We've updated our Privacy and Cookies Policy
We've made some important changes to our Privacy and Cookies Policy and we want you to know what this means for you and your data.
Welsh language rules could cost some councils 拢700,000
Top Stories
Adopting new Welsh language standards could cost some councils hundreds of thousands of pounds every year, it is being claimed.
Wrexham council said it estimated that new rules will land it with a 拢700,000 annual bill.
The authority said adopting the new Welsh government standards would lead to cuts elsewhere.
The Welsh government said the Welsh Language Commissioner would decide which standards councils had to meet.
Other councils have told 大象传媒 Radio Cymru's Post Cyntaf they also faced extra costs, though some local authorities said the rules will not have a financial impact.
Top Stories
Language Commissioner Meri Huws said it would not be appropriate to make any comment until she had time to consider councils' submissions.
Top Stories
Counting the cost
- Torfaen County Borough Council estimate a cost of 拢680,000 annually to meet the standards
- Carmarthen council said it could cost them an extra 拢110,000 to employ more translators each year
- Caerphilly council said it could cost 拢490,000 extra for translations of reports and agendas
- Anglesey council said it did "not foresee any substantial financial implications" from the new standards
Wrexham council has written to Ms Huws to say it could meet 134 of 164 standards but that it would cost 拢700,000 extra each year to adhere to the remaining standards against a backdrop of 拢45m in budget savings over the next three years.
Councillor Hugh Jones, Wrexham's lead member for communities and partnerships, said the authority would be "forced to make budgetary savings" elsewhere to adopt the remaining standards which "place at risk" its ability to support library and heritage services as well as the Stwit theatre in Rhosllannerchrugog.
Pressure group Dyfodol i'r Iaith (Future For The Language) said while extra standards were needed, they were too "bureaucratic".
Top Stories
More to explore
Most read
Content is not available