John Minihan (Progressive Democrats)

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and the opportunity to speak on the use of the Irish language, how it is taught to children and adults and its promotion and preservation. There will hardly be a Member of this House who is not concerned by the fact many of our young people leave school without a reasonable command of the Irish language as stated in the Opposition motion. I would also presume that no Member or party would have a problem, in principle, with 1,500 hours of Irish language education being delivered to Irish children throughout their school lives nor with the estimated annual cost of €500 million. It is also unclear how many people are truly worried that students are required to take Irish after the junior certificate examination. Few would take specific issue with the findings in the 2003 NCCA document, Languages in the Post-Primary Curriculum, that our syllabi and examinations "retain an emphasis on reading and writing at the expense of listening and speaking".

Given these points, this debate boils down to how the Irish language becomes, in the Opposition's words, "a living language of modern and useful communication". Our cultural heritage is protected and deepened by continuing to support our understanding, use and development of the Irish language in as many media as possible. Assessment of the Irish language in the curriculum must be part of a broader need to promote a better understanding and valuing of our national heritage and culture in schools.

Moving on from a system which has not delivered, necessitates understanding of what has and what has not worked. I welcome the evaluation of teaching and learning in Irish which took place in 40 schools between January and June last year. While the information gleaned from that must be analysed by the evaluation support and research unit, I urge that the final report be published as soon as possible. Similarly, I hope the final report of the evaluation of teaching and learning in the junior cycle, in which 75 schools took part between September 2004 and June last year, will also be published soon.

I commend the Minister and the Government on working towards the revised literature course for leaving certificate Irish. I understand this will be examined for the first time this year having been introduced in September 2004. It is crucial that modern texts in Irish are part of the curriculum. Language is central to the human experience, whether the communication takes place face to face or across time through literature. Students should experience contemporary Irish language use and culture through modern texts and I welcome the inclusion of contemporary works in the prescribed prose and poetry sections of the leaving certificate.

No matter what our personal view of the book might be, there is a sense that one has only to mention the name Peig Sayers to a certain age group and one will see a dramatic rolling of the eyes, or worse. If we are to move further towards Irish as a living language of modern and useful communication, we need to learn from this. That the elective material element of the leaving certificate for both prose and poetry provides candidates with opportunities to present alternative texts of their choice is a welcome development.

I also commend the Government on working to provide a revised literature course that allows the study of a contemporary Irish language film as an alternative to the prescribed play. The Minister has stated her view that the new Irish literature curriculum offers many opportunities to study modern texts and I commend her and her Department on their efforts to date to provide both teachers and students with the ability to choose works that match their interests. That is an important point and not one, I suspect, recognised generally or in the Opposition motion for that matter.

I have some concerns about the final point of the Opposition motion on a new national strategy for Irish. I understand Fóram na Gaeilge was to look at the preparation of a 20-year strategic plan with realistic goals for the Irish language in the State. It seems the advisability of a 20-year strategic plan for the Irish language has been among the issues that have been considered in general terms by Fóram na Gaeilge. The question of why it is advisable to have a strategic plan is debateable. Surely agreement exists on the need for the development of a clear statement on the part of the Government on the Irish language.

The Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs has stated his hope to be able to advance the matter "in the near future". It would be worthwhile if the House could get some sense of what work has been completed and what issues are holding up a strategic plan with realistic goals for the language.

I wish to deviate briefly to make a point about the promotion of the Irish language generally. Much has been made of the requirement on public bodies to ensure that certain documents of public interest shall be published in each of the official languages simultaneously — for example, annual reports. Again, I suggest that no one has a particular problem with this in principle, although I understand some members of Fine Gael are now sorry they supported the Official Languages Act. The problem seems to centre on the cost. It is an issue which is talked about with little, if any, reference to the facts.

In the first instance, the number of documents which must be translated is limited — covering major policy documents only. Second, the cost of compliance to Departments, the Revenue Commissioners and the Office of Public Works was approximately €350,000 in 2005. Compare this with the total expenditure of Departments of approximately €50 billion. The €350,000 cost of compliance with the official languages legislation should be kept in that context. People are often accused of knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing and I suggest that when it comes to preserving a language not only for us but for people not yet born, we must shed that limited view.

I welcome this debate and the opportunity to hear the view of all sides, particularly to hear the most up to date view of the Minister and the Department. I have concerns about the strategy, as I have outlined, and urge this be addressed as soon as possible. There is an old Irish saying — Níl neart gan cur le chéile, there is no real strength without co-operating. Are varying political and interest group approaches damaging the preservation and promotion of the language? The spirit of that saying spurs us to ask whether co-operation and consensus rather than divisive motions are the way to best promote and protect our native language. Government, Ministers, Departments, legislators, teachers, students and wider society must work together. It is in that spirit that I support the amendment to the motion.