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,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Office of An Coimisinéir Teanga to be Closed.

Options
12346»

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    Rebelheart
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,077 ✭✭✭Rebelheart


    texidub wrote: »
    I will say it again: Irish language lobbyists are a threat to Irish culture. They will use emotional blackmail, they will cajole, and they will guilt-trip in order to achieve their aim of disrupting and overthrowing Irish culture. They are the most anti-Irish group in the country.

    Intellectually speaking, this is extraordinary on so many levels - none of which make you look good.


  • Options
    #153
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Rebelheart wrote: »
    Yes, and I can just see the demand for all those fascinatingly interesting English language reports making the Government Publications Office super rich. Tell me, when was the last time that a state-funded report in the English language made it into the Top 10 selling publications?

    And how much does all that nonsense in English which nobody/hardly anybody reads cost taxpayers?
    Why is that relevent? The reports are already made in English, the cost of translating them is an additional cost.


  • Options
    #154
    Rebelheart
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,077 ✭✭✭Rebelheart


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Why is that relevent? The reports sre already made in English, the cost of translating them is an additional cost.

    Er, printing countless pages of reports in English is an additional cost to not printing these reports which few if any people purchase or even read.


    Why English-speaking monoglots in Ireland should be able to drag bilingual Irish-speaking taxpayers down to their own level of linguistic and cultural ignorance by forcing the English language on them with taxpayers' money has never been explained in terms other than linguistically fascist ones.


  • Options
    #155
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Rebelheart wrote: »
    Er, printing countless pages of reports in English is an additional cost to not printing these reports which few if any people purchase or even read.


    Why English-speaking monoglots in Ireland should be able to drag bilingual Irish-speaking taxpayers down to their own level of linguistic and cultural ignorance by forcing the English language on them with taxpayers' money has never been explained in terms other than linguistically fascist ones.
    *facepalm*
    The reports are already made in english. It's not the cost of printing them we're objecting to. It's the cost of translating them.

    And a few of them are read in the academic world. I have to read a report from the NRA for a project in college which my lecturer had already sourced.


  • Options
    #156
    Rebelheart
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,077 ✭✭✭Rebelheart


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    The reports are already made in english. It's not the cost of printing them we're objecting to. It's the cost of translating them.

    Clearly the "we're" here refers to the anti-Irish language lobby trying to set the agenda in a way which suits their prejudices. To most impartial observers, however, printing millions upon millions of pages of reports every year in English which few if any people will read - and incomparably fewer still will actually pay to read - is a complete waste of money. But pointing this reality out doesn't suit the agenda of the anti-Irish lobby.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Rebelheart wrote: »
    Clearly the "we're" here refers to the anti-Irish language lobby trying to set the agenda in a way which suits their prejudices. To most impartial observers, however, printing millions upon millions of pages of reports every year in English which few if any people will read - and incomparably fewer still will actually pay to read - is a complete waste of money. But pointing this reality out doesn't suit the agenda of the anti-Irish lobby.
    Again, it's not the cost of printing we're objecting to. Is there any point in having this conversation with you?


  • Options
    #158
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Rebelheart wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    And the other very vocal side of the debate doesn't? Are you serious?
    Rebelheart wrote: »
    In fairness, Fine Gael's Brian Hayes in his role as minister in charge of the OPW, also wants to put up statutes to heroes of the British Empire in the Phoenix Park, Dublin - as unbelievable as that sounds to most Irish people in 2011.
    Agreed it's beyond utterly daft. Hell I'd be in the long queue to blow the statues to bits again should this go through.
    Rebelheart wrote: »
    Well said. That particular poster has gone on several rants in this forum about how Irish culture generally is "backward" and basically that the British "civilised" the Irish. Such is the sort of baggage and benighted thinking behind at least one of the anti-Irish fanatics here.
    Permabear? really? I've not seen any examples of that. With charges like that being bandied about, links of such examples would be most welcome.
    Rebelheart wrote: »
    Clearly the "we're" here refers to the anti-Irish language lobby trying to set the agenda in a way which suits their prejudices.
    Nope just questioning the need for wasteful quangos(one of many) and questioning that need in light of actual numbers that would require such a quango.
    To most impartial observers, however, printing millions upon millions of pages of reports every year in English which few if any people will read - and incomparably fewer still will actually pay to read - is a complete waste of money. But pointing this reality out doesn't suit the agenda of the anti-Irish lobby.
    You really don't get this point do you? Printing unread reports is daft enough, but it's the extra cost of translation and printing of unread reports that even fewer will read other than the translators that's one of the issues.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #159
    deise go deo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Nope just questioning the need for wasteful quangos(one of many) and questioning that need in light of actual numbers that would require such a quango.

    An Coimisinéir Teanga is hardly wasteful, if you were being fair to him you might mention that he has in the past spoken out about waste in spending on the Irish language and pushed for services to be delivered more cost effectively.


  • Options
    #160
    SeanW
    Registered Users Posts: 8,740 ✭✭✭SeanW


    deise go deo wrote: »
    An Coimisinéir Teanga is hardly wasteful, if you were being fair to him you might mention that he has in the past spoken out about waste in spending on the Irish language and pushed for services to be delivered more cost effectively.
    But yet his entire job was to enforce laws that made the public services more wasteful, by forcing them to spend obscene amounts of money translating documents noone reads. Not something we can afford with taxes going up and vital services like A&Es, fire stations, welfare, education etc all under threat.

    Please don't give me this BS about this being a "violation of your human rights." English, in practice is the language of this country. You have to know and use English to interact with the vast majority of people in Ireland. I don't see why it should be different for every obscure government and local authority document.

    Which would you prefer, that your local fire station was closed down to save money, or that your local authority could save a similar amount of money on useless translations ??? ???

    Good riddance to this sick joke of an office.


  • Options
    #161
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    SeanW wrote: »
    .Which would you prefer, that your local fire station was closed down to save money, or that your local authority could save a similar amount of money on useless translations ??? ???.
    It's not just transalations. The OLA requires that Irish speaking firemen be available on demand.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,565 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    deise go deo wrote: »
    An Coimisinéir Teanga


    The Government has announced that it is going to close the Office of An Coimisinéir Teanga and transfer its functions to the Office of the Ombudsman as part of its public sector reform plan.

    The governments cutting some of the under-used and overpaid civil servants?

    About time. :mad:

    Oh what about - who gives a hell about the deficit - can we have an Office of English Speaking as well!


  • Options
    #163
    deise go deo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    The governments cutting some of the under-used and overpaid civil servants?

    Nope, no one will lose their jobs, that's the Croke park agreement for you, it won't save money, it will probably cost money.


  • Options
    #164
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    deise go deo wrote: »
    Nope, no one will lose their jobs, that's the Croke park agreement for you, it won't save money, it will probably cost money.
    What if they're not replaced when they leave or retire? Or, if they are assigned to more urgent work than language law enforcement?


  • Options
    #165
    deise go deo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    cyclopath2001 wrote: »
    What if they're not replaced when they leave or retire? Or, if they are assigned to more urgent work than language law enforcement?

    The office of the ombudsman will still have to deal with the OLA, so it's unlikely to be honest.


  • Options
    #166
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    deise go deo wrote: »
    The office of the ombudsman will still have to deal with the OLA, so it's unlikely to be honest.
    I believe the Ombudsman will be honest. It's his job. But will he have the staff?

    I think the Irish lobby have failed to realise that they've fallen for a Fianna Folly vote-buying exercise.

    Your FF friends are history and the Main Aim will have to wait.


  • Options
    #167
    Lord TSC
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 42,402 Mod ✭✭✭✭Lord TSC


    Ok, here's something I'm missing.

    The office isn't nessecarily closing, its moving, right? Deise keeps saying they are not firing anyone, just moving them and their jobs to a new office? That the workers will now work out of and under the Office of the Ombudsman?

    So....whats the problem? The function of the office is still going to exist, right? Or am I missing something? If no one is being fired and its just a "transfer its functions to the Office of the Ombudsman", then why all the fuss?

    And if it isn't going to save any money, why do you think the government are making this move? Is the implication that the government are doing this to just screw with Irish speakers?

    There's some contradictions being thrown round here...

    (Can worms. Open.)


  • Options
    #168
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,266 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    Say for example we decide to hire enough Irish speaking civil servants to fill all roles that involve communicating to the public. Do we even have enough Irish speakers to fill those posts.


  • Options
    #169
    SPDUB
    Registered Users Posts: 1,336 ✭✭✭SPDUB


    Teamshadowclan wrote: »
    Ok, here's something I'm missing.

    The office isn't nessecarily closing, its moving, right? Deise keeps saying they are not firing anyone, just moving them and their jobs to a new office? That the workers will now work out of and under the Office of the Ombudsman?

    So....whats the problem? The function of the office is still going to exist, right? Or am I missing something? If no one is being fired and its just a "transfer its functions to the Office of the Ombudsman", then why all the fuss?

    What you are probably missing is An Coimisinéir Teanga has been in a dispute about the Ombudsman office own use of Irish .

    And nobody being fired would be the case even if there was no Croke Park Agreement .


  • Options
    #170
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    SPDUB wrote: »
    What you are probably missing is An Coimisinéir Teanga has been in a dispute about the Ombudsman office own use of Irish .
    The office of the CT is probably in dispute with practically all public bodies.
    SPDUB wrote: »
    And nobody being fired would be the case even if there was no Croke Park Agreement .
    But they could be re-assigned to higher priority work.


  • Options
    #171
    Sica
    Registered Users Posts: 49 ✭Sica


    SPDUB wrote: »
    And nobody being fired would be the case even if there was no Croke Park Agreement .

    Plus the aim of the Croke Park agreement is to make changes through redeployment and shrink the public sector through natural wastage and a ban on recruitment, an approach which should reduce the public sector by 8% by 2015. Redeployment works better with a smaller number of larger public bodies rather than the patchwork of tiny sectional public bodies, like the CT, that we have right now.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    deise go deo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,677 ✭✭✭deise go deo


    Sica wrote: »
    Plus the aim of the Croke Park agreement is to make changes through redeployment and shrink the public sector through natural wastage and a ban on recruitment, an approach which should reduce the public sector by 8% by 2015. Redeployment works better with a smaller number of larger public bodies rather than the patchwork of tiny sectional public bodies, like the CT, that we have right now.

    Indeed, but the point I think you have missed is that the An Board Snip Nua report saw no merit in closing the office of an Coimisinéir Teanga.

    Redeploying the staff in this case means moving them from Galway to Dublin, that will cost money. It will also leave a building empty on which rent will continue to be paid, that's waste.


  • Options
    #173
    Sica
    Registered Users Posts: 49 ✭Sica


    deise go deo wrote: »
    Indeed, but the point I think you have missed is that the An Board Snip Nua report saw no merit in closing the office of an Coimisinéir Teanga.

    Redeploying the staff in this case means moving them from Galway to Dublin, that will cost money. It will also leave a building empty on which rent will continue to be paid, that's waste.

    Bord Snip Nua reported over two years ago, an age considering the changes which have taken place since then (new Government, new understanding of the depth of the financial crisis neccesitating the bailout etc). It was a reasonably cursory, broad brush look at how to go about making cuts in Government expenditure, a starting point for cuts and reform. It was a useful exercise but it was not a forensic and detailed exercise, it did not spend much time dealing with smaller Government offices like this one and it is no longer a particularly relevant in looking at how to make cuts and reforms now.

    Staff are unlikely to be paid relocation expenses (very uncommon in the public sector) so the cost to the Exchequer is minimal - it is likely that some staff members will wish to remain in Galway and be redeployed elsewhere in the public sector there while others already based in Dublin will take up the vacated relocated functions. The lease on the empty building, if it doesn't have a break clause, will eventually lapse, generating a saving when it does.


  • Options
    #174
    Sica
    Registered Users Posts: 49 ✭Sica


    Also, Bord Snip Nua did say:

    In examining this Programme, the Special Group notes the absence of objective studies to assess the Irish speaking abilities of the populace by age, gender, location etc. The Group recommends a cross programme analysis of all expenditure on the Irish language.

    The requirement under the Official Languages Act 2003 to translate all official publications into Irish entails very significant additional costs across all areas of public administration that is in our view out of proportion to the benefit actually being delivered to the public. We recommend that the requirement under the Official Languages Act 2003 to translate all official publications into Irish should be amended to apply to a more limited range of cases.

    i.e. the authors of the report were of the view that the requirements under the OLA which the CT is charged with enforcing are too costly and should be scaled back and furthermore recommended a more detailed examination on Irish language expenditure. This is hardly if the ringing endorsement of the CT's existence you suggest it is and to me suggest the authors would have no objection to a decision to close the office.


  • Options
    #175
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    deise go deo wrote: »
    It will also leave a building empty on which rent will continue to be paid, that's waste.
    This building?

    commiss_office.jpg

    How on earth could the Commissioner and his 5.5 staff fill that building?


  • Options
    #176
    citizenmick
    Registered Users Posts: 1 ✭citizenmick


    MysticalRain wrote: »
    We need to be spending less money on pointless quangos and more money on promoting foreign languages skills that are of economic benefit to the country.


    We must learn to talk the talk for boost in trading

    Given that the majority of the global population doesn't speak English, language skills are key to unlocking our export potential, says Google boss John Herlihy

    http://www.independent.ie/business/we-must-learn-to-talk-the-talk-for-boost-in-trading-2940092.html

    I agree, yes. But, in my experience, monglot English speakers (Americans, English, Irish, Australians) are quite insular and closed when it comes to foreign languages, and quite a lot of monolingual Engish Speakers are afraid of anything even a tiny bit 'Johnny Foreigner'. 'Oh, my God, Maureen, the menu is in French''. 'Jaysus, P.J., them there waiters wouldn't spake English to us', 'Aw, sh#te Joesphine, that film is in some foreign language, turn it off'. Probably, because English is such a dominant langauge.

    Motivation is one of the main factors in mastering a language, and unfortunately the average monoglot English speaker has a severe lack of motivation when it comes to learning another language. Most Irish students study a foreign language in school for five or six years and the majority can barely string a few phrases together and most will make no effort to use them. The mindset is closed and can't think beyond English.
    I lived in France for a number of years. There were of course English speakers who immersed themselves in the local culture, but I was flabbergasted by how narrowminded most monoglot English speakers were towards the host language and culture They remained immersed in English language culture; the Irish by going to Irish pubs and by spending their time watching sky tv or consuming English Language culture on the internet. This included some university students who were there to learn french.
    In my time in Europe, I found that a greater proportion of people of other nationalities (German, Danish, Norwegian, Swiss, Belgian, etc, etc) could converse in one or more languages. Some of these had left school at 16. Just a totally different mindset.

    So, my point is, yes, language skills are key to unlocking our export potential, but I think trying to teach all monoglot English speakers another language is a waste of time and resources. Most will never use the language or never want to. Sure, concentrate on the ones who want to, but I really don't see Irish monoglot English speakers mastering Chinese or Arabic.

    I also think languages have other values than just being a key to 'export potential'. They create a different state of mind and engender new ways of seeing things; they encourage critical thinking, etc. This is something that monoglot speakers don't realise as they are stuck in the mindset of one language and don't understand that languages can unlock our minds potential (gosh! I'm suddenly fluent in motivational business speak?).

    For the record, I speak Irish fluently, love the language and fell it has enriched my life. Hoever, I don't agree with every document being translated into Irish and think the governments language policy is flawed and futile. I am definately not a nationalist or a language facist (whatever that is) and as it happens I don't have a great affinity with being 'Irish' anyway.


Advertisement