BA/3/07
Meeting held at 1.30 pm on 21 March 2007 at RNIB, 105 Judd Street, London WC1H 9NE
Lisa Jones agreed to take minutes in the absence of Stephen Phippen.
(Note: The corresponding agenda item appears in brackets.)
1. (1) Roll Call: Bill Poole (Chair); Pete Osborne (Vice-Chair) by telephone; Lisa Jones (Minutes); Sheila Armstrong (replacing Mike Townsend [Public Relations Officer]); Rhoda Carratt; Hans Cohn; Maggie Grubb; Barbara Leighton; Jim McCafferty; Sarah Home; David McKerral; Marion Ripley; Alison Roberts; Richard West
2. (1) Apologies: Janet Bartholomew, David Boden, Stephen Phippen
3. (2) Minutes of the Last Meeting (29 November 2006) – These were approved without any correction.
4. (3) Matters Arising: Hans Cohn stated he is yet to produce the article on the physical aspect of reading braille.
Action: Hans Cohn.
5. (4) Officers' Reports:
(a) Chair – Bill Poole stated he has circulated some proposed rules on Unified English Braille (UEB) shortforms. The general agreement was they were too complicated to learn; but the original rules have not been significantly changed, meaning you can roughly do what you could before. The Australians thought simplicity should not be pursued to the point where many shortforms within words which were familiar to readers would be disallowed. The Canadians wish to abolish rules where the use of contractions might impede readability, ie shortforms and contractions could be used wherever the group of letters appears. Bill Poole advised the meeting he was opposed to it because the level of automatic translation is very high and there is no sense in simplicity of writing over simplicity of reading. Blind people read language as sighted people do, ie not deciphering character by character, but recognising whole word shapes. Bill Poole advised he is not participating significantly in the Rules Rewriting Committee.
(b) Secretary – Bill Poole advised Stephen Phippen is attending a meeting in New Zealand to discuss Maths and Science Standards in UEB.
(c) Treasurer – No report.
(d) Public Relations Officer – No report.
At this point members agreed to skip Agenda Item 5, Changes To The Constitution, and discuss it if there was time after the remaining items of business were completed.
6. (6) Relations between BAUK, COTIS and UKABP: Pete Osborne circulated a report proposing the Authority is involved in the discussions to create an umbrella organisation for drawing up standards for alternative format production. Sarah Home agreed to leave the matter for Pete Osborne to explain. Pete Osborne felt he misled the Authority by stating the umbrella organisation would be COTIS. Bill Poole stated he was in favour of embarking on negotiations, recognising there are issues to be resolved with the other 2 organisations. In response to David McKerral Bill Poole confirmed he was in favour of the organisations either working together or as a single federation subject to certain conditions. In response to Barbara Leighton Sarah Home stated COTIS is the obvious organisation to use as a structure because it is a registered charity where UKABP is not and it would be less complex. Members felt UKABP and BAUK deal with one format where COTIS covers several.
Richard West stated there are 2 issues to consider: the simple amalgamation of UKABP and COTIS without any inclusion of BAUK except on the Board, or greater involvement of BAUK in the group as a whole. The Authority could assume UKABP would produce braille to the British Braille standard. Pete Osborne felt BAUK is interested in the promotion, development and life of braille and the other organisations are involved in campaigning and promotion. All organisations are struggling with resources and a merged organisation could pool them. Hans Cohn stated every developed country in Europe and a number in other continents have gone the way of federations. At the last RNIB Assembly Lesley-Anne Alexander stated there are 400 voluntary agencies in the visual impairment sector, all doing their own thing to the disadvantage of blind and partially sighted people. The more people an organisation has the more you can afford the personnel these organisations benefit from, ie paid staff.
Sheila Armstrong stated she had not seen the papers, but feels there is an ungrounded fear of contact between producers and users as all producers have the interests of users at heart. Bill Poole feels if we are 3 equal-ranking partners there is no problem but a full merger would have issues. If there were producers who felt there is a bottom-line to meet then Bill Poole felt we could get into trouble and consumers would have issues. Bill Poole stated there was less interaction between service providers and users back in 1979 when BAUK was formed, therefore, users' interests had had to be safeguarded. Members were advised there are 3 consumer seats out of 15 in the Braille Authority of North America (BANA) and Bill Poole would be unhappy with a similar situation but acknowledged Sheila Armstrong may be right in observing times have changed. Bill Poole was on RNIB staff in 1971 when the decision was taken to keep the student braille and tape libraries separate. Although only involved in braille production he felt it was an absolute disaster and does not wish to make the same mistake here.
Hans Cohn felt major projects should incorporate consultation of braille readers. Hans Cohn felt there would not be any need for the Constitution to change if the organisations worked together but merger would necessitate alterations. Sarah Home stated the umbrella organisation would have the different organisations for braille, Moon, tactile diagrams, print, audio underneath it. Sarah Home continued saying the same faces appear on all the different organisations, especially as they are all talking about standards, etc.
In response to Richard West Bill Poole confirmed he would report any negotiation intentions to the International Council on English Braille (ICEB), but felt we should still be able to participate in the Council's activities. Bill Poole requested a decision and the appointment of a small group to investigate further, indicating we would have to seek permission from COTIS to join the negotiations as this may delay their decision to deal with this at their AGM. Bill Poole reminded members our AGM is in July, but we could organise a Special General Meeting if necessary. Bill Poole's view was to make immediate progress. Sarah Home, as part of the working group, stated the negotiations have not been extended beyond the group and it would be an ideal opportunity for BAUK to join. Hans Cohn felt the group could benefit from BAUK being a member of an international organisation, giving possible encouragement to one of the others to do likewise, giving an audio issue as an example.
The Authority agreed to enter into negotiations to break down barriers. Sarah Home confirmed the working group has 2 members, Sarah Home from UKABP and Sarah Morley-Wilkins from COTIS. There is a larger group with an extra 6 members. In response to Richard West Sarah Home suggested 1 or 2 representatives would be helpful. Bill Poole felt he ought to be on it with BAUK's consent. Richard West volunteered and Sarah Home confirmed it would be permissible for both to be involved with one present at face-to-face meetings. Sarah Home advised most of the work is done electronically. In response to Bill Poole Sarah Home confirmed face-to-face meetings will be rare.
Bill Poole sought confirmation the Authority agreed with the proposals in Pete Osborne's document in the event of BAUK joining. Bill Poole felt a technological mind would be helpful. Marion Ripley alerted the Authority that COTIS and UKABP are member organisations with paying members and issued a reminder to be aware those members are paying money for producers' interests to be protected and it is not a right of users to be there. There are organisational members and individual members within both and there may be situations where users would not have the right to object. Bill Poole stated if we became a member organisation we would be of a different structure and he has steered away from it because people should not have to pay to be consulted. Hans Cohn felt the objections voiced have no means of stopping the proposed organisation from functioning.
Sheila Armstrong stated the braille standard adopted by the other organisations has compliance with British Braille rules as the first requirement. Bill Poole stated braille changes that would make it easier to program translation software are discussed more in ICEB. Bill Poole clarified Richard West and himself will act on behalf of BAUK to see what is on offer, making an approach to negotiations in a positive spirit, and exploring issues other people have mentioned.
Action: Bill Poole, Richard West
7. (7) UEB Evaluation And Developments: Members queried the whereabouts of the paper Bill Poole referred to and Pete Osborne confirmed it was only sent to him. The document gives comments on the questionnaire and makes changes to it. Bill Poole will have a discussion with Cathy Rundle, who drafted the document. Hans Cohn felt members should be aware answers from consumers would be required by 2008. Bill Poole confirmed the consultation would go out in the summer with a closing date in the autumn. The ICEB Assembly date is scheduled to be in April, in Melbourne, Australia.
The recommendation is for the beginning of the document to have an introduction giving reasons why the Authority is conducting this survey. There are some formatting and reformulations, which Bill Poole is happy to deal with as appropriate. Personal data will be kept separate for contact about future developments.
Bill Poole was concerned that withholding details may entice multi-entries, but the disadvantage is people may be opposed to providing personal information on security grounds. Richard West felt personal details should be supplied but not included in any statistics. Sheila Armstrong said a tracking number on an enclosed envelope could be used. Evaluators must be satisfied there are no duplicates. Pete Osborne felt there was a Data Protection Act issue and BAUK has inadequate protection. Bill Poole will discuss that issue with Cathy Rundle.
Members felt sending out forms would give an idea of responses. Bill Poole felt people might receive the questionnaire from a publication in a magazine. Lisa Jones queried how could multiple email responses be prevented. Bill Poole said the questionnaire suggests several methods of answering including, electronic Word or text file, audio, print, braille. Bill Poole felt no audio responses should be acceptable as this is a media specific survey and people do things that hinder interpretation of their answers. Lisa Jones queried how new learners would respond but Sheila Armstrong felt they would need to be able to read Grade 2 to give an informed response. David McKerral suggested an option to give a telephone response. Bill Poole asked if it should be included. Pete Osborne felt anything is possible depending on resources. Bill Poole agreed to raise the issue of telephone responses and not allowing audio responses.
Bill Poole queried whether we should constrain the responses. Richard West felt we wish to know the features people like/dislike about the code. Members felt continuation sheets should be allowed. Hans Cohn felt answers should be given as precisely as possible. To prevent excessively long responses members recommended including "the most" in questions as appropriate. Marion Ripley suggested asking for the 3 main things and provide an opportunity to do more. Bill Poole felt "occasionally" and "rarely" has no distinction in terms of frequency. Marion Ripley stated an even number of options prevents people taking the middle ground. Further views are requested on things people regard as important. Pete Osborne agreed to arrange circulation of the paper. Responses by email need to be foolproof such that duplicate responses are not sent from the same person using different email addresses. Members were advised to send their views on questionnaire content to Stephen Phippen by 23 April.
In response to Hans Cohn Bill Poole confirmed the purpose of public meetings would be to discuss the issues of UEB, eg what it contains, the implications of implementation, etc. Bill Poole will discuss the length of the questionnaire. In response to David McKerral Bill Poole confirmed UEB samples would be in circulation soon. Marion Ripley queried if the Authority would have a presence at Sight Village, which runs from 17-19 July. This year there will be a reading area. It was felt producers could provide copies of the questionnaire once it is available. Richard West pointed out rooms must be booked soon and there will be a cost. In response to Hans Cohn Bill Poole confirmed people will reply to the questionnaire as soon as they feel able. Sheila Armstrong suggested producers produce a magazine in UEB. Richard West agreed to take forward the Sight Village booking for a seminar room. Pete Osborne advised a seminar room costs £300 for 3 sessions at one per day. Members agreed to spend the money. Richard West will contact Stephen Phippen.
Action: Pete Osborne, Bill Poole, Richard West, Stephen Phippen
Members discussed the next item for debate and agreed to finish the agenda.
8. (8) Braille Promotions Committee Report:
(a) General Matters: Richard West reminded members about literacy funds, which have been transferred to Learn Direct for them to administer. Unfortunately the 3 people tasked with investigating whether the money could be used for braille literacy have not completed the investigations. Richard West suggested a meeting with Pete Osborne to find the way forward through the undergrowth. Richard West has come across something from NALSVI regarding braille in Schools. Bill Poole is aware a Local Authority has refused a girl permission to learn braille. On 28 March there is a Right To Read lobby at Westminster Hall with the intention of people writing to their MPs about the inadequacy of the supply of braille books. Julianne Marriott at RNIB is the co-ordinator. There has been considerable publicity around the case in Hertfordshire and there is a petition on the Prime Minister's website. Marion Ripley was of the opinion anybody should learn braille but the child in question is learning large print. Past pupils of New College Worcester have started another campaign. Pete Osborne was at a meeting about the issue of securing braille as a form of literacy across the board for children and adults. Bill Poole advised he listened to the "In Touch" programme and it did not seem to him the best was being done for the girl. The matter was discussed and Bill Poole felt the parental wish for their child to learn braille should have been upheld. Bill Poole pointed out the new joint NLB/RNIB Advisory Group meets on 28 March. Richard West felt finishing the meeting early could be an advantage and Bill Poole agreed to make the conveners aware of the lobby. Pete Osborne advised the number of signatories on the Right for People to Have Braille petition is 2,600.
Action: Bill Poole, Richard West, Pete Osborne
(b) Louis Braille Bicentenary – Pete Osborne circulated a paper and advised the final draft would be a good structure for promoting braille.
(c) RNIB Braille Development Plan – Pete Osborne stated he is in the process of writing a Development Plan for promoting braille in RNIB and proposed to submit a summary paper to the next BAUK meeting.
Action: Pete Osborne
9. (9) Reports From Other Committees:
(a) Membership of the Music Committee – Barbara Leighton advised it has never met in the last 3 years. Claire Gailans is the Chair, John Armstrong the Secretary, and other members are Andrew Beaizley, Michael Campbell, Roger Firman, Matthew Wadsworth, Jane Ware, and Sid Wilson. Pete Osborne feels there is current work around the international exchange of music, how we use it, technology for producing it, and archiving. Pete Osborne agreed to support John Armstrong to approach all members and check their wish to remain involved. Pete Osborne stated he is aware of 4 people interested. Bill Poole agreed to encourage David McCann to rejoin. Pete Osborne indicated there are 2 organisations in different parts of the world involved with the scanning in of braille music archives. Both of them have some coding change recommendations to make this process easier. Pete Osborne has put a call out to ICEB to progress the matter on an international level.
Action: Pete Osborne, Bill Poole
10. (10) Any Other Business:
(a) Bill Poole confirmed d, dot 5 ou, y was permissible in response to Hans Cohn's query.
(b) Hans Cohn sought clarification as to when the Literary Code Committee would be convened as Bill Poole and Stephen Phippen had previously stated there is still work to do. Hans Cohn suggested there should be a meeting before July. Bill Poole confirmed if UEB happened this Committee will have different things to discuss.
11. (11) Date of Next Meeting: Tuesday 3 July 2007.
The meeting agreed to discuss the Constitutional amendments.
12. (12) Changes to the Constitution: This item was deemed to constitute a Special General Meeting for the purpose of allowing Constitutional decisions to be made (See Appendix 1). Richard West queried the reason for changing the number of co-optees from 1/8 to 1/5. Bill Poole stated there is not enough space to co-opt the people the Authority feels should have an input. This change would give us 5 co-optees rather than 3. Richard West moved we accept them and members unanimously agreed.
Meeting closed: 3:50 pm.
Paragraph 3(b) of the Constitution states: "Co-opted Members. The Authority may co-opt any number of individuals at any time who have made a substantial contribution to the work of the Authority or to the promotion of or research into braille nationally or internationally, provided that the number of co-options does not exceed one-eighth of the total number of ordinary members of the Authority. All co-options are to be reviewed annually."
1. Change the maximum number of co-opted members from one-eighth to one-fifth of the number of ordinary BAUK members.
2. Add that co-options can also be made for the purpose of improving the diversity and skills balance of the BAUK membership.