UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 348-ivHouse of COMMONSMINUTES OF EVIDENCETAKEN BEFOREWELSH AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
THE PROPOSED NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
FOR
|
|
1. |
This is an uncorrected transcript of evidence taken in public and reported to the House. The transcript has been placed on the internet on the authority of the Committee, and copies have been made available by the Vote Office for the use of Members and others.
|
|
2. |
Any public use of, or reference to, the contents should make clear that neither witnesses nor Members have had the opportunity to correct the record. The transcript is not yet an approved formal record of these proceedings.
|
|
3. |
Members who receive this for the purpose of correcting questions addressed by them to witnesses are asked to send corrections to the Committee Assistant.
|
|
4. |
Prospective witnesses may receive this in preparation for any written or oral evidence they may in due course give to the Committee.
|
|
5. |
Transcribed by the Official Shorthand Writers to the Houses of Parliament: W B Gurney & Sons LLP, Hope House, Telephone Number: 020 7233 1935 |
Oral Evidence
Taken before the Welsh Affairs Committee
on
Members present
Dr Hywel Francis, in the Chair
Nia Griffith
Mrs Siān C James
Mr David Jones
Alun Michael
Mark Pritchard
Hywel Williams
Mark Williams
________________
Witnesses: Mr Alun Ffred Jones AM, Minister for Heritage, Mr Huw Onllwyn Jones, Head of Welsh Language and Media Policy, and Ms Nerys Arch, Senior Lawyer, Legal Services Department, Welsh Assembly Government, gave evidence.
Q287 Chairman: (Through an Interpreter) Good afternoon. May I extend a very warm welcome to all of you to the Welsh Affairs Committee. I would like you to introduce yourselves to the Committee, please.
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) I am Alun Ffred Jones, Minister for Heritage at the Welsh Assembly Government.
Ms Arch: (Through an Interpreter) I am Nerys Arch. I am with the Legal Department at the Welsh Assembly Government.
Mr Huw Jones: (Through an Interpreter) I am Huw Onllwyn Jones from the Language Unit at the Welsh Assembly Government.
Q288 Chairman: (Through an Interpreter) Thank you very much. Can I please ask you to raise your voices. Please do not be shy and do not be scared of shouting at us! We are not scared of you. What evidence do you have to suggest that there is a sufficient demand for this Order and have you undertaken research into this?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter)
We are of the opinion that there is a
demand and, yes, we have undertaken consultations on a broad level with a
cross-section of society in
Q289 Mark Williams: Minister, why do you believe that the 1993 Welsh Language Act is inadequate, and how do you see the proposed Order as being more effective than current legislation?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) Once again, the Welsh Language Board deals,
of course, with the implementation of the 1993 Act and they themselves have
said they believe the Act, as it currently stands, is inadequate. It is inadequate because there is uncertainty
in relation to its implementation. There
is a lack of consistency within areas with certain bodies or companies included
and others not included within sectors, and of course evidence that you
yourselves have heard from experience in
Q290 Mark Williams: This Committee has heard evidence from some sections of the private sector who still advance the voluntary route specifically. We heard from the CBI. We had a different viewpoint, I think, from the representatives of the Federation of Small Businesses, who I know you have met with. Why do you feel a legislative route is necessary rather than the voluntary route which some are still arguing for?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter)
Well, of course it is evidence from this
Order that the majority of the private sector are outside the scope of the
Order, so the vast majority of the private sector are actually outside and we
will continue to depend upon the agreements, voluntary agreements, if you like,
in those cases. We do note certain specific
areas within the private sector where we believe there is a need for them to
come under the scope of the Order and they are generally in the utilities
sector, the water and energy sectors, things which come under the scope of the
1993 Act or which have operated voluntarily under that system. So what is important is that we create this
level playing field, if you like, between the different bodies or between those
different companies and they are the kinds of services which are essential to
the way in which society lives. It is
not just an option to have water or energy into the home, or whatever, so that
really is the criteria. The other area
which has been included in the LCO as it stands is the area of
telecommunications and it is important to note, I think, that the current
Government here in Westminster has recently stated, for example, that there is
a need to have broadband into all homes in the United Kingdom, which shows how
essential telecommunications are to the way in which we live these days. So I accept that a number of bodies within
the private sector have stated some uncertainty about this, but the majority
are supportive of the principle of having the power to legislate transferred to
the Assembly. I think that is what you
would expect the sector to say. I think
I am right in saying that the current Government in
Q291 Mark Williams: Of course, there are precedents around the world where what you are suggesting does work perfectly adequately in the telecommunications sector and elsewhere. We had evidence from Catalonia last week to this Committee.
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter)
Well, you have answered your own
question yourself really, have you not?
In asking it, it was noting that if you buy a relatively new mobile
phone these days you will have a choice of languages on the screen, and of
course you can receive minority languages, if that is the correct term for
them, lesser used languages, if you like, such as
Q292 Mark Pritchard: The Welsh Language Board have told us that they have insufficient powers of enforcement under existing legislation. How do you think the LCO, as drafted, will change that? What new powers do you think are required and what new powers do you think the LCO gives?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter)
As you said, the Welsh Language Board
have stated clearly that they feel the powers are not currently adequate. When a situation arises where a public body
does not respond adequately to a problem or a shortcoming which the Board have
identified, having received a complaint, and it is not possible to change that
under the current legislation the Order, as it has been formulated, permits us
to create a system then whereby that sanction could be strengthened. We, of course, have talked about creating the
role of a Commissioner and part of the work of the Commissioner would be to
deal with cases of that nature. Once
again, as in the last answer, there are examples across
Q293 Mark Pritchard: The Welsh language is lyrical, it is poetic, it is a very beautiful language and as somebody who, when growing up, spent a large part of my childhood in Wales, whilst I am not fluent I do appreciate and recognise the value of the language. Would you say that the Welsh language is something which unifies Wales?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter)
That is a very good question. I think the Welsh language is one of
Q294 Hywel Williams: (Through an Interpreter) Good afternoon. I need to be careful that I do not actually go after the issue of measures, but you yourself referred to the role of an ombudsman. If you could just confirm in a few words, perhaps, would a Commissioner have the function of an Ombudsman, somebody to enforce it if the need arose? Is that where the enforcement role would lie?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) You have noted that I do not want to discuss the issue of the measures this afternoon, and I do not, but what has been said clearly in the One Wales document is that the Government would, of course, wish to see the establishment of the role of a Commissioner, would wish to give the rights to receive services through the medium of Welsh and provide equal status to both Welsh and English. The exact nature of the role of the Commissioner is something to be discussed further, but certainly you would expect that a person or a Commission would have some role in enforcement, of course.
Chairman: (Through an Interpreter) Thank you. I hope the public and the press realise that it was actually a member of Plaid Cymru who asked that question about the measure. That is the last time such a question will be asked in this Committee
Q295 Mr David Jones: (Through an Interpreter) The LCO lists categories of bodies which come under the measure rather than naming individual bodies. Do you think the LCO is clear enough about which bodies are included and which are not included as it is drafted?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) The intention of the LCO as it currently stands is to build upon the 1993 Act. So the LCO includes each of those bodies which come under the 1993 Act and also those bodies which have volunteered to come under the 1993 Act. So the intention is that all of those will be included. But the intention of the LCO as drafted with categories of bodies listed is to ensure you have the flexibility in the future. If, for example, there is a change in the way public services are offered and that some might be privatised, or whatever, then that service is included within the scope of the measure as it will be drafted and formulated. Of course, it is a matter for the measure then and deliberations which will occur in formulating the measure to decide which bodies exactly will come within the ambit of the measure as it will be drafted, but I think the definitions as they stand are quite clear. As I say, it is a matter for the measure then and for the Assembly in dealing with the debates and it will be up to them to then decide which exact bodies will come under the measure.
Q296 Mr David Jones: Presumably you gave considerable thought to which categories should come within the scope of the proposed matter 20.1. Can you tell the Committee what was your rationale for deciding upon each of those individual categories?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) I think I tried to explain that in my previous response, i.e. in looking at the scope of the 1993 legislation, you have, as we know, something over 500 bodies where there are language schemes in creation and certainly our intention then is to build upon those bodies and those services which are offered. The best way of doing that is to create categories of bodies which will include all of those and will then allow flexibility for the future if, say, a new body was to be created which fell within those categories, including providing services to the public. That really is the important criteria. It is the issue of providing a service to the public and that liaison between the public and the service which is being offered and ensuring the element of bilingualism is included in that service, even though what you would expect from bodies would vary from body to body depending on the nature of that body.
Q297 Mr David Jones: In particular, you have got three types of utility suppliers - gas, water and electricity. There are, of course, other types of energy suppliers who are not included within that. We had evidence last week from Npower and E.ON, who described it as anomalous, for example, that it is only gas and electricity of all forms of energy that are actually included in that category. Why did you not, for example, widen it to energy rather than gas and electricity?
Mr Alun Jones: This is partly historical in the sense that these were nationalised utilities, of course, and therefore the way the legislation has developed over the years has come from that perception of these as essential building blocks of society. I presume that "electricity services" will include any form of electricity however it is produced. It is not confined to electricity from gas, for example, or from any other particular power source. It is the interface between the service and the public that is important.
Q298 Mr David Jones: Yes, but, for example, you have not got petrol and you have not got diesel. I understand that you refer to this being a legacy of privatisation, but nevertheless we are living in a different environment now, we have moved on from then, and whilst I can fully understand the historic reasons for including both gas an electricity it does seem to me anomalous that other forms of energy are excluded.
Mr Alun Jones: Well, it says, "gas, water or electricity services", so "electricity services" can include electricity produced from any source including hydroelectric.
Q299 Mr David Jones: Yes, but nevertheless it is confined to electricity as a form of energy. It does not extend, for example, to the supply of diesel or the supply of petrol?
Mr Alun Jones: No, it does not. To be fair, the electricity services is what you would expect a person in a household to receive. That is the service they receive. I think if you extended it to what you were suggesting - petrol, for example - you would be extending it to private businesses and garages, and so forth.
Q300 Mr David Jones: I am not suggesting you should extend it. The point I am drawing to your attention is the fact that other witnesses have described this as "anomalous".
Mr Alun Jones: I do not think it is anomalous. It is an attempt to capture the situation and to ensure that households have the choice of interfacing with the suppliers in their chosen language.
Q301 Mr David Jones: What about other services such as banking, insurance?
Mr Alun Jones: The scope of the LCO is the scope of the LCO and this is the agreement we had. There is an argument to be made about banking, and of course some of the High Street banks actually do provide elements of bilingual services, but this is the list we are agreed upon.
Q302 Mr David Jones: Could you expand on that point, "This is what was agreed"? Agreed between whom?
Mr Alun Jones: Well, agreed by the Government.
Q303 Mr David Jones: With whom?
Mr Alun Jones: This is a Government proposal and the Government LCO and these are the services we think it is right and proper should be included.
Q304 Mr David Jones: Would you regard insurance or banking services as services to the public, public services?
Mr Alun Jones: I suppose there is an argument to be made, but we are talking about building and developing, of course, the 1993 Act and that is why these particular elements are included.
Q305 Mr David Jones: So effectively you would regard what is proposed here as being a development of the 1993 legislation?
Mr Alun Jones: Certainly, yes.
Mr David Jones: Thank you.
Q306 Mrs James: (Through an Interpreter) Good afternoon. Minister, you have already talked about the private sector and if I could ask you more questions about that, the private sector representatives have expressed concerns about the lack of information available in relation to what they could face under future legislation. How, then, have you worked with and engaged with the private sector in preparing this LCO?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) There is a number of meetings which have taken place with the private sector. I am sure I have got a list of them somewhere here and I am sure you yourselves have also got a list in the evidence I have submitted to you. I am not going to read them all out, but they include services such as trains, energy, telecoms, water, postal services, et cetera, so there has been quite a lot of discussion with the private sector. What the sector says in terms of its concerns about what will happen is that it is quite understandable but it will actually be a matter for the measure to decide. Of course, you must remember that there is no hidden list which is suddenly going to appear. The duties we would wish to impose upon the bodies which are listed are a matter of discussion and open debate, as any measure which is discussed in this place, and evidence will be called and people will bring their cases forward. In essence, I go back to the point that we are really trying to develop the 1993 Act and we have examples and we have examples from the private sector about what is expected under the 1993 Act, for example the water service in Wales, and that is a kind of level of duty which you would expect in outline really without tying us to anything specifically. That really in outline is the pattern you are looking at. You can also look at the companies which have done this voluntarily, such as BT, which was again in this context of the contract between the company and the customer. That is what we are concentrating on and that is where we are going to concentrate our energy when it comes to drawing up the measure.
Q307 Mrs James: (Through an Interpreter) Thank you. The telecommunications sector has given evidence to us here and they have told us quite plainly and clearly that they are a bit concerned about what is happening. For example, Virgin Media has a large centre in the Swansea east area and I have been to see the company to talk about the problems and what is happening down in the centre, but they have said that they are concerned about the additional costs which will be incurred if they have to - at the moment they do not have much demand for Welsh regional services, so they are concerned, and other companies are concerned. So why have you included this sector?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) The rationale for naming the sector is quite
clear. As I have said, the current
Government has noted how important telecommunications now is to the way in
which we live. It is not just an add-on
to society any more. Broadband and
mobile phones, et cetera, and more and more services are going to be offered
through these means, so I think it is essential that this area is included,
particularly when you talk about trying to promote the Welsh language amongst
young people. You know just as well as I
do how children use the whole range of communications and the new technology
and I think it is very important that the Welsh language should have its place
within that particular area. In terms of
cost, of course what is important again is that we create a level playing field
between the companies which operate in the field. For example, one company in
Q308 Mr David Jones: Getting back to energy production, I told you that the evidence we had from E.ON and Npower was that they regarded certain anomalies in the proposed Order as drafted. One of them was in connection with energy production. They took the view that energy production was not an endeavour which had a consumer-facing stance. It was anomalous for energy production to be included in the draft Order. What would you say to that?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) Let us just start then with the energy companies in general. A number of the companies which supply energy or electricity to our homes already have bilingual policies in the way in which they deal with customers, so there is no problem in that respect in essence. Talking then about the companies which produce electricity, there are two things here. We do not know in the future what the shape and form of the industry will be and so the production companies could also become companies which offer services, so it is important that we are ready for that and that the legislation can deal with that. More importantly, any company which produces electricity has to produce it somewhere and if a company which produces electricity wanted to establish a station, whether that is a nuclear station or a hydroelectricity station, or any kind of station, then that process would mean they would deal with the public. Therefore, it is important that when those companies do that the bilingual provision becomes a natural part of that process. That is why we have included the production companies. I accept, of course, that in energy from day to day there is very little liaison with those companies and the customers, but if you take, for example, in my constituency the Denorwick electricity scheme, the company there attracts people and invites people in to look at the way in which that operates and contacts schools very often. It is important, therefore, that that provision is available bilingually with them for dealing with the public.
Q309 Mr David Jones: Could not the same argument apply to almost any industry because, after all, any company operating in Wales will interface with the public to a greater or lesser extent? Does that not show your argument as being tenacious, really? If your argument is that you have to have the necessary powers because electricity supply companies interface with the public, you could say that, for example, about banks, insurance companies, about any company which operates within Wales.
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) No, the companies which produce energy produce electricity and electricity is one of the essentials of life for everyone. In that respect there is a direct link between their activity and the way in which people live their lives. That is why I think it is important that we do include them, and they do come under the 1993 Act anyway and so it is important that we do not lose any companies out of that system. In due course, perhaps somebody in the future may see that there is a need to broaden the provisions to include, for example, banks, but at the moment what we believe is important is that we confirm the 1993 legislation and ensure that all companies or bodies which are included under the 1993 Act are included within the new legislation in order for us to confirm that situation and therefore we do not want to see anybody being lost out of the system.
Q310 Nia Griffith: (Through an Interpreter) Minister, why have you decided then to include the railways but not other forms of public transport like bus services, ships and airports?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) Partially this again is historically because the railways come under the 1993 Act, but not all aspects are included under the 1993 Act, quite strangely. For example, I am almost sure it is safe to say that under the current legislation the ticket sales service actually is not included, so it is important that we include railways and that all aspects of the work of the railways are included in the current legislation. That is why railways have been included. You have asked about bus services. To the extent that bus companies have contracts with local government - and many of them do - and also they receive public subsidies, then it is very possible that some companies or perhaps very many companies will come under the scope of the legislation and we believe it is in those areas it is important that local authorities will place those duties upon them, but at the moment that is the rationale of it, i.e. that we need to make the area consistent within railways and then those companies which receive public funds or have contracts with the public sector would be included in that way.
Q311 Hywel Williams: (Through an Interpreter) I wanted to ask you a question on the issue of the £200,000 question. First of all, how did you come to a decision on that figure of £200,000 as a minimum for bodies receiving public funds to come under the Order?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) The issue of £200,000 - we have reached that
for a number of reasons. You must
remember also that any body must also offer services to the public. It is not sufficient just that you are
receiving the money, you actually have to offer a service to the public. The kinds of body we felt it was important to
include, which are not currently included, are independent bodies, of course,
like the Botanic Gardens or the Millennium Centre in
Q312 Hywel Williams: (Through an Interpreter) Yes, that was one of the things I was going to ask you, actually, when I noticed it was £200,000 or more, a minimum of £200,000. Do you have any idea then of the number of these which would be likely to be caught in this?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) I have referred to two specific bodies and those are the kinds of bodies we would expect. Once again, this is consistent with the rest of the Order, which attempts to provide flexibility into the future so that if there is another body which may be created which is perhaps offering a service to the public and which receives a significant amount of money from the taxpayer, then that, too, could be included without having to name individual bodies. That is the problem when you do name individual bodies.
Q313 Hywel Williams: (Through an Interpreter) You have answered the question more or less in terms of bodies receiving a one-off grant, a one-off payment. Questions have been asked about bodies receiving Lottery funding. Would they then, for example, come under the LCO?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) The principle we have in relation to the Lottery is that the Lottery is a pot of money which exists outside of the natural system of public funding. I know there are arguments and deliberations to be had around that, but I think it is a cleaner and similar system to keep the Lottery grant funding outside of the scope of the Order.
Ms Arch: (Through an Interpreter) Lottery money would come within the definition in clause (b) of the definition of public money, but only to the extent that that funding is given to those bodies which actually allocate and distribute Lottery funding. It does not bring the grant recipient bodies into the scope of the LCO under that definition. Perhaps they come in under a different clause, but not in relation to that clause.
Q314 Mrs James: (Through an Interpreter) Turning now then to education, why has education not been included in the proposed Order and could this impact on the right to have Welsh medium education?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) The reason why education is not included is because we are of the opinion that there are adequate powers within the Assembly, within the field of education, to respond to the needs we would anticipate are needed to provide Welsh medium education. I know that the 1993 Act refers, of course, to one aspect of creating Welsh education plans, but to be honest the situation is one post-1993 means that the current powers are not adequate. So you could ask then, "Why do you not insist that there are more powers?" but we believe that the powers do exist there within the Assembly already within the education department and that that is the appropriate way forward to develop Welsh medium and bilingual education in Wales.
Q315 Mrs James: (Through an Interpreter) You are confident then that that is not going to impact upon people's rights?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) You may know, perhaps, that there is a Welsh medium education strategy being developed by the Welsh Assembly Government at the moment which will be directly involved with this particular area and the powers which are available to the Government are adequate for implementing that strategy.
Q316 Mark Williams: A general question but one which, I think, underpins the whole debate. Matter 20.1 includes provision for "Promoting or facilitating the use of the Welsh language; and the treatment of Welsh and English languages on the basis of equality". What does the provision in the LCO for the treatment of both languages on the basis of equality actually mean?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) I think I am right in saying that that treatment of Welsh and English on the basis of equality actually stems from the 1993 Act and that term is comprehensible. It means that you can bring measures in which would promote the Welsh language in order to offer a service which corresponds with what is available in English, but it does not mean that you have to ensure that the same level of service is available in Welsh as in English at all times because there is no need to have that and that would be unreasonable and very difficult to operate.
Q317 Mark Williams: But it is very much building on the provisions, as you say, of the 1993 legislation?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) Yes, it is a development of the 1993 Act and permits them to do anything which promotes the use of the Welsh language, and that is what we will be trying to do through the measures.
Q318 Chairman: (Through an Interpreter) Could I ask a question about the status of the English language? The Explanatory Memorandum makes reference to the Welsh Assembly Government's intention to, in your words, "confirm official status for both Welsh and English". Have you looked into the situation or any constitutional difficulties which could arise on the basis of the fact that there is no Act stating that English is the official language of the United Kingdom?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) This is an area where the lawyers themselves can have a field day and I am sure there will be an awful lot of deliberations on this in the future but, as I understand it, if there is a need it is possible to ensure that status can be conveyed both to English and Welsh if it is needed. The problem, as you have stated, with the words "official status" is that it is not defined within legislation at the moment, so any status which is given to the Welsh language through the medium of any measure would have to be tied to specific duties because that is how you define the status of any language, because there is no formal constitution for the United Kingdom. So you would tie the status to the service you would be offering rather than making a statement, an unclear symbolic statement, about that. I do not know if that answers your question.
Chairman: (Through an Interpreter) I think Mr David Jones is very keen to ask a question on that.
Q319 Mr David Jones: Yes. I would be interested in asking Ms Arch, actually. Do you know what body would be responsible for the administration of the official status of the Welsh language were this proposal to come to fruition?
Ms Arch: I am not sure that is a legal matter. That is more of a policy matter.
Q320 Mr David Jones: I am going to lead into a legal question, but perhaps we can have a policy answer. Mr Jones, which body would be responsible for the oversight of the official status of the Welsh language?
Mr Alun Jones: As I tried to explain, there is a difficulty here in terms of making a statement about the official status of any language, the Welsh language as well, and that is why I said the status of a language is connected to the services provided through the medium of that language, and that is what would have to be done in terms of any status given to the Welsh language. It would have to be linked to the duties imposed on any organisation or company.
Q321 Mr David Jones: I understand that. Do you envisage a language commissioner?
Mr Alun Jones: A language commissioner is part of our intention.
Q322 Mr David Jones: A Welsh language commissioner?
Mr Alun Jones: A Welsh language commissioner.
Q323 Mr David Jones: It could be an English language commissioner?
Mr Alun Jones: There is no intention of that.
Q324 Mr David Jones: So you would have two languages, Welsh and English, both with official status but a commissioner only for the Welsh language?
Mr Alun Jones: The intention of the LCO as it stands is to create the post of a Welsh Language Commissioner and that Commissioner is there specifically to develop and expand services through the medium of Welsh because there are deficiencies there. That is the purpose of a Language Commissioner. I am not aware that there is any need for a commissioner to protect the services through the medium of English. I presume that in general even if the services themselves are not always excellent, there is no issue ever about whether those services are available through the medium of English.
Q325 Mr David Jones: Interestingly, evidence we have had from other witnesses where language commissioners have been created shows the usually - not invariable, but usually - the commissioner has oversight of all official languages.
Mr Alun Jones: That is not correct. That is not the case in
Q326 Mr David Jones: It is in Quebec, for example.
Mr Alun Jones: I would suggest to you that the situation in Quebec is very different from the situation in Wales, and in fact that is true of practically all the examples we can give, that the context in which any language measure is introduced is very, very different from one place to another and I would suggest that the situation between French and English in Quebec is not remotely similar to the situation between the Welsh language and the English language in Wales.
Q327 Mr David Jones: Can I ask Ms Arch the legal question, then? Can you tell me, Ms Arch, where in the Government of Wales Act 2006 is provision made for the Assembly to make any declaration whatever in respect of the English language? It has such power in respect of the Welsh language. That is specifically provided. Where is the power in respect of the English language?
Ms Arch: The matter proposed in the current LCO proposes to give the Assembly power to treat both Welsh and English languages equally. Therefore, if a provision is to be made in respect of the Welsh language, that LCO gives the power also to make equivalent legal provision in respect of the English language.
Q328 Mr David Jones: It does not refer to the English language at all in the Act, does it?
Ms Arch: No, but the matter, which goes under the field of Welsh language, refers to producing equality of treatment between both Welsh and English languages and as such we would say that relates to the field of the Welsh language.
Chairman: Mr Jones, Mr Hywel Williams wishes to ask a supplementary question. I will come back to you in a second.
Q329 Hywel Williams: (Through an Interpreter) I am not a lawyer, so it appears to me that the only relationship which this LCO has in relation to the English language in official status terms is comparing the status of the Welsh language and the English language, and that is why the English language is in, so that you can see that it is there. As far as I can see, there is really no question about its validity and the reason there is that we can make sure then that under certain circumstances the Welsh language should have the same status. Is that a reasonable description of the situation?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) A number of politicians have said that
certainly since the debate around the 1993 Act, of course, that the Welsh
language and the English language are official languages in
Q330 Mr David Jones: Ms Arch, notwithstanding your previous answer, would you not say that making a positive declaration of official status for the Welsh language might arguably be regarded as ultra vires under the terms of the Act?
Ms Arch: It is not conventional but I think it is not without precedent to have a declaratory statement in that statute.
Q331 Mr David Jones: If it is not conventional, then it is arguable, do you agree?
Ms Arch: You can argue that. I think it is not without precedent.
Q332 Nia Griffith: (Through an Interpreter) Why does the Order talk about the establishment of freedom to use the Welsh language rather than a right?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) It appears that we have the right to speak Welsh anyway and that is what is said. The freedom to speak Welsh we have, but what has been challenged, of course, has been the right to speak the language amongst people in certain situations, and so the intention is to confirm, if you like, that freedom to speak Welsh and to ensure that nobody can hinder or hamper you from doing that. But in saying that, that does mean that we would have to define that freedom and in doing so you could have examples where you could say that you do not have the freedom. Am I right in saying that? You do not have the freedom to speak Welsh, for example, even though I am not an expert in this particular area, as a lawyer it appears that you could look at the issue of health and safety, for example, as a reason where you would limit somebody's right to speak Welsh.
Q333 Nia Griffith: (Through an Interpreter) So how then would it be possible to limit that right? How would it be possible to limit freedom?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) There are two things here, are there not? One is that we want to confirm that freedom and make it impossible for anyone to stop you from doing that unless there is an adequate reason for doing so. One example of an adequate reason would be, say, the example of a situation where you may endanger someone's health or someone's life by speaking Welsh in certain situations. That, I think, exists already but you would safeguard that freedom in conventional situations, whether it is in the workplace or outside.
Q334 Hywel Williams: (Through an Interpreter) I just want to go back to this question about the validity or a declaration regarding the status of the Welsh language. I know you are not responsible for Scotland at all, but I would like to refer very quickly to the Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005, where it says in the foreword: "An act of the Scottish Parliament to establish a body having functions exercisable with a view to securing the status of the Gaelic language as an official language for Scotland commanding equal respect to the English language." What I want to ask you, Ms Arch, is, do you know of any legal challenge to that statement in terms of its legal validity?
Ms Arch: (Through an Interpreter) This is part of Scottish law and I am afraid that I am not aware whether there has been a challenge or not.
Q335 Hywel Williams: The point, of course, is that this statement has been in place for at least three years and you are not aware of any problem that has arisen?
Ms Arch: (Through an Interpreter) Not as far as I know, no.
Hywel Williams: (Through an Interpreter) Thank you very much.
Chairman: (Through an Interpreter) Mr David Jones is keen to ask another supplementary.
Q336 Mr David Jones: I have been put on the spot again! It is correct to say, is it not, that the word "official" appears in the title of the Scottish Act which Mr Williams referred to? Does it actually appear in the body of the Act?
Ms Arch: I think it does in one section, in delineating the role of the Gaelic Language Board.
Q337 Mr David Jones: Could you possibly let us have a note on that?
Ms Arch: I can, yes.
Mr David Jones: Thank you.
Q338 Chairman: (Through an Interpreter) Could I ask one final question? It is a question relating to cross-border issues. Do you expect there to be any cross-border problems in relation to the Order, for example with transport organisations/companies?
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) The Government of Wales Act, I think, refers
to the fact that our rights - what is the technical term here? - in relation to
Q339 Chairman: (Through an Interpreter) Thank you very much for your evidence today and may I, as Chairman, extend my thanks to you, Minister, for giving your evidence in clear Welsh, a Swansea valley dialect. If you were to provide any official status to any dialect, I hope it will be that particular area of Wales. As the late Ray Gravelle said, "South-west is best."
Mr Alun Jones: (Through an Interpreter) As someone who married a girl from that area, I will consider the matter very carefully!
Witnesses: Mr Wayne David MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Mr Geth Williams, Head of Legislation Policy, and Mr James George, Legal Adviser, Wales Office, gave evidence.
Q340 Chairman: Welcome to the Welsh Affairs Committee once again, Minister. For the record, could you introduce yourself and your colleagues, please.
Mr David: Thank you, Dr Francis. It is nice to be back again. I am Wayne David, Parliamentary
Under-Secretary of State at the
Q341 Chairman: Thank you very much. Could I begin by asking you, Minister, a very straightforward question. Do you agree with the Welsh Assembly Government Minister that the present Welsh language legislation is inadequate?
Mr David: Yes. I think our starting point is that great progress has been made in enhancing the position of the Welsh language over the past few years, but there is scope certainly to enhance the position of the Welsh language and we are in broad agreement with what has been proposed by the Welsh Assembly Government.
Q342 Chairman: What is your evidence of demand for that additional legislation?
Mr David: We are aware of the opinion polls, which were referred to by the Welsh Assembly Government Minister. Also, I think there is a wealth of sometimes anecdotal, sometimes more scientific information to show that the Welsh language is much stronger than it was a few years ago. Perhaps crucially, there is a much broader acceptance of the role of Welsh language in Welsh life than there was before. This certainly applies to the vast majority of Welsh people who are non-Welsh speakers. They significantly believe that the Welsh language is an important part of their culture, as it is obviously central to the culture of Welsh people.
Chairman: Mr David Jones wishes to ask a supplementary.
Q343 Mr David Jones: In terms of assessing the demand for additional information, I understand the Secretary of State is consulting widely. Can you tell the Committee how many bodies he is consulting with?
Mr David: Certainly the Secretary of
State, on receiving the draft legislative LCO, did indicate publicly that he
wanted to have a public consultation and the responses we have had as a result
of that consultation will be passed on for the benefit of this Committee in
terms of its own deliberations. I have
to say there has not been a mass response to the public request from the
Secretary of State. I think there have
been about 70 responses altogether from organisations within
Q344 Mr David Jones: I was just wondering when that consultation process will be regarded as concluded.
Mr David: I think the formal date was announced by the Secretary of State in the second week of April, but certainly he is continuing to receive representations and those representations, as always, will be passed on to this Committee to help you with your work.
Q345 Mr David Jones: So we will have copies of all the responses before we deliver our own report?
Mr David: Yes, you will.
Mr David Jones: Thank you.
Q346 Mark Williams: You talked about the demand, you talked about the progression and we heard earlier from the Minister about the represented progression from the 1993 legislation, but why is it necessary to limit the scope of measures which the Assembly can make in this area rather than transferring wholesale competence over the Welsh language?
Mr David: Certainly in principle the Wales Office supports the fact that the Welsh language should be legislated for by the Welsh Assembly Government, but we recognise that there are practical constraints about a matter of principle. What we have before us is the considered opinion of the Welsh Assembly Government and they are specifically asking for the transfers in the two matters which you have before you.
Q347 Mark Williams: I guess those constraints are described really in the list of categories included in matter 20.1. Do you agree with that approach and do you agree with the specifics of matter 20.1, the areas covered by the LCO?
Mr David: We certainly are in agreement with the approach and support the bid being put forward by the Welsh Assembly Government. We do have some issues ourselves which we would like to discuss further. We are particularly planning to give considerable thought and care to the comments which we have received, but also the deliberations of this Committee as well. The Wales Office and also the Welsh Assembly Government would be extremely interested to receive your considered opinion, particularly on the categories which you have already touched upon in matter 20.1.
Q348 Mark Williams: One of those categories we have heard a lot about in this Committee is telecommunications and we have had some representations suggesting that telecommunications should be withdrawn from the list. We have also heard about the international precedents. What is your view on removing the telecommunications or retaining it in the list?
Mr David: We have also received representations from people in the industry who have expressed their concerns and I think those concerns have to be listened to and addressed. That is why I think it is very important to have this debate about telecommunications in particular. For example, I know that BT have given evidence to this Committee and also made representations to the Wales Office. They are concerned about a number of issues. They are concerned about the practicality of this applying to the telecommunications sector and I have to say it is a very complicated area because the technology is developing apace all the time. It is impossible simply to say that this applies to the current state of technological development, full stop. I think we have to, if possible, look ahead to the future and look at some of the issues there. I also know that concern has been expressed about the fact that there is not to be a voluntary scheme and that there should be a level playing field. I think it is important to look at the practicalities of how this might be achieved. I would add one further point, however. I do take on board the very strong point which is made by the Welsh Assembly Government, that we cannot pre-empt what might be in a measure, but I think that nevertheless it is important for the greatest possible clarity to be given to industry at this time so that they have some sort of idea what might be envisaged for them.
Chairman: This Committee is not interested in discussing the measures, as you know.
Q349 Hywel Williams: You said that the Wales Office has invited submissions and comments. Have you really sought any information on issues which might be of concern to you? I am thinking particularly in terms of telecommunications and I am sure you are aware of the evidence provided to us by the Catalan Government last week, which indicated there seemed to be no real technical problems. Have you, as the Wales Office, sought that sort of information either from other parts of the UK or in any other parts of Europe, or elsewhere?
Mr David: We have had information from industry and we have heard first-hand exactly what their concerns are. We have not, however, received representations directly from other parts of the European Union, but I have to say that I have read the evidence which has been given to your Committee regarding Catalonia and I think it is important to consider that practical example of how it would appear things have not been as problematic as they might have been and put it alongside the concerns which are expressed by some of the companies in this country. I think what we need to do is to have a measured, considered evaluation and come to a conclusion on that basis.
Q350 Hywel Williams: I have to share my concern with you that the representations we had from the telecommunications people here were from their UK representatives, whereas these companies work in several countries and the views of either their parent companies or their subsidiaries abroad perhaps might be somewhat different. That is just a comment.
Mr David: I note your comment!
Q351 Mr David Jones: Minister, you have mentioned that you have certain issues and you have outline telecoms and the potential for additional burdens upon business at this difficult economic time. Are there any other issues you are concerned about?
Mr David: I would emphasise that we are in broad agreement and any points we want further clarification about and think are worthy of debate must be seen in that context. That is the point I make first of all. I do, however, think that if we look at matter 20.1 and, for example, clause (h), we see the phrase, "all those other services which relate to any of those services", our concern is that that might be vague or interpreted in a way which perhaps was not intended by the Welsh Assembly Government. I think that is possibly one area which is worthy of debate so that we can have further clarification on that, because that is an important point. Taking up what you have just mentioned about burdens on businesses, naturally I think we have to be mindful of that, especially at this difficult economic time. We know the clear policy pronouncements of the Welsh Assembly Government with regard to that and we know what the policy intention is, but I think we have to make sure that we have the tightest possible wording in this piece of legislation so that there is no room for doubt or equivocation.
Q352 Mrs James: Are you content that listing categories of bodies is the most effective way of providing clarity regarding which bodies fall within the scope of the proposed Order/
Mr David: I think it is a very practical way to do it. I think we have the advantage of having the 1993 Act, which by common agreement has taken the position of the Welsh language forward and I think this Legislative Competence Order draws much of its practical wording as well as spirit from that very sound piece of legislation in 1993.
Q353 Mrs James: Have you considered whether there are likely to be any cross-border issues arising from the draft LCO? For example - and we have heard a little bit about this - what would be the position of cross-border transport providers?
Mr David: We have not received any
representations from organisations which might be considered to be
cross-border. Obviously we are mindful
of this issue and we think it is something which should be to the fore of the
Welsh Assembly Government's mind when it puts forward measures, but I do not
see it as a huge problem at this stage.
I think it is pretty self-evident that this LCO applies specifically to
Q354 Hywel Williams: Many of our witnesses have called for the list of bodies to be expanded to include those involved in the financial sector, and indeed I have had quite a heavy post bag, I think rather more than the Wales Office has had, though many of those were standard letters, I must confess, topped and tailed, but that has been the call in many of those letters as well. What is your view of including the financial sector and also the statutory insurance sector as well?
Mr David: I understand the strength of the representation you referred to, and of course there is a certain logic there, I cannot deny, but again taking the point that much of the inspiration of this comes from the 1993 Act, I think that is a whole new sector which at this stage the Welsh Assembly Government does not particularly want to delve into. Could I say also that I think that is sensible because we have to be extremely mindful of the critical economic situation we are in and the turmoil which exists in the banking sector in particular.
Q355 Mr David Jones: If I could just follow up that point further. One of the concerns which have been expressed to this Committee - and this certainly applies to the financial services - is that smaller providers might decide not to enter the Welsh market, with the consequence that Welsh consumers would be deprived of an element of competition which people in other parts of the country would enjoy. Is that a concern which the Wales Office has?
Mr David: It is, if you like, a concern in terms of a light motif, which runs through the whole debate we are having, but I do not think it is a particular concern because I think we have to not simply look at the LCO but I think we have to consider the policy pronouncement which the Welsh Assembly Government has made.
Q356 Mr David Jones: Which, of course, can change from time to time?
Mr David: Indeed, that is true.
Q357 Mr David Jones: A similar concern was expressed last week in respect of, for example, electricity services. You now have online such as uSwitch, which encourages people to switch their suppliers. One of the concerns which were expressed was that certain suppliers again might decide not to enter the Welsh market, and again that would be to the disbenefit of Welsh consumers?
Mr David: I have to say that is a theoretical possibility, but I think there is very little practical evidence which has been brought to demonstrate that that scenario could actually come about.
Q358 Mr David Jones: We had evidence before the Committee last week that that was a concern.
Mr David: Well, it is certainly not evidence which has come in my direction.
Q359 Mr David Jones: Presumably you read the evidence we have?
Mr David: I will certainly read that evidence, but I think the Welsh Assembly Government has been very, very mindful of the concerns of businesses and I think the deliberations you have had and which we have had will enhance the body of evidence they have before them when it comes to drawing up the final measures, which are, I remind everybody, the crucial things which will impact upon people at the end of the day.
Q360 Mr David Jones: What was the view of the Wales Office when it saw the suggested £200,000 threshold set out in matter 20.1, paragraph (e)?
Mr David: We think this is another area which there could be clarity and further debate on.
Q361 Mr David Jones: I thought you might say that!
Mr David: Because £200,000 is a very neat figure, but I think there is an argument to be taken further as to why exactly it is £200,000. Some of the representations we have received have drawn some attention to that and expressed some concern. The Law Society, for example, has referred to the fact that there are certain Legal Aid practices which receive in excess of £200,000 per annum and perhaps inadvertently they feel as though they might well be caught in this LCO and any measures which stem from it. So I think there is more of a discussion to be had. I have to say, however, I can see a certain amount of logic in there needing to be a figure, but whether or not that is the best approach we would be very, very interested to have the Committee's considered collective view on that.
Q362 Mr David Jones: What logic can you see for there being a need for a figure?
Mr David: I think that others, for example, have said that there needs to be some sort of threshold otherwise you could be catching a whole host of individuals and organisations who receive very, very small sums of money. So there needs to be some sort of threshold. Whether or not that is perhaps the best figure which can be selected is, I think, a matter for discussion and consideration.
Q363 Mr David Jones: One of the points which has been made, obviously, in today's questioning is the fact that that figure could be eroded by inflation, although that in the present circumstances is probably going to be augmented by deflation. It is a concern as well that that figure may become meaningless in, say, ten years' time.
Mr David: That is possible. It is not my intention to suggest this, but perhaps consideration may be given to some flexibility there -
Q364 Chairman: Or indexation?
Mr David: -- to take into account and indexation would obviously be one method of it. I am not saying that that is necessarily the way forward, but it is worthy of consideration.
Mr Williams: It is worth saying it is a baseline figure as well, it is not necessarily the figure the Assembly would have to legislate on.
Q365 Mr David Jones: I appreciate that, but as time goes on £200,000 in today's terms may, in 20 years, be worth £20,000.
Mr Williams: Yes, indeed, but they could set a threshold of half a million to start with.
Q366 Mr David Jones: Yes. I think it is a concern and I think it is a concern which is clearly shared by the Minister that this is a figure which appears to a certain extent to be plucked out of the air. It seems to me from what the Minister is saying that further deep thought is going on at the moment about that particular matter. Is that fair, Minister?
Mr David: Yes. Discussion is ongoing about it and I realise full well, having looked at some of your evidence session, that this has been an issue raised by other people as well. As I say, it is one of those issues which I think is worthy of further debate in this situation.
Mr Williams: It is an issue not necessarily about the £200,000 alone but also about whether it should apply in more than one financial year.
Mr David Jones: Indeed, yes.
Q367 Alun Michael: I am sorry I missed some of your earlier comments, but the figure can be something like a blink in a nat's eye to a large organisation or the total income of a relatively small organisation. Similarly, the cost impact which results from hitting the threshold, however flexible the threshold is, could be massive for a small organisation and almost insignificant for a large organisation, so without suggesting that you come down with a fresh figure, which obviously would not be realistic at this stage, how do you see it working in practice, wherever the line is drawn?
Mr David: I think a lot will depend on what clearer definition there is at an appropriate stage. We do see some difficulties with that. For example, in matter 22 there is a reference to public monies and monies being made available directly or indirectly by - and there is a whole list of organisations. It is quite possible, for example, that we are talking about grants from the European Union through the European Commission from the structural funds, and it is possible, at least in theory, that organisation might be caught in that respect. It is possible, too, that organisations, bodies operating on an England and Wales basis, might be recipients of grants of whatever kind when they are in England but have an operation in Wales and they might find themselves as part of the stipulation in that respect. So I think there are issues which need to be looked at very, very carefully as far as this is concerned.
Q368 Alun Michael: There is also a difference, is there not, between, for instance, a contractual arrangement where the Assembly or a local authority is buying services and one where a grant is being made. Does that not also raise issues in relation to third sector organisations, voluntary sector organisations?
Mr David: That is quite possible and I know it is of some concern, but also it has to be said some reassurances has been given by the Welsh Assembly Government to the Welsh Council for Voluntary Action, for instance, but it is something which people are worried about. I am just underlining the point that we need to think through very, very carefully the implications on what is quite a complicated issue.
Q369 Alun Michael: I think it is reassuring that you are giving that amount of thought to it, but can I ask at the end of the day, because we are fairly late in the process now, is it the intention that the precise requirements, the precise intentions, will be incorporated into the drafting of the final draft LCO which you bring forward for consideration by the House more widely after these processes have been completed? I think on a number of occasions the Committee has expressed concern that Legislative Competence Orders should be drafted in such a way so that they do precisely what they say on the tin, and is that not important in relation to this type of issue?
Mr David: Yes, that is very, very
important indeed, and of course we have to learn as this process matures, and
of course we want to produce the best piece of legislation possible at the end
of the day. When this Committee comes to
its collective view, I think the Welsh Assembly Government and the Secretary of
State for
Alun Michael: That is helpful. Thank you.
Q370 Hywel Williams: I just want to go back to the competition issue raised by Mr Jones earlier on. Would you agree that establishing a level playing field is the essential principle here, much in the same way as when the minimum wage was brought in by Government, the concerns people had about competition issues then, which were addressed by making sure that it would apply to all and it enabled them to put a requirement on all as well. Would you see that as being a suitable comparison?
Mr David: I think certainly in some ways it is, but the principle of having a level playing field is, I think, a very important principle. As we all know, business organisations and large businesses, large utilities in particular, have said they would prefer a voluntary scheme, but if there is not to be a voluntary scheme then there should be a level playing field. I think that is very, very important so that no particular organisation is disadvantaged. I think that is a cardinal principle which needs to be upheld.
Hywel Williams: Thank you.
Q371 Nia Griffith: You were here, Minister, for the discussion we had with the Assembly Minister and officials on the fact that the Explanatory Memorandum makes reference to the fact that they should want to confirm official status for both English and Welsh. Have you got any further comments to make on that, particularly in respect of any constitutional issues which might arise?
Mr David: No. I have to say that I heard the evidence from the Welsh Assembly Government Minister and we are in broad agreement with the evidence and the case which he has presented. I think the essential starting point is the need to build on and reinforce the 1993 Act, and that is an approach we are in full agreement with.
Q372 Mr David Jones: Mr George, what is your view of this expression "official status" for the Welsh and English languages? Do you understand what that means?
Mr George: It is something which would need to be defined in the sense that it does not have a fixed legal meaning at the moment, but we certainly understand that it means the collection of legal protections and statuses which the Welsh language already has.
Q373 Mr David Jones: You heard the point I made to Ms Arch about whether or not legislating for the English language would be ultra vires given the provisions of the Government of Wales Act. What are your views on that?
Mr George: We certainly accept your starting point. The field that we are talking about is the Welsh language, so the matter which goes into that field has to relate to the Welsh language, but we do agree with the Welsh Assembly Government that the matter about treating English and Welsh on an equal footing is about the Welsh language, it relates to the Welsh language, and that view is reinforced when you look at what existing Welsh language legislation actually does. The treatment of the two languages on the basis of equality is what the Welsh Language Act is about, so I think it is clear to us that when that field was inserted into Schedule 5 for the Welsh language a matter about treating the two languages equally was exactly the kind of thing you would have expected to go in there.
Q374 Mr David Jones: I can understand the equality point fully, but that is not my difficulty. My difficulty, paradoxically, given that we are talking about a Welsh language LCO is that so far as I can see from the Explanatory Memorandum the Welsh Assembly Government proposed to make legislation concerning the status of the English language, in other words by declaring it to be an official language, whereas in fact according to the Act the Assembly has no competence for the English language. Is that not a concern of yours too?
Mr George: It is certainly a point which we considered carefully when we were looking at the proposal, but we do feel that setting out the existing status of the Welsh language and saying that the English language has the same status is within the powers which the Assembly can be given.
Mr David: It might be helpful to you if
I just refer to the comments of Sir Wyn Roberts when he was Minister of State
at the Welsh Office in July 1993 during the passage of the 1993 Act, which
became the Act. He said: "Let me be quite clear. The Government starts from the simple premise
that the Welsh language already enjoys 'official status' and can therefore be
said to be an official language in
Q375 Mr David Jones: Yes, as I say, paradoxically it is not the official status of the Welsh language which concerns me from a legal point of view, it is what is proposed to be done in connection with the English language, which it seems to me is beyond the competence of the Assembly. That is the point I make and it is a matter I would be grateful if you would consider because it is one which does exercise me because I am concerned.
Mr David: But it has to be said, and I say it as an English speaker myself. This Legislative Competence Order is about the position of the Welsh language and we want to ensure that it is as practically best supported as we can.
Q376 Mr David Jones: I fully understand that, but that is not my concern. Maybe I am a bit of an anorak! Being a lawyer, I probably am, but nevertheless it is a matter which concerns me. Can I return to the draft LCO? It includes provisions which could result in Crown bodies, including ministers of the Crown, potentially falling with the scope of the Order. How do you consider this would improve on the duties placed on Crown bodies under existing legislation?
Mr David: We think the issue of Crown bodies is an important consideration. We are quite comfortable with what the Welsh Assembly Government has proposed here and we think that negotiations which are already taking place, which have taken place, will continue and we do not see any particular problem as far as that is concerned.
Q377 Mr David Jones: It seems to me that talk of negotiations at this particular stage of the game is a bit late, is it not?
Mr David: No, because I come back to the very fundamental point that we are talking about a Legislative Competence Order, we are not talking about direct measures, and I think the Assembly Government has given cast iron commitments and granted a full and comprehensive consultation with people who will be impacted upon by any specific measure.
Q378 Mr David Jones: Can I repeat the point I made earlier that of course one Assembly Government cannot bind its successors.
Mr David: That is true, but we
nevertheless accept the principle that it is correct for the Welsh Assembly
Government within certain confines, which are before us, to develop Welsh
language policy as it sees fit for the people of
Q379 Mr David Jones: Your job is to consider the wider impact of that.
Mr David: Indeed, but I am confident that the Welsh Assembly Government is more than capable of doing that.
Q380 Hywel Williams: Do you think there is room for improvement in the sorts of Welsh language services provided by Crown bodies? For example, there is a number of Crown bodies which I understand still do not have a language scheme, so would you agree that there is some room for further development?
Mr David: I think there is room for further development, but I think it is also the case that we have seen a great deal of progress in recent times and I think just about every government department has a policy whereby if somebody writes to them in Welsh they will receive a reply in Welsh and I think that is something which is a matter of government policy and will continue to be developed effectively.
Hywel Williams: Thank you.
Q381 Chairman: Thank you, Minister. Could I thank you for the oral evidence which you have given us today and commend you in particular on the fact that as a Labour minister you have quoted a former Conservative minister in defence of a Plaid Cymru minister bringing forward proposals on behalf of a Labour/Plaid Welsh Assembly Government! Harmony is breaking out all over!
Mr David: It is the first time I have done it. It is probably the last as well!
Q382 Chairman: If you feel there are points which you have not made today, we would, as a Committee, be very pleased to receive them and we will, of course, be looking forward to receiving the findings of the consultation. I know that that has now ended, although you have indicated that you are still receiving the fruits of that consultation. We are keen to be speedily but thoroughly producing our report sometime long before the summer recess and so the sooner we get those findings and also any additional information you wish to share with us then we would be delighted to have them.
Mr David: Could I just say, Chairman, thank you very much indeed for your cooperation and of course the information which I referred to will be passed on to the Committee in full. Could I also say that we do particularly value the opportunity to express our views on other matters, in particular I refer to matter 21 and the issue of what is established by prerogative instruments. We think it is important that you will be able to receive the Wales Office's considered view on that matter in particular.
Q383 Mr David Jones: Chairman, could I ask if the Minister could expand on that? What is your concern about that?
Mr David: For you, Chairman, we think that is one of the other areas which requires clarification because we are worried that bodies which are set up by Royal Charter may again, perhaps inadvertently, consider themselves to be covered by this particular element here. We think that is worthy of consideration. We can think of a number of organisations such as the British Legion, for example, the CBI, Girl Guides, Mother's Union, and we realise full well that it is not the intention of the Welsh Assembly Government to cover these bodies, to include them in any way, but nevertheless this might be an inadvertent consequence and we think, once more, it is worthy of discussion and possible clarification.
Chairman: I am very grateful to you for drawing our attention to that. I am reluctant to open up another set of discussions around those particular issues. We would be very pleased to receive your considered views on that and we may well then respond to you for further clarification, if that is required. Thank you very much.