop the existing 11 official languages. Now that the campaign for the development of sign language will cost DBE approximately R63 million, will this budget cover the reported 47 schools already teaching sign language? In what way would PanSALB give support to these schools? Since there are already 47 schools offering SASL HL, which new school is joining? Why is additional funding needed? How did PanSALB create awareness for sign language besides translating the national anthem?

She asked how successful the provincial workshops would be and whether the Department would indicate how many people would be reached through the provincial workshops. Where would the launch of the Sign Language Dictionary set to happen on 1 September take place?

Ms R Adams (ANC) asked how DSAC was partnering with the Higher Education Institutions and the Department of Science on the innovation of 4IR technology development to digitise SASL and encourage innovation in SASL.

She posed the following questions to DBE: Do post-schooling education institutions have adequate facilities to support the continued learning of Deaf students? How does the DBE monitor their transition post-schooling? Are the number of Deaf schools enough to cover the needs of Deaf learners? How does the Department ensure that learners with special needs living far from Deaf schools have access? What is the experience of the Department in the development of SASL for education purposes and how can SASL be taught to the broader community in an impactful manner?
Does the department think all learners should be taught the basics of SASL to increase its usage?
What is the level of collaboration between DBE and higher education for SASL development and research and innovation in the area; and what outcomes are expected?

Mr B Madlingozi (EFF) spoke in vernacular. He wanted to know what solutions PanSALB had to address the glaring problem of young children, especially black children from poor backgrounds who cannot speak, read, and write in their mother tongue.

He opined that sign language should not only be provided during news or special communication being televised; it should have a space in every programme that appears on the television, including advertisements. The population of Deaf people was not less important than the rest of the country’s population. Hence, sign language should not be relegated.

He also argued that it was a waste of money to provide sign language to a song that constantly reminds South Africans of the torture and murder of its leaders by the Apartheid Government. To him, translating the Stem to sign language was a waste of time.

On the DoJC&D presentation, he agreed with Mr Mhlongo it was incorrect for the Department to state that it had consulted with the Committee. In his opinion, the presentation was only drafted and hurriedly sent the previous night.

Mr D Joseph (DA) pointed out that based on the information before the Committee, the process for the amendment of the Constitution to include sign language as an official language commenced in 2016. The constitutional review committee, the petition by Deaf South Africa, and the National Assembly had this under review. In other words, this process has a history, and the Committee and other relevant Committees only have to introduce the Bill for the current and next generation. The imminent challenge remained how to ensure the compatibility of these amendments with all other amendments to make sign language legal.

He objected to the submission that the Nation was resistant to sign language, particularly in communities. In his opinion, the issue was more of ignorance about how to respond to Deaf people.
He wanted to know how the higher education would be funded to carry out all the research alluded to and develop sign language to the highest level; Whether the Department was connected to any international bodies like the United Nations or BRICS for the experience and for funding, as well as the commonwealth and what the role of provinces would be in adopting sign language.

After 1994, some provinces (if not all) adopted a certain amount of languages that were conducive to the cultures and people of that province. How will that fit into the provincial status serving deaf people across the country? On the slides, he asked what LTSM stood for.

Lastly, he commented on the social cohesion and mandate for every Department to incorporate sign language to promote interaction between those who can hear and those who cannot hear.
The time was ripe for the government to push the amendment of the Constitution to achieve proper equality before the law and as human beings.

Ms V Malomane (ANC) wanted to know what other funding sources the Department had to mobilise stakeholders to support its initiative. Would the Department have to request further appropriation for this medium-term expenditure framework to meet up with the R86.9 million budget or will it reprioritise funds within its current allocation? How would the DBE ensure that people in the broader community learn the basics of sign language and its usage?

Mr B Mamabolo (ANC) commended the DSAC, Pan SALB, and DoJCD for the great work that they are doing, noting that it was evidence of the South African government being in good hands. People should just continue to vote for this government even until 2024 and forever.

He asked if an accredited body has been established as required by the South African Language Practitioners Act 8 of 2014. What is the National Treasury saying about this establishment? Has the Department budgeted for this? Beyond high school, will SASL be taught at the tertiary level?

The Chairperson asked if any of South Africa’s Higher Education Institutions offered SASL beyond the school national qualification framework. If so, what higher education institutions were these? She also asked if the SASL was compatible with other sign languages across the globe and if so, what lessons have PanSALB drawn from other countries with the development of sign language to promote sign language in the country.

Responses by DBE

On how DBE and PanSALB publicise, advocate, and ensure commitment to SASL, Dr Poliah emphasised that SASL would be given equal status like other official languages. Whatever would be done for the existing 11 languages would also apply to SASL. An example is a current programme still in the foundation phase known as the ‘introduction of African languages’, where every learner is expected to take up an African language as part of DBE’s social cohesion initiative. SASL is also included in the list of African languages to enable interested learners to choose SASL.
A lot of discussion and debate is currently ongoing around mother tongue instruction. The DBE is promoting the concept of mother tongue instruction by looking into bilingual education. A lot of research is being carried out, and a pilot of training on African languages was ongoing in the Eastern Cape. It has become important to incorporate sign language into every sphere and include some of the common sign language signs so that all learners are exposed to and have basic literacy in sign language.

The funding of the 47 schools is the sole responsibility of the DBE. The Department is currently busy with audits to ensure that each school has all the necessary resources needed to support SASL.

On the question of whether all schools were offering SASL, Dr Poliah clarified that there were currently 47 schools for the Deaf where sign language is a language of learning and teaching. However, only 24 schools offered SASL as a Grade 12 examination subject. The DBE was working towards further promotion of SASL so that all schools that have Grade 12 learners would be able to offer SASL as part of the NSC examination.

Regarding DBE’s relationship with DHET, it was noted that although the Departments have a relationship with each other, it is not as strong as it should be and more work still needs to be done in that regard. However, certain Higher Education Institutions were assisting with furthering the promotion of SASL. An example was the University of the Witwatersrand (Wits University), which offered a course in sign language and assisted in training DBE teachers. Wits University assisted the Department with the development of the SASL terminology which was put on to a DVD and circulated to all schools where sign language is offered.

The Department picked up the nudging from the Members of the Committee to strengthen its relationship with the Higher Education sector and get a sense of which universities have strong faculties supporting SASL. This would help to forge a deeper relationship between both departments and enhance continued support from higher institutions in training DBE teachers to develop needed materials.

Regarding DBE’s relationship with PanSALB, it was noted that PanSALB was an important player in the area of languages and played an important role alongside all relevant stakeholders in the development of the SASL curriculum. The Department has embarked on a review process to strengthen the curriculum, starting with extensive consultation and PanSALB will certainly be included in that process.

DM Mhaule added that LTSM stood for ‘Learner Teaching Support Material’, such as exercise books, textbooks, tablets, etc. The LTSM for Deaf learners were more expensive because they are tailor-made for each child, unlike general stationery for ordinary learners. For Deaf learners, LTSM has to be fit for individual learners. The Department was working with its partners to prioritise gadgets for Deaf learners and special schools.

In addition to Dr Poliah’s response on the number of schools offering SASL, she noted that there were teachers who were not Deaf teachers but who underwent training to teach sign language to address the teacher capacity issue. Training the entire community on sign language basics may be impossible but it will not be dismissed by the Department as a future project.

Response by DoJC&D

In addressing the issue of late submission of the presentation, Mr Tsietsi Sebelemetja, DOJC&D,  explained that the Department sent out the presentation on time to the team that liaises with Parliament. He called the team to confirm if the presentation was only submitted last night and he was informed that what was sent through to the Committee the previous night was a resubmission. He, however, apologised on behalf of the Department for all the issues caused by the late submission.

The Chairperson expressed confusion on what the Department meant by ‘resubmission’ but said that the Committee had accepted its apology and any subsequent presentation submission or update should be sent in timeously.

On the publication of notice for comments on the Amendment Bill, he noted that the Department complied with Section 24 which provided for the procedure to be followed in introducing a Bill to amend the Constitution. The Department was required to publish a notice and provide letters to all Speakers within the provinces.

Also, the Department’s presentation to the Committee did not in any way imply a consultation with the Portfolio Committee. Instead, it was an update on what has been happening since May when Cabinet approved that the Minister should go ahead with the introduction. After that approval, the Department published the notice of intention to introduce the Bill in the gazette, with a 30-day duration, excluding weekends. Engagements on the Bill would continue even as the Department properly introduces it in Parliament. Comments received in the past would be submitted, and more inputs submitted after tomorrow would still be considered. The 30-day timeline prescribed by the Constitution is the minimum duration for public participation on a Bill and not the deadline for submission of comments.

Responses by PanSALB

Mr Dantile confirmed that PanSALB did not have the projected R13.5 million alluded to in the presentation. The board planned to make a request to National Treasury through the Department.

Regarding members of the Board present, he explained that most of the Board members could not make the meeting because of prior engagements and bookings. However, he was joined by Dr Sally Maepa, the provincial officer overseeing all issues relating to sign language within the national language body.

PanSALB did not offer bursaries at the moment due to a lack of funding. But the Department was providing some bursaries, which, though inadequate, was assisting in some way. It was a better arrangement to have the bursaries concentrated in one institution than spread it thinly across the board, as the latter may create complications over time.

Regarding the number of workshop attendees, he noted that workshops were organised in seven provinces and more than 1000 parents participated across these provinces with Eastern Cape leading with four sessions. These workshops aimed to mitigate the effects of lack of communication and access to information by the parents in terms of the well-being of their kids from the kids' perspectives. Efforts were also being made to link some of the parents in dire need of sign language services with certain institutions or individuals that can assist with helping them understand the basics of sign language. As mentioned earlier, PanSALB was working with seven universities to develop strategies for sign language interventions in communities, since these universities had a process called ‘Community Engagement Responsibility’.

The issue of standardisation and CAPS is where the Board’s National Language Bodies are striving to link two other provincial offices with the department. A successful meeting was held some weeks ago with the Department over this issue and the board would begin to deal with issues already alluded to with the help of the Department. The board realises that it may face some resistance in addressing standardisation, which may result in a longer timeframe to achieve this goal, as there could be people who insist on continuing their way of speaking, irrespective of the language.

The proposed Amendment Bill was necessary to ensure that national departments and state governments incorporate sign language and ensure compliance with existing legislation including the Constitution, the UOLA, the PanSALB Act and all other provincial Acts that identify with these languages.

On why PanSALB did not clarify the issue of indigenous languages in relation to sign language, Koi San and Afrikaans, it was explained that the issue was being handled within the board, as it wanted it to go through its internal processes before putting up a position. It may be perceived as late, but the board was of the view that it was a sensitive matter that required further research to advise accordingly. PanSALB was taking into consideration advice from relevant advisory structures including the Provincial Language Committee; National Language Bodies; and the National Lexicography unit to have a research-based understanding of this particular issue.
However, the indigenousness of these languages was not debatable, as each language was indigenous to particular communities.

On how PanSALB supports schools, he explained that PanSALB invites schools to be part of its projects done in collaboration with the DSAC. During its awareness programmes, schools engage the provincial department or provincial language committee on PanSALB programmes, especially in arts and culture education.

Dr Maepa added that the launch of the sign language dictionary would take place on Thursday, 1 September. There would be a media briefing in Parliament between 10 and 11 am. By 11:30 am, the Department and PanSALB would move to Iziko Museum, where a formal programme would be hosted till 1:00 pm.

Regarding DBE monitoring post-schooling of Deaf learners, a process needs to be established from the PanSALB perspective, not only for the SASL but for all other languages, in terms of encapsulating the transition from Matric to Higher Education Institutions into the entire schooling programme. DBE was working towards facilitating this process by promoting multilingualism in language and education.

Regarding what PanSALB was doing to address black children who do not speak their indigenous languages, it was noted that the board was always promoting mother tongue. It has been highly involved in monitoring the situation in Eastern Cape. Issues have been picked up, some of which the National Department was aware of. The board was also involved in the translation process of the exam papers for Matric, and workshops organised for staff members, to ensure the promotion of indigenous languages, especially previously marginalised languages, in conjunction with English.

He rebutted the myth that the process was trying to do away with English and argued that indigenous languages would augment and support English education. The process seeks to expand the education system by proving that other knowledge systems are important and should be brought into the education system. This is particularly important because the process of learning a language always comes with learning the culture(s) of that language, which then equates to education and the ability to personalise said language. This was a better model than cases of children getting taught in only English language by teachers who were second, third, fourth, or even fifth language speakers of English; they are not really teaching in terms of that, and then forgetting what was taught in school.

It was important to transform the language of learning and teaching to enable students to grasp what is being taught better, as modelled in Eastern Cape with results from Matric exams increasing from the 40s to 70s in the first year of implementing this kind of educational system. In the past 12 years, PanSALB has worked behind the scenes on this project to encourage not only the speaking of indigenous languages but also the use of these languages at higher rates, especially in the education system. PanSALB is also engaging in several projects that would encourage these programmes, including the incremental introduction of African languages in former Model C schools and private schools. The board is monitoring these programmes to ensure the quality of implementation is up to standard, and to avoid instances where schools are introducing certain previously marginalised languages without allocating sufficient for their black curriculum systems.

Responses by DSAC

Regarding language bursaries, Dr Khumalo said that DSAC provides bursaries to language practitioners at Higher Education Institutions. Its target per year is 250 but it has been able to continuously exceed that target through close collaboration with higher education institutions. These bursaries are provided in a way that helps DSAC to manage processes directly with the higher institutions.

As for implementing the South African Language Practitioners Council Act, she explained that the commenced last year with DSAC drawing up the implementation model. During this process, the department identified the factor. Through the Minister's approval for the appointment, an advisory committee was established to work with the department to explore different options for implementing the Act. This advisory committee has presented different options to the DSAC’s executive management team meeting chaired by the DG, and all options have been costed. The cost of implementing the Act which was calculated to cover a period up to the 2025/26 financial year, came to about R40 million, at an average of about  R5 million per year.

The costing considered budget items like the board; required staffing support; and operational costs. DSAC has also considered options that would allow the implementation of the Act, considering other economies of scale. For instance, PanSALB has agreed to provide office space for the next five years to host council meetings for the committee. DSAC has also approached National Treasury and done a presentation on implementing the Act and costing, but National Treasury has indicated that no additional budget was available. The Department was therefore engaging its Chief Financial Officer (CFO) to figure out how to prioritise and commence implementation with the basic requirements that would allow this structure to grow over the years.

On the bursary programme, Ms Lisa Combrinck, Head of Communications, DSAC said that the Department cannot ascertain the number of Deaf students, but it was working with universities that either offer SASL or are in the process of doing so. An example was Wits University which now has 44 students studying SASL between 2021 and 2022 through the support of DSAC. Between 2018 and 2020, there were 68 students. Another example was the University of Free State University (UFS), which in the last financial year had seven students studying SASL.

While these were the available statistics, the Department submitted that most of the other universities it was working with were in the process of beginning to offer SASL. Wits University already has a full programme; UFS has commenced its own SASL programme; North West University is also starting; the University of Venda has an approved programme, and the University of Forte Hare is in the process of approval. Progress was being made in this regard.

On how the department would structure itself so that the SASL practitioners also become workers and employees in support of the officialisation of sign language, she noted that the DSAC has investigated the existing structure of the National Language Service which is the chief directorate, and according to the structure, at least two officials should work on a particular language. DSAC’s projection is to have two officials shuffling between the translation directorate and the terminology directorate and working as sign language practitioners. But this is subject to the OSD process that the Department is currently undergoing. The organisational development process would concretise these posts. In the interim, it has advertised two sign language posts temporarily but within the Department, there is currently existing support with one official doing sign language interpreting at various events of the department.

Regarding what DSAC would do to ensure other departments are aware of and accommodate SASL, it was noted that Minister Mthethwa has written letters to all national government departments and its entities to explain the importance of the SASL and the need to have interpretation at all events. In addition to this and as the Department proceeds with the amendment of the UOLA, awareness workshops would be organised with the other departments around this issue. Roadshows would also be organised with provincial representatives to ensure proper accommodation of the country as a whole. The Department also intends to use a national language stakeholders engagement forum to create awareness around SASL. The forum embraces the fact that this was the decade of indigenous languages. The Department highlighted SASL as part of the milestones achieved on its roadmap for this decade.

Regarding digitalisation of SASL, DSAC currently has two major projects in place; one of which is with a service provider that looks at the development of digital and intelligent systems and SASL dictionaries that is being supported over a period of three years for R3 million. DSAC has also partnered with UFS to advance SASL through technological development using place names, a process that would be funded with R5 million over three years.

Mr Tshikani Mabasa, Director: Responsible Human Language Technology, DSAC, added that the two projects DSAC currently had with the service provider and the UFS aim to develop software that would assist sign language interpreters in doing their work. The first one would be a system in which English is inputted for the system to carry out an interpretation in sign language. This project was important because of the difficulty in finding human sign language interpreters in all working spaces, including spaces like hospitals, clinics, and police stations. This system would be designed to assist users of sign language to properly communicate whatever information they needed, and even make a statement in a police station when the need arises. The Department also aimed to develop a sign language translating system where the input would be from English, Afrikaans, and other languages but the translation happens in the background and the output becomes a sign language. An example would be a video transmission of information inputted into the system. The last project is the development of systems that would assist those who are not sign language users to learn sign language, in a bid to ensure that sign language was learned by the non-users of the language.

Regarding budget and how DSAC would mobilise funding, Dr Khumalo explained that the Department’s portion of the projected total of R86 million was about R18 million. Out of that R18 million, there was funding and DSAC was considering reprioritising its internal budget to the tune of about R2 to R3 million to fund the project. The Department was hopeful that this great milestone of including SASL as the 12th official language would encourage the National Treasury to engage and assist in topping up with the funding requirements for this project.

On monitoring the language bursary, Ms Zanele Ndima, DSAC, said that sign language has always been a criterion for universities applying for bursaries. The requirement was once again emphasised for the current cycle which takes a period of 3 years, as an awareness strategy on the officialisation of SASL, and also so that the sector can be capacitated. Monitoring strategies currently used include holding meetings with universities; and requesting quarterly reports on a list of SASL students who have been awarded bursaries to be submitted by universities during the second and third quarter, especially in the two active universities offering SASL (Wits and UFS).




Further discussion

Mr Mhlongo said not all his questions were answered; questions on what effective public participation meant to DoJC&D; why the chairperson of PanSALB resigned; what the status of the board was and how many Board members were present at the meeting; and if PanSALB had the projected R13.5 million budget.

Mr Dantile reiterated that PanSALB did not have the projected R13.5 million but was considering an appropriation from DSAC and Treasury.

Regarding the question on the resignation of the PanSALB chairperson, he clarified that the chairperson of the board did not resign. The PanSALB Act requires a chairperson to be voted every financial year to serve for a term of two and a half years. This meant that the chairperson that was voted in when the board was appointed by the Minister would serve two and a half years, after which another chairperson would be voted in by the members of the board. So far, no member of the board has resigned, and the current chairperson is still a member of the board. A new chairperson would be elected in the next financial year, but it should be noted that members of the board were still the same since the resignation of the first chairperson of the board.

Mr Dantile expressed confusion over the response given, noting that Mr Dantile contradicted himself by saying no chairperson had resigned, yet members of the board remained the same since the resignation of the first chairperson.

To this, Mr Sibusiso Tsanyane, Director: Entity Oversight and Interface, DSAC, clarified that indeed, the first chairperson of PanSALB, Dr David Maahlamela, resigned from his position after some allegations were brought by a whistleblower against the board. The board responded to those allegations but the chairperson, who was, at some point, the acting CEO of PanSALB, resigned and left the board. After this, a new chairperson (the deputy chairperson to the resigned chairperson) was elected. After this second chairperson’s term expired, the current chairperson was elected. So yes indeed, there was a chairperson who resigned, and he was the initial chairperson of the board.

Regarding effective public participation, Ms Baloyi explained that the Constitution provides that 30 days before the introduction of the Bill to Parliament, the Department should publish the Bill for public comment. DoJC&D was guided by the Constitution, but the 30-day requirement was the minimum, and comments were still welcomed after the 30-day lapse on 1 September. The timeframe for comments cannot be left open as this would delay the process and steps for finalisation before the Bill was introduced to Parliament.

Additionally, after the introduction of the Bill to Parliament, Parliament is expected to run its own public participation process. In essence, the public would still have an opportunity to comment on the Bill later on in the process. DoJC&D had also allowed the provincial legislatures to comment as well.

The Chairperson thanked the Departments for their engagement and clarification where necessary. She also thanked Members of the Committee for their robust engagement with all presentations.

Consideration of Minutes

Mr Mhlongo moved for the adoption of the minutes with amendments to the introduction by the Chairperson and was seconded by Ms Malomane.

Mr Mhlongo asked for an update on the discussion around Skating which appeared on the programme. He also asked the Committee to request that the CEO of the National Orchestra appear before the Committee whenever the Orchestra comes, seeing that the CEO was a member of the National Arts Council of South Africa (NAC).

The Committee Secretary said a letter would be sent to the Department indicating that the Committee is inviting the CEO of the Orchestra to join the Committee. The Committee secretariat indicated that the Committee had requested the presence of DSAC and the MEC but would stipulate the requirement for the CEO’s attendance in addition.

The Official indicated that a written submission would be made regarding Skating.

The Chairperson indicated that this information had to be circulated to the Committee. The Department and Committee had to keep up the good work.

The meeting was adjourned.