An Fochoiste um an Straitéis 20 Bliain don Ghaeilge 2010-2030 agus Rudaí Gaolmhara debate -
Tuesday, 25 Nov 2014

Supporting Minority Languages: Welsh Language Commission

Acting Chairman (Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú)

Tá fáilte roimh gach aon duine anseo. Tá beirt comhalta - Teachta Dála amháin agus Seanadóir amháin - i láthair. Is féidir linn tosnú leis an gcruinniú. Is mian liom fáilte a chur roimh an gCoimisinéir Teanga ón mBreatain Bheag. I welcome Ms Meri Huws. I also acknowledge that we had a wonderful trip to Wales which was both constructive and productive. We learned that there were many similarities between Ireland and Wales. In some ways, I wondered why we had not been more conscious of this heretofore. The country has so many things like our own, the language Act, for instance, and one mirrors the other. I am not sure in which direction, but they are very much alike. Wales has a language commissioner and also its own Welsh language television channel. It is to be hoped that from this debate we will find ways and means to progress co-operation between the two countries.

I also welcome Mr. Julian de Spáinn and Mr. Cuan Ó Seireadáin from Conradh na Gaeilge. It is always nice to have them here. They are probably very much up to date on the position in Wales. Perhaps, however, we might find other ways of working together. There has to be an echo in terms of the absence of a language Act in Northern Ireland, but the similarities should help us.

By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act, 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. However, if directed by it to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and continue to do so, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence.

They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person or an entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. I also advise that the opening statement and any other document submitted to the committee may be published on its website after the meeting.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I ask the commissioner to address the committee.

Ms Meri Huws

Diolch yn fawr. Bore da.

I thank the joint committee for giving me the opportunity to address it and reiterate the kind words about the visit to Wales which we enjoyed. I think I followed in the committee's wake as I heard about all of the meetings it had with various individuals, including the First Minister.

I am the Welsh language commissioner. In many ways, I am an infant compared to the Irish Language Commissioner who has been in place for ten years. The role of Welsh language commissioner was established not quite three years ago, as a consequence of a piece of language legislation, the Welsh Language (Wales) Measure 2011, one of the first pieces of legislation produced following the devolution of powers to Wales. It is a very new role but one which builds on the strong tradition of language planning in Wales and the work of the Welsh Language Board which was established under the 1993 Westminster legislation.

I would like to share some messages which have become very clear to me. The committee is at a very interesting time in terms of Irish language legislation which it is considering amending. I see this as a wonderful opportunity for it to set a pattern for the future. I will raise some issues and questions. I have examined the proposed heads in the documentation and draw the attention of the committee to some lessons I have learned, of which the first and probably most important which has become apparent to me as Welsh language commissioner is that it is dangerous to leave the language in a policy silo. If one sees the language as something which is absolutely discrete and it is dealt with solely as such, there is danger. That approach gives status to the language, but it also means that as one plans for economic, social, employment, education and health policy, it sits outside the debate. In Wales it has been and continues to be critical for us that we integrate consideration of one of the official languages we use into all policy debates. That is a key issue for me as commissioner. As we look at planning and health legislation, it is key that I ask how the language has been considered in the policy proposal, decision or legislation. That is a key message to share with the committee as it considers new or amending legislation in terms of how it can use the opportunity to integrate the Irish language into the mainstream of policy and politics. That is something that I have learned is critical. If one allows the language to sit in a box with "Irish Language" written on the front which is opened occasionally and then shut again, that will not mean productive policy decisions will be made.

The second issue is current in Ireland.

The Welsh language is seen as a work based skill. How do we ensure that the Welsh language is seen by employers in the public, voluntary and business sectors as a strength of the workforce? We have invested in Welsh medium education in Wales, just as Ireland is investing in Irish medium education. How do we ensure a strong flow of young people from the school setting to the workplace? I would argue this is critical across Wales. It is no longer an issue solely for the traditional Welsh speaking communities; it presents significant challenges and opportunities in the context of our large centres of population. I work in Cardiff on a daily basis. It is critical that we have bilingual and Welsh language skills in workplaces in Cardiff, Swansea and Wrexham. There is a national challenge for us in Wales to ensure that employers recognise the language as a workplace skill and that they do so in a meaningful way, in terms of planning their workforce for the future and recognising their future needs.

As with all good Welsh sermons, there are three headings to my comments. I will address the third heading very briefly. In Wales we have a tradition of language schemes. I am aware that Ireland has language schemes as a consequence of the legislation introduced here. Since the Welsh Language Act 1993, Wales has in the region of 600, most of which are statutory, although some voluntary. While recognising the importance of language schemes in locating language as part of the fabric of Wales, the revised legislation reflects the fact that each language scheme is different. For the citizen wishing to access Welsh language services, the experience can be very different from organisation to organisation. As a consequence of recognising that we need to place the citizen or service user at the core of the relationship, we are moving away from language schemes and towards statutory standards for public sector organisations, many third sector and voluntary organisations and, over time, some business organisations. Rather than having that wonderful tapestry of language schemes, all of which are different, we are moving towards the consistency of statutory standards which will be imposed on organisations over time. The first set of standards will issue in early 2015 and I am certain these standards will be of interest to the committee. The first standards will be imposed on the Welsh Government, the 22 local authorities and the three national parks. By April or May 2015 we will start on a journey whereby Welsh language schemes are set aside for statutory standardised requirements governing service delivery, policy making, internal operations, promotion of the language and evidence keeping.

It is an interesting time for this committee to examine Irish legislation and consider the future of language schemes. I understand it is considering extending language schemes from three years to seven years. I may have a view on that. The question arises from our experience in Wales of how one secures consistency in a language scheme structure.

Language schemes have changed the face of service delivery in Wales. Done well, they change the face of service delivery. We are moving along in that journey which may be of interest to the committee.

As a language commissioner, I have gained great benefit from talking to other countries. When committee members were in Wales, we discussed the fact that there was an International Association of Language Commissioners, of which the Irish commissioner and I are members. There are only ten members. I glean great benefit from examining what happens in other jurisdictions, particularly Canada, where they have attempted to place the citizen at the heart of the relationship with the language. A citizen does not have to ask for a service in his or her language but is offered it.

Diolch yn fawr. I thank members for listening and hope I have given them a flavour of some of the issues on which we touch in Wales. I could talk for hours about the Welsh experience, but I do not think members want that on a very busy day.

Acting Chairman (Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú)

Gabhaim míle buíochas leis an gcoimisinéir. Bhí sé sin an-shuimiúil agus an-chabhrach go deo. Táim cinnte go mbeidh ceisteanna agus díospóireacht anseo anois againn a bheidh suimiúil chomh maith.

Mr. Julian de Spáinn

Gabhaim mo bhuíochas leis an gcoimisinéir. Is there simultaneous translation? As I have a few words of English, we will be okay.

I thank the commissioner for her informative speech. We in Ireland have learned much from Wales during the years and must learn more in the future. Ms Huws has compared herself to an infant, given that the Office of the Irish Language Commissioner was established before the Welsh one. Having recently had a baby, I am hearing terminology about growth spurts. I think the Welsh language commissioner may have spurted into the teenage years and left us behind as toddlers. Wales has examined exactly what the language commissioner should do and what powers she should have. The first thing Ms Huws mentioned was integrating the language into the mainstream, which does not seem to be part of the Irish Language Commissioner's role. For example, in Wales any new Bill or policy must be brought before the Welsh language commissioner who can make recommendations which the relevant Minister or authority must take into account while developing the Bill or policy. This does not happen in Ireland and is not mentioned in the heads of Bills. This issue must be addressed clearly and quickly.

Ms Huws also mentioned workplace skills. In Wales much of the talk is about how to bring the language into the private sector, not only the public sector. In Ireland we are very much at the point of the public sector. Although there was recently a Government initiative to ensure 6% of new entrants into the Civil Service would have a command of the Irish language, we know from the figures provided by the Irish Language Commissioner that the target is far too low to make an impact. The people taking early retirement happen to be those who were employed when civil servants had to have Irish and a significant command of Irish. There is a major deficit and a 6% intake in the future will not ensure an adequate number of staff to provide services in Irish. We are starting from a very low base and will not go anywhere quickly, judging by the Government's proposals.

One of the other measures we are proposing for inclusion in the language Bill is a quota of at least 30% for the next ten years to address the deficit in the Civil Service before we even begin to look at the private sector. As this is not contained in the Bill, perhaps it is something at which we might look.

The third issue mentioned concerned the move from having schemes to statutory standards. This is something we are trying to promote in the discussion on the language Bill to be placed in front of the Houses of the Oireachtas. As it stands, all we can see is a weakening in what is included in the heads of the Bill which will increase the timeframe for a language plan from three to seven years. The only reason we can see for doing this is to give Departments more time to avoid what they must do. The vast majority of plans we have seen so far are very weak. Even the plans written and agreed to in the past three years contain a significant amount of get out of jail clauses such as "if resources are available" or mention "when Departments are able to achieve this...". The terminology has changed, even from what it was when they were put in place originally to something that is far weaker and the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht is accepting them.

The heads of the Bill that we are seeing are very weak. There are only about two things in them that I would describe as good. The first is the provision that any Irish citizen should be able to use his or her name and address in Irish. This is something that is not included in legislation, even though everybody thought it was. Therefore, it is to be welcomed. The second is that any Department, semi-State company or other body should automatically come under the language Act and not have to be prescribed by the Minister. This is also to be welcomed. However, there are only two things in the heads of the Bill which have any merit and they could be introduced as amendments to any other Bill without too much trouble.

The Government needs to overhaul the Bill it is proposing. Last week I attended a meeting of coiste comhairleach na Gaeilge with representatives of the Department, Údarás na Gaeilge, Foras na Gaeilge and a number of community groups. We were told that the Government was going ahead with the Bill, as it stood and that the Government was not retreating from the heads of Bill on the table. I will have a meeting with the Minister of State to discuss how much progress needs to be made on the Bill, but it is very weak and lacking and if it is placed in front of the Houses of the Oireachtas as it stands, we will be very worried. When the Gaeltacht Act passed through the Oireachtas, not one amendment tabled by the Opposition was accepted. If the Bill goes through as it stands, it will effectively weaken what is provided for Irish speakers. Not only that, it will be a wasted opportunity because if this is how we are progressing a ten year review of Irish language legislation, we should look to the experience of Ms Huws and the progress made in Wales and include such measures in the language Bill that will be placed in front of the Houses of the Oireachtas in the near future.

Acting Chairman (Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú)

We are particularly fortunate to have the commissioner with us and the opportunity to ask further questions and tease out some of the points made.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

I thank the delegates for attending. Ba mhaith liom pointe a dhéanamh ar dtús. Sílim gur ardaigh an tUasal de Spáinn an pointe freisin. Nílim ag díriú mo mhéar ar aon duine sa seomra seo ach is trua é nach bhfuil an acmhainn ar fáil againn go bhféadfaí an díospóireacht seo a dhéanamh go dhá-theangach agus go mbeadh córas aistriúcháin ar fáil. Tuigim go bhfuil ganntanais ann ó thaobh na seomraí áirithe ach sílim gur léiriú é freisin ar an bpolasaí atá sna Tithe seo ó thaobh na Gaeilge de.

Acting Chairman (Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú)

Tá sé ar fáil i seomra eile agus ní hé seo an gnáth-sheomra dá leithéid.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Tuigim é sin. Níl mé ag cur locht - beag ná mór - ar aon duine anseo ach is léiriúchán é ó thaobh na Tithe anseo. Mar a dúirt an Coimisineir, sa Bhreatain is féidir leo a rogha teanga a úsáid nuair is toil leo é sin a dhéanamh. Ní féidir linn é sin a dhéanamh, fiú sna Tithe seo. Daoine a bhíonn an cumas orthu déileáil as Gaeilge de ghnáth, níl siad ábalta é sin a dhéanamh. My apologies - I am noting the point made that we do not have translation facilities.

While I do not point the finger at anyone in particular here, it shows that the policy of the Houses does not support me in my rights as a parliamentarian who wants to use the language, or the delegates, which is a disappointment.

On the Act, some very interesting points have been made. I also sit on the Public Service Oversight and Petitions Committee which deals with the various ombudsmen. We had a very interesting meeting the other day with the Financial Services Ombudsman, Mr. Bill Prasifka, who noted that compared to the Official Languages Act, he had a very strong Act, including very serious sanctions he could impose on financial services institutions which did not follow the legislation. He said that while he had had the powers for a number of years, last year he was also given the power to name and shame. He said that since he had used the name and shame power, he had achieved a much higher compliance rate among the organisations under the auspices of the Act.

We deal also on the committee with the language commissioner, An Comisinéir Teanga, and my sense is that the previous commissioner, Seán Ó Cuirreáin, and the current office holder, Ronán Ó Domhnaill, and their teams have done a very good job. They have done exactly what they have been asked to do, taken all of the complaints on board and followed the procedures, but they have not received co-operation from semi-State bodies and Departments. For a long time the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht did not live up to its own commitments as regards the Act. There is a huge backlog in the schemes, in particular, not being ratified by the Department. We have legislation which is not enforced. The Garda Síochána element is being enforced from a policing point of view, but the judicial element whereby semi-State bodies and Departments are taken to task and made to observe their legal obligations is severely lacking. I would welcome the delegates' opinions on the heads of the Bill, as I agree with Conradh na Gaeilge that it is a huge step backwards to move towards what is suggested.

What the delegates said about their capacity to review legislation, as it was being passed and, so to speak, Welsh-proof, was interesting. They might tell us a little more about how that process works. We do not tend to have that capacity here. A colleague of mine put forward an equality proofing Bill which was not accepted but which would have required the equality proofing of legislation on all grounds, including equality in language. Is the Welsh scenario in the context of similar legislation or is there a specific provision in the Act that constitutes the language commission? Is there specific equality legislation? There are two ways of doing it.

It is interesting also in that most of the activity we have seen on the part of our own language commissioner is in the area of semi-State bodies and Departments, etc. The Act does not govern the private sector, whereas there is a very different scenario in Wales where the commission has a wide remit. Before we came into the formal meeting, the delegates told us about the good work being done with supermarkets. People walking into shops and businesses in Cardiff get a sense of bilingualism in these outlets, but there is no sense of this being extended here in the heads of Bill we have seen. Is that somewhere we should be going? Groups such as Gallimh le Gaeilge in Galway have done great work, as have Clár as Gaeilge and other organisations around the country. There is a much more vibrant sense of bilingualism in shops and cafés in Belfast. How was the Welsh language commission able to achieve this? What is the role of the private sector?

On the transition from schemes to statutory standards, I take it that the delegates are talking about a rights-based model which gives people a right to do things in their own language. How long will the transition take and how will it work? The delegates invited a question on the length of the language schemes and I will ask it. They said they would have more to tell us about the length being increased from three to seven years. I am interested in this issue.

On the practical side of things, the point made by Mr. Julian de Spáinn is an important one. He might correct me, but either 3% or 6% of staff in the administrative section of the Department of Education and Skills are proficient in Irish.

Was it 3% in the Department who were proficient in Irish? The Department of Education and Skills is probably one of the most crucial when we talk about the development of the language, but Mr. de Spáinn might correct me on that point.

Mr. Julian de Spáinn

It is 1.5%.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Tuilleadh gearrtha siar. Some 1.5% of the staff in the Department of Education and Skills are proficient in the Irish language, the key Department in the transmission of Irish.

What legislation is used in Wales if the civil service or the public service is recruiting? How do they ensure there is a suitable number of staff proficient in the Welsh language to deliver services? Does the commissioner have any thoughts on the matter? What are the carrots and sticks she can use? How does she encourage organisations to participate fully and live up to their responsibilities under the language Act? If they do not play ball with her, what are the sanctions she can impose on them?

Acting Chairman (Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú)

The Senator has made many interesting points, on some or all of which Ms Huws might like to respond at this stage.

Ms Meri Huws

I believe the Senator has covered the entire spectrum in those questions. He raised the question of influencing or offering advice to Welsh Ministers on legislation. The relevant section is section 4 of our measure which has proved very useful in the past two to two and a half years. It is a statutory requirement for Welsh Ministers to pay due regard to any statutory advice we offer to them and to which they have to respond. Of course, the words "due regard" can mean many things to many people, but at least they are included in the legislation which we have used extensively in past years. We choose when we use it, but we have used it in dealing with social welfare legislation, including specifically a piece of social care legislation which has now received royal assent, when we used it to ensure the language was seen as a key requirement. It had not been referred to in the legislation or in the discussion on the floor of the committee when it was said: "Of course it will be there." However, we argued that unless it was on the face of the legislation, it would not be there and succeeded in giving advice and offering amendments to the legislation.

We are in a similar and very interesting position on a new planning Bill for Wales which seeks to address a host of technical and policy issues. We have offered statutory written advice, but we are also going to the scrutiny committee in two weeks time to offer it again. It is the case that our advice has to be given "due regard". It is a very useful tool in terms of our influence. We have also used it at Westminster, but its key use has been in terms of legislation in Wales. As I said, we target it and it is a case of ensuring the Welsh language is referred to, where appropriate, on the face of Welsh legislation. Section 4 has been very useful within our legislation.

On the various sectors involved, the Senator asked about the transition from schemes to standards. It is going to be a long journey, about that there is no question. The first 26 organisations will be drawn into the standards sphere next year. We have just commenced the statutory process of bringing in the next 120 and have already identified the next 250. Therefore, by the end of my period as commissioner, I expect to see in the region of 600 to 800 organisations included. What is interesting is that, by that time, we will have extended outside the public sector into the voluntary sector. As we increasingly see services being delivered by the voluntary sector and the third sector through the subcontracting out of health services, social welfare services and other services in Wales, it is very important that the standards are imposed on these sectors also.

By the end of my period as commissioner, which lasts seven years and I am nearly three years into that, I expect we will have started to address, through statutory processes, the business or private sectors that have been named in the legislation. In the first instance, energy companies have been named, water is already in so that means energy, telecommunications and those service delivery sectors within the private sector.

Members asked about carrots and sticks. The committee will notice that I have not mentioned the retail sector and it has not been named in the legislation. Banking has also not been named in our legislation. Our approach is slightly different in those sectors. It is a combination of strong carrots in regard to talking to organisations about the economic and marketing advantages of delivering services in a bilingual country. We have done a fair bit of research in that area which shows that service users or customers are attracted to services that are delivered bilingually.

Alongside a strong incentive there is an element of name and shame. Fairly recently, in Wales, service delivery in Welsh by very large international supermarkets was not as strong as one would have expected. We intervened at the highest level with their chief executives. We indicated to them not the error of their ways but the opportunities being missed and we have had a very positive response.

In terms of the public sector, and increasingly the third sector and over time in the business sector, we will have statutory powers. I was asked what those statutory powers are and the financial ombudsman was mentioned. As commissioner, I will have capacity to impose financial sanctions for non-compliance, a route I hope I will not have to follow too often. I hope the tactic of name and shame and claims of a lack of regard for the public will bear greater influence. There is the possibility of financial sanctions which, I admit, are not huge but they do exist. We are moving towards a very different environment.

Quotas were mentioned. Within language schemes in Wales we have not used quotas in the way that Members spoke about in regard to State bodies. The requirement, which is embedded in most language schemes, is a skills audit and having a very formalised procedure to identify which posts require which level of language capacity. Rather than identifying a number it is a case of looking at the entire workforce and identifying what skills, where and to what intensity. Over time where such analysis is done well that has become standard practice. There are some good examples in Wales. I mentioned to the committee, on our visit, the work that the North Wales Police force has undertaken. All members of the North Wales Police force now require a certain level of language capacity. This varies according to the role but the requirement is integrated across the institution rather than being a quota. The fear about quotas, in many respects, is that they will be in the wrong places at the wrong time. Having an integrated assessment of language requirement across an organisation per post is the ideal. Where that initiative has been done well in Wales it has proved to be very beneficial. The scheme is not perfect and I do not admit that it is perfect. We challenge organisations, on a regular basis, as to how they have made decisions about certain posts.

That has been formalised over time.

I am not sure whether I omitted to answer any of the questions raised.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Will Ms Huws comment on the proposed duration of the schemes?

Ms Meri Huws

I note that head 7, which details the proposed section 14, refers to moving the duration of schemes from three years to seven. If I, as Welsh language commissioner, were confronted with the same proposal in Wales, I would be very concerned by the inflexibility it might introduce into the situation. When it comes to public sector organisations, change is constant. My concern is that a seven-year scheme would not be sufficiently flexible. Reference was made to there being opportunities to call in the schemes and ask that they be amended, but that would have to be exceptional. I would be very concerned if it were a statutory requirement that organisations move from three to seven years. There may be a happy medium in five years, but seven seems like a very long period of time in the State sector.

Deputy Peadar Tóibín

I welcome the language commissioner and thank her for her presentation. Have there been any efforts to measure which activities have had the greatest impact in strengthening the Welsh language? Intergenerational transition is probably one of the most important factors for languages. Have any activities proven to be particularly useful in that respect?

I understand that in Wales, equal space is given to both languages on road signs, for example, and the same font is used. There is some concern in Government that to do the same here would send motorists crashing into each other. I am interested to hear what the experience has been in Wales in that regard.

The provisions Ms Huws outlined regarding penalties are very progressive. Without those penalties, her job would be far more difficult and there would be a greater cost to the state in the long run. What are the funding levels like for her office? Every organisation always wants and needs more funding, but it would be useful to have that information for comparison purposes.

Has Ms Huws met with the Minister of State with responsibility for the Gaeltacht, Deputy Joe McHugh? It would be very useful for him to discuss some of these issues with the commissioner.

Finally, will Ms Huws comment on the general health of the Welsh language?

Ms Meri Huws

On the Deputy's first question, it is very difficult to measure the success or otherwise of various initiatives. In terms of quantitative measures, the census is a particularly useful one. We were disappointed that the latest census showed a slight drop in the numbers indicating a capacity in the Welsh language; after going over the 20% mark, we have now dipped back below it. The census figures are still being unwrapped and we have seen only the very high-level data. However, we are starting to move now to the more granular information. What is very interesting is the indication of a growth in the numbers of young people who have some capacity in the language. That is something we need to grasp. As a consequence of Welsh-medium education, we are seeing an increasing capacity. Whether we are then harnessing that and moving it forward into the workforce is another question. There is a major issue for us around third level education.

Deputy Peadar Tóibín

What percentage of children in Wales receive Welsh-medium education?

Ms Meri Huws

There are different levels, but almost all schoolchildren will have some experience of the Welsh language. It varies from school to school to some extent. Many will go through the Welsh-medium education, but there are different grades in different areas. I will be happy to send the latest information to the Deputy.

Census figures show growth among young people and in geographic areas where traditionally the language did not exist in the past century. There has been growth in Cardiff, the main city, and places like Swansea but there has been a diminution in the traditional heartlands in the west. This is a measure of change, rather than success or failure. It is a challenge and we must work with these figures.

Other measures are more qualitative and it is difficult to measure things in terms of levels of awareness. I have worked in the language sphere for many years - officially for the past three years but prior to that in the realm of the Welsh Language Board. The aim is to increase the level of awareness that Wales is a bilingual nation among employers and organisations. For example, next week, at the Welsh agricultural winter fair, we will give a presentation on the use of bilingual branding on food and drink in Wales. The growth in awareness is somewhat imperceptible but it exists.

In terms of inter-generational activity, most project-based promotional work occurs within the Welsh Government and this has been the case for the past three years, since the establishment of the commissioner's office. There was a division of roles - the statutory regulatory role went to the commissioner and the promotional role went to the Welsh Government. The Twf scheme, a well-established programme, encourages young parents to speak Welsh. Under the Twf scheme young mothers are congratulated around the point of birth on bringing a young Welsh person into the world and bilingualism is encouraged. Some soft projects emanate from the Welsh Government and, alongside statutory measures, have an impact on the qualitative experience of being in Wales.

Regarding road signs, I do not think we have figures on casualties and fatalities. The road sign debate has persisted since my early teens and that period was a long time ago. We have moved towards bilingual road signs and safety concerns are raised occasionally but there is no evidence that it leads to higher casualties than in any other bilingual country. As an organisation, we recently re-published our guidelines on bilingual design. I will send a copy of this to the committee as it may interest the members to see how we create safe bilingual signage and brands.

Questions on funding levels have been asked of the Welsh Government recently. I have an annual budget of £3.6 million but all language budgets in Wales are facing cuts. I will happily provide the committee with the latest figures released by the Welsh Government on funding the Welsh Language Commission and Welsh language activity generally as they may be useful.

I do not believe I met the Minister previously but I would be very happy to meet any Irish Ministers who might find such a meeting useful. I know that a meeting took place previously with the First Minister of Wales.

An interesting question was asked on the general health of the Welsh language and, to some extent, my answer depends on the day of the week. These are challenging times for minority languages in a globalised world where majority languages dominate.

Increasingly, we have a move in Wales towards thinking about being a country in which people are bilingual which, in terms of policy development, would have implications for means of operation and service delivery. Over time - I do not want to be too positive about this - it has become a question not of why we are doing this but of how we do it. The one area in which I have seen this very significant change is health and social care, in which a general level of awareness has emerged among practitioners and providers of health and social care services that communication through the medium of Welsh is not just a fad but actually a clinical requirement. It is coming to be understood that delivery through both English and Welsh, on the basis of an active offer instead of the patient having to demand it, is part of a good solid health service. We are seeing significant change in some very important areas, but there are still huge challenges and that posed by the workforce is one of our biggest. How do we ensure young people coming through the Welsh-medium education system will flow out into the workforce and that they will not see the Welsh language just as a subject they have to study but as a skill for the future? There is a real challenge in the way we teach Welsh at both second and third level.

Acting Chairman (Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú)

As Ms Huws noted, we had a very focused and open meeting with the Welsh First Minister who was exceptionally gracious on the occasion. Ms Huws's offer to meet relevant Ministers here is worth looking into. Although we can certainly relay some of the information from today's meeting, it would be very helpful if an arrangement could be made whereby Ms Huws would meet the relevant Ministers to go over some of the items discussed. I also note that she is very up to date on our legislation which she has research very well.

Senator Jim D'Arcy

Ba mhaith liom fáilte a chur roimh Ms Huws anseo. I believe it was the Welsh who named the Irish gwyddel, fierce angry men, at the time when we were kidnapping people in Wales, St. Patrick et al, and that that is from where the word "Gael" comes.

I note Ms Huws's comments on the plean teanga Gaeilge and the three or seven year term. As I always thought in school that a three year cycle was best, I would support an implementation and review plan as much as I could within that timeframe.

I should stand up for the former Minister of State at the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Deputy Dinny McGinley. He has told me that he considers his greatest achievement to be saving the position of An Coimisinéir Teanga. As we do not know what went on internally or anything else about that matter, we will not talk about it.

To address Mr. de Spáinn's point, a statutory figure of 6% is low, but it is a start to the process. The figure is only 1.5% in that august body, the Department of Education and Skills. I want to redress the imbalance.

I was very interested in Ms Huws's statement that a service in the Welsh language was offered rather than just available. That is something we should consider implementing as part of the role of An Coimisinéir Teanga.

I am more interested in the general health of the language. I got a phone call the other day from Donegal. Like Senator Ó Clochartaigh, I had been talking about how the mná tí should get a few bob extra. This guy rang me and said "You'll never get another vote. The Irish language is a waste of time - forget about it." My answer to him was that I never got that many votes anyway, so it would not affect me greatly. Then I went into Bonner's pub in Kincasslagh during the summer. I had been there many years before and I was stunned because all the people at the bar were conversing fluently in English. It stunned me. I could not believe it. That just knocked me out.

We can have all the legal frameworks we like but it is like putting spinach on the school dinners and leaving it there and the spinach might be there but it will never be eaten. We must look on it that way. I am doing a study for the Oireachtas Committee on Education and Social Protection on effective Irish in primary schools, because it has reached a crisis point. I would be very interested in that document Ms Huws is sending to Deputy Tóibín. She was talking about leaving Irish in a discrete box. It will not work. This strategy is not working in primary schools either. Without coming up with the result before I have done the investigation, I would like Ms Huws's opinion on this. I know it might be a wee bit outside her role, but I would like her opinions on that. That is the most important thing for me.

I have relatively young children, in their early teens, and they listen to Spin and iRadio, which are music stations. It is amazing that the young disc jockeys on these stations speak a bit of Irish all the time. That is a fabulous way of getting the Irish out among the teenagers. It makes it cool. All these radio stations are all at it now. In fact, I listened to my own local radio station this morning and the disc jockey on their mid-morning music programme was talking half in Irish and half in English. If we could get that sort of thing going it would be worth its weight in gold. Next thing, we would get the retailers and the girls or the men at the checkouts using Irish.

Acting Chairman (Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú)

We are just about finished, because there are time constraints, but I ask the commissioner to respond to Senator D'Arcy's points.

Ms Meri Huws

Diolch yn fawr. I now understand where the "angry men" saying comes from. One of the major challenges we face is making the language relevant. In terms of education, one of the challenges in Wales, in which we have not fully succeeded, is making the language something that exists outside the classroom, so that young people can see that it is relevant to plumbing, retail, beauty, health and social care. Wherever they want to go in the world, they can take the language as a skill with them, and it is an added skill. This is being done well in Wales, particularly in third level education, although Senator D'Arcy was talking about primary education, where it is being mainstreamed into young people's real interests in life. This works.

I have seen courses in which young plumbers are being taught their skills well and are also being encouraged to talk about it, not formally but in their day-to-day Welsh language. That works.

Spin Radio was mentioned. This places the language in a context which is familiar, where they have confidence and where they see it as being cool. That goes back to an issue the Chairman raised, that of "active offer". It is something that is critical. The Chairman also talked about service delivery, which, through the medium of Welsh, is improving. However, if the public are not aware that the services are there, if they are not marketed properly, if they are not evident, or if they have to ask specially, it makes it difficult for an individual to use the service. It is case of their saying "Oh, I've got to go and ask for it as well," and then it is delivered. Therefore, active offer is critical for us, so that where services are provided and delivered, they have to be well marketed and made evident. It is not a case of being given the Welsh form if one asks for it; the Welsh form needs to be there. The Welsh language nurse or the bilingual receptionist needs to be there.

That is appropriate from the right-spaced approach, but it also means that people gain confidence and see it as something that is part of what they should expect, rather than what they need to ask for. One of the things I often hear in Wales is someone saying "I don't want to upset someone," or "I don't want to ask for the service because I may not get it." I think we have to change that mentality.

The Chairman mentioned negativity. We still have pockets of negativity. I am not painting an absolutely rosy picture. One still has angry letters in our national newspapers about the language, but that is the reality. One will always find that element of negativity. We need to normalise the Welsh language within a bilingual country.

Acting Chairman (Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú)

Go raibh míle maith agaibh. Cuirfear clabhsúr anois leis an díospóireacht. I thank the witnesses very much for what has been a constructive and productive discussion. I will not say that we have achieved major things, but I think we are all pretty practical in that regard. I hope there will be a continuing interaction, including the offer Ms Huws made of speaking to relevant Ministers here. That would be progress. In addition, the documents that Ms Huws is sending to Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh and Senator Jim D'Arcy are important.

Perhaps language bodies here, such as Conradh na Gaeilge, that are always at the coalface in delivering on the Irish language, can strengthen their relationship with Wales and learn from that.

The joint sub-committee adjourned at 1.14 p.m. sine die.