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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Scrap the Irish Language Commissioner

1…181920212224»

Comments

  • #1152
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,663 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    opti0nal wrote: »
    What it means is that Secretary Generals of departments will be at risk of imprisonment if they say they can't afford to comply. That would be obstructive.

    Incorrect. see below:
    OLA 2003
    17.—Where—

    (a) a public body fails or refuses to prepare a draft scheme in accordance with a notice issued under section 11 or 15,

    (b) after presentation by a public body of a draft scheme to the Minister for confirmation, the public body and the Minister are unable to agree the terms of the scheme, or

    (c) after receipt by a public body of a notice of proposed amendments to a scheme, the public body and the Minister are unable to agree on any amendments,

    the Minister shall report this failure, refusal or inability to each House of the Oireachtas.

    It just states that each cases would be reported. Doesn't say anything about jail. Furthermore:
    OLA 2003 Section 22
    (4) A person who fails or refuses to comply with a requirement under this section or who hinders or obstructs the Commissioner in the performance of his or her functions under this section shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €2,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or both.

    Obstructing an investigation by the commission would do it, but that's not the same as not being able to afford to implement it.
    The Language Commissioners office will be anxious to maintain momentum towards their main aim and won't want to waste time looking at business cases or cost-benefit analysis.

    Are you sure you're not mixing up the main aim of CnaG with the LC? The LC aim is merely to observe and investigate, not promote.
    The best thing that can happen is the proposed closure of the Spiddal office and the merger of the function with the that of Equality Commissioner. This could lead to a more rational approach to the rights of Irish language enthusiasts.

    This might explain the LC's aggressive attitude, as he probably knows that the OLA is unpopular and expensive and his quango is on the government/troika hit list.

    Wouldn't be a bad idea.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • #1153
    opti0nal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 892 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    An Coilean wrote:
    What is An Coimisinéir Teanga's 'Main Aim'?
    To enforce the Official Languages Act to the fullest.
    An Coilean wrote:
    You are casting spurious allegations around that have no basis in reality. The OLA has been in place for 10 years now, show me one case, just one, of what you describe above actually happening.
    There's nothing at all spurious about the existence of criminal sanctions for people who resist the Language Police. The fact these powers have not been used reflects the fact that this would cause a backlash that would precipitate popular demand for the abolition of the OLA. Nevertheless, the threat is very real: it's written in the law. What were they thinking of when they decided that it might be necessary to threaten people with jail in order to secure compliance with the OLA?
    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    It just states that each cases would be reported. Doesn't say anything about jail. Furthermore:...Obstructing an investigation by the commission would do it, but that's not the same as not being able to afford to implement it.
    After receiving a report, the government would decide whether or not to use the powers of the act. Whether or not someone has obstructed the Irish Language Czar is all a down to the attitude of whoever is in power at the time.
    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    Are you sure you're not mixing up the main aim of CnaG with the LC? The LC aim is merely to observe and investigate, not promote.
    Check the Language Commissioner's website, it has an graphic advertisement on the bottom left of the front page for something called 'Bliain na Gaeilge'. BnaG appears to be a creature of CnaG as it operates from the same address and has the same CEO. The LC's links page contains a link to CnaG and other Irish language organizations.


  • #1154
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,663 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    opti0nal wrote: »
    After receiving a report, the government would decide whether or not to use the powers of the act. Whether or not someone has obstructed the Irish Language Czar is all a down to the attitude of whoever is in power at the time.

    Ah now, you're getting as hysterical as AC now! There is no provision in that act for even the DPP to prosecute or jail anyone merely for a funding issue.

    And saying it could happen is merely scaremongering. As I said, different forum.
    Check the Language Commissioner's website, it has an graphic advertisement on the bottom left of the front page for something called 'Bliain na Gaeilge'. BnaG appears to be a creature of CnaG as it operates from the same address and has the same CEO. The LC's links page contains a link to CnaG and other Irish language organizations.

    Firstly, this is massively circumstancial; secondly it does not even come close to addessing the point I raised that you replied to.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • #1155
    opti0nal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 892 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    Ah now, you're getting as hysterical as AC now! There is no provision in that act for even the DPP to prosecute or jail anyone merely for a funding issue.
    So can you describe when those draconian powers would be used?
    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    Firstly, this is massively circumstancial; secondly it does not even come close to addessing the point I raised that you replied to.
    You said that the LC is not involved in Irish language promotion, I demonstrated that it has links to CnaG. I would not at all surprised if some of the staff are active members.


  • #1156
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,663 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    opti0nal wrote: »
    So can you describe when those draconian powers would be used?

    You said that the LC is not involved in Irish language promotion, I demonstrated that it has links to CnaG. I would not at all surprised if some of the staff are active members.

    1 - I said they could NOT be used in the way you suggested

    2 - As i said - linking to an offshoot of a different organisation does not imply the same "main aim". Example: rte.ie has a link to the lotto - does this mean RTE are now a gambling organisation...??

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • #1157
    Rubeter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 390 ✭✭Rubeter


    opti0nal wrote: »
    You said that the LC is not involved in Irish language promotion, I demonstrated that it has links to CnaG. I would not at all surprised if some of the staff are active members.
    Oh my God!!!! :eek: There might actually be someone working for a government agency set up to ensure Irish speakers have access to services in their native language who is also a member of a voluntary organisation which promotes the language, what an outrageous situation. Why don't you report such a horrific situation (go on give someone a good laugh).


  • #1158
    opti0nal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 892 ✭✭✭opti0nal


    Rubeter wrote: »
    Oh my God!!!! :eek: There might actually be someone working for a government agency set up to ensure Irish speakers have access to services in their native preferred language who is also a member of a voluntary organisation which promotes the language, what an outrageous situation. Why don't you report such a horrific situation (go on give someone a good laugh).
    Fixed that for you.

    What if a person, who is a government employee, participates in the activities of a voluntary organisation which criticises government policy on freedom of language choice (if that language is English) and lobbies voters to vote against a particular party?

    The point at issue is that the Language Commissioner's office is not a dispassionate objective enforcer of a a piece of legislation.

    Who funds CnaG?


Advertisement