Alun
Michael: Indeed I do. As there are fears around, we need
some definition in the legislation. I think that is what the Secretary
of State is trying to reflect, as a lot of it is about
fear. That
brings me to my final point, which is about the fifth and final
challenge. We must ensure that MPs and Assembly Members, including the
Secretary of State and Ministers in the Assembly Government, continue
to develop the teamwork and co-operative approach that has
characterised the work of the Welsh Affairs Committee, which surely has
to be the central principle of devolution. The first 10 years have been
a decade of ups and downs. Sometimes the Welsh Assembly has looked too
inward-looking and too narrow in its focus.
Some Whitehall Departments have not understood that they still have to
engage with Wales in the interests of the Welsh people, and not regard
it as if Wales had drifted offshore by 100 miles. I think we see some
growing maturity and reconnection. Devolution must be an effective
reality—there must be joined-up thinking rather than that sort
of either/or
approach. I
referred earlier to the failure of the shadow Secretary of State, the
hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham, to understand the process, but so
too, as I indicated, has the Presiding Officer of the National Assembly
for Wales. Much of what he said in the lecture at the Eisteddfod this
year was positive and constructive, but he also
said: “If
we wish to make the LCO process more effective and less open to be
obstructed by irrelevant considerations, then in my opinion, whichever
House of Commons’ Committees that scrutinises legislative
competence orders must adopt an attitude more akin to that of the House
of Lords’ Constitutional Committee. Although that Committee of
course takes note of all proposed orders, it does not scrutinise them
unless there is some feature of them which raises constitutional
questions.” That,
with respect to him, misses the point—it is wrong. We need to
scrutinise the power that is being transferred and the terms of that
power, not the Measures that will then emerge as a result. That is a
basic point that the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham and the
Presiding Officer of the Assembly have missed. What happens with
Measures is the business of the Assembly. The power has been
transferred; it is their responsibility. Our responsibility is to
consider what powers transfer and under what conditions. It is the
responsibility of the Welsh Affairs Committee to advise the House,
having properly scrutinised any proposal in the way that has been done
on this occasion.
Let us
celebrate this report and the consensus across four parties on the
potentially contentious issue of the Welsh language. That we can be
united on this topic speaks volumes for the members of the Committee
and, of course, the quality of chairmanship received by the Committee.
It also speaks volumes for the potential of politicians in the National
Assembly for Wales and Welsh Members of Parliament to work together in
the best interests of making devolution a working reality, and to work
together in the best interests of the people of
Wales.
2.46
pm
Mr.
Roger Williams: It is always a great pleasure to listen to
the right hon. Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth; he brings great
experience and knowledge of the Assembly. I am sure that the work of
the Welsh Affairs Committee benefits from that.
I welcome the
opportunity to consider the order in the Welsh Grand Committee; it is
the first time that we have done so. I pay tribute to the Chairman of
the Select Committee, the hon. Member for Aberavon, and all the other
Committee members who have done so well to bring this degree of
consensus to what started out looking like an issue that would bring
great difficulty. That would have been a pity, because I think we all
wish to ensure that the Welsh language is given as much support as
possible so that it can flourish and avoid the dangers of decay and
demise suffered by languages of other small nations.
I am aware
that some Assembly Members wanted this meeting to be cancelled, because
they were concerned that it might delay the LCO process. I agree that
we do not want to delay that process. I listened to the Secretary of
State and his commitment to having the matter debated on the Floor of
the House. Although I welcome that, I want to be assured that the
agreed timetable will continue to be respected and that a debate on the
Floor of the House will not affect it in any
way.
The
Secretary of State for Wales (Mr. Peter Hain):
To reassure the hon. Gentleman, the Assembly is not due to consider the
LCO until next month. It will take into account, for example, what we
are discussing today. However, I am confident that once that has
happened we can get the LCO on to the Floor of the House well before
the end of the year, which is what the Assembly Government have asked
for.
Mr.
Roger Williams: I welcome that reassurance, and I am sure
that other Members welcome it too.
Lembit
Öpik (Montgomeryshire) (LD): My hon. Friend would
presumably agree with me that, although this Secretary of State is
genuinely committed to devolution, and I have faith that there is no
attempt to obfuscate on the implementation of the policy, it
nevertheless shows that if a more anti-devolutionary Government were to
take charge in Westminster, there are many mechanisms they could use to
stall the devolution of further powers to the Assembly. Based on what I
heard this morning, I am not at all comfortable or confident that that
opportunity would not be taken by, for example, a Conservative
Government.
Mr.
Roger Williams: I certainly agree. One of the reservations
that I and my party have about the LCO process is that it is open for
people who are not as committed to passing new powers to the Welsh
Assembly, or who do not look as favourably on doing so, to use the
process to slow down such things, or even stop them altogether. The
right hon. Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth talked about the
Assembly not having the processes—I cannot remember the exact
term—to enable delay to take place. One thing that we have
learned about this place is that if the Government—the party in
power—wish to delay things, that is certainly open to them
through a number of processes, and that makes the LCO not as strong or
robust a way of passing new powers to the Assembly as we would
wish. This
debate has attracted a lot of interest. It is definitely the first time
that I have received so many briefings from lobby groups for a meeting
of the Welsh Grand Committee. The Liberal Democrats, particularly the
Welsh Liberal Democrats, wholeheartedly welcome the order. Since the
passage of the Welsh Language Act 1993, more and more people are using
Welsh as their primary language, as can be seen by the fact that
between 1996 and 2006 10,000 more young people were educated primarily
through the medium of Welsh. The 2001 census showed that 20.8 per cent.
of people used Welsh as their primary language, up from 18.7 per cent.
in the previous census. Some 20 per cent. of children are now educated
in Welsh-medium schools, and I think
that even the most sceptical of those present would recognise that,
particularly among the younger generation, there is greater enthusiasm
for the language and greater ability to speak it, than before the 1993
Act. The greater
number of Welsh speakers is mirrored by people’s desire to
conduct more of their lives in the Welsh language, and by a greater
confidence to speak Welsh and receive material written in Welsh. I
would not for one minute argue that all those who describe themselves
as Welsh speakers want to receive all information in Welsh, but I think
that a sizeable number do, and it is right that they should be given
the opportunity to do so when it is
reasonable. As
we heard earlier in the Committee, take-up rates for the voluntary
schemes have not been great, but I am not sure that Welsh language
provision is always marketed with the same gusto as English language
services. It is also right that one of the reasons why the Welsh
Assembly Government are keen to extend the Act is to continue to
promote the language. The 1993 Act has been extremely successful in
helping to promote the Welsh language, and I have no doubt that that
work will be continued under the measures introduced as a consequence
of the
order. Turning
specifically to the order, I thank the Select Committee for its work in
scrutinising the LCO and for putting forward sensible points in its
report. I also thank the Secretary of State for taking a constructive
approach, and for working with the Assembly to put forward a practical
option that I hope we can all sign up to. The principle is clear: the
Welsh Language Act should be extended. There are obvious candidates for
new provisions to be included. The difficulty that has been faced is
how to apply a set of criteria to ensure that those who should be
working bilingually do so, and that those for whom that is not a
reasonable requirement do not have to comply. I support the Secretary
of State’s approach. A reasonableness test that can be appealed
is a useful concept, and I hope that will give the Assembly enough to
work with when it looks at the measures. I am not sure that the chippy
in Chepstow ever had much to fear from the order, but nevertheless the
addition of that point
helps. I
know from discussions with my hon. Friend the Member for Ceredigion
that one of the most striking features of the Select Committee’s
scrutiny was how reassured business representatives were by the
deliberations in the Assembly, and it is pleasing that scaremongering
has not won the day. I welcome the agreement to raise the
£200,000 threshold, but there are still issues to be discussed
in that regard. The Select Committee talked about it, and concerns were
raised, as the evidence to that Committee reveals. The Secretary of
State has now provided a more plausible threshold, which will reassure
many, particularly small and medium-sized
enterprises. The
Secretary of State and the Assembly Government agreed with the Select
Committee’s conclusion that not all organisations that had been
established by royal charter should be included in the order. I am
pleased that that recommendation has been accepted, and welcome the
fact that the services those organisations provide will be considered.
That represents a significant response to a concern raised in later
evidence to the Select Committee that organisations such as the Royal
British Legion and even the Girl Guides could be adversely
affected.
I am pleased
that an agreement has been reached to include larger bus companies
within the scope of the order, mitigating the concern of those who felt
that there was an inconsistency between the way bus and train companies
are treated. The Secretary of State and the Assembly
Government further agreed to the Select Committee’s
recommendation that any duties placed on public broadcasters should be
clarified to mean only their public business and not the preparation or
broadcasting of programmes. That is a sensible suggestion, which meets
the objectives of the Assembly Government and the desire for
reasonableness and
proportionality. Finally,
the Secretary of State has agreed with the Committee’s
suggestion to redraft the enacting words of the LCO to clarify the
boundaries of the Assembly’s competence. That is a helpful
change, which I imagine will be welcomed both here and in the Senedd.
My party would like a referendum on further powers. We have been
relentlessly critical of the LCO process, but we wish to see the
process working as well as it possibly can. Assembly Members and
members of the Committee should be commended on the way in which they
have worked together on what was expected to be an extremely
controversial
proposal. Lessons
have been learned from the affordable housing LCO and I hope that we
can now continue to move forward in a way that will provide the best
outcome for Wales. The one concern I had about the procedural aspect
was that there were reports that the media were being briefed before
the amended LCO was laid down in the Assembly. The Heritage Minister
described himself as being miffed at that turn of events, and one can
understand
why. I
warmly welcome the LCO—both the principle behind it and the
order we now have. It is a shame that it has taken so long, but we now
have an order that will take the Welsh language forward, while not
making unreasonable requirements of organisations and businesses in
Wales. My party fully supports the LCO and is keen to see it enacted as
soon as possible.
The
Chairman: Order. I should like to start the wind-ups at
3.35 pm. Three hon. Members are indicating that they would like to
contribute to the debate, so if we could have reasonable brevity,
everyone will get
in. 2.58
pm
Mr.
Paul Murphy (Torfaen) (Lab): The LCO has been a long time
getting here, and was initially controversial. The controversy has died
down because of the way in which Members of the House of Commons,
Members of the Assembly and Ministers were able to deal with the tricky
issues. However, it was complicated and long. I have spent 17 months of
my life having to deal with it, having had the experience of the less
lamented housing LCO, which I assume is to be resurrected fairly soon.
Because of its length and complexity, the experience has been a good
one. There were huge issues and strong views to be considered, not
least those held by myself. The consultation that I called for in
January, which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has
continued, was an important step in ensuring that people throughout
Wales were able to express their views on the development in Welsh
language legislation. To a large extent, we were
vindicated in doing so, because it meant that people could air their
views. As a consequence, what emerges as law is something that enjoys
general consensus.
I want to
commend the Welsh Affairs Committee, particularly its Chair, my hon.
Friend the Member for Aberavon. He mentioned one of his earlier
incarnations as an historian, but he omitted to mention his later
incarnation as my special adviser at the Wales Office for a year or
two, at which he did his very best—partly successfully—to
moderate my Monmouthshire views on various aspects of language
legislation.
Dr.
Hywel Francis (Aberavon) (Lab): I am delighted that my
right hon. Friend has mentioned Monmouthshire. He briefed me last night
on what he was likely to say, so I looked up Aneurin Bevan in 1958 at
the National Eisteddfod in Ebbw Vale. He said that although
we “in
Monmouthshire...speak English and no Welsh we are essentially a
part of Wales...Its characteristics are Welsh, its legends are
Welsh.” I
hope that my right hon. Friend will concur with that view. Next year,
the Eisteddfod will come back to Ebbw Vale. I hope that he will join me
in going around the Maes and listening to some lectures, one of which
will be on Aneurin Bevan and another on Paul
Robeson.
Mr.
Murphy: As long as my hon. Friend is speaking English, I
will be delighted to come and hear what he has to say. As he knows, I
taught in Ebbw Vale for a long time, and my duties included teaching
Welsh history. The point that I am trying to make is that, as so many
members of the Committee have said, the LCO deals with all parts of
Wales. The legislation affects every Welsh person in Wales, whether or
not he or she can speak
Welsh. I
would like to explain briefly how important the Welsh Affairs Committee
process was, because when we consulted in January this year the two
Governments had not agreed on the final nature of the LCO. They were
not disagreeing but they had not reached agreement because there were
difficult issues. Therefore, the consultation, and particularly the
work of the Welsh Affairs Committee, has meant that we can make
progress. If I thought that I was doing the Secretary of State’s
job with the solution that the Committee came up with, I would be very
proud of myself. In fact, the Committee came up with an admirable way
with which to deal with the legislation, which is to look at whether it
is reasonable, proportional, effective, including cost-effective, and
whether it is precise enough. The choice of those issues is a credit to
the Committee. This LCO alone and the way in which the Committee has
dealt with it proves that the scrutiny that we apply to LCOs, however
defective people might think it is, in this instance, absolutely
first-class and the Committee did its job properly. I commend my hon.
Friend the Member for Aberavon and the other Committee members for the
way in which they have dealt with the LCO.
There have
been developments as a consequence of the consultation over the past
couple of months. The move from £200,000 to £400,000 is
good. Our dealings with the Royal British Legion, chartered bodies,
voluntary and charity groups, and small shops, have shown that common
sense is what needs to be applied to law. The Committee’s
solution is based on common sense, and I agree with it.
There are two
areas about which I am still troubled, including telecommunications,
which should not be part of the LCO. I hope that the Committee’s
solution, which includes reasonableness, might answer the points that
trouble me. When the Welsh Language Act 1993 was passed, the world of
telecommunications was wholly different from the world of
telecommunications today. I am not at all convinced that the
legislation should still cover telecommunications, but the
reasonableness and proportionality argument may overcome that
issue.
The other
issue is about transport and whether the legislation should apply to
bus companies. It should not. It is daft, to be honest, for buses to be
covered by the legislation, and I am surprised that the proposal has
emerged. I hope that, either in the final LCO or in the way in which
the measure is structured in Cardiff, great care is taken in dealing
with buses. I do not say that in terms of linguistic policy; I am
talking about the practicalities for people who travel on buses in
non-Welsh-speaking areas, which is 80 per cent. of us. People such as
myself who use concessionary travel passes and cannot speak Welsh could
be confused. A lot of our bus routes are kept afloat by pensioners, who
could be confused and troubled by announcements or signage on buses
akin to those, for example, at some train stations in Wales. I agree
entirely with the bilingual policy but I think that the English
announcement should come before the Welsh one in an English-speaking
station where English is predominant—not because of any language
issue but because of the confusion that may be experienced by older
people and by others. When the Committee reconsiders the issue, I hope
that it and the two Governments will rethink the issue, particularly as
a lot of our bus companies are very small and some are experiencing
financial difficulties. I am not convinced of the sense of including
buses in the legislation, and that was certainly not part of the LCO
when I was dealing with it. I would not have agreed it were I still
Secretary of State, even though it would not in the end be my
decision. In
general, however, I think the LCO is a good one. It is right that the
Welsh Assembly should deal with the Welsh language. It is a great story
in Wales, particularly in areas such as mine, which my right hon.
Friend the Member for Islwyn mentioned this morning, where Welsh has
flourished and prospered largely because of the schools—not just
Welsh-medium schools but English-medium schools—where Welsh is
taught. That is the way to encourage the language, that is the way for
it to flourish and that is why, of course, so many more people are now
speaking the language. A language will not flourish or prosper
because of signs in Welsh on buses. It will flourish because more and
more people take great delight in reading, speaking and
understanding it.
We have
developed over the years since the Welsh Language Act 1993 by tailoring
the provisions of legislation according to the needs of different parts
of Wales. The situation for someone living in Gwynedd is different from
that for someone living in Torfaen, and it is vital that we take that
into account. I urge the Welsh Language Board to implement legislation
with great sensitivity and not to be heavy-handed. I am not suggesting
that it
is the case, but sensitivity matters with all these new developments.
The last thing we want is to go back to the days when Wales was deeply
divided about the Welsh language. Happily those days have gone. We must
be sure to progress rather than go back in the way we deal with those
who cannot speak Welsh as a first language. 3.7
pm Nia
Griffith (Llanelli) (Lab): I congratulate my hon. Friend
the Member for Aberavon on his excellent and eloquent introductory
speech, his skilful management of the discussion of the Welsh language
LCO in the Welsh Affairs Committee, and his liaison with Ministers here
and with colleagues in the
Assembly. It
is important to remember that the topic matter and prioritisation of
LCOs is determined by the Assembly. This process is testimony to the
success of devolution and the provisions of the Government of Wales Act
2006, and we are now seeing that in action. Too often outside, the
story of politics is told with one storyline only, that of two opposing
factions drawing up battle lines against each other, with exaggerated
claims and positions attributed to both sides. Sadly, there are those
who are all too ready to see this LCO as a battle between Westminster
and Cardiff, between east and west, between urban and rural or between
those who are more comfortable speaking Welsh and those more
comfortable speaking English. In reality, those involved in the debate
and those who gave evidence all engaged in a very rational and
constructive process. It was a tremendously challenging situation. The
process of managing LCOs was extremely new and we dealt with a
potentially controversial
subject. I
welcome the response of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to
the report from the Welsh Affairs Committee and, in particular, his
mention of the significance of reasonableness and proportionality. That
is extremely important in ensuring that disproportionate obligations
are not placed on any one body. With regard to the inclusion of bodies
that receive more than £400,000 in public funds, I am pleased
that the Secretary of State accepts our recommendation and has also
said, like us, that a body that receives only a one-off grant should
not be made subject to the measures. Clearly, a recipient of a one-off
grant is not the same as a provider that regularly draws down public
funds for a whole range of public services. There is clearly a huge
difference.
The
clarification that shops will not be included is helpful. Let us hope
that that puts paid to some of the nonsense that we heard at the
beginning, when people were talking about how on earth one would
translate “spaghetti” into Welsh—if we can even
find the English for it. It is welcome that we are excluding training
because, with the best will in the world, it is not always easy to find
providers for specific types of training in all areas of Wales. Again,
there are huge differences between one region and another in the
availability of personnel for specific
skills. We all know
that legislation and enforcement of the law rely very much on the
consensus of the majority. That is particularly the case when we are
talking about language. We simply cannot force people to
use a particular language, so legislation on language
has
to reflect wider developments. Many colleagues today have mentioned the
extremely important element of Welsh-medium education and the huge
amount of work that has been achieved, particularly in some of the
English-speaking areas such as the old Glamorgans and my own county of
Carmarthenshire, in promoting Welsh-medium education. The opportunity
to be immersed in the Welsh language for 12 years or more has been a
fantastic one for many young
people. We
should also pay a huge tribute, however, to those teachers who are
often working against the odds in some of our English-medium schools,
particularly primary school teachers who, in addition to 12 national
curriculum subjects, attended top-up training in the ’80s and
’90s to be able to provide Welsh as well. That helped a lot of
children to develop an understanding of, and a taste for, further study
of the language, and those teachers have done an extremely good
ambassador’s job in many areas of Wales. No one should feel
guilty or a need to apologise if their preferred language is English.
The choice of which language we use as our first language is not ours
but our parents’, and it is mostly our parents’ choice as
to which school we might end up in. For many people of our generation
and older, there were simply not the opportunities to have the very
advantageous start of Welsh in
school. The
written evidence provided by the Wales Council for Voluntary Action,
which consulted its entire membership of 2,600 organisations, describes
a situation with which many of us are familiar. While there is plenty
of enthusiasm and good will among its members to try to develop Welsh
in their work, there are often obstacles and considerable confusion
about how to achieve that. For example, there is often an assumption
that a person who happens to be a Welsh speaker can also be the
translator. First, the person already has a job to do and that would be
imposing a huge extra role. Moreover, people forget that translation is
a very specific skill. Perhaps we ought to be looking at many more ways
of upskilling Welsh speakers to become capable of translating. Perhaps
we have to go back to some of the old-fashioned types of translation
work, with which some of us were familiar in our formal education many
years ago. It is an important point that, while we are moving forward
with the legislation and with a general consensus of opinion, we still
need the skills. We must not forget
that. If
we look around Wales, sadly some of our permanent
written—painted—signs have mistakes. We need to put that
right. We need good examples of good Welsh, and we should not see on
stations or in hospitals words that are clearly misprints on permanent
painted signs. On Llanelli station the other day, I was taken aback to
hear an announcement in both Welsh and English that the heart of Wales
line goes through a place called “Bunnier”. After
blinking for a few seconds, I realised that they meant Bynia.
Obviously, I have written to Arriva Trains Wales pointing out the
error. We should avoid that type of thing. No recorded message should
include something wrong—in this case a place name, which is
unacceptable. While
the LCO is a response to the growth in the interest in Welsh over the
past 20 years, at the same time it is not enough. We have the will and
we have legislation, but we also need to improve the skill base to deal
with the issue
effectively.
3.15
pm
| 
