Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005 (Consequential Modifications) Order 2006

My Lords, I thank the Minister for the exemplary way in which he has explained these rather complicated and involved orders for the far north of this land. In addressing the Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005 (Consequential Modifications) Order 2006, I must declare an interest as I was introduced as a very small boy of about two years old to life-long membership of An Comunn Gaidhealach, the organisation promoting Gaelic. The Minister was right to tell the House that this measure is simply to replace a bòrd with one name with another that is not dissimilar. He hinted that there are some crucial differences, which are explained in the explanatory memorandum. Bòrd Gàidhlig na h’Alba was established as a company limited by guarantee, but because of the Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005, the Scottish Executive have now been able to institute the new Bòrd na Gàidhlig with statutory powers. With the use of the Education and Training (Scotland) Act 2000, they have has power to ask local authorities to prepare a strategy for Gaelic education in each area. Having spoken to someone in their offices, they seem conscious that this will be more appropriate in some areas than in others. I hope that they will pursue that with some sensitivity. I believe that there are about 90,000 Gaelic speakers of at least moderate fluency in Scotland. That represents a slight increase in recent years. The board to which they will be appointed, Seirbheis nam Meadhanan Gàidhlig—the Gaelic Media Service—has the power to produce Gaelic programmes and to hold broadcast licences with the intention of establishing a Gaelic channel. It was very useful that the Minister gave us some details on that because, with the advent of digital broadcasting, this is more feasible than it was a few years ago. The House should be aware that when that body was set up by the Conservative government in 1992, £9.5 million was provided. That funding exercise has now been delegated to the Scottish Executive, but currently that body is receiving only £8.5 million. A study by Deloitte has recently estimated that the cost of establishing a channel broadcasting for one and a half hours per day with a sustaining service would be £16.8 million. Noble Lords interested in these matters will be aware of what a great lift has been given to the Welsh language by the establishment of the Welsh-language channel S4C, which has a similar level of programme production to that proposed for the Gaelic channel. I was pleased to hear the Minister giving us some dates and proposals because the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages was signed by the British Government in 2001. Is the Minister satisfied with the rate of progress and the definitive programme that has been given? Moving on to the Charities and Trustee Investment (Scotland) Act 2005 (Consequential Provisions and Modifications) Order 2006, we can agree that there has been a need for better oversight of charities in Scotland. The setting up of the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator is the method that the Scottish Executive have chosen to do that. By this instrument, the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator is deemed to be a non-ministerial office in the Scottish administration. I am grateful to the Minister for explaining to the House that the board of that organisation will be held accountable to Scottish Ministers, as that was not entirely clear from the wording of the order. We in this House have spent many hours recently dealing with major legislation to regulate charities, the Charities Bill, which is now in another place. The Minister is no doubt aware that the critical determination of a charity under that Bill is expressed as the ““public benefit test””. I understand that there are somewhat similar criteria under the Charities and Trustee Investment (Scotland) Act, but those criteria are different. Will these raise an issue for Scottish charities operating in England, or for English charities operating in Scotland? Will there be any need for charities to achieve registration separately in both halves of the United Kingdom? I am pleased otherwise to agree to these measures.