Opinion

Patricia MacBride: Unionist outrage at Irish language legislation is really about what’s going on in unionism

The TUV is using legislation around the Irish Language Act to claim that the DUP is selling unionism down the river by capitulating to Sinn Féin. Pictured is TUV leader Jim Allister.
The TUV is using legislation around the Irish Language Act to claim that the DUP is selling unionism down the river by capitulating to Sinn Féin. Pictured is TUV leader Jim Allister. The TUV is using legislation around the Irish Language Act to claim that the DUP is selling unionism down the river by capitulating to Sinn Féin. Pictured is TUV leader Jim Allister.

In June of this year, there was a faux wobble as to whether or not the DUP would nominate a first minister in the midst of the internal wrangling that saw the party go through three leaders in almost as many weeks.

The parties were called together for discussions and, having been handed the opportunity by the DUP to negotiate with the British government, Sinn Féin said the price for their return to Stormont was bringing forward legislation on culture and identity as had been agreed in 2020’s New Decade, New Approach agreement.

Following the negotiations, Brandon Lewis said it remained his preference for the language laws to be brought forward through the assembly, but added that the British government would take the legislation through Westminster. If that becomes necessary, he said, they would introduce legislation in October 2021.

Tick tock, Brandon.

Protests over the Irish language from unionism are as cyclical as the seasons. It must be incredibly tiring being a unionist politician and having to live in a constant state of outrage, anger and fury.

I find this state of affairs all the more baffling when it’s over something as benign as the proposals around identity and cultural expression set out in New Decade, New Approach.

Let’s be clear what we are talking about. The proposed legislation provides for the creation of an Office of Identity and Cultural Expression with a director appointed by the first and deputy first minister. That office’s primary aim is “to promote cultural pluralism and respect for diversity, including Northern Ireland’s ethnic, national, linguistic and faith communities.”

The office will guide public bodies and monitor how they provided services to users of languages other than English. It will examine how cultural traditions and identities are being promoted. The office will appoint both an Ulster Scots Commissioner and Irish Language Commissioner and any recommendations made by those commissioners or by the office must be approved by the first and deputy first minister.

The debate over the language and cultural expression legislation has all too often fallen into the trap of “false balance” in the media. Yes, of course, everyone is entitled to have their own opinion but they are not entitled to have their own facts. When a group or individual misrepresents the facts or deals in falsehoods, and are given the same airtime for the sake of balance, it gives those views a legitimacy they do not deserve.

Those who peddle inaccuracies such as an Irish Language Act will introduce quotas of Irish speakers in the civil service, or require all road signs to be bilingual or that a language commissioner will be able to ride roughshod over fair employment legislation cannot be allowed to spread misinformation unchallenged.

In an article in the News Letter earlier this month, the TUV’s Jim Allister said: “Official recognition of the status of Irish will be enforced through an Irish Language Commissioner with statutory powers to ‘promote and facilitate’ the use of Irish throughout the public sector.

“This zealot will set standards that every public body must meet in the use of Irish in the delivery of its services. Such will bring obvious recruitment advantage to Irish speakers across the public service.”

My friend knows very well the legal enforceability of language like “promote and facilitate.” He also knows very well that any recommendations of the commissioners can be blocked by either the first or deputy first minister.

Unionist outrage at any legislation around the Irish language is really about what’s going on in unionism. The TUV is using it to say that the DUP is selling unionism down the river by capitulating to Sinn Féin. The DUP is complaining that Westminster might make legislation over the heads of the assembly when, of course, they are quite happy for anything to do with equality or rights to be taken out of their hands so as to not spook their fundamentalist Christian voter base. We’ve seen this already with abortion legislation and marriage equality.

If I were of Ulster British identity, I’d be lobbying the universities to set up degree programmes in Ulster Scots so that those graduates could go on to do their PGCE and become teachers in Ulster Scots schools. I’d be looking for like-minded parents who wanted to educate their children in the heritage, tradition and language they themselves grew up with so that we could establish those schools together.

The rising tide of confidence in one’s culture, heritage and tradition should lift all boats. Instead of the constant “themmuns” arguments, political unionism should focus on the positive opportunities this legislation can present for those of Ulster British identity.

Ach ní dhéanfadh an domhan capall rása d’asal.