Irish Language Act will cost too much?
Interestingly the proposed Irish Language Act featured in a speech by William Logan Sovereign Grand Master of the least political of the three main loyal institutions, the Royal Black Institution last Saturday in Bangor. No great fan of the Martin and Ian show, he landed a few barbed comments in that direction, labelling it a “cosy and insidious arrangement” is dangerous because it may lead to “many slow, incremental and subtle changes which would go unnoticed and unchallenged”.Then he turns his attention to the said Act (still yet to emerge as a bill):
“An interesting part of that agenda is the increasing pressure to introduce dual language legislation. Consider for a moment the enormous cost involved in implementing such a system with dual language road signs and documentation having to be printed in two languages. This money required would be better spent on improving and upgrading essential services such as hospitals, general health service and the roads and water infrastructure.”
Dewi, I think that anybody with the leasainm of ‘outsider’ already has a problem. It’s the old majority thing. When you are no longer in a majority you shout ‘fenian conspiracy’ over your shoulder and slink off to warmer climes!
When you are no longer in a majority you shout ‘fenian conspiracy’ over your shoulder and slink off to warmer climes!
Considering out of 50 posts mine was virtually the first from a Unionist perspective it illustrates that the board has a problem. Moving on to warmer climates like my fellow Unionists have done does not seem a bad idea.
As another aside, an dtig le duine ‘ar an aer’ an abairt seo a aistriú? I saw twins and I couldn’t tell “Which was which”? I suggest ‘ Cé acu a cheile’ and wait for better.
So, Outsider, please tell us what the big wow is ? After many posts I still can’t work it out !
I suspect that he has slunk off, Dewi. Is mór an trua é. I don’t think that I would retreat if I was under pressure from an opposing point of view but as I say when you are used to being the organ grinder it’s hard to be the monkey!
Are you serious Outsider? I would like to read these anti-Unionists posts…
Go raibh maith agat a Phancho’s Horse. For your translation i’d say ‘nà aithneoinn as a chéile iad’ or ‘nà raibh mé in ann dealú eatarthu’.
Tá mé ag iarraidh mana beag snasta cruinn chun chur ar T-léine. An bhfuil fadhb agat le Cé acu a cheile agus cad chuige?
gaelgannaire
a) to highlight that it doesn’t matter politically (thereby illustrating the Executive’s incompetence);
b) because I personally am quite interested in the subject (same reason I blog on Arsenal FC, for example).
IJP
Just been to your blog – an enjoyable and interesting read. Will return!
NÃl a Phancho, lean ort. An mbeidh na t-léinte seo ar dÃol nó an rud pearsanta é?
Tá cúpla ag m’inÃon chleamhnais agus tá suim aici i nGaeilge. NÃl ann ach rud pearsanta. Thig leat rudaà mar sin a dheanamh ar an rÃomhaire. Is féidir paipeár éigeanta a fháil agus Ãomhá a bhualadh ar T-léine. Caolán agus Séamus na hainmneacha atá ar an chúpla.
Gabh mo leithscéal. NÃl an focal sin ‘eigeanta’ sin ceart. particular an focal atá uaim.
Lets not forget that we have an Irish Gaelic Medium Schools policy that is substantially more advantageous than for regular schools, in that the minimum allowed enrollment is much lower for Irish Gaelic Medium schools than for standard English medium schools – a privileged position currently. Are Irish Language people willing to give that up on the grounds of equality?
A Shlug, a chara, don’t forget we have 400 years to make up.
For those who hadn’t noticed, the problem arises here in Pancho’s contribution:
It’s called a ‘Straw Man’ argument (or more accurately non argument). It is also known as ‘disambiguation’. Wikipedia says this about it:
This kind of gross misrepresentation happens in the comment zone all the time, and it is most often used against Unionist commenters. It is a problem, but short of spending all my time ‘micro chairing’ all discussions I am at a loss to know what to do about it.
I am often astonished at the high degree of tolerance for it amongst other commenters party to the same discussion. It is also, incidentally, a fairly mundane case of playing the man.
Sorry Pancho. You are not the only one, nor the worst.
Mick, you’re too smart for your own good. Imagine being sucked into a morass like this!
The only way to conduct a decent conversation between people who disagree on the fundamentals of any given argument is ask them (kindly) to play the ball.
You can only do your best and we DO appreciate it.I would hate to see anybody and I mean anybody driven off this site.I apologise most sincerely for breaches of protocol and will try not to repeat (for tonight at least)
Pancho
“and will try not to repeat (for tonight at least)”
Not good enough. The rules of this forum must be respected always.
Mea culpa,I will forever be obedient but what about the 400 year deficit?
“Mick
The fact that you have two Protestant/Unionist members in the hierarchy of Slugger cannot mask the fact this it has disintegrated into a far left Nationalist/Republican and thinly veiled sectarian board. Its just one anti Protestant/Unionist post after another and its no great mystery why many of the main Protestant/Unionist bloggers no longer frequent this board.”
Thge thing is Mick is that b4 this comment there was absolutley nothing “far left”, “nationalist”, “republican” “anti Protestant” (an unbelievable accusation in this context, where did religion come into this ?,) or “anti Unionist” in this thread at all. We were all trying to keep cool – knowing the recent history of these types of thread…
Dewi,
Going back to the original post. You should not think of this act in terms of Wales. What it will be is yet another example of one side staking out it’s territory and making the minority in that area feel intimidated. It is a devisive, not a uniting act.
DMC
1) I don’t think of this act in terms of Wales honestly.
2) It’s only divisive if Unionists consider it thus. My consistent remarks have been on the lines that embracing it as part of heritage of the whole community is the best approach.
3) Notwithstanding 2) the right to communicate in Irish with public bodies need not be intimidatory in any fashion.
4) What’s the Black in RBI about ??
The problem is it’s not the heritage of both communities, just one.
I’ve no problem with communicating with public bodies in Irish if that’s what people want to do (and if there is a genuine demand).
The intimidation and territory marking occur because only the areas that demand it will have bilingual signs. Hence marking areas as “Republican”.
Sorry, am not an expert on the Loyal Orders.
“The problem is it’s not the heritage of both communities, just one” – we’ve been through this a number of times – the Gaelic speaking requirements on some Presbyterian ministers compared with the Catholic church’s anti-English attitude etc etc. A long time ago I know.
“only the areas that demand it will have bilingual signs. Hence marking areas as “Republican— – I agree, I think all areas should have bilingual signs. Which would u think worse ? All areas or just nationalist areas ?
Dewi,
What Unionists consider it to be is the key conditioning element as to whether this thing happens or not. All moral indignation on the part of nationalists at the robust expression of that perception is, politically-speaking, besides the point.
Truth is, that the SF strategy on this seems to have been: “we don’t need to engage with Unionists on this, because we have already dealt with Westminster”. In practice however, as Pete points out elsewhere, the overall settlement does not appear to give them a way ‘out’ on this.
It is also true that an Act is a maximal instrument to achieve what looks like a minimal measure. The same measure could be achieved by co-opting relevant sections of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, with the agreement of their unionist colleagues.
Is that possible? I don’t know exactly, but the Irish language should have some valence in the horse trading that’s expected before the Programme of Government is set in October. It’s almost as though SF were trying to get it through by paying no ‘price’ at all.
But, if SF really is serious about this issue, then the problem may be, as Nick Ridley once famously (and rather distastefully) remarked, that the legislative ship has left the harbour ‘with its bow doors left open’.
Which further raises the question: did someone really just take their eye off the ball, or is this just another ill-judged game of ‘winding up the Prods‘?
On post 25 I meant Catholic Church’s anti-”Irish” attitude ! – Sort of messed up the point.
I can think of a few things more costly than an Irish Language Act. Policing the marches and demonstrations of the “Loyal Orders” for instance has cost the North’s economy billions over the past ten years.
The current British misadventure in Iraq – how much is that costing our health services and education sectors? And yet Gordon Brown wants to stay there.
Whether or not the Irish language costs money – and official recognition won’t be without cost – is not the question. The principle here is recognition of Irish language and culture as an integral part of the state of NI. If that accomodation isn’t forthcoming from the Unionist parties, because of their ‘straw man’ arguments (Irish language is divisive because we don’t like it!). What’s that catchcry from 1776 – no taxation without representation?
Oliver
You have representation. Those representatives at Stormont will decide how your taxation is spent and I fully expect it will not be on an Irish Language Act.
That’s democracy for you!
Sometimes you wont get what you want and guess what?
Because Stromont is up and running you wont be able to run whinging to the Brits to give an ILA to you.
Oh how I look forward to this getting to the floor of Stormont.
Cue raving Irish language nutters casting hysterical “bigot”/”denier of equality” rants. LOL!
Mick – you have fallen into Nationalist / Unionist horse trading trap on this. It only becomes horse trading if Unionists so wish – “Something for nothing ?” – Why not just do it cos it’s right ?
“Winding up the prods” ? Agreeing to Policing, Total decommissioning, serving under Ian Paisley ?
If you want an example of “winding up” how about agreeing to an ILA in the St Andrews Agreement and now saying “we were only kidding, you can get lost ?”
P.S. …and Ruth Dudley Edwards also knows a bit about “winding up” people while we are at it !
Dewi
The ILA came out of a side deal between HMG and SF. The DUP had nothing to do with it and when it gets to the floor of the assembly I fully expect them to kill it stone dead.
So do I Ginfizz. A wonderful example of the inclusive nature of Unionist outreach.
Dewi,
“Why not just do it cos it’s right?”
Because we have the equivalent of a Thatcher/Kinnock government what is ‘right’ is sometimes going to be mediated to what’s ‘acceptable’.
Thankfully, it looks like most issues there is broad agreement on; although that may be as much to the limitation of resources released by Whitehall only allow for a highly limited set of policy responses.
It may also be because both parties are learning how to do ‘real’ politics, and haven’t got the capacity to stir every pot, for fear of having some of their own inconveniently upset over the fire.
two points
Firstly, I am ambivalent on bilingual signs, but what I don’t want is for it to turn into another surrogate “lampost p*ssing” contest that marks our “our” territory aka flags, kerbstone painting, marches, bonfires. The line i was given in justification before i was subject to a petty sectarian thumping was “you think its okay to come into our area when we can’t come into yours? THUMP”. Will roadsigns now mark out what is “our area” and what is “yours”?
Secondly, I think that alot of the arguments on this point (cost, etc.) are a little disingenous. Deep down, a lot of people are for or against it because its themums or usuns.
Ok, an extra 3rd point. When i was driving through wales, it did slow me down a little while looking at place names on signposts and i was thinking “is that another place, or the same place just in welsh”.
Side point – je crois que c’est un petit peu mal – parler dans une langue que les autre personnes ne savoir pas. (horrible french, sorry. i mean, its a little bit rude to switch into a language that other people part of the conversation can’t understand. not an objection to threads as gaelige, just shutting people out of an existing debate)
I am fairly ambivalent on them in principle Bollix but in practice and I agree that these signs have the unfortunate potential to mark out areas tribally if they are done area-by area, and I would regard that as a negative.
dear bollix, I object to you drifting into French when some people don’t understand it. It smacks of elitism. But seriously, you are correct. My only defence is that any Irish that I use is not essential to the debate and a translation can be given if required.
My only defence is that any Irish that I use is not essential to the debate and a translation can be given if required.
Not only that Pancho’s Horse but we were speaking to each other about things that had nothing to do with Bollix.
Dewi,
“Why not just do it cos it’s right?”
On further reflection, this is probably the right question to ask. But, then who is making the case for it being the right thing?
It’s not coming from SF, and the SDLP’s line similarly to hang a default blame on the DUP. Dominic Bradley:
This is looking more and more like a convenient means for dumping a measure no nationalist party is qualitatively prepared to back by hanging the blame on ‘those pesky unionists’, when as GF suspects, they ‘kill it stone dead’ in the Executive/Assembly.
Which begs yet another question: who is going to look after the best interest of the language?
Dewi
What?!!! Like the Nationalist outreach of having morons glorifiying murder parading through the streets of Belfast, replica rifles in hands? What work exactly have nationalists done to “reach out” to us?
Oh lets see now, there was Alex Maskey’s half-assed attempted at laying a wreath at the cenotaph away from the main event and that well, err, is it.
Oh no how silly of me to forget, there was the master stroke of appointing a bomber as the SF director of Unionist engagement – hmmmm that one’s bound to work.
Don’t you dare presume to lecture me on outreach work after what Sinn Fein and their ilk put the Unionist community through. We owe them nothing. You see this is the problem some nationalists have with democracy – no longer able to run crying about evil Unionists to Downing Street, locked in to the assembly structure, disarmed and legally bound to support the rule of law, they can no longer wield the influence they once did with the powers that be.
They won’t get everything you want and for that I am mighty glad!
There are a number of arguments put up against an Irish Language Act in NI, the vast majority based on simple prejudice.
However Slug, and IJP have drawn attention to the fact that Irish signs will be defaced or not erected in Loyalist areas. Indeed, comically, I recall an Ulster Scots signs was defaced in a Loyalist area as the locals thought it was in Irish.
The underlying fear is that language will be used as yet another marker of difference to go along with religion, schools, football, wee button noses and all the rest.
This would be most regrettable and is a genuine concern IMO.
I’d much rather see multilingual road sings in Mandarin or similar, given that they’d actually be of some use then. The whole thing smacks of another territorial pissing contest. As always it’s the genuine Irish language enthusiasts who will suffer the most as nationalist politicans use the language as a handy tool to beat the unionists with, while unionism’s suspicions deepen and hostility to the language grows and grows. No doubt unionists will come out of the whole thing looking terrible once again.
GINFIZZ
Supporting an Irish Gaelic Act isn’t ‘giving in to Republicans’, it’s recognising the Irish language community who come from all sections of our society.
PÃID
‘The underlying fear is that language will be used as yet another marker of difference to go along with religion, schools, football, wee button noses and all the rest.’
If Unionists support the language it won’t be. Irish speakers just want increased rights and recognition, they don’t want to use the language for any politcal reasons.
________
Some people here are against bilingual signs because they’ll mark areas as culturally Gaelic or culturally Planter. Their solution is to have no signage at all. So Irish speakers are denied their own and native language on signs because it will upset some Neanderthals? Give me a break…
the hysterical ranting of the likes of Ginfizz is indicative of their poor grasp of the concepts of human rights, diversity of culture, equality. Apparently the Irish Language Act shouldn’t be enacted because it is giving in to the IRA etc – language echoed by the similarly shortsighted UUP MLAs in their recent motion – not because it is right or wrong in itself.
The old unionist mindset – no Irish about this place – is evident in this argument. They want the cold house to remain cold for Irishness.
that’s a good recipe, no doubt, for a return to the bad old days. Of course it’s not going to happen. Most reasonable unionists will see the Irish language act as a necessary part of a shared future, those who don’t will have to put up with the bilingual signage, the more regular programme as Gaeilge on BBC NI and so on.
The only hysterical ranting on this issue is from you and your ilk.
Unionists generally recognise and support Irish Language and activity in the cultural and educational spheres (where it belongs). What won’t be tolerated is expensive and divisive encroachment on the public sphere and that I’m afraid, you’ll have to get used to, because it won’t be imposed on unionists when it isn’t wanted or needed.
Another Straw man argument Oilibhear?
I have been looking for the substance in this debate for some time. It’s in the submission of Pobal and others, but it is strangely missing from the public pronouncements of our politicians.
However you cut it, the ‘if it wasn’t for those pesky unionists’ line doesn’t make up for that lack of substance.
I am sick to death of the out an out blatant disdain for anything however remote that expresses Irish culture and identity. In 4 years of living in England the heartland of Britain and speaking Irish on a daily basis in public not once did i experience even one negative comment. Rabble rousers such as Paisley are dying breed .They represent a dying breed of a Xenophobic Britains whose time is at an end e.g. Enoch Powell. If peace is going to last it must not be on the terms of one side or the other. Unionists should respect Nationalist identity and vice versa and I’m not talking about violence before anyone drags guns and bombs into this debate. This debate has nothing to do with them. Mar focail scóir “Acht Teanga Anois”
ZIZNIVY
…because it won’t be imposed on unionists…
Could you please let us know how an Irish Language Act will impose anything on Unionists? Some of whom, by the way, are Irish speakers.
MICK
I have been looking for the substance in this debate for some time. It’s in the submission of Pobal and others, but it is strangely missing from the public pronouncements of our politicians.
That’s true. There are even a number of submissions that make better arguements than POBAL’s document.
When debating this issue the media should show some intiative and interview representatives of the Irish language community, not simply politicians who do not have the same insight into Irish language life and issues.
Ginfizz – did I ever say that Sinn Fein outreach initiatives ever worked ? No – they obviously haven’t – although in terms of tension reduction at least elements are having a go. Indeed I can’t remember mentioning Nationalist outreach activities on this thread at all.
“Don’t you dare presume to lecture me on outreach work after what Sinn Fein and their ilk put the Unionist community through. We owe them nothing. You see this is the problem some nationalists have with democracy – no longer able to run crying about evil Unionists to Downing Street, locked in to the assembly structure, disarmed and legally bound to support the rule of law, they can no longer wield the influence they once did with the powers that be.”You see this is the problem some nationalists have with democracy – no longer able to run crying about evil Unionists to Downing Street,”
I repeat that this doesn’t have to be a sectarian issue – indeed a wonderful opportunity for Unionists to start playing the inclusivity game – might get one up on Sinn Fein you never know. Current strategy is:
1)Weren’t we clever to ensure that commitment in At Andrew’s could be overturned.
2) I know, let’s use that right as soon as we can to upset our Nationalist fellow citizens ASAP-
3)oh and while we are on about let’s crow about being in charge
Humbly suggest that that ain’t useful.
“Could you please let us know how an Irish Language Act will impose anything on Unionists? Some of whom, by the way, are Irish speakers.”
That largely depends what it consists of. I’m not opposed to further legislation for the protection and advancement of the language in the cultural and educational spheres.
Where an Act would be an unecessary and unacceptable imposition, on unionists and others, is if it attempts to enforce bi-lingualism, wastes public money on Irish Language forms, allows time-wasters to demand to correspond in Irish with government departments etc. That is what extremists like Oliver and yourself are demanding as I understand it.
That you will not be permitted to get.
Ooooooh!! “enforced bilingualism” eh, Ziz.
The alternative is called “enforced monolinguism” – your preference, no doubt, you big inclusive liberal you.
And “That you will not be permitted to get”. My, how the modern Unionist has come on.
Get this, Ziz. If you want loyalty to your statelet, have a dramatic rethink.