Clause
59
Panel
member continuing though ceasing to be
Commissioner
John
Healey:
I beg to move amendment No. 370, in
clause 59, page 30, line 36, after
‘until’ insert ‘—
(a)’.
The
Chairman:
With this it will be convenient to discuss
Government amendments Nos. 371 to
377.
John
Healey:
May I own up to the Committee, Mr.
Illsley? We have spotted a loophole. We did not spot it earlier, but we
have spotted it now, and the amendments are designed to close it. I
hope that if I briefly explain to Members what the loophole is, they
will agree that the amendments are appropriate. It involves a curious
situation that could arise. Clauses 59 and 73 could allow an
ex-commissioner to opt to prolong their term of office until the end of
a particular examination, regardless of whether or not they had been
removed from that examination by the chair—in other words, even
though they were no longer conducting or involved in the examination.
[Interruption.] Does the right hon. Gentleman want me to give
way?
Mr.
Curry
indicated
dissent.
John
Healey:
If an ex-commissioner opted to prolong their term
of office after they had already been removed from the panel, they
would be treated as a commissioner, paid a salary and any other
benefits, but would not do any work for it. We are anxious that such a
situation should not arise, but it could at the moment.
Mrs.
Jacqui Lait (Beckenham) (Con): I shall not detain the
Committee for long. I am grateful that the Government have spotted that
loophole. I wish that they would pick up on a few of the loopholes that
we have spotted, but never mind. We are happy to accept the
amendments.
Amendment agreed
to.
Amendments
made: No. 371, in clause 59, page 30, line 37, after
‘application’ insert ‘,
or
(b) (if earlier) the ex-Commissioner
ceases to be a member of the
Panel.’.
No.
372, in
clause 59, page 30, line 39, after
‘until’ insert ‘—
(a)’.
No. 373,
in
clause 59, page 30, line 41, after
‘application’ insert ‘,
or
(b) (if earlier) the ex-Commissioner
ceased to be a member of the Panel.’.—[John
Healey.]
Clause
59
, as amended,
ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clauses
60 and 61 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
62
Membership
of Panel where application relates to land in
Wales
Dan
Rogerson:
I beg to move amendment No. 282, in
clause 62, page 31, line 27, leave
out ‘or’.
The
Chairman:
With this it will be convenient to discuss
amendment No. 283, in clause 62, page 31, line 28, at end
insert ‘or
(c) a Commissioner who
is conversant in the Welsh
language.’.
Dan
Rogerson:
This is a relatively minor point, but it could
be significant to some people who are concerned with individual
applications. There is only one Committee member present who represents
a Welsh constituency, as the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy is
not here. [Interruption.] There are two members—I
apologise to the hon. Member for Clwyd, West. I spotted one, but I had
not looked over my right shoulder. I hope, then, that there will be
even more support for the amendment than I had anticipated.
The amendment is about the
Welsh language. I am a great supporter of the Cornish language, but,
unfortunately, we are not quite at the stage when people will need to
give evidence in the Cornish language regarding an application in
Cornwall. I am grateful to the Department for Communities and Local
Government for supporting the Cornish language and for giving it some
funding for the first
time.
2.45
pm
John
Healey:
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his
comments, and I will make sure that those responsible in the
Departments know about them. Would it be in order if he were to move
the amendment in Cornish, Mr.
Illsley?
Dan
Rogerson:
Meur ras. I can say thank you, and that is about
it.
Alun
Michael (Cardiff, South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op):
Rwy’n barod iawn i ateb yng
Nghymraeg.
Dan
Rogerson:
Meur ras, I
think.
The
Chairman:
Order. In English
please.
Dan
Rogerson:
Sadly, I grew up in Cornwall at a time when the
language was not receiving funding and was not available in school. I
am sure that the Minister is following the debate on a single written
form, which will allow it to be pushed out into schools in the
community a lot more. However, the amendment relates to the Welsh
language, which has a significant and growing community that includes
not only those who use it as a second language, but those who use it as
their first language. That is the
point.
There
have been debates and Bills in this place and consideration in the
courts about the use of the Welsh language and the ability of people to
be cross-examined in Welsh and to have their case heard by a
Welsh-speaking jury. Where we are discussing provisions for the Welsh
Assembly to advise on the appointment of members to the commission, it
would be beneficial for one of those members to have an understanding
of the Welsh language. We have already heard about the many wind farm
applications in north Wales, and there may be other significant
projects that fall within the provisions of the Bill and that are heard
by the commission. I am sure
that it would benefit those people who have Welsh as their first
language to be able to give evidence in Welsh. I hope that the Minister
will consider accepting the
amendment.
Mr.
Curry:
On a point of information, Mr. Illsley.
European regulations, which are printed in all sorts of different
languages, can sometimes lead to great confusion simply because one
concept does not translate easily into another language. For example,
the German word “Raum” is not the same as the English
word “room”, and I remember that huge problems arose with
the regulations concerning the slaughter of poultry on the question
whether rooms had to be provided for vets or whether there simply had
to be spaces. If there is a dispute between the Welsh and the English,
which text will take
precedence?
Mr.
David Jones (Clwyd, West) (Con): I feel constrained to
make a contribution to this debate. Over the years, the Conservative
party has shown its adherence to and support for the Welsh language.
The Conservative party piloted the Welsh Language Act 1993
through Parliament, so we yield to no one in our support for the Welsh
language. My concern is not that the commissioner should, so far as is
possible, be able to speak Welsh; it is just a question of
capacity.
We are
talking about appointing commissioners who are experts in their
individual fields. Wales is a small, but highly talented nation.
Unfortunately, the number of fluent Welsh language speakers who are of
working age is relatively small. Among their number are some
distinguished hon. Members, including the hon. Member for Meirionnydd
Nant Conwy and the right hon. Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth. I
am concerned that it may be difficult to find a sufficient pool of, for
example, Welsh-speaking nuclear engineers to form part of the panel.
Welsh-speaking nuclear engineers would probably find it far more
profitable to be employed as expert witnesses rather than as
commissioners. Although I sympathise with the thrust of the hon.
Gentleman’s amendment, in practice it is probably
unattainable.
Alun
Michael:
This is probably an attempt by the Liberal
Democrats to look positive and sympathetic about the Welsh language,
which is always welcome, but it is inappropriate in these
circumstances. The fact of the matter is that, because of the greater
use of Welsh in a variety of circumstances, such as court and tribunal
proceedings, public bodies in Wales are used to dealing with the
language and ensuring that that is done appropriately. I hope that the
Minister will tell us that, in accordance with the modern requirement
for public bodies to have policies on how to deal with the Welsh
language, the new body will always look at making it possible for
people to give evidence in the language of their choice and for
appropriate arrangements to be made, if a commissioner were to need
that capacity.
I agree with
the hon. Member for North Cornwall that the important thing is to have
the right people in place with the right competencies, rather than
having artificial constraints on the appointment of commissioners.
The issue is more about how things have changed over the years, in part
because education has developed over many years. The hon. Member for Clwyd,
West has mentioned the Conservative party’s support for the
Welsh Language Act 1993. The increased use of the language in areas
where it was not previously available or spoken is largely due to the
considerable generosity of Labour authorities, often in
non-Welsh-speaking areas, in promoting the teaching of Welsh over many
years.
The point is
that the artificial limitation proposed for the appointment of
commissioners is inappropriate. I hope that we will hear from the
Minister that appropriate provision will be made for Welsh in those
arrangements, as in all others.
Mr.
Elfyn Llwyd (Meirionnydd Nant Conwy) (PC): May I first
apologise for not being present at the beginning of the debate? The
right hon. Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth made the point well
that, as a public body, the new body must have a Welsh language policy.
Therefore, the points that concern the hon. Member for North Cornwall
will be dealt with within that
body.
John
Healey:
Clause 62 will ensure, as hon. Members have
recognised, that as far as is reasonably practical, any panel that
considers an application for a major project in Wales will have among
its members a commissioner who has been nominated by Welsh Ministers.
We have said that there will be two or three such commissioners, or a
commissioner whom Welsh Ministers are content should be considered in
that way.
The
amendments would add a third option, so that a member of the panel
would be able to speak Welsh. We all agree that it would be excellent
if at least one member of a panel considering a Welsh application were
able to speak Welsh and to understand anyone who wished to be heard in
that language. However, it is extremely likely that one of the criteria
that any Welsh Minister will want to consider when nominating a
potential member of the commission will be the ability to speak Welsh.
We will discuss that matter with Welsh Ministers when we come to
specify in our advertisements the skills and competencies that we are
looking for in potential applicants. In the spirit of devolution, I
think that that is something that the Committee should leave in the
hands of Welsh Ministers. Well intentioned as the amendments are, I am
not sure that they would either add flexibility in appointing
commissioners or, in the case of a panel or single commissioner
considering an application in Wales, ensure that someone is found with
the right skills for the job.
Dan
Rogerson:
I am grateful to the Minister for that reply and
to all hon. Members who have given me the benefit of their experience,
particularly the three former Welsh Ministers who have participated in
the debate. The amendment is not an attempt to make a political point
for the Liberal Democrats; it is a personal point, as I am a great
supporter of all the Celtic languages, and wherever I see the
opportunity to try and promote them, I will. In passing, I will mention
that my mother is Welsh, although she is an English
speaker from the valleys. I was also at university in Aberystwyth, where
I had the benefit of hearing the Welsh language in action a great
deal.
I accept what
the Minister is saying. We do not want to fetter too greatly the Welsh
Ministers in deciding whom they would like to recommend. However, we
have added to the list of qualities that the special people whom the
Government will seek must have. The issue of social skills was raised
earlier. When considering applications in Welsh, an important
consideration could be that the candidate can understand contributions
made by members of the public and objectives in both languages that are
in common use in Wales. I certainly will not push the matter to a vote,
but I am glad that we have had this debate and that the Minister has
considered the importance of the Welsh
language.
Amendment,
by leave,
withdrawn.
Clause
62 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clauses
63 to 65 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
66
Panel
to decide, or make recommendation in respect of,
application
Amendment
proposed: No. 206, in clause 66, page 32, line 40, at beginning
insert ‘Subject to subsection (1A)
below,’.—[Mrs.
Lait.]
Question
put, That the amendment be
made:—
The
Committee divided: Ayes 6, Noes
11.
Division
No.
13
]
Question
accordingly negatived.
Clause 66 ordered to stand
part of the
Bill.
| 
