Question follow-through · 91071
Treasury: Sign Language
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what steps (a) her Department and (b) its public bodies are taking to (i) develop and (ii) use artificial intelligence approaches to British Sign Language.
About this written question
A written question asks a government minister for information in writing. Parliament publishes the question and any answer.
- Answering body
- Treasury
- Tabled
- 13 Nov 2025
- Target answer date
- 17 Nov 2025
- Answer
- 10 Dec 2025 · 27 calendar days after tabling
Elapsed calendar days describe the record timeline, not whether Parliament considers an answer on time.
Votes on this topic
- Draft Code of Practice on Electronic and Workplace Ballots for Statutory Trade Union Ballots · 15 Jul 2026
- Draft Trade Unions (Permissible Means of Voting) and Employment Rights (Unfair Dismissal) (Amendment) Order 2026 · 15 Jul 2026
- Taxation (Energy and Vehicles) Bill Committee: New Clause 5 · 1 Jul 2026
These Commons divisions share a topic label. The question did not necessarily lead to a vote.
Recorded timeline
13 Nov 2025
Question tabled
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what steps (a) her Department and (b) its public bodies are taking to (i) develop and (ii) use artificial intelligence approaches to British Sign Language.
17 Nov 2025
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
10 Dec 2025
Answer published
Across government, there are opportunities to use AI to accelerate the creation of accessible content across public services. If public bodies trial the use of AI in approaches to BSL (British Sign Language), they would be required to conform with both WC...
Official data retrieved 28 Sept 2026.
Later records
Possible follow-up questions
Strong links require the same MP, department and exact heading. Other same-department questions are shown as unreviewed candidates, not as confirmed follow-ups. No debate link is asserted unless a stable source relationship exists.
No later same-department questions indexed.
This is an absence in covered public data, not evidence that no follow-up occurred elsewhere.