Irish Language Act in the North: Have Sinn Fein scored a major own goal?

blanch152 wrote: »

I really don't understand where you get the bitterness from. However, I am glad that you finally accept that Sinn Fein don't have any power in relation to the GFA.

On the other hand, the Irish government does. For all intents and purposes, that is Leo and his bunch of merry men and women. So SF need to curry their favour if they want decisions. That is the point I am making.

Where did you get the idea that a single political party would have decision making power in an agreement between two sovereign nations?

Are you just learning this stuff as you go? :rolleyes:

blanch152 wrote: »

I have said that SF will have an input, they can come and talk to Leo and make requests and seek his favour, but ultimately, the Irish government and the Taoiseach will make whatever decisions they feel are best for the country. All of the decisions will be theirs.

Sometimes, that will be exactly what Sinn Fein have humbly asked for, other times Sinn Fein won't agree, other times Sinn Fein will pretend that the outcome is what they requested, that is what not having the power to make decisions gives you.

Are you really so blinded by your Animal Farm "everything SF bad" constant rhetoric that you cannot even see the problems for both the London and Dublin governments ?

It is evident from today`s headlines that SF were not running to Varadkar or Coveney yesterday to ask them for anything as you were implying.
They were there to tell them that there would be no restoration of Stormont without an Irish Language Act.

In other-words no Irish Language Act = direct rule.

The problem for London is under direct rule are they going to deny Northern Ireland what is already there for Scotland and Wales relating to language, plus there is the sticky wicket of same sex marriage.
For Dublin not only are they on the same sticky wicket on both, their is also the major problem of an Assembly gone where the majority were in favour of remaining in the EU, now on Northern Ireland matters having to deal with a London government where the tail that wags the dog (and campaigned to leave the EU) is the DUP.

charlie14 wrote: »

Are you really so blinded by your Animal Farm "everything SF bad" constant rhetoric that you cannot even see the problems for both the London and Dublin governments ?

It is evident from today`s headlines that SF were not running to Varadkar or Coveney yesterday to ask them for anything.
They were there to tell them that there would be no restoration of Stormont without an Irish Language Act.

In other-words no Irish Language Act = direct rule.

The problem for London is under direct rule are they going to deny Northern Ireland what is already there for Scotland and Wales relating to language, plus there is the sticky wicket of same sex marriage.
For Dublin not only are they on the same sticky wicket on both, their is also the major problem of an Assembly gone where the majority were in favour of remaining in the EU, now on Northern Ireland matters having to deal with a London government where the tail that wags the dog (and campaigned to leave the EU) is the DUP.

We are only at this juncture because SF were able to wield their power.

Whether that is a good or a bad place is up to the individual, but the UK and Dublin would not be dealing with DUP intransigence voluntarily, they were forced to.

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Red_Wake wrote: »

If the government is composed of a single party, as it is atm, why would they be obliged to ask other political parties for their opinions.

Note I say obliged - they can still choose to ask for the input of FF, Labour, Greens, SF, if they so choose. However, they can also choose to ignore it, though I'd assume they'll ask SF for their opinion.

The independent alliance are in govt too.

Fair point, I had forgotten about them.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The Secretary of State is now intimating that the Government may go above the DUP's head and institute SSM despite them.

What a slap that would be for the 'party who have influence'.

If they do it would be the first intelligent act of May`s government.

It would be not only a slap in the face for the DUP overall but a might kick up the behind for their MP`s who scuppered an agreement being reached last week.
They could rant and rave all they wanted but it would put them in their place as there would be sweet fa they could do about it if it came to a Commons vote.

blanch152 wrote: »

That would be great news and would take the issue off the table and if they also legislated for a Minority Languages Act that would be great.

They have agreed to a free standing ILA though in the St Andrew's agreement.

An observer might see that this is a shot across the DUP bows at the request of SF and the Irish gov.
Do the 3 acts deal or we simply live up to what we agreed to in St Andrews (which doesn't include an Ulster Scots Act)

The DUP, not for the first have snookered themselves here, if it is the case. They lose every which way. Even if they take down the Tory government.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They have agreed to a free standing ILA though in the St Andrew's agreement.

An observer might see that this is a shot across the DUP bows at the request of SF and the Irish gov.
Do the 3 acts deal or we simply live up to what we agreed to in St Andrews (which doesn't include an Ulster Scots Act)

The DUP, not for the first have snookered themselves here, if it is the case. They lose every which way. Even if they take down the Tory government.

It would be a serious wake up call for the British electorate seeing the type of troglodyte political party their government is in bed with if the DUP even considered causing a general election over SSM or a language act.

blanch152 wrote: »

What exactly are you looking for in an Irish Languages Act?

I am not looking for anything, I am in the south.

All the nationalist parties want an ILA and their proposals for same are out there.

blanch152 wrote: »

Are you just parroting a political party's statements then?

Surely, as someone who wants an ILA, you would have some idea on what it should contain?

I agree with the other nationalist parties.

I have no interest in debating the merits or demerits of it with you however.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I agree with the other nationalist parties.

I have no interest in debating the merits or demerits of it with you however.

So they all have identical proposals for an Irish Language Act, do they?

For something you claim to be supporting unambiguously, you seem to have little idea of what it contains? Will it be similar to the Act in the South?

blanch152 wrote: »

So they all have identical proposals for an Irish Language Act, do they?

For something you claim to be supporting unambiguously, you seem to have little idea of what it contains? Will it be similar to the Act in the South?

What I want is immaterial. I do know what they all propose as I also know what the scaremongered parts are.

The question was resolved at St Andrews. It is a yes or no question. 'Yes', I think there should be a freestanding ILA.

charlie14 wrote: »

As someone who agrees with the DUP position on that proposed Irish Language Act, perhaps you could detail what the DUP members in Westminster found so disagreeable that they scuppered their own party leader over when by all accounts she was willing to accept ?

Who said I agree with the DUP position? I have my own views, very different to the DUP.

I am happy to give my own views, if asked, but I really don't care what the DUP's position is.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What I want is immaterial. I do know what they all propose as I also know what the scaremongered parts are.

The question was resolved at St Andrews. It is a yes or no question. 'Yes', I think there should be a freestanding ILA.

Why is your opinion immaterial? Surely we aren't all on here just to parrot the position of particular parties ad nauseum without offering our own opinions? I am interested in finding out what supporters of an ILA believe should be in such an Act.

Havockk wrote: »

Not just Nationalists, Alliance, Greens, PBP, also.



How about for a start, official recognition for the indigenous language of the land? Then perhaps a lifting of the ban in regards to being used in the courts. Bi-lingual signs, in areas where they are welcome. You know, common sense stuff.

After that, sure we can leave it to the experts.

At last, someone who can answer some of the questions. In the South, the Irish language is given prominence on street signs i.e. always on top as a result of the ILA. Do you agree this should be the case in the North as well?

Other than street signs, every piece of official nonsense that is read by only a few, has to be translated into Irish to be read by none. Do you believe that should also be the case in Northern Ireland?

On the indigenous language bit, do you realise that the Ulster dialect of the Irish language died out in the mid-1970s and that Irish is no more indigenous to Northern Ireland than say Scots Gaelic i.e. it is spoken in a neighbouring country and has been imported?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_language_in_Northern_Ireland

"The last speakers of varieties of Irish native to what is now Northern Ireland died in the 20th century. Irish as spoken in Counties Down[8] and Fermanagh were the first to die out, but native speakers of varieties spoken in the Glens of Antrim[9] and the Sperrin Mountains of County Tyrone[10] and County Londonderry survived into the 1950s and 1970s respectively, whilst the Armagh dialect survived until the 1930s or '40s.[11] Varieties of Irish indigenous to the territory of Northern Ireland finally became extinct as spoken languages when the last native speaker of Rathlin Irish died in 1985.[12] Séamus Bhriain Mac Amhlaigh, who died in 1983, was reportedly the last native-speaker of Antrim Irish."

It is sad that the Irish people of Northern Ireland let the language die out up there and that the dialects are lost for all time. However, it is to the credit of the revival movement (and also to the Ulster-Scots revival movement) that the languages have been resurrected.

blanch152 wrote: »

Who said I agree with the DUP position? I have my own views, very different to the DUP.

I am happy to give my own views, if asked, but I really don't care what the DUP's position is.





Why is your opinion immaterial? Surely we aren't all on here just to parrot the position of particular parties ad nauseum without offering our own opinions? I am interested in finding out what supporters of an ILA believe should be in such an Act.



At last, someone who can answer some of the questions. In the South, the Irish language is given prominence on street signs i.e. always on top as a result of the ILA. Do you agree this should be the case in the North as well?

Other than street signs, every piece of official nonsense that is read by only a few, has to be translated into Irish to be read by none. Do you believe that should also be the case in Northern Ireland?

On the indigenous language bit, do you realise that the Ulster dialect of the Irish language died out in the mid-1970s and that Irish is no more indigenous to Northern Ireland than say Scots Gaelic i.e. it is spoken in a neighbouring country and has been imported?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_language_in_Northern_Ireland

"The last speakers of varieties of Irish native to what is now Northern Ireland died in the 20th century. Irish as spoken in Counties Down[8] and Fermanagh were the first to die out, but native speakers of varieties spoken in the Glens of Antrim[9] and the Sperrin Mountains of County Tyrone[10] and County Londonderry survived into the 1950s and 1970s respectively, whilst the Armagh dialect survived until the 1930s or '40s.[11] Varieties of Irish indigenous to the territory of Northern Ireland finally became extinct as spoken languages when the last native speaker of Rathlin Irish died in 1985.[12] Séamus Bhriain Mac Amhlaigh, who died in 1983, was reportedly the last native-speaker of Antrim Irish."

It is sad that the Irish people of Northern Ireland let the language die out up there and that the dialects are lost for all time. However, it is to the credit of the revival movement (and also to the Ulster-Scots revival movement) that the languages have been resurrected.

I'm not going to prepare a whole written document for you to peruse. You asked and I answered some basic items that could be included. Experts are better placed than you or I in that regards and as such all that is incumbent on us is to agree that in principle the idea is sound. Which it is.

Besides, I know and live beside a large community here where everyone under the age of 21 is fluent and were taught via Irish medium schools which are a roaring success and gaining popularity. So you argument there is disingenuous at worst and ignorant at best.

Ulster-Scots is not a language. Irish is an indigenous language on this island.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Ulster-Scots is not a language. Irish is an indigenous language on this island.

It's also probably worth noting that Scots Gaelic would definitely be linked to Irish Gaelic since it was introduced to Scotland by the Northern Gaels around the 4th or 5th Century. Pictish would be the other allied Q-Celtic language that would have been indigenous to Scotland but it has unfortunately gone extinct.