Irish Language Commissioner resigns

oscarBravo

HansHolzel wrote: »

Even the Brits in the 1980s made sure to know the meaning of seoinín

The epithet "west Brit" isn't any less immature when expressed in Irish.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

HansHolzel wrote: »

Even the Brits in the 1980s made sure to know the meaning of seoinín

Jenkin...?

HansHolzel

oscarBravo wrote: »

The epithet "west Brit" isn't any less immature when expressed in Irish.

Seoinín = toady

(not 'West Brit' or even 'Jenkin')

+

I'd rather be responsible for an "immature" post than an ignorant one any day.

AerynSun

HansHolzel wrote: »

Seoinín = toady

(not 'West Brit' or even 'Jenkin')

+

I'd rather be responsible for an "immature" post than an ignorant one any day.

Doesn't Seoinín = little John? Which amounts to more or less the same as West Brit?

I'm also glad my post is more immature than ignorant

Iwasfrozen

HansHolzel wrote: »

Seoinín = toady

(not 'West Brit' or even 'Jenkin')

+

I'd rather be responsible for an "immature" post than an ignorant one any day.

Seoinin means little John which has the same root as Jackeen (Jack being the diminutive of John and een being and anglization of in which means little.)

Jackeen comes from Union Jack so yeah Seonin = West Brit. A very immature term and frankly your willingness to use it says a lot about you.

Chips Lovell

Who's he referring to as seonin/jackeen/West Brit?

Iwasfrozen

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Who's he referring to as seonin/jackeen/West Brit?

Everyone who disagrees with him it seems.

Grudaire

oscarBravo wrote: »

Yes. Largely through the irrational behaviour of its lobbyists. Irish speakers are compelled by the fact of living in a de facto English-speaking country to learn and use English. The pretence that this isn't the case is what will lead to the destruction of the Irish language.

You don't have to believe that, but your refusal to countenance it will continue to ensure that it's true.

I am curious that you are portraying people who want the state to provide services in Irish where required as the reason Irish is not more widely spoken.. I doubt that is the case, albeit I'm sure that there is reliable anecdotal evidence to prove it.


People as taxpayers pay for the services, and people as voters have requested the services to be provided in Irish. The OLA has been passed through the Dáil.

I'm surprised you're so aggrevied at an Coilean for wanting the legislation that was enacted to be abided by, rather than stepping back and approaching the politicians to ammend/remove the legislation.

HansHolzel

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Who's he referring to as seonin/jackeen/West Brit?

They obviously know who they are e.g. by their willingness to jump for the hopped ball.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Grudaire wrote: »

I am curious that you are portraying people who want the state to provide services in Irish where required as the reason Irish is not more widely spoken.. I doubt that is the case, albeit I'm sure that there is reliable anecdotal evidence to prove it.


People as taxpayers pay for the services, and people as voters have requested the services to be provided in Irish. The OLA has been passed through the Dáil.

I'm surprised you're so aggrevied at an Coilean for wanting the legislation that was enacted to be abided by, rather than stepping back and approaching the politicians to ammend/remove the legislation.

Firstly, we never voted for such a thing and I'll assume you're not suggesting that casting a vote automatically assumes support for every governemtn initiative.

Seconfly, if you the full post you quoted, you'll see he's aggrived by AC for different reasons.

(General point follows, not specific to quoted post)

Anyway, a though: does the OLa refer to all communicartions between state and citizen or just publications? I ask because the only grievance that has been aired on this thread was the famous Gardai incident, and I;m not sure the act refers to actual spoken dialogue. Havent; read the only thing, but I can;t find any section that refers to it - just "documentation".

Which brings me to the point of the title: the commissioner stated he was not getting support from the government to ensure compliance. What other areas has the State failed in?

Chips Lovell

HansHolzel wrote: »

They obviously know who they are e.g. by their willingness to jump for the hopped ball.

Are English speaking Americans West Brits too? Or is it just the jackeens?:;)

Iwasfrozen

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Are English speaking Americans West Brits too? Or is it just the jackeens?:;)

To Hanz (lovely Irish name there) Americans are no doubt just really west Brits. Which is funny because given and dominance of American culture I would be more likely to say the British are east yanks.

HansHolzel

Cé hé "Hanz"?

If you're going to have a pop, spell your target right, in whatever language you don't have a neurosis over.

Iwasfrozen

HansHolzel wrote: »

Cé hé "Hanz"?

If you're going to have a pop, spell your target right, in whatever language you don't have a neurosis over.

Oh I'm sorry my post was about the dominance of American culture over British culture in the modern world. To highlight this I replaced the "s"in your name with a "z". A common feature of Americanzation. I thought that was implicit but it obviously went over your head Hanz.

HansHolzel

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Americanzation.

?

Stop digging.

Forrest Gump's observation about stupidity comes to mind re you and your fellow travellers on this thread.

Iwasfrozen

HansHolzel wrote: »

?

Stop digging.

Forrest Gump's observation about stupidity comes to mind re you and your fellow travellers on this thread.

Do you have a thing against travellers too? Racist against your own people as well as isolationist and xenophobic? What a nice combination. You're really doing the language lobby a service with your behaviour today Hanz.

HansHolzel

From Oedipus Rex (Sophocles)...

OEDIPUS
Came there no news, no fellow traveller
To give some clue that might be followed up?

AerynSun

HansHolzel wrote: »

From Oedipus Rex (Sophocles)...

Er... are you calling one/all of us a motherclucker?

Iwasfrozen

AerynSun wrote: »

Er... are you calling one/all of us a motherclucker?

I think he's clearly calling English speakers patricides.

Tut tut Hanz, not only are you a racist, isolationist, xenophobic little Irelander you're also pretentious in your use of Greek literature in an attempt to appear semi-intelligent.

And to think all this from a person who uses the word "seonin". Well I never thought I'd see the day.

karma_

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I think he's clearly calling English speakers patricides.

Tut tut Hanz, not only are you a racist, isolationist, xenophobic little Irelander you're also pretentious in your use of Greek literature in an attempt to appear semi-intelligent.

And to think all this from a person who uses the word "seonin". Well I never thought I'd see the day.

When you're calling someone pretentions, is there any real need for the extra exposition?

Just a thought

Iwasfrozen

karma_ wrote: »

When you're calling someone pretentious, is there any real need for the extra exposition?

Just a thought

Probably not in fairness but this "more Irish than you" attitude irks me.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Lads, without wishing to sound like a backseat moderator or something, is there any chance yiz could take this to PMs?

Scofflaw

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Lads, without wishing to sound like a backseat moderator or something, is there any chance yiz could take this to PMs?

Indeed - an earlier report of this thread might have saved the handout of penalties that now has to happen.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

HansHolzel wrote: »

Even the Brits in the 1980s made sure to know the meaning of seoinín

HansHolzel wrote: »

Seoinín = toady

(not 'West Brit' or even 'Jenkin')

+

I'd rather be responsible for an "immature" post than an ignorant one any day.

HansHolzel wrote: »

They obviously know who they are e.g. by their willingness to jump for the hopped ball.

Hmm. Back from a month's ban for trolling starting on the 6th December, and can't go even a day without trolling. Reckon that's a permaban.

Some other posters should know better than to feed the troll.

moderately,
Scofflaw

oscarBravo

Grudaire wrote: »

I am curious that you are portraying people who want the state to provide services in Irish where required as the reason Irish is not more widely spoken.. I doubt that is the case, albeit I'm sure that there is reliable anecdotal evidence to prove it.

I didn't say that was the reason. I said that those who want more people to speak Irish need to persuade more people to want to speak the language, and that the idiotic policies that the state uses to "promote" the language are not merely ineffective, but counterproductive.

People as taxpayers pay for the services, and people as voters have requested the services to be provided in Irish. The OLA has been passed through the Dáil.

There's no requirement (that I know of) that I fully support every piece of legislation that has ever been passed.

Grudaire

Thanks Scofflaw

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Firstly, we never voted for such a thing and I'll assume you're not suggesting that casting a vote automatically assumes support for every governemtn initiative.

Seconfly, if you the full post you quoted, you'll see he's aggrived by AC for different reasons.

oscarBravo wrote: »

I didn't say that was the reason. I said that those who want more people to speak Irish need to persuade more people to want to speak the language, and that the idiotic policies that the state uses to "promote" the language are not merely ineffective, but counterproductive. There's no requirement (that I know of) that I fully support every piece of legislation that has ever been passed.

Well I don't doubt that at least some policies are counterproductive, but given that you're a rational poster OscarBravo I'd be curious if you have anything other than anecdotal evidence to support what you're saying?

Secondly my point regarding voting etc is trying to move away from this idea that there is only a handful of enthusiasts for the language, and it's their "irrational behaviour" that is at fault.
I'm not claiming that all voters support all party policies, but I don't see why the "Irish language lobby" are getting abuse on the thread when this is really a political decision taken by TDs.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Anyway, a though: does the OLa refer to all communicartions between state and citizen or just publications? I ask because the only grievance that has been aired on this thread was the famous Gardai incident, and I;m not sure the act refers to actual spoken dialogue. Havent; read the only thing, but I can;t find any section that refers to it - just "documentation".

Which brings me to the point of the title: the commissioner stated he was not getting support from the government to ensure compliance. What other areas has the State failed in?

Duitse: http://www.coimisineir.ie/index.php?page=cearta_faoi_acht&tid=10&lang=english

You can get a feeling for other investigations here also: http://www.coimisineir.ie/index.php?page=imscrudaithe&tid=32&lang=english

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Grudaire wrote: »

Well I don't doubt that at least some policies are counterproductive, but given that you're a rational poster OscarBravo I'd be curious if you have anything other than anecdotal evidence to support what you're saying?

Secondly my point regarding voting etc is trying to move away from this idea that there is only a handful of enthusiasts for the language, and it's their "irrational behaviour" that is at fault.
I'm not claiming that all voters support all party policies, but I don't see why the "Irish language lobby" are getting abuse on the thread when this is really a political decision taken by TDs.

The problem is a handful of enthusiasts (not the majority, granted) behaving irrationally. Refusing to coperate with the police when you could easily do so is beahaving irationally. Expecting that the guards carry out investigations slowly and with flash cards when they could be done quicker and there is a common language is irrational.

Do what needs to be done with them, complain later. That would be rational.

Duitse: http://www.coimisineir.ie/index.php?page=cearta_faoi_acht&tid=10&lang=english

You can get a feeling for other investigations here also: http://www.coimisineir.ie/index.php?page=imscrudaithe&tid=32&lang=english

Yeah, I had a look through those earlier, but it doesn't really enlighten me as to the Commissioner's reasoning. He's employed to montior, deal with complaints and report back. He's done that.

In what way is the government not supporting him? Has he ever gone into detail in that?

Iwasfrozen

As regards to how petty the Commissioner's job was this "investigation" into the logos on stationary from the University of Limerick (you couldn't make this up) is a perfect example.

http://www.coimisineir.ie/downloads/2012_University_of_Limerick.pdf

Makes you wonder what sort of crackpot reported this!

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

As regards to how petty the Commissioner's job was this "investigation" into the logos on stationary from the University of Limerick (you couldn't make this up) is a perfect example.

http://www.coimisineir.ie/downloads/2012_University_of_Limerick.pdf

Makes you wonder what sort of crackpot reported this!

Interestingly, they weren't in breach of the legislation. The law clearly states that logos are exempt.

The report then says what would happen if this was allowed to continue (people would relegate Irish to secondary on printed matter), but does NOT state that the act is it stands was actually breached.

EDIT - Correction, it says it's not a logo it's a trademark, therefore not exempt. Talk about a loophole.

I wonder if the Commissioner is a victim of his own lack of common sense and impartiality?

oscarBravo

Grudaire wrote: »

Well I don't doubt that at least some policies are counterproductive, but given that you're a rational poster OscarBravo I'd be curious if you have anything other than anecdotal evidence to support what you're saying?

I don't. I think it's not unfair to say, however, that the current approach to promoting the Irish language isn't working, and I've always tried to live my life by the maxim that if what you're doing isn't working, it's time to start doing something else.

Secondly my point regarding voting etc is trying to move away from this idea that there is only a handful of enthusiasts for the language, and it's their "irrational behaviour" that is at fault.
I'm not claiming that all voters support all party policies, but I don't see why the "Irish language lobby" are getting abuse on the thread when this is really a political decision taken by TDs.

TDs, like elected politicians everywhere on the planet, are vulnerable to lobbies. There are some objectively stupid things being done in the name of promoting the Irish language, and those objectively stupid things are being applauded by people who claim to be interested in the future of the Irish language.

If you have evidence that AGS are being forced to use flashcards to deal in Irish with people who are fluent in English because that's something the electorate actually wants, I'd be interested to see it.

Grudaire

oscarBravo wrote: »

I don't. I think it's not unfair to say, however, that the current approach to promoting the Irish language isn't working, and I've always tried to live my life by the maxim that if what you're doing isn't working, it's time to start doing something else. TDs, like elected politicians everywhere on the planet, are vulnerable to lobbies. There are some objectively stupid things being done in the name of promoting the Irish language, and those objectively stupid things are being applauded by people who claim to be interested in the future of the Irish language.

In fairness a half arsed implementation of the OLA over the last 10 years isn't exactly evidence that we need to try something else.

I also think you're looking at the OLA as a 'promotion' of the language. I would rather view it as an attempt to make state bodies live within our constitution, and make services available in both English and Irish.
Nobody is going to start speaking Irish as a result of the OLA, but it does allow Irish speakers to interact with the state through Irish.

oscarBravo wrote: »

If you have evidence that AGS are being forced to use flashcards to deal in Irish with people who are fluent in English because that's something the electorate actually wants, I'd be interested to see it.

I think the Irish public are broadly in favour of services being available through Irish.

The Gardai are interesting as all new Gardai go on the beat, and as such all Gardai are 'frontline', and have the potential to deal with Irish speakers. I'll agree that it's not an eloquent solution to the problem.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

The problem is a handful of enthusiasts (not the majority, granted) behaving irrationally. Refusing to coperate with the police when you could easily do so is beahaving irationally. Expecting that the guards carry out investigations slowly and with flash cards when they could be done quicker and there is a common language is irrational.

Do what needs to be done with them, complain later. That would be rational.

In fairness there genuinely are people in Ireland that are more comfortable conversing in Irish than English. I don't see why it is unreasonable that someone would prefer to answer questions in Irish - particularly if they are being accused of something, and their statements can be used.

The case at hand there was no particular urgency to the situation, if there was a fight, or murder taking place around the corner I would hope that common sense would apply.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Yeah, I had a look through those earlier, but it doesn't really enlighten me as to the Commissioner's reasoning. He's employed to montior, deal with complaints and report back. He's done that.

In what way is the government not supporting him? Has he ever gone into detail in that?

Well the annual reports give a more comprehensive look at his suggestions:
http://www.coimisineir.ie/downloads/Annual_Report_2012.pdf

For yourself I would also say to look at most of the state websites, and how the offering on the 'Gaeilge' version is relatively pathetic.
I, although an Irish speaker, feel uncomfortable approaching state bodies requesting to deal in Irish. That is the real issue IMO. I know the receptionist, Garda on the desk or whoever answers the phone is probably unlikely to have Irish, or know who to get to deal with me. Routine reports/queries become full productions..
Although I have had a very nice experience with Dublin City Council over emails recently, so I'll definitely use that approach again.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Grudaire wrote: »

In fairness a half arsed implementation of the OLA over the last 10 years isn't exactly evidence that we need to try something else.

I also think you're looking at the OLA as a 'promotion' of the language. I would rather view it as an attempt to make state bodies live within our constitution, and make services available in both English and Irish.
Nobody is going to start speaking Irish as a result of the OLA, but it does allow Irish speakers to interact with the state through Irish.



I think the Irish public are broadly in favour of services being available through Irish.

The Gardai are interesting as all new Gardai go on the beat, and as such all Gardai are 'frontline', and have the potential to deal with Irish speakers. I'll agree that it's not an eloquent solution to the problem.



In fairness there genuinely are people in Ireland that are more comfortable conversing in Irish than English. I don't see why it is unreasonable that someone would prefer to answer questions in Irish - particularly if they are being accused of something, and their statements can be used.

The case at hand there was no particular urgency to the situation, if there was a fight, or murder taking place around the corner I would hope that common sense would apply.



Well the annual reports give a more comprehensive look at his suggestions:
http://www.coimisineir.ie/downloads/Annual_Report_2012.pdf

For yourself I would also say to look at most of the state websites, and how the offering on the 'Gaeilge' version is relatively pathetic.
I, although an Irish speaker, feel uncomfortable approaching state bodies requesting to deal in Irish. That is the real issue IMO. I know the receptionist, Garda on the desk or whoever answers the phone is probably unlikely to have Irish, or know who to get to deal with me. Routine reports/queries become full productions..
Although I have had a very nice experience with Dublin City Council over emails recently, so I'll definitely use that approach again.

The majority have no problem with bilingual services, but not if it's going to impede the service provided or where nit=picking over logos/trademarks is going to cause unnnessecary stress. I accept the matter with the Guards wasn;t serious, but if it was, would the person in question STILL insist on Irish being spoken? I'm not entirely sure that he wouldn't. But, as I;ve said numerous times before, there will be situations where you can not expect to have irish and it's urgent to pass on information. The logos recommendations were awful.

And pointing at the constitutaion and shugging shoulders will NOT help. Use common sense.

Irish langauge websites and the report from 2012 don't really answer my questions: he resigned at the end of 2013 and never, to my knowledge, gave any specific reasons as to why. If, for example, he's defining incidents like UL standing up for themselves and not wanting to change their logo as "lack of committment" then to be honest, good riddance.

Chips Lovell

Grudaire wrote: »

I think the Irish public are broadly in favour of services being available through Irish.

I agree. But I also think that public opinion would change if the cost of making services available through Irish was broken out.

A lot of people have a sentimental attachment to the language but I don't think it's so strong that they'd be willing to put their money where their mouth is.

Grudaire

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

And pointing at the constitutaion and shugging shoulders will NOT help. Use common sense.

That is NOT what I said tbf. I was making the point that the OLA is not an issue of language promotion, but rather of rights.
Although as an aside the government is bound by the constitution, so it should not be ignored completely either.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Irish langauge websites and the report from 2012 don't really answer my questions: he resigned at the end of 2013 and never, to my knowledge, gave any specific reasons as to why. If, for example, he's defining incidents like UL standing up for themselves and not wanting to change their logo as "lack of committment" then to be honest, good riddance.

I'm not sure where your "lack of commitment" quote comes from?

To turn this from you demanding that I explain his logic - do you believe that services are available in Irish from the state, across all areas?

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

I agree. But I also think that public opinion would change if the cost of making services available through Irish was broken out.

A lot of people have a sentimental attachment to the language but I don't think it's so strong that they'd be willing to put their money where their mouth is.

Well we're dealing in the hypothetical now... Perhaps a bit pointless to argue!

• Perhaps some would turn against the language.
• Many more would hold onto their opinions
• Perhaps people think more is being spent on the language than actually is..

An Coilean

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Interestingly, they weren't in breach of the legislation. The law clearly states that logos are exempt.

The report then says what would happen if this was allowed to continue (people would relegate Irish to secondary on printed matter), but does NOT state that the act is it stands was actually breached.

EDIT - Correction, it says it's not a logo it's a trademark, therefore not exempt. Talk about a loophole.

I wonder if the Commissioner is a victim of his own lack of common sense and impartiality?

The UL Logo investigation was an interesting one to me as I went to UL once upon a time. (I did not make the complaint)
I found UL's reaction to the whole thing to be quite funny, it should be noted that UL are very uptight about their brand image, there have been ructions in the past between the University and the SU/C&S over improper use of their brand image.
They actually have a document outlining the correct use of their brand image. There is a section about making changes to it and how this is unacceptable in which several examples of a slightly altered 'Logo' are ruled out as unacceptable (some of which are exactly what would comply with the OLA.)

About the supposed loophole, the point An Coimisinéir made is that if UL's argument was accepted, then the whole section of the act dealing with this would be null and void as any public body could claim that their brand image/trademark etc is a 'Logo'.

I agree that it is a storm in a teacup and of no practical relevance to anyone except at a symbolic level wheather UL's trademark has Irish in tiny letters or the same size as the English, but that's the act, and An Coimisinéir Teanga is required to enforce it.

An Coilean

oscarBravo wrote: »

I don't. I think it's not unfair to say, however, that the current approach to promoting the Irish language isn't working, and I've always tried to live my life by the maxim that if what you're doing isn't working, it's time to start doing something else.

That would beg the question, what would you define as 'working'. What would you need to see to came to the conclusion that such and such an approch is working?

An Coilean

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Anyway, a though: does the OLa refer to all communicartions between state and citizen or just publications? I ask because the only grievance that has been aired on this thread was the famous Gardai incident, and I;m not sure the act refers to actual spoken dialogue. Havent; read the only thing, but I can;t find any section that refers to it - just "documentation".

Which brings me to the point of the title: the commissioner stated he was not getting support from the government to ensure compliance. What other areas has the State failed in?

The OLA itself contains very little by way of obligations on public bodies with regard the language.

There are a few types of document that are required to be provided in Irish and English under the act.
A requirement that if someone makes contact with a public body in writing in Irish (Letter/email) then it must be responded to in Irish.
If the public body makes contact with the public, or a class of the public (for example, the referendum commision sending booklets to all households) then this must be in Irish and English. (But not direct contact with individuals or a group that is not considered to be a class of the public).
It outlines a few things that were already in place such as the right to a trial in Irish as well.

The vast majority of things regarding the language that public bodies are required to do are not directly under the act its self, but under language schemes agreed with the Dept. of arts, herritage and the Gaeltacht.
These schemes are the basis on which the act is supposed to work, a large part of the reason Seán Ó Cuirrean decided to resign is the ham fisted and ineffective approch the Dept. has taken to the language scheme process with public bodies being allowed to go for years without putting a scheme together and when they do, empty platitudes instead of actual commitments being accepted in them.

With regard to doing your business with the Gardaí in Irish, a large part of the reason why I would want this is that should it happen that there is a trial as a result, I would want that trial in Irish, and as such it would be important to me to have had all dealings with Gardaí before the trial in Irish as well.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Grudaire wrote: »

That is NOT what I said tbf. I was making the point that the OLA is not an issue of language promotion, but rather of rights.
Although as an aside the government is bound by the constitution, so it should not be ignored completely either.



I'm not sure where your "lack of commitment" quote comes from?

Sorry, wasn't meant to imply that you did: but it has been one of the most common reasons given in support of some of his decisions - "it's in the Constitution".

"A lack of commitment" was the official reason the commissioner gave for resigning.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

An Coilean wrote: »

The OLA itself contains very little by way of obligations on public bodies with regard the language.

There are a few types of document that are required to be provided in Irish and English under the act.
A requirement that if someone makes contact with a public body in writing in Irish (Letter/email) then it must be responded to in Irish.
If the public body makes contact with the public, or a class of the public (for example, the referendum commision sending booklets to all households) then this must be in Irish and English. (But not direct contact with individuals or a group that is not considered to be a class of the public).
It outlines a few things that were already in place such as the right to a trial in Irish as well.

The vast majority of things regarding the language that public bodies are required to do are not directly under the act its self, but under language schemes agreed with the Dept. of arts, herritage and the Gaeltacht.
These schemes are the basis on which the act is supposed to work, a large part of the reason Seán Ó Cuirrean decided to resign is the ham fisted and ineffective approch the Dept. has taken to the language scheme process with public bodies being allowed to go for years without putting a scheme together and when they do, empty platitudes instead of actual commitments being accepted in them.

With regard to doing your business with the Gardaí in Irish, a large part of the reason why I would want this is that should it happen that there is a trial as a result, I would want that trial in Irish, and as such it would be important to me to have had all dealings with Gardaí before the trial in Irish as well.

This would indicate that the guards have the right to request you to speak English and is a point I made ages ago: if you initiate the conversation, you choose the language, they follow suit - fine. But if the guard instigates the conversation, he chooses the langauge and you have to oblige him. It's not an infringment of your rights in the same way being compeled to help the Gardai is not an infringment of your rights. Again - becuse the constitution says so and shurgging shoulders won't help.

When in custody, anyone has he right to remain silent until a lawyer is present. I presume (and hope) that the same can be said for a translator - but you WILL be held until the Guard says otherwise (or 6 hours, I beleive).

When at or before trial, evidence or statements can be retracted and translated if nessecary so there is no need for a change of language to influence the outcome of a trial.

nuac

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Interestingly, they weren't in breach of the legislation. The law clearly states that logos are exempt.

The report then says what would happen if this was allowed to continue (people would relegate Irish to secondary on printed matter), but does NOT state that the act is it stands was actually breached.

EDIT - Correction, it says it's not a logo it's a trademark, therefore not exempt. Talk about a loophole.

I wonder if the Commissioner is a victim of his own lack of common sense and impartiality?[/QUOTE

Comment

I read the Commissioner's report and decision.

Absolute nonsense and a waste of time by two organisations both funded by the taxpayer.

That attitude brings the cause of Irish into disrepute. I say that as a supporter of the voluntary use of Irish and as an occasional user of Irish

Iwasfrozen

nuac wrote: »

I read the Commissioner's report and decision.

Absolute nonsense and a waste of time by two organisations both funded by the taxpayer.

That attitude brings the cause of Irish into disrepute. I say that as a supporter of the voluntary use of Irish and as an occasional user of Irish

Don't blame the University of Limerick, don't even blame the Commissioner (however much I want to) there's clearly a failing in the system*.

*I'd say there's a little failure in the person who reported it too but unfortunately we can only change the system.

nuac

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Don't blame the University of Limerick, don't even blame the Commissioner (however much I want to) there's clearly a failing in the system*.

*I'd say there's a little failure in the person who reported it too but unfortunately we can only change the system.

I blame

1. Whoever reported this matter. I would urge that person to get a life.

2. The Commissioner for making such a fuss about it.

Iwasfrozen

nuac wrote: »

I blame

1. Whoever reported this matter. I would urge that person to get a life.

2. The Commissioner for making such a fuss about it.

The commissioner has to make a fuss that's his job. The fault lies with us as voters collectively for passively allowing the commissioners job to exist in its current capacity. I hope to see the government take some initiative here and scrap the position but I predict the position will merely remain vacant for a very long time.

dr Golden

I was disgusted to read today that the salary for this micky mouse job is over 2k per week and the government have appointed somebody new to the job.