ABP

- Rapport -

IRELAND - LANGUAGE ACT FOR THE NORTH LEAGUE SUBMIT VIEWS

Despite its reservations about the need for yet another round of consultations on Irish language legislation and its application to the North the Celtic League has submitted supplementary views to the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure. Secretary General, Rhisiart Tal-e-bot makes it clear (see below) that the League wholeheartedly endorse

Par Cathal Ó Luain pour Celtic League le 19/06/07 19:50

Despite its reservations about the need for yet another round of consultations on Irish language legislation and its application to the North the Celtic League has submitted supplementary views to the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure.

Secretary General, Rhisiart Tal-e-bot makes it clear (see below) that the League wholeheartedly endorse views already expressed by by the Irish language campaign group POBAL and concludes by expressing the hope that Irish language legislation is introduced shortly:

"Margaret Ó Keeffe, Irish Language Bill Team, Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure, 3 rd Floor, Interpoint, 20-24 York Street , Belfast BT15 1AQ

Margaret.OK eeffe [at] ...

28 May 2007

Dear Margaret Ó Keeffe

Second Irish Language Consultation

Following a letter, dated 27th April from Judena Goldring in response to the League's concerns that a second consultation period is needed on Irish language legislation, we are writing again to make our views further known on the matter.

The fact that Judena Goldring's letter has not adequately justified why there is a need for a second consultation period, demonstrates the significance of the League's protestations against a second consultation and its continued engagement with the process.

Goldring's letter states that the responses to the first consultation "did not reflect a pronounced divergence of views among different sections of the community, and this suggested a need to build consensus around the form of any future legislation." This inadequate explanation from the Northern Ireland Department for Culture, Arts and Leisure naturally gives rise to several obvious questions, the first of which is did the Department want a particular response to the consultation process? Also, if some sections of the community did not respond to the initial consultation, surely this is an indication that they were not interested one way or another. Are we therefore to assume that when the 'expected' response did not materialise, with 93% of replies in favour of legislation for Irish, the Department decided to try again and will there be further consultations if this second one proves unsatisfactory?

As you can see there are a number of issues that are still unresolved for the League regarding the decision to hold a further consultation and consequently demand a fuller explanation. Nevertheless, we are aware that the deadline for the second consultation is on the 5 th June and we would like to express our views once again in case we miss our chance.

Rather than repeat what has already been stated, the League would like to make it known that we are in agreement with the 15 points laid down by the Irish language campaign group POBAL, with regard to the future of the Irish language in the north of Ireland. These are:

· The Irish Language Act must be rights-based and founded on POBAL's proposals, agreed with the support of the community and now further overwhelmingly endorsed in the December 2006-March 07 DCAL consultation. Consensus on language rights cannot be built on the denial of rights to Irish speakers.

· DCAL's second document states that its "approach draws heavily on the experience of Wales and the Republic of Ireland" but there are a number of clauses in the draft document that are significantly weaker than legislation in these jurisdictions

· There is no reference in the second document to the status of Irish. The Act must make Irish an Official Language in the north, in the title and text of the legislation and in the range of guaranteed rights that it creates

· There is no reference in the second document to education. The Act must create guaranteed rights in Education, including the right to Irish Medium education and the right for parents to have their children learn Irish. In addition, provision must be created for the teaching of Irish to adults and for training and further and higher education through Irish

· There is no reference in the second document to broadcasting. The Act must outline the broadcasting provision through Irish that must be made and as broadcasting is a reserved matter, this is a further reason for the Act's enactment at Westminster

· There is no reference in the second document to Irish in the NI Assembly or local councils. The Act must provide for guaranteed rights in relation to the use of Irish in the political institutions, local councils, the media, the provision of public services, the courts and employment

· It is not clear from the second document which of the Crown Authorities will have duties under the legislation. The implementation mechanism proposed for Crown bodies in the document is inadequate. The legislation must place significant, enforceable duties on all Crown bodies

· We agree that the courts should bear the costs of translation and that the repeal of the 1737 Administration of Justice (Language) Act (Ireland) is overdue. We welcome the proposal in the second document that an Irish language oath should be recognised within the courts and tribunals. However, access to use of Irish must not be subject to exemption based on "the interests of justice". Irish language documents must have equal validity with English language documents in the administration of justice

· The definition of 'schemes' and services is very limited in the second document. The Irish language Act must describe the services that government and public bodies must provide and the timescale in which they will provide them. We support the type and range of services laid out in the POBAL agreed proposals. There is a reference in the second document that due regard must be given to the extent to which Irish is used by persons requiring services. We reject this clause because it is inappropriate in the north of Ireland.

· Provision must be made in the act for signage and the use of placenames, street names, personal names and organisation names in Irish

· The description of the role of the Commissioner given in the second document is inappropriate. The Irish Language Commissioner NI must,

· - carry out monitoring on the way in which state bodies are fulfilling their duties under the Act and

· - take every measure necessary to ensure that duties under the Act are put into force

· - investigate complaints, and if necessary initiate a review, where there is failure to act on the rights of Irish speakers under the Act or any other enactment that deals with the use or status of the Irish language

· - The Commissioner must also make advice available to the public regarding their language rights and advises bodies of their responsibilities in relation to the Act

· The Office of the Commissioner must be independent of negative political influence and must be adequately resourced

· - The Commissioner must have an Irish language designation in the Act

· - The Commissioner must publish an Annual Report, without change or amendment by any other authority (Minister, Secretary of State, Assembly or Assembly Committee etc)

· Private individuals must have the right to make complaints and have court remedy if necessary

Despite our full agreement with the above 15 points concisely outlined by POBAL, we trust our views will be taken into consideration independently of them.

We look forward to the implementation of appropriate legislation for the Irish language in the north of Ireland in the near future.

Yours sincerely

Rhisiart Tal-e-bot General Secretary"

Further information can be found on the DCAL website at:

(voir le site)

ABP

Agir

Nous suivre