Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

Does the Minister of State agree that planning authorities and the commission have a significant role in the decisions they make and how they go by their planning decisions, and that can impact Irish-language communities and Gaeltacht areas? If he agrees that they can, then clearly it would be important to have training for people in those areas, so they are aware of their obligations, responsibilities and what they need to do to protect and support the language. If the Minister of State does not feel the legislative requirement is needed to ensure that happens, what is he proposing to be done to ensure that there is training in those areas? That is amendment No. 1132.

Likewise, amendment No. 1127 discusses the need of the Office of the Planning Regulator to protect the linguistic and cultural heritage of the language and Gaeltacht communities. Does the Minister of State agree that it needs to do that? If he agrees that it is part of its remit, why would he not have it included in the Bill as a legislative requirement?

Likewise, regarding the role of the commission in the status of language plans, why should it not be a requirement for decisions and appeals to the commission not to materially contravene language plans? I will give an example of this in a Gaeltacht area. The Minister of State fairly made the point that language is only one of the aspects. I have not at all been arguing that language should be the only aspect of planning decisions. I am absolutely not arguing that point. Of course, it should be one of the considerations. If, in a Gaeltacht area, there is a new housing development where 20 homes are built, which has happened in recent years, and the developer sells those 20 homes as holiday homes to English-language speakers from outside the community who do not have the language, that will impact the Gaeltacht area. It will not meet the local housing needs of Gaeltacht speakers. It will also bring more English-language speakers to this area and will have a tipping effect on the Gaeltacht status. I am not arguing, and I have never argued, that of those 20 houses, there could not be some short-term lets or some that are geared towards tourism or renting of the sort. Yet, a problem occurs when 20 out of 20 of them are sold as holiday homes and short-term lets. A very significant problem is created by that. If the language plan sets out the need to promote and protect the language in the area, but planning decisions like this that are contravening it, why would the language plan not be able to have this status in the Bill? That is my question about that.

Amendment No. 8 deals with competency in the language at B2 level of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. Does the Minister of State not accept that there needs to be some sort of competency level? If he does not propose this level that has been put forward, what level is he proposing? Why should it not be in the legislation? There is inconsistency in this. As Deputy Ó Snódaigh said, some local authorities are insisting on competency levels, such as this level. Indeed, the organisations working in the area are proposing this. Why, then, should it not be a uniform competency level?

I do not think we can be satisfied with situations in some areas where there is no competency level. Housing is being built and developed with the idea that it would be made available to Irish-language speakers in the Gaeltacht area, but it then ends up in the hands of people who are not Irish-language speakers. That creates a further threat to the Gaeltacht area and undermines it. There is an urgency here. If we do not do what we can and if we continue on the current route, in a number of years we could be left with a situation where we do not have these Gaeltacht areas. I would therefore welcome the responses of the Minister of State to those questions.