How long before Irish reunification?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/ulster/2020/0109/1105256-stormont-talks/

https://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/2020/01/new-decade-new-approach.pdf


Government deal is published.

"DUP leader Arlene Foster has said she believes the proposals provide a basis upon which the Stormont Assembly can be re-established "in a fair and balanced way"."

"Sinn Féin leader Mary Lou McDonald said her party's Ard Chomhairle will meet tomorrow to "fully assess" the proposals.

Ms McDonald said Sinn Féin are "studying the text and will give it careful consideration".

Interesting that they have an Ulster Scots Language Act as well as an Irish Language Act. More or less what I predicted months ago.

I wonder will Sinn Fein be able to wear it. More or less parity of esteem for Ulster Scots. Looking at the proposals, it is clear that the whole language thing is unworkable in the long-term, with simultaneous translation making it a laughing stock.

Far as I know, SF never had a problem with an Ulster Scot act or legislation, they wanted separate stand alone legislation for Irish. Seems to be there.

Deal will be done imo.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Far as I know, SF never had a problem with an Ulster Scot act or legislation, they wanted separate stand alone legislation for Irish. Seems to be there.

Deal will be done imo.

And so it begins, the rationalisation of equal status for Ulster Scots.

The high horse brigade

20-30 years

blanch152 wrote: »

And so it begins, the rationalisation of equal status for Ulster Scots.

They won't like that

markodaly

blanch152 wrote: »

I wonder will Sinn Fein be able to wear it. More or less parity of esteem for Ulster Scots. Looking at the proposals, it is clear that the whole language thing is unworkable in the long-term, with simultaneous translation making it a laughing stock.

We have seen oursevles in the south how political the Irish language can be, never mind costly.
Translating all legal documents, government text and so on, that no one reads, is both a waste of resources and time, and does nothing to promote the language in the real world.

We should have learned from our mistakes of the past, but sadly not.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

And so it begins, the rationalisation of equal status for Ulster Scots.

What?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What?

"The three Bills will share a common framework through linked references in
each Bill to the principles set out in paragraph 5.2 above. It is intended that
the Bills will be introduced as part of an integrated package of legislation, and
accordingly no Bill should be regarded as independent from the other two."

"Once enacted by the Assembly, the three Bills will amend the Northern
Ireland Act 1998 by inserting the provisions as new, separate Parts. The Irish
language provisions will form a new [Part X] of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.
The provisions dealing with the second Commissioner will be inserted as
[Part Y]; and provisions dealing with the Office for Identity and Cultural
Expression as [Part Z"

There is one legislative package for language rights incorporating both the Irish Language Commissioner and the Ulster Scots Language Commissioner, under the one Act, exactly as how I suggested the ultimate solution would be. Separate arrangements within an overall framework rather than the stand-alone Irish Languages Act proposed by Sinn Fein and backed on here.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

"The three Bills will share a common framework through linked references in
each Bill to the principles set out in paragraph 5.2 above. It is intended that
the Bills will be introduced as part of an integrated package of legislation, and
accordingly no Bill should be regarded as independent from the other two."

"Once enacted by the Assembly, the three Bills will amend the Northern
Ireland Act 1998 by inserting the provisions as new, separate Parts. The Irish
language provisions will form a new [Part X] of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.
The provisions dealing with the second Commissioner will be inserted as
[Part Y]; and provisions dealing with the Office for Identity and Cultural
Expression as [Part Z"

There is one legislative package for language rights incorporating both the Irish Language Commissioner and the Ulster Scots Language Commissioner, under the one Act, exactly as how I suggested the ultimate solution would be. Separate arrangements within an overall framework rather than the stand-alone Irish Languages Act proposed by Sinn Fein and backed on here.

This was all agreed/compromised on before now and then the DUP walked away.
Do keep up blanch. You are a bit late puffing out your chest.
From 2018!

What do the papers say? By BBC NI political editor Mark Devenport
Eamonn Mallie says the 13-page document he has obtained was sent by DUP negotiators to their Sinn Féin counterparts late on the night of Friday 9 February.

That's five days before the Stormont talks collapsed.

The paper says the two main priorities of any new executive would have been implementing health reforms and dealing with the impact of Brexit.

A section on language confirms plans for three separate bills, dealing with Irish, Ulster Scots and the importance of respect and tolerance.

Square brackets indicate some details may still have been under discussion, but there are clear plans for the creation of Irish and Ulster Scots commissioners, simultaneous translation for people speaking at the Assembly and a translation unit within the finance department.

The document says English would remain the language used in courts, but Irish and other languages could be facilitated when deemed necessary.

On same-sex marriage, the Mallie document says only that the parties hold different policy positions on the issue.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-politics-43133533

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

This was all agreed/compromised on before now and then the DUP walked away.
Do keep up blanch. You are a bit late puffing out your chest.
From 2018!



https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-politics-43133533

If that is the case why did you spend a long time after that calling for a separate standalone Irish Languages Act?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

If that is the case why did you spend a long time after that calling for a separate standalone Irish Languages Act?

Because I personally think there should be one? Because I think it is a massive insult to our language and culture to equate it to Ulster Scots, which I believe, with many many others, is no more than an interesting and beautiful dialect/accent?

We get it blanch, you are trying to present this as a massive loss for SF, but the fact is, there is very little in here on languages that is different to what was compromised on and agreed before. Therefore the blame for not getting Stormont back up and running lies at the feet of those who walked away from that previous compromise.

You are a day late and a dollar short getting the boot into your boogeymen.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Because I personally think there should be one? Because I think it is a massive insult to our language and culture to equate it to Ulster Scots, which I believe, with many many others, is no more than an interesting and beautiful dialect/accent?

We get it blanch, you are trying to present this as a massive loss for SF, but the fact is, there is very little in here on languages that is different to what was compromised on and agreed before. Therefore the blame for not getting Stormont back up and running lies at the feet of those who walked away from that previous compromise.

You are a day late and a dollar short getting the boot into your boogeymen.

It's not just me

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-northern-ireland-51040628

"It’s over to Sinn Fein now. The language legislation is probably less than some campaigners would like."

It isn't the same deal as before. The previous deal had separate standalone bills, this time the bills will be separate amendments of existing legislation with a single framework. There is a big difference.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

It's not just me

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-northern-ireland-51040628

"It’s over to Sinn Fein now. The language legislation is probably less than some campaigners would like."

It isn't the same deal as before. The previous deal had separate standalone bills, this time the bills will be separate amendments of existing legislation with a single framework. There is a big difference.

My personal opinion is that it is still an insult to the Irish Language and evidence once again that Unionists will not allow the same language rights that everybody else on these islands have.

But if they find a compromise they both can live with for now, I can live with the continued insult. I am a democrat after all.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

My personal opinion is that it is still an insult to the Irish Language and evidence once again that Unionists will not allow the same language rights that everybody else on these islands have.

But if they find a compromise they both can live with for now, I can live with the continued insult. I am a democrat after all.

I really don't think that either language deserves the proposed trappings in the North, but each must have it's own, but what is interesting is that the actual outcome is exactly how I thought and predicted the compromise would happen.

That prediction didn't exactly receive a warm welcome around here, but that's life.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I really don't think that either language deserves the proposed trappings in the North, but each must have it's own, but what is interesting is that the actual outcome is exactly how I thought and predicted the compromise would happen.

That prediction didn't exactly receive a warm welcome around here, but that's life.

??? Exactly as you predicted?

I seem to remember you at one point recommending that what was needed was a Minority Languages Act?

The compromise away from an 'Act' happened long ago, as shown above.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

??? Exactly as you predicted?

I seem to remember you at one point recommending that what was needed was a Minority Languages Act?

The compromise away from an 'Act' happened long ago, as shown above.

The principle I set out was a single overarching framework in legislation with separate provisions within for each language (you can go back and read my posts for the detail). Yes, I called it a Minority Languages Act, but I wouldn't have been familiar enough with Northern Ireland legislation to see that it could be done by amendment of the Northern Ireland Act. So it is the same thing but different title to what I proposed. A bit more cumbersome, but there is probably some optics on it.

What I missed until just now in the document was this:

"prepare, in accordance with guidance from Ministers, best practice
standards for the use of the Irish language by public authorities - these
standards are to be agreed by the First Minister and deputy First
Minister;"

There is a unionist veto on Irish language standards, that will inevitably lead to another collapse as Sinn Fein will collapse it over something like a roadsign.

blanch152

blanch152 wrote: »

Segregated schooling has meant no reform in decades leading to unacceptable educational outcomes.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

More sensationalism.
It is probably one of the most observed and studied systems on these islands and has seen plenty of reforms. Look at the list here.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/incoming/education-reform-in-northern-ireland-28034497.html

And what does the new deal say about education?

"The education system has a diversity of school types, each with its own
distinctive ethos and values. However it is not sustainable."

As I kept saying, much more reform is needed, and the deal acknowledges this.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

The principle I set out was a single overarching framework in legislation with separate provisions within for each language (you can go back and read my posts for the detail). Yes, I called it a Minority Languages Act, but I wouldn't have been familiar enough with Northern Ireland legislation to see that it could be done by amendment of the Northern Ireland Act. So it is the same thing but different title to what I proposed. A bit more cumbersome, but there is probably some optics on it.

What I missed until just now in the document was this:

"prepare, in accordance with guidance from Ministers, best practice
standards for the use of the Irish language by public authorities - these
standards are to be agreed by the First Minister and deputy First
Minister;"

There is a unionist veto on Irish language standards, that will inevitably lead to another collapse as Sinn Fein will collapse it over something like a roadsign.

You wanted an Act and didn't get it.
SF wanted an Act and didn't get it.
I wanted an Act and didn't get it.
DUP didn't want an Act but you say what they got 'is the same thing as an Act, but a different name'.

Confused? So am I.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You wanted an Act and didn't get it.
SF wanted an Act and didn't get it.
I wanted an Act and didn't get it.
DUP didn't want an Act but you say what they got 'is the same thing as an Act, but a different name'.

Confused? So am I.

That isn't what I said.

I didn't want any Act, as I think Language Acts are not necessary, North or South, other than for symbolic reasons. However, I recognise that that is a minority view, and my prediction of a compromise was that of one framework encompassing both languages. For convenience I called it a Minority Languages Act. That is what happened with the framework being the existing Northern Ireland Act.

So, to sum up, yes, you and SF wanted a particular Act and didn't get it, I don't put any importance on minority language rights, but correctly predicted the outcome, while I haven't a clue and don't really care what the DUP wanted.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

That isn't what I said.

I didn't want any Act, as I think Language Acts are not necessary, North or South, other than for symbolic reasons. However, I recognise that that is a minority view, and my prediction of a compromise was that of one framework encompassing both languages. For convenience I called it a Minority Languages Act. That is what happened with the framework being the existing Northern Ireland Act.

So, to sum up, yes, you and SF wanted a particular Act and didn't get it, I don't put any importance on minority language rights, but correctly predicted the outcome, while I haven't a clue and don't really care what the DUP wanted.

So 'you didn't propose an Act because you think language acts are unnecessary, you proposed the same thing as an Act but just with a different name?

blanch152 wrote:

Yes, I called it a Minority Languages Act, but I wouldn't have been familiar enough with Northern Ireland legislation to see that it could be done by amendment of the Northern Ireland Act. So it is the same thing but different title to what I proposed

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So 'you didn't propose an Act because you think language acts are unnecessary, you proposed the same thing as an Act but just with a different name?

I didn't propose, as that implies ownership and favouring.

I offered a solution and predicted an outcome.

A bit like saying Kerry would beat Mayo in a game, doesn't mean I support Kerry, or that I want anything other than both of them to lose.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I didn't propose, as that implies ownership and favouring.

I offered a solution and predicted an outcome.

A bit like saying Kerry would beat Mayo in a game, doesn't mean I support Kerry, or that I want anything other than both of them to lose.

So are you saying we have what are Acts in all but name? That's what you say you proposed.

Yes, I called it a Minority Languages Act, but I wouldn't have been familiar enough with Northern Ireland legislation to see that it could be done by amendment of the Northern Ireland Act. So it is the same thing but different title to what I proposed

markodaly

blanch152 wrote: »

It's not just me

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-northern-ireland-51040628

"It’s over to Sinn Fein now. The language legislation is probably less than some campaigners would like."

It isn't the same deal as before. The previous deal had separate standalone bills, this time the bills will be separate amendments of existing legislation with a single framework. There is a big difference.

I mentioned before that SF needed the assembly up and running more so than the DUP, given that we are in election mode in the south.
Therefore they were more than ready to compromise here.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

I mentioned before that SF needed the assembly up and running more so than the DUP, given that we are in election mode in the south.
Therefore they were more than ready to compromise here.

Great theory until you realise that they had agreed to more or less this deal over a year ago and the DUP walked away over the Language part. The DUP, who lost 2 seats in the GE and had been publicly blamed a couple of weeks ago by the Tory SOS (formerly known as their best buddy) for being the sole obstacle to a deal, were facing an election too.

If you come onto a politics forum to gloat or have a dig, at least try and disguise it better. :rolleyes: Unfeckingbeliable.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Great theory until you realise that they had agreed to more or less this deal over a year ago and the DUP walked away over the Language part. The DUP, who lost 2 seats in the GE and had been publicly blamed a couple of weeks ago by the Tory SOS (formerly known as their best buddy) for being the sole obstacle to a deal, were facing an election too.

If you come onto a politics forum to gloat or have a dig, at least try and disguise it better. :rolleyes: Unfeckingbeliable.

Steady on. I was right in my prediction in a deal being agreed and there is no separate Irish Langauge act. SF appears to have moved on that front because they know there is bigger fish to fry.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Steady on. I was right in my prediction in a deal being agreed and there is no separate Irish Langauge act. SF appears to have moved on that front because they know there is bigger fish to fry.

Everybody knew a deal would probably be done once the DUP/Tory love-in went sour.
There was no separate ILA over a year ago when SF agreed a deal that the DUP walked away from when the backroom boys seen it.
It's a compromise deal, nobody got everything they wanted, but if you look at what has changed since Stormont went down...those who wanted rights across the board, from women's rights to LGBT rights to language rights, are the big winners.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's a compromise deal,

Ah, so SF did move the past few days. Thanks for confirming.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Ah, so SF did move the past few days. Thanks for confirming.

Did they allow the DUP some wriggle room on the Irish Language provisions the DUP had previously baulked at?
I suspect they must have. Do you understand 'compromise' as a concept?

P.S. I don't think they should have. But then I am not a politician.

RobMc59

10-15 years

markodaly wrote: »

Ah, so SF did move the past few days. Thanks for confirming.

It seems common sense has prevailed and perhaps NI can move forward now that the wind has been taken out of extremists(on both sides)sails.
I'm not sure the cost of providing translators for Irish or Ulster Scots is justifiable though.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Everybody knew a deal would probably be done once the DUP/Tory love-in went sour.
There was no separate ILA over a year ago when SF agreed a deal that the DUP walked away from when the backroom boys seen it.
It's a compromise deal, nobody got everything they wanted, but if you look at what has changed since Stormont went down...those who wanted rights across the board, from women's rights to LGBT rights to language rights, are the big winners.

Do you have a copy of the deal from a year ago so we can compare the two, or are you just making something up from hearsay?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Do you have a copy of the deal from a year ago so we can compare the two, or are you just making something up from hearsay?

Working off what Eamonn Mallie said of it. I linked to his article earlier. If the DUP wish to dispute what he had to say, all they need to do now is publish it.

Lord Fairlord

15-20 years

The two orange sections on that pie chart look pretty much the same colour to me!