National Assembly for Wales

I nominate Dai Lloyd.

Seconded. 

Dai Lloyd.

You've got it, Dai, whether you want it or not. 

Yes. I think we would argue that the introduction of the standards has caused us to think quite hard about how we do things—what our habits are, if you like, in terms of the use of Welsh. We obviously did use Welsh beforehand, and we have been active for many years in promoting Welsh-medium higher education. So, it's not unfamiliar territory for us, but, nonetheless, it was a challenge, as Sian has just described, and, I think, a positive challenge in terms of causing us to think again about the operational habits that we have.

We have over the last three years been developing our own role as a regulator of higher education, following 2015 legislation. And there's, I think, a very helpful continuum of intervention between those circumstances where the people you regulate both understand what they need to do and are doing it, which you can celebrate as a regulator, and, at the other extreme, where people understand what they should be doing but are determined not to do it, where you actually have to start deploying some of the regulatory tools. Between those two extremes there's an awful lot of work that is about supporting, developing and guiding the people you regulate. My sense is that, if we're not careful, we will focus too much on the compliance part of the machinery here, and I think there's a lot to be done in terms of helping the various regulated bodies understand better what the expectations are and carry on the journey that they've started. And if we get into the kind of territory where you have to smack the people you're regulating, actually some of the rest of it has gone wrong somewhere. So, that's about balance, really.      

Okay. Part of what we're looking at is where we've come from, how the system has worked, what the implication of it is, and, of course, that has an impact on where we might want to go, issues around possibly new legislation, and so on. There's no doubt, I think, from the evidence collectively, that everyone was aware of the potential burden in terms of applying suddenly a set of standards, and so on. But collectively, it seems  that the view from all your evidence is that hasn't turned out to actually be the case, that the implementation of standards has actually worked far more practically than I think perhaps any of you would have envisaged right at the beginning. Is that a fair assessment as to where you're coming from?

If I start, certainly, I would say that was our experience. When we first looked at the range of the potential standards that might have applied to us, there was an awful lot there, and we had to expend a fair bit of energy just understanding that. But I would say that the commissioner's office were very prepared to engage with us in that process of understanding and interpreting the standards. And, also, in allowing us to share with them our operational practices and the extent to which it was feasible for us to deliver on the full range of standards. So, I think we had a good engagement there. And, in fairness to the commissioner's office, they can't know the operational detail of all the bodies they regulate without those conversations happening. So, I think we—. It was a process. It was a process that required some energy and some resource, but I think, in the end, we got to a good place with it, and, as I said earlier, the requirement to comply with those standards has caused us to think about how we do things in a very positive way. So, I think it's fine, actually. It's turned out to be much better, as you say, than it might have been. 

I would agree with that. I think that was our experience as well, and I think it was good to have stretch targets, in hindsight. I think that was really good for us internally, as I said before; it certainly raised the profile. And it also highlighted the area around technology, websites. There is a lot of stuff that we could publish on our website that would be a resource for the sector, which we choose not to because we can't afford to translate, or the use of technology—Apple, Microsoft, the big tech giants, and that sort of easy translation interface is very challenging for the Welsh language. I think we really need to get behind the drive to get that done, and it should be a key investment, I think, to enable us to roll out the use of Welsh in future, where there's going to be a shift from the narrative and the written to the audiovisual and the verbal. 

So, I think it's really important that we get Alexa and Siri speaking Welsh and things like that, and Google Translate needs more use so that it gets better, because those technological solutions are part of it. And we had a very positive and interesting and fruitful dialogue with the commissioner around that sort of area, and they did moderate some of the standards around that, bearing that in mind—the need for third party information to come in. We don't want to devoid sectors of information and services that they could maybe benefit from. 

I take that as being a fairly general reflection of all of your views. What is relevant, of course, is that the issue of the amount of time, the amount of resource, the amount of cost that applies to the administration of standards, the implementation of standards, was not only an issue at the beginning, but, of course, it is an issue that is continually raised, and is raised in terms of the development of further standards. So, your experience is actually really quite important in terms of further stages. 

So, I would ask you, although I think I probably know the answer to it, generally, about the impact on your resources, your ability to do your main functions and so on, and the cost of that. How is that being managed and what impact has that had on you as organisations? 

Can I come in? On your first point, where did we come from? We came from a position where there was a Welsh language plan. Therefore, most organisations, from the mid-1990s or mid-1980s, had language plans. So, what's the migration to standards was against the background of existing plans. The standards were, for our organisation, which is tiny organisation—we have nine staff—. We had 168 standards. So, the issue is how do we migrate to the standard regime? One thing I have to say in general is that one of the impressive features of local government and the public sector in Wales is that they'll absorb anything that's put to them and come out successfully. And I think that's the evidence you're hearing. Nevertheless, it is a resource issue. So, that's one thing. It can be absorbed. It required attention from staff, and as the consultative document says, the diversion of staff to different tasks. 

I think the second thing I'd like to say is that I just wonder about the vocabulary used in the compliance notices. I think this is reflected in the consultative document, in its analysis. I come from a position where we had a voluntary language plan in the 1970s, and we had a statutory Welsh language plan imposed on us. Now, the words 'compliance', 'imposition', 'you must', 'you must not', are not friendly words to people who are supposed to engage. The evidence that you had is that people do engage, and that is a laudable part of the reaction of the public sector. In fact, the wording is better in Welsh: 'hysbyseb cydymffurfio'—compliance notice. Lawyers would say, well a commencement date, or a start date, is an easier—it's a softer way of doing it.

And I think one of the issues that we've had is that a harder edged approach in order to get the standards in place may have a reaction. And the reaction I can point out to—from a publication from the Welsh Language Commissioner, 'A Measure of Success' 2017-18, it looks as though in cases that there's been a spike in compliance soon after 2016-17, and a decline in 2017-18. I wonder why. Now, is that a spike because people were geared up and engineered their systems to comply, and then there's a fall off? That's not to say—and I want to make the point that there have been huge successes, and you've heard already that things have moved on considerably. But I just wonder whether, as the consultative document identifies, there is a need to think of other ways of carrying people with the whole concept.

Well, that's where I wanted to get to, really, with the next question, which is that one of the points that's identified within submissions is, of course, the level of support for, I suppose, the next stage, and that is the development of language skills. And, having won hearts and minds, and so on, people can then be felt left alone with a set of standards, and the need for ongoing support, the ongoing development of that. How do you feel about the level of support that there was to actually go beyond just the implementation of a standard, and to, I suppose, ingrain it within the culture and operation of your organisations?

I think, certainly from us—we're bigger than Owen's organisation, with 50 staff, but, again, implementing the full range of standards would have been a serious challenge for us, and we have people who are experts who happen to be monoglot Anglophones, and having everybody bilingual would mean clearing out most of the organisation. So, actually we're very lucky that the Welsh Language Commissioner was perfectly sensitive to that, and so the timelines for implementation, and the various standards that we didn't have to adhere to, were sorted out sensibly. But, in a sense, it's reflecting on one of my earlier answers—I think there's a lot of work that needs to be done between the extremes of compliance, you know, people who are brilliant and people who are very bad. Actually, the bit in the middle is what really matters. And so, increasing the availability of support and guidance, I think, is—and possibly even co-ordinating what's already around, not necessarily changing the legal frameworks around that. It's possible in Wales for people to work together perfectly happily, if they're given the space to do it, so I think co-ordinating some of that availability would be helpful.

Just one point that follows on: Do you think that there is a weakness in the functioning of the language commissioner, that this actually could be part of the responsibility and process of the language commissioner to actually take on board that aspect? We know that Government usages are a key issue that we've been discussing, and we know that there are clearly the main functions with regard to Government, but in terms of the implementation of standards and our understanding of the implementation of standards, that the promotion of, and the well-being of the implementation of those standards—I think what you're suggesting is that we need to give some more thought to the responsibilities and the functions as to how that can be achieved.

Chairman, IIP, obviously, started off in Government, I understand, and then it became a not-for-profit company that is apart from the public sector. Quite honestly, I don't know. It may be an independent body adjudicating on success. It may be a more objective way, rather than the invigilator—there's that schoolteacher, again—giving the gold star. And it may have more credibility if there's a degree of separation.

However, I'm very conscious of the resources that would be involved, the cost, especially in a time of receding funding for the public sector. We want to avoid adding cost. But, perhaps, if this was considered, it may be that the cost—that there is a benefit, there's a value-added coming out of whatever resource goes into it. Whether it's the commission—I'm quite honestly unable to help you on that.

Okay, thank you. That's been very helpful.

Diolch yn fawr, Cadeirydd. I wonder if there's been any shift in your own internal working practices. I'd presume that all your major lines of work or projects are done on a team basis. Are any now led in Welsh, or conducted at least bilingually?

I think internally, certainly, for us, the answer to that is probably ‘no', but what we have got, I think, is an increasing incidence of people using Welsh in the office. There's partly the issue about confidence, which Sian touched on earlier, where people who are like me—dwi'n ddysgwr—I need to actually use it more in the office, even though my Welsh is limited, but there's also the encouragement of people who are first-language Welsh speakers also to use it and not feel uncomfortable about the fact that there are some monoglot Anglophones there who might not be able to follow the conversation. Clearly, you don't want to be exclusive, but on the other hand, you don't want people to feel that avoiding the exclusivity is such a barrier that they don't use it. And I think we're seeing a shift in habits within the office. Celia.

And I think that’s the difference with the standards, that, previously, we had a scheme, a Welsh-language scheme, that was very outward looking, and the standards have made us focus much more on our own staff, on our own services to our staff, and that, in return, is starting to build confidence, and we’re starting to see some outcomes of that in terms of the use of Welsh in the office and, as you say, hopefully moving towards—. I mean, it’s very early days, actually, to look at the impact, but we are starting to see the signs of more use of Welsh in the office and in the workplace.

David.

One of the reasons I've put my question this way—I will ask more basic ones about the workforce challenges you face—is that, to me, if we had a bilingual culture and, obviously, Britain has a deeply monoglot approach to nearly all its national life, which makes it fairly unusual—. I was really interested at the start of this session that Mr Watkin, in reference to compliance issues, said that the phrase in Welsh is much more efficacious, and if we had a bilingual culture, that's what would happen in your teams and your work streams, isn't it—you'd be working through and then, a couple of people on there whose first language was Welsh would say, 'We can tackle this perhaps more effectively by going through the Welsh language route'? And I'm sure that if I asked the civil service this question, I'd get similar answers, and I realise that you're a smaller organisations, but I don't see much evidence that that internal working culture is yet at that level, then. Would that be fair? And, as I said, I'm not making this, in any way, as a point that I feel you're failing—it's just a measure of where we're at, really, in our shift to a bilingual culture, generally as well as you specifically.

Shall I get mine out of the way because it's so small? English is the medium of communication because that is the language of the majority of the staff. As I said, were we able to appoint bilingual staff, then it would change. And I agree with your point that was excellently made, that the perception of the vocabulary is critical when people have to do things in response to an outside organisation that is a supervisor requiring them to do things.

We have around 10 per cent of our staff who are able to use Welsh confidently as part of a working language, but that doesn't give us enough mass, really, to conduct much of our operation through the medium of Welsh. But, again, we are actively trying to—. You know, some of them can, and where they can, they're using Welsh, but we are very conscious of the need to build the competency base of our staff. And that's not just about recruiting Welsh speakers, it's also about developing Welsh language learning facilities and encouraging people to move through that, and, actually, encouraging people like me, whose Welsh is limited, to use what we can. All of that, I think, is changing as a result of the imposition of these standards and the need to reflect on what we do internally.

Someone said to me yesterday, about the standards, that as a Welsh speaker they felt they had permission to use the language in the workplace. That's not to say they didn't have permission before, but it's a formalised permission, and more people are using Welsh in the workplace. There has been research at Canolfan Bedwyr in Bangor that has shown that the more Welsh speakers speak to each other in the workplace, it does increase that culture of bilingualism. So, I think we're at early stages, but we are moving in that direction.

I want to shift to—. The central point, really, of our inquiry, is the whole robustness of the standards approach, which obviously the Government have now put on hold in a fairly dramatic change of policy, or at least a pausing of policy. It seems to me, given that a standards regime inevitably has a sharper edge than a policy scheme, for instance, that you had a lot of misgivings about how, practically, this would affect you, but I've heard nothing in this morning's session to suggest that the regime you find yourself under is unreasonable or disproportionate. It seems to have been very natural and it's got rigour, but your interaction with the commissioner, for instance, has not been well known for appearing before the beak every morning and trying to explain why you failed in standard 32 or whatever. Despite the internal rigour of this approach, it seems to me to have been applied in a way that reflects the capacity of your organisations whilst, obviously, pushing you to more measurable standards and a higher level of service, really, to those you interact with.

Yes, I think, certainly, that was our experience, that Meri was a sensitive regulator, wasn't a pushover, but nonetheless we were able to have proper, sensible exchanges and get to a reasonable place, which has got a degree of stretch, as Sian has indicated, but which is not such that we are simply going to fall over trying to get there.

Diolch, Chair. Firstly, apologies for logistics this morning and being late. In terms of promoting the language internally—apologies if I go over ground that you've already covered, but perhaps you can inform me if that's the case. So, we're talking very much at the moment in terms of internal cultures within organisations and with regard to the onerous nature or not, or the applicability or not, of that culture within your organisation. So, particularly in terms of the Arts Council of Wales, in terms of the arts portfolio organisations—and there are many of them—how do you feel that the application of the standards is being cascaded down to those organisations in terms of promotion in particular, and also in terms of the requirement and duty within that mandate for you as an arts council?

Yes. Well, I think we've taken it on three levels: what we can do ourselves internally as an organisation in terms of our own operations, secondly, what we can do in partnership with the organisations we fund, and then, thirdly, taking a leadership role. You know, you realise you're a public body and you can make a difference and use your influence. So, we try to do that in support of the Welsh language. But, in terms of the partnership with the portfolio organisations that we fund regularly, they have to have Welsh language plans as part of their business planning, which is what we use as a tool for assessing and working with them and working around their funding. And those are assessed and given positive feedback or negative feedback from us. So, there is a level of engagement around the quality of those plans: we don't just check them off, although I'm sure we could improve the way that we do that.

I don't know whether you're aware, but we've seconded one of our senior managers into the well-being of future generations commissioner's office to specifically look at developing the Welsh language goal. So, a lot of that work around mentoring, ideas of good practice, examples from Wales elsewhere, bringing communities together, making connections, networking—we're trying to do that in partnership with the well-being of future generations office under the cultural goal so that we don't have too many levels of legislation and reporting and accountability. Because I think that's a key point, and I'm sure our portfolio organisations would attest to this very strongly: capacity is at a complete premium in everything we do. 

Absolutely. Yes. So, on that particular point—and that's very encouraging and innovative, in my view, on many levels—how, then, in terms of promotion and in terms of the application to become part of that portfolio, if an organisation—? And this is purely for clarification and purely to Arts Council of Wales: if an organisation comes to you and they don't have the appropriate plans in place, are they immediately disbarred or do you then help them and enable them to come up to the appropriate level of application in this regard?

Well, we don't regularly invite people into the portfolio, do we? That would be part of a portfolio review. But, obviously, I think Welsh language planning and cultural diversity in its whole entirety, really, would be part of that assessment process, obviously. And, also, in terms of the lottery grants we award as well, we do look at those to make sure that they're advertising bilingually. Of course, we can't police everything that happens, but it is a requirement on—

So, in terms of an organisation at that review point coming to you without the appropriate plans in place, would they then be advised and supported and mentored by you to make that—?

Within our capacity to do so, yes. 

Okay. Okay. Okay, thank you. And, internally, in terms of the boundary commission and HEFCW, your view in terms of that cultural analysis—we talked earlier about alienation, and, obviously, in a majority of the monoglot area that I represent, which has got a thriving and progressive Welsh-medium education foundation base, and that continues to grow—how do you approach that type of an issue in regard to promotion within the Welsh language context? I don't know who wants to take that first. Because it is an issue, and it tends to be skirted about a little bit. 

Chair, I'd just explain that the promotion category is not applied to the boundary commission, for clear reasons. Internally, there always has been a very healthy attitude towards the use of Welsh. A small staff, but the attitude is positive—

I don't want you to repeat what you said earlier, but that's interesting. 

But what is significant is that we have to recruit, as I explained, on the civil service, and people who come to us who perhaps are not from Wales are often more enthusiastic about using Welsh than others and they're willing to learn Welsh. 

Why do you think that is the case? 

I think because they think we're different. Coming to Wales is a different experience, and they want to be part of it. In draft reports and electoral reviews to all authorities, including those in south-east Wales, they're all published bilingually, and, if there is a wish to discuss the draft or any report through Welsh, then we're absolutely delighted to provide facilities to do that.

Okay, thank you. And yourselves? 

Similarly, we've always had, I think, a healthy attitude towards the use of and promotion of Welsh within the organisation. I just haven't seen that as an issue at all. Our difficulty is getting people who have the Welsh language skills, but also the technical skills that we need in some of our jobs. We also have had a long-established role in terms of promoting the use of Welsh in higher education, of course, and that work continues. Celia could give examples of where universities are helping in respect of promoting the use of Welsh. Universities are captured by the standards themselves. We don't have a role in monitoring their compliance with the standards, of course; that's with the Welsh Language Commissioner. 

Okay. And, finally, Chair, in regard to the use of technology and translation search and find—and we have Google obviously—do you think that there needs to be a drive in terms of research and development around translation in Wales? 

And, in regard to HEFCW, do you think that there is a deficit there in terms of what we can do in Wales in this regard? 

Well, I think we need to think about the broader picture as well. So, for example, we're working with the National Union of Students about mental health, student mental health, and one of the issues that's coming up there is about the facility for accessing bilingual counselling, a lot of which is online. So, we're starting to think about that but, of course, it's a big cost, so it's not just about those sorts of issues; it's a much broader picture. 

There's also—. And Sian made the point earlier: we also need people to use the tools that are there. Google Translate actually improves every time somebody uses it, and it's so much better now than it was even three years ago, but it will get better again if people keep using it.

Thank you, Chair. 

Yes. We would agree with that, I think. We've been through a process where there's been a fairly substantial transition, and the cost associated with that transition, both for regulated bodies, but also for the commissioner and her staff—I can't see a great appetite for going through another version of that. All it does is it will stop momentum, and I think, both we as regulated bodies and the commission will now have more space because that framework is there—more space, more time—to actually think about how to promote and how to maintain momentum. If we start again, then, actually, we'll just go backwards, would be my view.

And all this effort, really, has been about making the services available. We now need to embed that and to build the confidence, magu hyder, so that people are able, not just people like David and minnau, who've learned the language, but also fluent Welsh speakers, as you say, to fill in the forms, to use the services available. Maybe that's the next stage.

Diolch, Chair. Just very succinctly, then, in that regard, would you go further than that and say that, potentially, if there were to be legislation, that could be regressive in terms of culture or the potential for alienating the progress that's been made, or do not have a view on that?

I fear it could be problematic and not helpful to go further. I think, as I was saying earlier, if you've got a regulatory framework, actually, you hope never to have to use that in anger; you hope to keep people away from failing to meet the expectations. We've got a baseline of expectations now; people will have to continue to be monitored as to whether or not we're achieving those. But, actually, it's much more important to focus the energies on maintaining momentum, as I say, and developing the use of the language, embedding it rather than starting again and putting another regulatory framework in place, or just changing the rules. Let's just keep going. And, actually, there are various players in the context of promoting the use of the Welsh language in various contexts, and it's perfectly possible, it seems to me, in a country the scale of Wales, to get all of those bodies to work more closely together without having to regulate or legislate for that. It's just, you know, encourage.

There seems to be agreement with that. I don't know about—.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. What I'd like to say is that, you know, we'd all like to have a bottomless pot of money, wouldn't we? But that's an ideal view of everything. To be practical, we have to prioritise with the resources that we have. So, many aspects of linguistic planning deserve attention, but are there any aspects that you feel deserve, or need, more resources and focus? For example, Sian, you said that you wanted it to be an inclusive language and bring everyone on board. So, in terms of the question that I've just asked, can you relate to that and tell me how you would prioritise giving focus, perhaps, to certain elements? Because I’ve also got concern here that we are mentioning bringing people on board all together, but what about our elderly people who don’t know anything about Google, who maybe don’t have access to computers and new technology? How are we reaching everyone, as you said?

Well, I’m sure you’ll forgive me for saying that I would believe wholeheartedly that an investment in culture and the arts helps deliver on all of this agenda. We are working in old people’s homes now with people with dementia, we are providing arts practitioners to go into arts and healthcare settings, working in Welsh and in English. We are trying to develop the contemporary music scene in Wales, so that we can encourage people to go to gigs and use the Welsh language. We’re trying with theatre—we’ve invested in Sibrwd, which is technology to allow non-Welsh speakers to go to the theatre and enjoy Welsh-language productions. I think, on that cultural interface, there are so many opportunities to bring communities together and enhance understanding of the importance and the value of the Welsh language, not to just Welsh speakers but to all of us in Wales, for our tourism, for our vibrant communities, for our education, for our health and well-being. So, I hope you will forgive, but I do think—. I don’t want to say arts can deliver on Welsh language—that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying invest in the culture and the arts of Wales, and as a by-product you will have a very healthy input into a vibrant and exciting Welsh language as well.

Chair, can I just say that the point made about the elderly is absolutely important? It’s vital. But it’s a generational thing, isn’t it? We’ve heard from Sian about school leavers having the capacity, and we want them to use it. The remarkable thing about the elderly is that they’ve been denied the opportunity throughout their lives, especially in old people’s homes, hospitals, for example, and they, for the first time, are able to use Welsh. Perhaps they didn’t realise they could, but they now are able to. So, it comes back to the organisations being able to look after the elderly in a proper way, to realise their language of choice.

Speaking as an old person, my cohort are far more advanced in IT than I am, and they’re brilliant. So, what happens is that—what are they called? The silver wolves or the grey wolves. They’re able to use IT, but the more that is available, the more will be used. So, if it’s language planning or IT or communications, there’s a fertile ground to develop and to make opportunities available for people.

In terms of language planning, then it’s important for all organisations to think of it. What I suggested previously about planning the nudge factors—it’s worth investing in that to see whether that generally can help. But I think we should look forward with optimism that this can be made better, as long as everybody works together and understands that this is a positive thing we can achieve.

It’s been mentioned in our evidence that there’s been concentration on compliance as opposed to actually promoting the language, and the suggestion by the arts council that future generations may provide a better means of integrating the work of public bodies in promoting the language. Can you comment on this, really, because I think we need to bring the private sector, the public sector on board, and so on? So, how do you see this role in promoting the language along with the day-to-day activities then, which have been mentioned as well—being put in real-life situations and using the language as a way of promoting as well?

I’ve referred to our faith in the legislation around the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. We’ve seconded somebody in to do that very thing, really. So, we are looking at extending the reaches of things like Clwb Cymraeg at lunchtime—opportunities for people to practise their Welsh; looking at taking culture out—the Eisteddfod, can we do more with that? Partnerships. We’ve got a group of all the cultural sector bodies who've got an interest in developing the Welsh language audience—the national library, the museum and Llenyddiaeth Cymru. We've all come together to think, 'Can we be more than the sum of our parts if we work together?' And that's been inspired by the well-being of future generations Act, because we're all doing that. But we've got a full-time secondment at the moment, and she's looking at good practice examples. She's trying to share where she sees things working. There are some brilliant examples funded by HEFCW in the universities—Pontio in Bangor. There are really good examples there that can be shifted around the country, not necessarily picked up and replicated, but you can learn and be inspired by examples from elsewhere. And that's been facilitated through the well-being of future generations Act. And there's more that we could do on that, I'm sure. And the Government could help that through remit letters and stuff like that as well, I'm sure.

Agreed.