Scrap the Irish Language Commissioner

Coles

€30 million is a modest amount! Have a look at how much money RTÉ spend and for what? Or a commercial station like TV3? If it wasn't for Vincent Browne the station would be completely unwatchable. TG4 are running a television service that is available through out the island and creating a lot of quality employment by doing so. The money is not wasted.

The fact that the television service is provided in Irish is secondary to providing a television service to the entire community.

But if you weren't attacking TG4 you'd be attacking road signs. Haters gotta hate.

clairefontaine

Coles wrote: »

€30 million is a modest amount! Have a look at how much money RTÉ spend and for what? Or a commercial station like TV3? If it wasn't for Vincent Browne the station would be completely unwatchable. TG4 are running a television service that is available through out the island and creating a lot of quality employment by doing so. The money is not wasted.

The fact that the television service is provided in Irish is secondary to providing a television service to the entire community.

But if you weren't attacking TG4 you'd be attacking road signs. Haters gotta hate.

RTE and TG$ should both be scrapped. There is no justification for state television in this day and age.

And as for the constitution, they need to rewrite the whole thing. Yes if Irish is compulsary and in the constitution as the first language, than the state should back that up. Obviously they cant back that up, so it should be removed as the first language and no longer made compulsary.

I never got why Irish people pay their tv license, sometimes it looks like the whole country has stockholm syndrome.

kowloon

clairefontaine wrote: »

I never got why Irish people pay their tv license, sometimes it looks like the whole country has stockholm syndrome.

It's being changed (or has it already been done?) to the 'Broadcasting charge' which is mandatory for every household whether you have a tv or not. It's their way of harvesting tax money from everyone. A lot of people didn't replace their tv when it all went digital, others ditched it long ago for the interwebs (myself included).

Broadcast tv is a sinking ship. Why have someone dictate when you watch if you can just stream or download whenever you feel like it?

VinLieger

Coles i find it interesting you are constantly posting your own graphics as fact without linking any source for them, if your gonna post statistics either post them from the source or make up your lovely little pictures if it keeps you happy and post them and the source, also simply saying "its all available from such and such" is not good enough if you post information the onus is on you to provide the proof of its accuracy as you have so rightly asked others to do in this thread

An Coilean

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

In your head, maybe. Certainly not in any constitutional mind or paper.

No, Actually the superior position of the Irish language in the constitution has been referenced in more than one Supreme Court judgement.

Wibbs

Coles wrote: »

€30 million is a modest amount!

We're making progress. Earlier you avoided that. So now you admit you were wrong about their funding breakdown? Unlikely, but like I said hope springs...

Have a look at how much money RTÉ spend and for what?

An accusation one could level at TG4.

Or a commercial station like TV3? If it wasn't for Vincent Browne the station would be completely unwatchable.

TV3 are commercial, that's the point. They don't require a red cent from the exchequer's purse to operate so I don't see how they're part of the debate.

TG4 are running a television service that is available through out the island and creating a lot of quality employment by doing so. The money is not wasted.

Two percent market share. Switch off the subtitles and see how that would drop.

The fact that the television service is provided in Irish is secondary to providing a television service to the entire community.

Not according to their own remit. In writing. To suggest TG4 is just another broadcaster that just happens to be in Irish is beyond daft.

But if you weren't attacking TG4 you'd be attacking road signs. Haters gotta hate.

Misdirection again. I never mentioned road signs. Personally have no great issue with them, though would regard them as yet another example of cultural window dressing as the vast majority of Irish people will absorb the english part of the sign.

An Coilean wrote:

No, Actually the superior position of the Irish language in the constitution has been referenced in more than one Supreme Court judgement.

Indeed it has AC, but it proves nothing, or has little impact on the ground. As 9959 noted there is a diff between de jure and de facto. I mean the same constitution has a lot of religious(and catholic in tone and origin) wording in it too, yet this nation is increasingly agnostic and certainly retreating from catholicism. If we were to take our constitution as a guide we'd be daily communicants.

An Coilean

Wibbs wrote: »

W
Indeed it has AC, but it proves nothing, or has little impact on the ground. As 9959 noted there is a diff between de jure and de facto. I mean the same constitution has a lot of religious(and catholic in tone and origin) wording in it too, yet this nation is increasingly agnostic and certainly retreating from catholicism. If we were to take our constitution as a guide we'd be daily communicants.

''In my view this has lead to a situastion where only a person of unusual independance will attempt to conduct his or her legal business through the medium of Irish.....
I can only say that this situation is an offence to the letter and spirit of the constitution''

''It is my opinion that it is not possible (at least in the absence of law of the type envisaged in Article 8.3) to exclude Irish, which is the national language and at the same time the first official language of the State, from any part of the public discourse of the nation or from any official business of the State or from the official business of any of its members. Nor is it possible in these contexts to treat it in a manner which is less favourable than the way in which the second official language is treated. Neither is it possible to prevent those who are capable and desirous of using Irish in making their case or in communicating from so doing or to disadvantage them when so doing in any national or official context''.

The case this comes from vindicated the Right of Irish speakers to be tried through Irish and have the necessary materials provided to them through Irish, it also formed the incentive for the OLA to be passed which set up the Office of an Coimisinéir Teanga. It can actually have quite a bit of impact on the ground.

kowloon

Just out of curiosity, does anyone here think that third level institutions, being public bodies, should be required to offer all courses through Irish? Is it within someone's rights to require that all staff have a working knowledge of Irish?

opti0nal

Coles wrote: »

This is deeply depressing. We've been discussing the Irish Language and the role of the Irish Language Commissioner for 700 posts and you don't understand the constitutional position of the Irish language? Oh dear Jesus.

Yes we do: the constitutional position is absurd, an irrational denial of reality.
,

Iwasfrozen

kowloon wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, does anyone here think that third level institutions, being public bodies, should be required to offer all courses through Irish? Is it within someone's rights to require that all staff have a working knowledge of Irish?

They wouldn't be able to facilitate the request. Simply put.

Coles

opti0nal wrote: »

Yes we do: the constitutional position is absurd, an irrational denial of reality.
,

The Constitutional position is reality. And it's not going to change. Certainly not when you see the numbers who are learning the Irish language to such a high standard.

And I have already given the source for all the data for my charts. It is entirely accurate, but if any of you don't believe me I will happily supply a link. Just ask. Nicely.:)

Iwasfrozen

Coles wrote: »

The Constitutional position is reality. And it's not going to change. Certainly not when you see the numbers who are learning the Irish language to such a high standard.

And I have already given the source for all the data for my charts. It is entirely accurate, but if any of you don't believe me I will happily supply a link. Just ask. Nicely.:)

It obviously isn't reality when there's only 150k fluent speakers in the country* or approximately 2.34% of the population of the island.

*Figure supplied by An Coilean, I still think it's a big high but she was able to back up her figures so I'm happy to go along with it.

Wibbs

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

They wouldn't be able to facilitate the request. Simply put.

Why not? I mean most of the lecturers and admin staff would have gone through the Irish education system learning Irish... Oh wait... yea bit of a problem there alright. Plus they're all thick chavs with attittude problems so no joy there.

It obviously isn't reality when there's only 150k fluent speakers in the country* or approximately 2.34% of the population of the island.

Indeed, but god forbid that gets in the way of the augmented reality among some in the pro Irish language camp(watch the census figures make another appearance). If there are that amount of fluent speakers then fair play, but at that level it's very much a niche language and nowhere close to our "first language". The example AC gave earlier of Welsh never got down to that level and even then they were crying "extinction" with much better fluency numbers. Like I said though I don't buy the Irish is dying stuff. It may grow a little, it may decline a little but I'd put good money down that in 20 years time it'll be around that percentage figure still.

Chips Lovell

The only thing to do is give all of that 2.34 per cent of the population jobs as Guards.

Iwasfrozen

Wibbs wrote: »

Why not? I mean most of the lecturers and admin staff would have gone through the Irish education system learning Irish... Oh wait... yea bit of a problem there alright. Plus they're all thick chavs with attittude problems so no joy there.

It's ok Wibbs I know what do do. We just hire twice as many lecturers flaunt in irish (at a premium of course) and double the number of lecture theaters in every college in the county. That will let Irish speakers be educated in Irish. After all it's their right. Not the Poles though, apparently they can go fuck themselves. :rolleyes:

Wibbs wrote: »

Indeed, but god forbid that gets in the way of the augmented reality among some in the pro Irish language camp(watch the census figures make another appearance). If there are that amount of fluent speakers then fair play, but at that level it's very much a niche language and nowhere close to our "first language". The example AC gave earlier of Welsh never got down to that level and even then they were crying "extinction" with much better fluency numbers. Like I said though I don't buy the Irish is dying stuff. It may grow a little, it may decline a little but I'd put good money down that in 20 years time it'll be around that percentage figure still.

You can be realist or a romantic but rarely both.

Lightbulb Sun

Wibbs wrote: »

So Coles/An Coilean/Lightbulb Sun et al what direct benefit is the promotion of the language to you? And we're not talking of any cultural vibe here. Are you teachers, from a Gaeltacht, involved in Irish language media/promotion or such like?
[/SIZE]

I'm neither of those three or an activist for that matter. Just a fluent Irish speaker with an interest in keeping the language alive.

The original point of the thread is whether the language commissioner should be scrapped and I believe this to be ridiculous.

Eliminating this position would contribute to putting another dent in the heritage of the country.

We have a submissive government here who are happy being bossed around by the ECB etc but I hope even they can see the value in not getting rid of a position central to the very culture of Ireland. There are far bigger sources of financial concern at play here.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

An Coilean wrote: »

No, Actually the superior position of the Irish language in the constitution has been referenced in more than one Supreme Court judgement.

Links please. (Not doubting your word, just like to read some).

And once again: how is the position "superior"? What difference does it ultimately make?

Also, regarding article 8:

3. Provision may, however, be made by law for the exclusive use of either of the said languages for any one or more official purposes, either throughout the State or in any part thereof.

Assuming the Guard was on official purposes (i.e. his job) it would appear then that he has the right to order any citizen to communicate in English, assumign that citizen has the ability.

Wibbs

Lightbulb Sun wrote: »

I'm neither of those three or an activist for that matter. Just a fluent Irish speaker with an interest in keeping the language alive.

And that's cool LBS. It's just I have found that often the loudest voices in this are those with more to lose than the cultural aspect.

The original point of the thread is whether the language commissioner should be scrapped and I believe this to be ridiculous.

Funny enough, on that topic I actually agree with you. I don't see much point in dropping the position, nor would it save much if anything. There's more to be gained overall. Where I would like to see changes is in an acceptance of realities on the ground. EG let's face facts and acknowledge the language is "foreign" to the majority of the population of Irish people and no matter how often it's said to be our "native" language it isn't in practice. Acknowledge that the education system and other government drives over the last century have not slowed the fall in usage of the language. If anything they may well have served to increase it's demise.

When we do that then we can look anew at what we can do to fix it, if indeed the majority actually want a fix. While support for the language in straw polls and censuses seems pretty clear it's again in practice lip service. So I'd suggest a couple of things that might help. For a start relax the compulsory aspect in education, certainly for the leaving cert. If there's no interest by then there won't be. This would free up resources for the kids who show an aptitude/want to learn and hopefully take away some of it's "it was forced on us" stigma, which is most definitely out there.

opti0nal

Lightbulb Sun wrote: »

Eliminating this position would contribute to putting another dent in the heritage of the country.....a position central to the very culture of Ireland. There are far bigger sources of financial concern at play here.

You over estimate the importance of Irish, and it is certainly not central to our culture. For that to be true, we would all be speaking Irish.

You miss another issue arising from the absurd First National Language policy....the imposition of Irish on English speaking children.

Laws don't maintain culture....people do.

Iwasfrozen

Lightbulb Sun wrote: »

The original point of the thread is whether the language commissioner should be scrapped and I believe this to be ridiculous.

Well it seems democracy is against you on this one but why out of interest is it ridiculous? What's ridiculous is guards carrying laminated cards like children.

Lightbulb Sun wrote: »

Eliminating this position would contribute to putting another dent in the heritage of the country.

Only if you consider Irish to be part of your heritage.

Lightbulb Sun wrote: »

We have a submissive government here who are happy being bossed around by the ECB etc but I hope even they can see the value in not getting rid of a position central to the very culture of Ireland. There are far bigger sources of financial concern at play here.

If the government scrapped the language commissar (sorry commissioner) and other useless projects they could use the money saved to help regain our financial sovereignty.

Lightbulb Sun

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Only if you consider Irish to be part of your heritage.

Evidently you don't and the tone of that informs the rest of your opinions in that last post.

If the government priorities were to harm the role of Irish in society instead of going after unguaranteed bondholders there is something illogical about that, culturally and of course financially.

Iwasfrozen

Lightbulb Sun wrote: »

Evidently you don't and the tone of that informs the rest of your opinions in that last post.

If the government priorities were to harm the role of Irish in society instead of going after unguaranteed bondholders there is something illogical about that, culturally and of course financially.

The only illogical thing about it is spending unnecessary money when you're in debt.

Lightbulb Sun

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The only illogical thing about it is spending unnecessary money when you're in debt.

Oh, so you'd prioritize cutting (in context) a small amount of money towards funding a national language against the factors that are really bringing the country to it's knees?

Iwasfrozen

Lightbulb Sun wrote: »

Oh, so you'd prioritize cutting (in context) a small amount of money towards funding a national language against the factors that are really bringing the country to it's knees?

No one said prioritise, but certainly we can't afford to waste money when we are in debt. Hell we can't afford to waste money during a surplus either. And it's not the national language you need to stop saying it is when only approx 2.34% of people speak it. Granted the constitution says it is but the constitution says a lot of out dated stuff.

opti0nal

Lightbulb Sun wrote: »

If the government priorities were to harm the role of Irish in society ...

The results of government policies on Irish speak for themselves (in English).

opti0nal

Lightbulb Sun wrote: »

Oh, so you'd prioritize cutting (in context) a small amount of money towards funding a national language against the factors that are really bringing the country to it's knees?

National languages don't need funding. People either speak them or they don't.

Lightbulb Sun

opti0nal wrote: »

National languages don't need funding. People either speak them or they don't.

It's not as simple as that. People are employed in the sector. Through education, TG4 etc.

Iwasfrozen

Lightbulb Sun wrote: »

It's not as simple as that. People are employed in the sector. Through education, TG4 etc.

Employed by the government, to satisfy a demand the government created. I have no sympathy for them.

Lightbulb Sun

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Employed by the government, to satisfy a demand the government created. I have no sympathy for them.

Why would they need your sympathy? What demand are you talking about?

Iwasfrozen

Lightbulb Sun wrote: »

Why would they need your sympathy? What demand are you talking about?

What demand indeed. There is none.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Employed by the government, to satisfy a demand the government created. I have no sympathy for them.

I veer slightly to the other side here. Part of a government's remit, I would argue, is to maintain fund and promote arts, culture and expression. That includes langauge. I may not like the way they go about this, and I certainly disagree with the people who are employed to do the above (let's face it: if someone who doesn't learn the lanaguge in 14 years is "stupid", what does it say about entire organisations who have been trying to promote it for decades and still fail to turn it into a widely-spoken language?), but what is left if said government turns around and does nothing?

nesf

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

I veer slightly to the other side here. Part of a government's remit, I would argue, is to maintain fund and promote arts, culture and expression. That includes langauge. I may not like the way they go about this, and I certainly disagree with the people who are employed to do the above (let's face it: if someone who doesn't learn the lanaguge in 14 years is "stupid", what does it say about entire organisations who have been trying to promote it for decades and still fail to turn it into a widely-spoken language?), but what is left if said government turns around and does nothing?

14 years of sitting in a classroom without working on your language skills and ability to speak it outside of the classroom will inevitably mean, unless you are a true linguistic savant, that you won't be able to speak it to a half decent level.

The reason we see this attitude everywhere is because the vast majority of people in this country are monoglots so they don't have any idea of just how much work is involved to get to a decent speaking standard in a language. 14 years of sitting in class is nowhere near enough. Now 14 years of immersion on the other hand would do it quite well.

Lightbulb Sun

nesf wrote: »

14 years of sitting in a classroom without working on your language skills and ability to speak it outside of the classroom will inevitably mean, unless you are a true linguistic savant, that you won't be able to speak it to a half decent level.

The reason we see this attitude everywhere is because the vast majority of people in this country are monoglots so they don't have any idea of just how much work is involved to get to a decent speaking standard in a language. 14 years of sitting in class is nowhere near enough. Now 14 years of immersion on the other hand would do it quite well.

I think living in a Gaeltacht either fulltime/temporarily (on a regular basis) and Gaelscoils are the only true immersive experiences at the moment.

In English speaking schools, its one subject contained within no true Irish speaking environment. Then when kids step outside it's just a continuation of English language life really.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

nesf wrote: »

14 years of sitting in a classroom without working on your language skills and ability to speak it outside of the classroom will inevitably mean, unless you are a true linguistic savant, that you won't be able to speak it to a half decent level.

The reason we see this attitude everywhere is because the vast majority of people in this country are monoglots so they don't have any idea of just how much work is involved to get to a decent speaking standard in a language. 14 years of sitting in class is nowhere near enough. Now 14 years of immersion on the other hand would do it quite well.

Oh, I know. I was referencing another poster there.

Rubeter

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Only if you consider Irish to be part of your heritage.

No, not really true.
You see many people these days love the richness and diversity of cultures around the planet and appreciate that sometimes special effort is needed to protect aspects of these from being subsumed by a larger one (do you think for example that the only people in north America who feel that native American cultures/languages are worth protecting are native North Americans?).
Though there are still many around who think only "theirs" is of any value they are usually associated with far right movements or people with xenophobic or racist tendencies who are usually looked down upon by most liberal and broad minded people in modern day Europe.
Interestingly one of the fears of some northern Unionist people is that their culture is not considered to be worth anything to those from a nationalist background and your attitude of "only mine is worth anything to me" is one of the root causes of the distrust we still have on this island between two culturally different peoples.

Now that said any person with Irish ancestry irrespective of religion, creed, colour or political affiliations who believes Irish had no part in their history needs to brush up a little on the history of Ireland.

9959

Rubeter wrote: »

No, not really true.
You see many people these days love the richness and diversity of cultures around the planet and appreciate that sometimes special effort is needed to protect aspects of these from being subsumed by a larger one (do you think for example that the only people in north America who feel that native American cultures/languages are worth protecting are native North Americans?).
Though there are still many around who think only "theirs" is of any value they are usually associated with far right movements or people with xenophobic or racist tendencies who are usually looked down upon by most liberal and broad minded people in modern day Europe.

Now that said any person with Irish ancestry irrespective of religion, creed, colour or political affiliations who believes Irish had no part in their history needs to brush up a little on the history of Ireland.

Mad stuff, 'thinly veiled' Irish language enthusiasts are broad-minded, left of centre liberals rooting for the small guy....eh, me arse Ted.

Rubeter

9959 wrote: »

Mad stuff, 'thinly veiled' Irish language enthusiasts are broad-minded, left of centre liberals rooting for the small guy....eh, me arse Ted.

Interesting how you read something into a post that is not there in any way whatsoever and then disagree with it, not the best of conversational/debating skills there I'm afraid.
I don't suppose you have something a little more worthwhile to add to the conversation? Such as responding to an actual point maybe.

opti0nal

Rubeter wrote: »

You see many people these days love the richness and diversity of cultures around the planet and appreciate that sometimes special effort is needed to protect aspects of these from being subsumed by a larger one (do you think for example that the only people in north America who feel that native American cultures/languages are worth protecting are native North Americans?).

Interesting comparison. Are all schoolchildren in America forced to learn one of the native American languages?

Other than language preference, what is the cultural difference between Irish speakers and an English speakers?

Rubeter

opti0nal wrote: »

Interesting comparison. Are all schoolchildren in America forced to learn one of the native American languages?

Nope. I thought you would have known that.

Other than language preference, what is the cultural difference between Irish speakers and an English speakers?

None that I know of, do you know any?

9959

Rubeter wrote: »

Nope. I thought you would have known that.

None that I know of, do you know any?

Why so circumspect now?

The post to which myself and 'opti0nal' responded was majestically wide-ranging in scope and vision, covering the indigenous population of North America, the fascism of nationalist movements in central Europe, and the little matter of cultural identities in Northern Ireland.
Was really looking forward to your next 'opus' where - I was hoping - at least a passing reference might be made to the Israel/Palestine conflict, or a helpful guide to the Balkan conflict of the '90's, imagine my disappointment on reading the less than informative, monosyllabic reply "None that I know of....."
Smarten yourself up and stop slumping, stamina man, stamina!

Rubeter

9959 wrote: »

Why so circumspect now?

Questions asked, questions answered.

The post to which myself and 'opti0nal' responded was majestically wide-ranging in scope and vision, covering the indigenous population of North America, the fascism of nationalist movements in central Europe, and the little matter of cultural identities in Northern Ireland.
Was really looking forward to your next 'opus' where - I was hoping - at least a passing reference might be made to the Israel/Palestine conflict, or a helpful guide to the Balkan conflict of the '90's, imagine my disappointment on reading the less than informative, monosyllabic reply "None that I know of....."

Tough.

Smarten yourself up and stop slumping, stamina man, stamina!

I'll take that a "no" to my request for you to maybe respond with something relevant to the point I raised. 'Till you decide to do that, bye.......

9959

Rubeter wrote: »

Questions asked, questions answered.

Tough.

I'll take that a "no" to my request for you to maybe respond with something relevant to the point I raised. 'Till you decide to do that, bye.......

That's better, you're back.

"take that a "no"", unless of course you can guide me towards your 'point', your post conflated many issues, I think you might also be confusing making a point with making a post, you constructed the latter, but neglected to include the former.
Try again, but this time stick to the subject under discussion, rather than taking us on a geopolitical world tour of your wildest imaginings.
Good luck to you!

opti0nal

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

I veer slightly to the other side here. Part of a government's remit, I would argue, is to maintain fund and promote arts, culture and expression. ..... but what is left if said government turns around and does nothing?

The problem is that rather than attempting to do what you say, i.e. promote art, culture and expression, the government is pursuing CnaG's absurd 'Main Aim' of restoring Irish as the common language of Ireland.

If funding and goverment interference in people's rights were reduced to that commensurate with any other cultural endeavour, Irish would still be spoken by enthusiastic, passionate people.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

9959 wrote: »

Mad stuff, 'thinly veiled' Irish language enthusiasts are broad-minded, left of centre liberals rooting for the small guy....eh, me arse Ted.

In fairness, there's been evidence to the contrary in this very thread.

opti0nal wrote: »

The problem is that rather than attempting to do what you say, i.e. promote art, culture and expression, the government is pursuing CnaG's absurd 'Main Aim' of restoring Irish as the common language of Ireland.

Agreed. As i said, I didn't necessarily agree with how they went about achieving their aims.

(Is CnaG's 'Main Aim' as described? Sounds a bit arrogant, not to mention conformist)

If funding and goverment interference in people's rights were reduced to that commensurate with any other cultural endeavour, Irish would still be spoken by enthusiastic, passionate people.

A few problems here.

I can't really accept the way you use "funding" and "government interferance" in the same sectence as if they are synonyms of each other. Whcih one is it? If you mean funding, do you have figures to show how much they fund Irish compared to other endeavours? If you mean interferance, a comparison is impossible because you can't measure interferance in other endeavours.

feargale

A very long thread this. Well, hands up anybody who has been persuaded to change their original position by one jot.

DJP

Irrespective of if we have an Irish Language Commissioner Government Departments and Councils and some other State and semi-State bodies will still naturally have to comply with the Official Languages Act.

opti0nal

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

(Is CnaG's 'Main Aim' as described? Sounds a bit arrogant, not to mention conformist)

From the CnaG website:

Conradh na Gaeilge is the democratic forum for the Irish-speaking community and promotes the language throughout the whole of Ireland and around the world. Is main aim is to reinstate the Irish language as the common tongue of Ireland.

Many Irish enthusiasts will deny the existence of the main aim or deny any association with CnaG. But this is the real agenda.

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

I can't really accept the way you use "funding" and "government interferance" in the same sectence as if they are synonyms of each other. Whcih one is it? If you mean funding, do you have figures to show how much they fund Irish compared to other endeavours? If you mean interferance, a comparison is impossible because you can't measure interferance in other endeavours.

'Funding' is the cost of providing Irish lessons to children. Interference is the forcing of children to learn Irish.

Darren J. Prior wrote: »

Irrespective of if we have an Irish Language Commissioner Government Departments and Councils and some other State and semi-State bodies will still naturally have to comply with the Official Languages Act.

The Irish Language Commissioner's job was created by the Official Languages Act. He and his staff enforce Irish language policy from an office building in Spiddal. Abolish the OLA and there is no Language Comissioner job.

Rubeter

opti0nal wrote: »

Many Irish enthusiasts will deny the existence of the main aim or deny any association with CnaG. But this is the real agenda.

CnaG want Irish to be the main language of the country, so what?
The only possible reason I can think of that would produce the attitude you have about that "main aim", is if you are scared (and I mean really really scared) that it might actually happen.
This is quite amusing because it is so incredibly unlikely and you must imagine the majority would not retain the ability or desire to also speak English, which is so unlikely as to be unthinkable.
Your attitude in relation to this "main aim" is most extraordinarily entertaining.

opti0nal

Rubeter wrote: »

CnaG want Irish to be the main language of the country, so what?
The only possible reason I can think of that would produce the attitude you have about that "main aim", is if you are scared (and I mean really really scared) that it might actually happen.

No, I'm outraged at the human and financial cost of attempting to bring this about.

There nothing funny about forcing children to speak Irish.

Lelantos

opti0nal wrote: »

No, I'm outraged at the human and financial cost of attempting to bring this about.

There nothing funny about forcing children to speak Irish.

More worried about religion being forced upon them at school myself.