Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Is it no really time to assess how much the irish language costs us all?
Options
Comments
-
Being supportive or the Irish language does by no means make you an Irish fanatic or indicate that you are a romantic Irish/celtic nationalist.
Many people i know , including my self who support the language do not do so fanatically, nor would we see our selves as nationalist, far from it, many of them are fairly liberally minded, speak other languages and very open to other cultures. Support of Irish is seen across the political spectrum, not just nationalist, conservative elements, as is opposition to it.
Not wanting Irish supported in any way or form is opposing it, if I wanted art to be no longer funded in the school and the state, I would be opposed to it.
And by and large the majority of the population do support the language, its teaching and its funding, just like most of us support the funding of a public health service, how we want the funding applied and spent does causes differences, Similarly in Irish the vast majority don't want the funding and support to be removed, but there will always be debate on how to most effectively use that funding, as there is in all fields.
However there is a Minority who oppose the language, as they want funding for it to stop completely or be drastically reduced, as the polls blow show, some carried out by reputable bodies like NUI Maynooth, those who oppose the funding of Irish are a Minority.
article on poll
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/eyauqlgbqlql/rss2/
the poll, shows 92 % wish to see it supported , in some form or another
http://www.pobail.ie/ie/Preaseisiuinti/file,9801,ie.pdf
MORI poll which shows in radio, while most people dont listen to RnaG etc, most support it
http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=653
another one which shows most people want it supported and passed on
http://www.irishpressreleases.ie/2006/05/29/usi-hails-poll-showing-public-support-for-irish-language/
Goverment report which shows a larger proportion supporting it
http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/Government_Press_Office/Government_Press_Releases_2008/Government_Press_Releases_2006/Government_Statement_on_the_Irish_Language.html
I cant find any serious study which suggests a large body of people wish the teaching or irish to be discontinued, if any one can provide such a thing, then by all means do0 -
starbelgrade wrote: »but the fact of the matter is, that for the vast majority of the country, it is essentially a dead language & we have a right to question what it costs most of us when it has very little value to us - whether in recession or not.
Looks like a majority rules argument to me. The majority of people dont use Irish: stop wasting money on that. The majority dont need disabled access: stop wasting money on this also. Let the record show etc.cyclopath2001 wrote: »The OLA imposed a blanket requirement on all government departments to make all documents and services available in Irish.
No it didnt, only certain documents. Please read the 2003 languages ACT.Why not club together and hire a room? Or ask to use part of a library some evening?
Surprise, surprise this has/is being done. When the government sees positive actions taken by ordinary people like this on the ground it is more inclined to spend its money in these areas. (Although, Im sure Gaelscoil Cabra would disagree).Those of us beaten at school for not knowing the Tuiseal Gna-Laithraeach or who had their names forcibly translated into Irish know a bit of Gaelic fascism.
Nothing to do with the Gaelic language, everything to do with bad teachers.
The same type of teachers were beating the heads off kids a hundred years ago for speaking Irish.
A lot of the arguments against seem to be disguising an irrational hatred of the Irish language.It's a waste of money. If our government offers people a choice between more taxes and getting rid of a wasteful government department, what will the majority choose? Cutting budgets and limiting expenditure is not Fascism.
What will the majority choose? Do we need a referendum on this decision?Is it too much to ask the Irish speakers to emerge from the intoxicating Celtic mists of whatever you're smoking and come into the real world of money and the lack of it?
Again it is the Irish government and the EU you need to attack for the translations into national languages of public documents. Your continuing to blamd Irish speakers for this is misguided and unfair. The real world is about more than money surely? In the new McCarthy era Wildes analysis of the cycic of knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing is more relevant than ever.They spoke latin too, Languages are not static, they change over time and just because irish was spoken here for millenia as you claim does not mean that we should forever speak irish on this island as if the island and the language were somehow dependent on each other.
Well the language is certanly dependent on the Island. If it dies in Ireland it is dead.
Why waste millennia of ideas, history, stories and culture without raising a finger?Why should the place names dictate what language people speak?
What language? I think people in Ireland should be billingual those who cant will be English only speakers.
Place names on their own shouldnt decide but the poster asked for reasons and that is one.
Glendalough? Meaningless? Glen da Locha? Valley of the two lakes.
Even the limited knowledge of Irish most people have is good enough to decipher most placenames and their meaning. This could potentially enrich peoples expoerience of living in Ireland/being Irish a bit?I was one of the thousands of children being thought irish in our schools, do I have no say then?
Ofcourse you do and if you want to force your children not to learn Irish as well as other peoples children (even those who have chosen yto send them to Irish speaking schools) then away you go. You will get no popular support for this in Ireland.Seriously if it is that much a part of our culture, making it optional in school and not translating documents into it needlessly won't finish it off.
Not translating documents into Irish will mean the languages Act has been repealed and the language is no longer a national language which would be detrimental to it.If this kills it off, it was already dead
It wasnt already dead, so have to disagree with you there.
Opportunity cost my good man - every euro spent translating documents that no one ever reads into Irish is a euro that is not spent on providing cancer tests for kids.
Think of the kids.........
Like I said, every euro you want to spend on such stupidity is a euro youre stealing from people who want to pay for cancer tests for kids. Think of the children.
Have you ever lobbyed a local politician about cancer tests for children? If the answer is no, what does that make you in view of your comments above?Can we talk about the opportunity cost of unlimited and undirected Irish spending in a time of bitter cutbacks now?
The budget on Irish is unlimited. Do you have a reference for this or did you just make it up?Cart before horse. Its because the country is economically crippled that we can not afford to translate documents you and I will never read into Irish so that you can feel warm and fuzzy inside that silly amounts of money are being spent on bureacratically insane projects to appease ridiculous lobby groups.
Again it is your local politicians you would need to speak to both TD and MEP.
You need to get the languages ACT repealed and get the European Council to stop its policy of translating documents into languages of its member countries.Funny how Irish fanatics claim its part of our cultural heritage, but dont place any importance on the care for children in our cultural heritage. Sad to be honest, sad.
Stop trying to be antagonistic and disrespecfully using the very serious issue of funding for childrens health (which you quite clearly care about not one whit).starbelgrade wrote: »Opinion polls mean nothing. You cannot claim to have the majority backing based on a poll of how many people? Of what demographic? And run by who?
I could do an opinion poll tomorrow myself, that would counteract any other opinion poll.
So, I too could also speak for the majority if I so chose.
The closest thing to an opinion poll on this issue was the Dail (representing the electorate) and passing the languages ACT in 2003.0 -
Nor does it mean a desire for large amounts of scarce tax revenue to be spent on it.daithicarr wrote: »Being supportive or the Irish language does by no means make you an Irish fanatic or indicate that you are a romantic Irish/celtic nationalist.
Straw man argument & illogical even it it were true, since the withdrawal of funding is simply an opposition to funding a particular activity and is not an opposition to the language itself. If I choose not to give money to Concern, that does not mean I hate poor Africans.daithicarr wrote: »Not wanting Irish supported in any way or form is opposing it, if I wanted art to be no longer funded in the school and the state, I would be opposed to it.
But every time a rational debate is attempted along these lines the Irish lobby responds by throwing its toys out of the pram and shouting "Why do you hate Irish?"daithicarr wrote: »but there will always be debate on how to most effectively use that funding,
Are you quite sure it was commissioned by NUI Maynooth?daithicarr wrote: »reputable bodies like NUI Maynooth,
Straw man argument. (again...sigh.)daithicarr wrote: »I cant find any serious study which suggests a large body of people wish the teaching or irish to be discontinued, if any one can provide such a thing, then by all means do
The budget is unlimited because no limit exists. All departments have been ordered to provide all communications and services in Irish and are being actively pursued by the relavant quango. The OLA initially provided for a limited number of documents being translated but that was just for openers. The quango responsible for the Irish language industry is now aggressively pressing for the implementation of the OLA in full. This may be due to the impending possibility that Mr O'Cuiv's empire and the associated Irish language industry is under scrutiny.T runner wrote:The budget on Irish is unlimited. Do you have a reference for this or did you just make it up?
If the public had to choose between translating documents into Irish and providing disabled access, what would they choose?t runner wrote:The majority of people dont use Irish: stop wasting money on that. The majority dont need disabled access: stop wasting money on this also.0 -
Its not a straw man arguemnt in any shape or form, if the vast majority of people want to see the langauge supported then they are prepeared to pay for it, that is what support means.
Never suggested that people who didnt want it funded hated irish, but they are opposed too it being supported.
Your argument on a limitless budget are also weak , it is not limitless, many gaelscoils lack propery facilitys etc, how would this be the case if the funds were limitless?
it can be similarily argued that spending on the military, health etc is limitless because no limit has been imposed.
as for large amounts of tax revenue spent on it, no one has provided figures on how much is actually spent.
If you read the polls they show the vast majority of the people support Irish funding in general, they may differ over what areas to focus on, but over all the desire to see the funding in place is much stronger than seeing it removed0 -
But what is meant by 'support' and how much do people want to pay?daithicarr wrote: »if the vast majority of people want to see the langauge supported then they are prepeared to pay for it, that is what support means.
The OLA made no provision for the costs to be measured.:rolleyes:daithicarr wrote: »as for large amounts of tax revenue spent on it, no one has provided figures on how much is actually spent.0 -
Advertisement
-
cyclopath2001 wrote: »The budget is unlimited because no limit exists. All departments have been ordered to provide all communications and services in Irish and are being actively pursued by the relavant quango. The OLA initially provided for a limited number of documents being translated but that was just for openers.
Please elaborate, are you saying that the OLA has been amended from its 2003 version? (The 2003 version is the one you mean by "for openers" above.
Here is the relevant article of the 2003 OLA. Please tell me what has been changed from this and when.
10. —Notwithstanding any other enactment, the following documents made by or under the authority of a public body (other than a body, organisation or group standing prescribed pursuant to regulations for the purposes of clause (b) of paragraph 1(5) of the First Schedule) shall be published by that body in each of the official languages simultaneously:
[GA] (a) any document setting out public policy proposals;
[GA] (b) any annual report;
[GA] (c) any audited account or financial statement;
[GA] (d) any statement of strategy required to be prepared under section 5 of the Public Service Management Act 1997; and
[GA] (e) any document of a description or class standing prescribed for the time being, with the consent of the Minister for Finance and such other (if any) Minister of the Government as the Minister considers appropriate having regard to the functions of that other Minister of the Government, and being a document of a description or class that is, in the opinion of the Minister, of major public importance.If the public had to choose between translating documents into Irish and providing disabled access, what would they choose?
They would never be put in this alice in wonderland position. In real life they have chosen both through the Dail.cyclopath2001 wrote: »But every time a rational debate is attempted along these lines the Irish lobby responds by throwing its toys out of the pram and shouting "Why do you hate Irish?"
Sorry to but in: but that particular post could hardly be responsible for the toys out of the pram comment. You did say that everytime a rational debate is attempted the toys come out of the pram: this is clearly not the case.
You did however make this assertion:cyclopath2001 wrote: »Those of us beaten at school for not knowing the Tuiseal Gna-Laithraeach or who had their names forcibly translated into Irish know a bit of Gaelic fascism.
If people do indeed show signs of hatred it is legitimate to point out to them that prejudice or hatred is never a basis a "rational debate".Is it too much to ask the Irish speakers to emerge from the intoxicating Celtic mists of whatever you're smoking...
A bit rich etc....0 -
NewDubliner wrote: »The OLA made no provision for the costs to be measured.:rolleyes:
Why would it. Did the local Government act make provisions for the costs of the production of the selected obligaratory reports (in any language)?
How much did the Clare CoCo annual report cost to produce? A hell of a lot more than the Irish translation thats for sure. Is there a provision for measuring the cost of that report or a limit on the cost of that report?0 -
Yeah, I haven't grasped English yet because the 't' on my keyboard is a bit fiddly. I suggest you sort out your own dodgy capitalisation and punctuation (or complete lack thereof) before having a go at mine mate. :rolleyes:seems some of us haven't grasped english yet, what does that even mean?
0 -
I find it funny that we are supposed to believe that spending money in this way on silly, rarely read documentation will somehow save, or even promote the Irish language. I find it especially funny because here in this city the Turkish language flourishes despite receiving not a jot of money from the city or government. Strange that-didn't Irish also flourish in parts of Northern Ireland where no money was ever forthcoming from government, where street signs were all in English and where absolutely no official documents, even useful ones, were ever translated into Irish? Perhaps people in the Republic of Ireland just don't have enough interest in the language? It's a distinct possibility. However, I'd rather see the cash spent on meaningful language promotion programs rather than silly and expensive translations. If it still fails, scrap official spending on it altogether and let folks do it in their own time out of their own pocket.0
-
no one here is suggesting that just spending money on docuemnts such as the one in question will help the langauge, i personaly dont think it will help it in the slightest to have these docuemnts in irish, but it is their right as its an offical langauge and there is no suuport to remove irish as an official langauge.
As for turkish and polish and all the other langauges, they flourish due to immigration, with in a generation or two their decendants will largely loose the langauge (unless ease of travel and mproved communications with nations of origins slows this rate down)
basically if the majority want to support it , then its their right to have it funded. Just because some of the money was spent in a way which has questionable benefit doesnt mean the whole project should be abandoned
as for support it means a whole range of things from wanting the langauge to be maintained, About 52% of the population. or to restore it as a spoken language by a large portion of the population (or all) , about 40 %, its a wide ranging support , and id imagine they would all have various levels of funding in mind0 -
Advertisement
-
No, I am not saying it has been amended. The minister has been granted wide-ranging granted powers to pass Statutory Regulations which avoid the inconvenience of debate in the Dáil.Please elaborate, are you saying that the OLA has been amended from its 2003 version? (The 2003 version is the one you mean by "for openers" above.
Here is another relevent article:Here is the relevant article of the 2003 OLA.# The duty of public bodies to prepare a scheme detailing the services that they will provide:
* through the medium of Irish,
* through the medium of English, and
* through Irish and English;
* and the measures to be adopted to ensure that any service not provided by the body through the medium of the Irish language will be so provided in the future (within a timeframe to be agreed - in effect, distinguishing between such services to be provided in lifetime of the current scheme and those to be addressed in a longer timeframe). [Section 11]
I doubt that the public were aware of what was being foisted on them. Now that that is has been passed, it only needs statutory instruments to expand the act's scope. These are passed solely at the pleasure of the minister for the Irish Language Industry.They would never be put in this alice in wonderland position. In real life they have chosen both through the Dail.
This highlights the irony of accusing people of being Fascist when they merely questioned government spending on Irish.You did however make this assertion:
"Those of us beaten at school for not knowing the Tuiseal Gna-Laithraeach or who had their names forcibly translated into Irish know a bit of Gaelic fascism."
If people do indeed show signs of hatred it is legitimate to point out to them that prejudice or hatred is never a basis a "rational debate".0 -
-
Exactly. It's like saying that asking an Irish speaker to read a document in English is the same as asking a blind man to watch television instead of listening to the radio. It's a nonsense comparison which holds no water.starbelgrade wrote: »I don't see how you can even make the comparison.0 -
starbelgrade wrote: »I find your attitude on this issue absolutely abhorrent. I don't see how you can even make the comparison.
The argument of culling spending on things that dont affect the majority is your argument not mine (I have quoted you in my last post). I am making the comparison to attempt to show you the error in your argument by applying it to a more black and white issue.
I dont for a minute think funding should be reduced for access for people with mobility problems. I think it should be increased.0 -
Exactly. It's like saying that asking an Irish speaker to read a document in English is the same as asking a blind man to watch television instead of listening to the radio. It's a nonsense comparison which holds no water.
An Irish speaker has the abilty to read English. Wheelchair users do not have the luxury of being able to walk at will, as much as a blind person cannot choose to see.
Thanks for your post.0 -
cyclopath2001 wrote: »No, I am not saying it has been amended. The minister has been granted wide-ranging granted powers to pass Statutory Regulations which avoid the inconvenience of debate in the Dáil.
Here is another relevent article:
I believe this explains it:Authority of Minister -with the consent of the Minister for Finance- to make regulations for the purpose of giving full effect to the provisions of this Bill. [Section 4]
The relevant minister has the right to make regulations to allow the Bill to be implemented. Just whats in the Bill and nothing more.I doubt that the public were aware of what was being foisted on them.
As much as the public are aware whats being foisted on them when any ACT is passed in the Dail? Do you want to change this system for all ACTs or just the ones you dont like?Now that is has been passed, it only needs statutory instruments to expand the act's scope. These are passed solely at the pleasure of the minister for the Irish Language Industry.
Thats just not true is it?
Authority of Minister -with the consent of the Minister for Finance- to make regulations for the purpose of giving full effect to the provisions of this Bill.
The most he can do is give full effect to the Bill. He clearly cannot expand the ACTs scope.This highlights the irony of accusing people of being Fascist when they merely questioned government spending on Irish
So its OK to accuse people of being fascist yourself and to mock "Irish speakers". Clearly for you the rules seem to be different depending on who is doing the name calling.0 -
And this provides for much more than what you originally disclosed.The relevant minister has the right to make regulations to allow the Bill to be implemented. Just whats in the Bill and nothing more.
I don't like any act which promotes wasteful expenditure or which gives too much power to a minister, allowing discretionary expenditure.As much as the public are aware whats being foisted on them when any ACT is passed in the Dail? Do you want to change this system for all ACTs or just the ones you dont like?
The term 'fascist' was levelled in general at anyone who questioned the expenditure on Irish, justified by a fabricated and exageratted outrage that this somehow equated to a desire to destroy the language.So its OK to accuse people of being fascist yourself and to mock "Irish speakers". Clearly for you the rules seem to be different depending on who is doing the name calling.
I think it's quite more accurate and fair to describe as 'fascist' anyone who beats a child for not knowing Irish grammar or who Gaelicises non-Irish names. How you take this riposte to as an insult to all Irish speakers is yet another example of the evasiveness of the Irish language lobby (here on boards) in any attempt to quantify and justify what is spent under the terms of the OLA.
In these difficult times, will the Irish language lobby give up some of the non-essential concessions granted to them during the boom and help share the load we all have to bear?0 -
cyclopath2001 wrote: »And this provides for much more than what you originally disclosed.
So you have dropped the "bogeyman" story that the minister does not have "far reaching powers" to expand the scope of the Bill. He has powers to implement the Bill in full in consultaion with the minister for Finance which is right and proper.I don't like any act which promotes wasteful expenditure or which gives too much power to a minister, allowing discretionary expenditure.
Again this implies that you accept that this Bill was not foisted on the public in any untoward way. Again the Act allows the minister to enforce it (in consultation with the minister for finance). No more, no less, no bogeyman.I think it's quite more accurate and fair to describe as 'fascist' anyone who beats a child for not knowing Irish grammar or who Gaelicises non-Irish names.
Would you say that these experiences have had any negative impact on your view of the Irish language?How you take this riposte to as an insult to all Irish speakers is yet another example of the evasiveness of the Irish language lobby (here on boards) in any attempt to quantify and justify what is spent under the terms of the OLA.
But I didnt take that riposte as an insult to all irish speakers! I think you know it was the comment you made directly about "Irish Speakers" that struck me as irrational.Quote:
Is it too much to ask the Irish speakers to emerge from the intoxicating Celtic mists of whatever you're smoking...
I commented that it struck me as a bit rich. I think it may also demonstrate that your attitude to Irish may be born from the bad experiences of it that you personally experienced.
To be fair, I dont think Ive been evasive about the OLA: my last couple of posts dealt with its contents. Infact people following this thread will now have an exact idea of what the minister can and cant do under the OLA. On the other hand, your assertion that the minister could "expand its scope" has been shown to be an exageration. You have clearly been more evasive about the truth of the OLA than I have.In these difficult times, will the Irish language lobby give up some of the non-essential concessions granted to them during the boom and help share the load we all have to bear?
The issue is should Irish have official status or should it not.
If it has official status then the translations must happen.
A citizen has the right to ask for a public document in one of the national languages. This holds true in any country.
For several reasons I wont bother listing, the citizen has the right to recieve a public document promptly e.g not to have to wait for a translation!
If you want to save money on translations you either get tougher with the translators or appeal to your TD to have it removed as a national language (for Irish public documents) and also as a regional language (for EU documents).
If you know of another way let us know but otherwise let your TD know. Stop blaming the Irish Lobby (whoever they are) or Irish speakers or whatever other bogeymen you see as behind this.0 -
Sources ?daithicarr wrote: »as for support it means a whole range of things from wanting the langauge to be maintained, About 52% of the population. or to restore it as a spoken language by a large portion of the population (or all) , about 40 %,
No its notdaithicarr wrote: »Not wanting Irish supported in any way or form is opposing it
What if they did ?Would you say that these experiences have had any negative impact on your view of the Irish language?.
So despite not being of the slightest help to anyone in any way and despite the fact that nobody will use it. It still needs to be done because regardless of resources required or any detriment to funding of other acivities (including activities which might actually be beneficial to the language and those who speak it) its someones "right" ?daithicarr wrote: »i personaly dont think it will help it in the slightest to have these docuemnts in irish, but it is their right
This stuff really would be laughable if so many people didnt unquestioningly believe it.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
But the Dail does not get to debate any SIs?So you have dropped the "bogeyman" story that the minister does not have "far reaching powers" to expand the scope of the Bill. He has powers to implement the Bill in full in consultaion with the minister for Finance which is right and proper.
The fact remains that after consultation with his mate, the Miniser for Finance, the Minsiter for the Irish-speaking industry is hounding government departments to make all documents and services available through Irish, regardless of the demand or to th fact that these services can be just as effectively delivered in English and at lesser cost.
The question is how we can manage the cost of your demands.Would you say that these experiences have had any negative impact on your view of the Irish language?
Read the thread title?The issue is should Irish have official status or should it not.
If it has official status then the translations must happen.
So, I take it that in the present economic circumstances, the Irish lobby will not 'do its bit' to help keep government costs down & will instead insist on the full uncompromising implementation of the all of the provisions of the OLA?A citizen has the right to ask for a public document in one of the national languages.
I think your lobby has made a major mistake, by insisting on 'all or nothing' and refusing to negotiate, you are more likely to get nothing.0 -
Sources ?
.
The polls i provided in an earlier post, shows the general levels of support for the irish langauge.
As for beating children who dont know irish and gaelicization of names, it was by and large the other way round. Children were beaten for speaking irish and most place and personal names were anglicized in such a manner0 -
The one you say was conducted and published by NUI Maynooth, have you checked that this is true?daithicarr wrote: »The polls i provided in an earlier post, shows the general levels of support for the irish langauge.
In any case, there is a distinct lake of detail concerning what 'support' means in terms of how much extra tax people would pay.
The roles were reversed after 1922.daithicarr wrote: »As for beating children who dont know irish and gaelicization of names, it was by and large the other way round. Children were beaten for speaking irish and most place and personal names were anglicized in such a manner
We're still not getting any closer to knowing if the Irish language lobby will make concessions in view of the dire economic circumstances.0 -
Isn't this what I said? Maybe we are just agreeing with each other lol.starbelgrade wrote: »An Irish speaker has the abilty to read English. Wheelchair users do not have the luxury of being able to walk at will, as much as a blind person cannot choose to see.
Thanks for your post.
I find the comparison (made earlier, not by you starbelgrade) between asking an Irish speaker to read an English document and asking a paraplegic to walk to be pretty revolting tbh.0 -
cyclopath2001 wrote: »But the Dail does not get to debate any SIs?
Can the Minister expand the scope of the OLA or can he not?
The answer is no. Has any of the SIs expanded the scope of the OLA?
The answer is no. Red Herring. Drop it.
So he must consult and persuade the Minister for Finance. According to you the Minister for Finance is his "mate" so will not question him. (Presumably for the same reasons he would not question any other FF ministers?) Therefore the minister for the gaeltacht etc is corrupt, the minister for Finance is corrupt all to facilitate the evil "irish speaking industry". And all this pie in the sky to rationalise your untrue assertion that the minister is trying to implement more than the scope of what is actually allowed in the ACT.The fact remains that after consultation with his mate, the Miniser for Finance, the Minsiter for the Irish-speaking industry is hounding government departments to make all documents and services available through Irish,regardless of the demand or to th fact that these services can be just as effectively delivered in English and at lesser cost.
He is implementing the ACT as it must be implemented. I have invited you to come up with a way of reducing the costs withoiut amending the ACT. You evade because presumably You cant.
Im not demanding anything. You are demanding that the OLA be dropped. Or what exactly are you asking for and how will it be done?The question is how we can manage the cost of your demands.So, I take it that in the present economic circumstances, the Irish lobby will not 'do its bit' to help keep government costs down & will instead insist on the full uncompromising implementation of the all of the provisions of the OLA?
Ill repeat my answer from the last post which you evaded answering again shall I? Feel free to address the points in it.T Runner The issue is should Irish have official status or should it not.
If it has official status then the translations must happen.
A citizen has the right to ask for a public document in one of the national languages. This holds true in any country.
For several reasons I wont bother listing, the citizen has the right to recieve a public document promptly e.g not to have to wait for a translation!
If you want to save money on translations you either get tougher with the translators or appeal to your TD to have it removed as a national language (for Irish public documents) and also as a regional language (for EU documents).
If you know of another way let us know but otherwise let your TD know. Stop blaming the Irish Lobby (whoever they are) or Irish speakers or whatever other bogeymen you see as behind this.cyclopath2001 wrote: »I think your lobby has made a major mistake, by insisting on 'all or nothing' and refusing to negotiate, you are more likely to get nothing.
Im not actively part of any lobby on this issue (apart from the posts on this thread).
Tactically, To get maximum money for the Ministers department he must play that card (The ACT was passed in 2003 so he is in a strong position to insist that departments adhere). He is essentially making it difficult for the Minister of Finance to cut funds. Ultimately if the minister for Finance has the power to do it he could delay the full implementation of the ACT until the overall budget looks better. It must be done at some stahge though as its Law.
Lucky we dont have 4 national languages like the Swiss. A lot of their documentation seems to get translated to 5 languages (inc. English).0 -
cyclopath2001 wrote: »The one you say was conducted and published by NUI Maynooth, have you checked that this is true?
In any case, there is a distinct lake of detail concerning what 'support' means in terms of how much extra tax people would pay.
The roles were reversed after 1922.
We're still not getting any closer to knowing if the Irish language lobby will make concessions in view of the dire economic circumstances.
Yes if you look at the report you will find it is issued by the sociology department of NUI maynooth.
Yes there is a lack of detail concerning how much people are willing to pay, id imagine in correlation with how much they want it supported. But many here suggest it is being foisted on the Irish people, its simply not the case, the vast majority of people support its funding.
But is some 50% want it maintained , its not hard to conclude that most want the proportion of support to stay the same.
if around 40% want it revived, it is plausible to assume they want the current levels of support if not more.
But without any evidence at all to show people are against the funding of the language, I fail to see how claims that most people are unhappy with the amount of money being spent on Irish are valid at all.0 -
daithicarr wrote: »As for beating children who dont know irish and gaelicization of names, it was by and large the other way round. Children were beaten for speaking irish and most place and personal names were anglicized in such a manner
No it was both ways around During the 19th Century children were beaten for speaking irish and most place and personal names were anglicized then during the 20th Century children were beaten for not speaking irish and most place and personal names were gaelicization then.
But seemingly this is ok on the basis that two wrongs make everything right :rolleyes:0 -
Isn't this what I said? Maybe we are just agreeing with each other lol.
I find the comparison (made earlier, not by you starbelgrade) between asking an Irish speaker to read an English document and asking a paraplegic to walk to be pretty revolting tbh.
I will make sure to take youre revulsion very seriously indeed.
Thanks for your post.0 -
Would you take a 10% cut in your dole to pay for these translations if it came to it?daithicarr wrote: »Yes if you look at the report you will find it is issued by the sociology department of NUI maynooth.
Yes there is a lack of detail concerning how much people are willing to pay, id imagine in correlation with how much they want it supported. But many here suggest it is being foisted on the Irish people, its simply not the case, the vast majority of people support its funding.
But is some 50% want it maintained , its not hard to conclude that most want the proportion of support to stay the same.
if around 40% want it revived, it is plausible to assume they want the current levels of support if not more.
But without any evidence at all to show people are against the funding of the language, I fail to see how claims that most people are unhappy with the amount of money being spent on Irish are valid at all.0 -
Advertisement
-
a 10 % pay cut to fund these translations ?? how do you come to a 10 % figure. Irish language support does not take up anything like 10 % of income tax revenue. these reports are but a small percentage of the total.
It doesn't matter what i personally will take, the point i am making and you are ignoring is that most people support funding for the Irish language. The levels of which and how its spent differ greatly from person to person.
Perhaps the how the government funding on Irish is effectively used could be examined , just as it could in all other things its spent on. But while Irish is one of the official languages of this state and the union we are in, the right for people to have documents etc in Irish remains.
And the people overwhelmingly support the maintenance of Irish as an official language and are unlikely to change their opinion just because 30,000 was spent on a report which no one read in Irish and precious few did in English either.0
Advertisement