Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)

I thank Members for their useful contributions. Senator Regan raised a question, which also was raised subsequently, about those individuals who did not qualify. I understand they were small in number. I listened to the anecdote told by my colleague, Senator Denis O'Donovan, and while I do not know what happened to the two people who were before him in the queue, it was always said that the examination was not that difficult to pass. Never having sat the examination, I cannot give a judgment in this regard.

Regarding those who have completed their legal training without meeting the statutory Irish language requirement and who have not been admitted to practice, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Dermot Ahern, is aware of the issue. He is in the process of consulting with the various interests on the best way to resolve this matter. Any necessary amendments will be tabled in this House under the aegis of the Minister and this issue is under consideration.

The second issue relates to that raised by Senator de Búrca and others and concerns the question of what was happening in the past, both with regard to the legal position and in practice. From a legal perspective, the issue raised about people being competent to hear court cases in the Gaeltacht did not arise because according to the law, everyone had passed this great examination that meant they were capable of conducting cases through Irish. In a fantastic world that appears to have been created, everyone had a marvellous competence to conduct their business in Irish because they had passed the examination. Consequently, anyone who was appointed to serve in a Gaeltacht area should have been able to conduct the business by virtue of having passed the examination.

As everyone is aware, however, this legal theory was far from the reality. The Government now is attempting to deal with the reality. The idea of having a basic terminology requirement as well as a higher level examination is highly realistic. I will provide two simple examples. Members should consider the case of a solicitor in practice whose normal business is conducted through English. That usually will be fine, as 99% or 100% of the solicitor's clients deal with him or her through English and have no interest in having cases heard through Irish. Moreover, the solicitor does not feel competent to conduct cases through Irish. One day however, a document in Irish arrives into the solicitor's e-mail, or however they receive information these days, with the words "Urghaire Chúirte" air. If one presumes the individual in question literally has no Irish, the urgency of the matter might not strike him or her immediately. Allowing that one had a basic knowledge of basic terminology, one would immediately realise this was an injunction and one normally must deal with injunctions fairly quickly. The terminology is a practical tool for people who are not practising in Irish but need to know at a glance, because the other side might send documents in Irish, whether a document is important or urgent and what should be done with it.

Obviously, were the document complicated and were one to recognise it as an injunction, one would quickly get someone who could deal with the issue and explain its contents to allow one to move on to the next stage. While it does not mean one is competent to deal with the entire issue, one would have enough Irish to know what is going on. Members accept this concept in these Houses, where they use words such as "Cathaoirleach", "Ceann Comhairle" and so on. Everyone in Ireland understands this, although undoubtedly some visitors find proceedings to be something of a puzzle. In a bilingual State, it is good that people can issue such documents in both languages. However, it is important that people should avail of the opportunity to learn the basic terminology.

One of the purposes of the Bill was to get away from an examination that had no function. It was a compulsory examination that simply annoyed people and did not have a practical function in the world. To those who do not bother to attend this course, I hope they never get caught out by not understanding simple terms like "toghairm", "urghaire" and a few other key words. Were they in a small practice without understanding what was happening, it could be very costly to them. On the other hand, I refer to a scenario that will happen quite frequently in Dublin, because many more people now use Irish on a daily basis. This is not simply a Gaeltacht issue as the census proved that outside the educational system, more than 80,000 people choose to use Irish on a daily basis. Therefore, when involved in court proceedings, they will wish to have the cases heard in Irish, as is their legal and constitutional right.

At present, no list, register or other means exist to find out who, among those who passed this great examination that we know does not mean one can conduct business through Irish, really can do so. As soon as the new system has been put in place, those who have done the ardchúrsa will be on such a register. One will be able to contact any of them in the knowledge they have passed a real, genuine high-level test. While I do not like talking in commercial terms, this pertains to the market and the customers or clients will be able to read the list and find the people they want. Alternatively, a solicitor will be able to get a list of barristers and pick someone from it who is properly qualified do conduct the business in Irish.

Recently, in respect of an issue pertaining to a special area of conservation, my Department needed an ecologist to advise a farmer. There are registered lists of ecologists that are used, for example, by the National Parks and Wildlife Service. They have been recognised by the service as having the requisite qualifications and it is highly useful. One provides it to the farmer who picks one, two or three names and proceeds from there. In a similar way, for the first time ever, there will be a database of people who are competent to conduct business through Irish. Not only will people be available to so do, their identities will be known. This is absolutely vital.

While Connemara is the strongest and biggest Gaeltacht in the country, I can think of a number of solicitors who have extensive practices solely on the basis that they are fluent in the language. Many customers choose to go to them because of their competence and ability to conduct the business in court in Irish. They have created a market niche out of it. These are businesses and people are looking for work. If one has a competitive advantage in the market, one can exploit it quite legitimately. I foresee a development whereby many people will perceive that the ardchúrsa will provide them with a competitive advantage on the market because they will be in a market that others will be unable to access. Heretofore, there was no official recognition of that reality and therefore there was no great spreagadh ann for people to improve their Irish and to try to aspire to be what one might call the A-list.

It is vital that this test will be a real test of competency. While the test will be voluntary, it must be of an extremely high standard. The other point to be made is that many more people are pursuing law degrees and many more people are qualifying as barristers and solicitors than in the past. Another good thing is that many more people who are daily Irish speakers now are getting such qualifications. Therefore, I have no doubt about our ability to supply the market, given my personal knowledge of people who have qualified in law at all levels and in all branches of the law and who would be able to provide such services.

It must be recognised that the Irish language has a constitutional status and there is a legal obligation on the State to ensure that people can exercise their rights in respect of the Irish language. Moreover, further issues were raised in the Official Languages Act. The Act established that it was customer-based in that a person going to court had a right to do business in Irish and the court could in no way penalise him or her for making that choice nor could it impose any cost burden on the person choosing to do business in Irish. I believe that is only right if there are two official languages. It would be ridiculous if a person who chose to take a court case in the first official language of the State suffered a penalty for doing so. Equally, I do not believe a person who chooses to do so in English should suffer a penalty. It should be equal to all. The issue of language choice should be one for the customer, the defendant or the person before the court. It is a citizen's choice issue. That is very important.

The Bill is very significant. It brings a totally new and rational approach to the language in that it returns to the attempt made by the Official Languages Act to facilitate a citizen's choice within reason. I have said previously with respect to the Official Languages Act, from which much of this Bill stems, that if such an Act had not been introduced, the Constitution makes the Irish language the first official language of the State, the national language, and the judgment given by one member of the Supreme Court was that a citizen is entitled to have every service and document through Irish. By my reckoning we now translate a percentage of documents into Irish. That is possible because the provision in the Constitution was used to delimit, by law, the right to documents and other services in Irish. That is specifically provided for in the Constitution but if it is not activated, it does not happen. For the first time ever, that provision was activated and severely limited people's rights to services in Irish.

On the other hand, there is a basic level of documentation services, including court services, to which people are entitled. An attempt was made to ensure not only were these in place in name and as a right, but that they were in place in practice. A compromise or balance was involved. One was to delimit and to be practical, while the other was to establish that the limited service promised would exist in reality when people came looking for it. I see this Bill as complementing that philosophy. There is no point in saying a person can go to court and do business in Irish if, when the person goes there, he or she finds, like Mother Hubbard, that the cupboard is bare in terms of aturnaethe and abhcóidí to do the business.

There are two levels, the basic one of which is that a person can send a document to another person in Irish. I would hope that most solicitors and barristers would avail of the opportunity to have the basic terminology so that they can defend their clients' rights when they get the documentation in Irish. The second level, which I believe will be addressed by the Bill, is that there will be a list of competent solicitors and barristers who have passed the árd léibhéal, a real test which will qualify them to process cases in Irish. That will exist for any citizen in this country who chooses, by citizen's right, to do his or her business in the courts through Irish. I have no doubt this will create a market of its own. Once the provisions are in place, people will know this and will be encouraged therefore to do their business through the Irish language if they are of a mind to do so. They will know it is possible and feasible to access the personnel.

Ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghlacadh leis na Seanadóirí. Sílim go raibh díospóireacht an-mhaith againn inniu. Is Bille tábhachtach é seo. Athraíonn sé cur chuige an Stáit. Tá pointí ardaithe ag na heagraíochtaí Gaeilge. Go deimhin féin, labhair mé leis an tAire, an Teachta Ó Luineacháin, lá amháin nuair a bhí sé mar Aire Dlí agus Cirt, Comhionannais agus Athchóirithe Dlí. Phléamar an cheist seo le hionadaithe ó Chonradh na Gaeilge. Sílim go bhfuil an Bille seo i bhfad níos feiliúnaí do shochaí na 21ú aoise ná mar a bhí an sean-réim.

I gcás coimhlinte dlí idirtheangach i dtaobh na Bunreachta de, tá an tosaíocht ag an nGaeilge. Tá buntáiste mór ag daoine a bhfuil tuiscint scríofa, ar a laghad, acu ar chéard a chiallaíonn an leagan Ghaeilge. Mar a scríobhadh i leabhar an-mhaith mar gheall ar aistriú an Bhunreacht, tá difríochtaí beaga idir an leagan Gaeilge agus an leagan Béarla den Bhunreacht. Is deas an rud é bheith in ann breathnú ar an leagan Gaeilge, é a thuiscint agus an comparáid a dhéanamh leis an leagan Béarla. Is dhá theangacha difriúla iad. Tuigtear dom go bhfuil sé mar an gcéanna san Eoraip. Tá na leaganacha Gaeilge údarásach anois, ó thugadh stádas mar theanga oifigiúil oibre don Ghaeilge san Eoraip. De réir mar a thuigim é, déantar comparáid go minic san Eoraip idir na leaganacha sna teangacha éagsúla. Beidh deis ag abhcóidí agus aturnaetha a bhfuil eolas acu ar an nGaeilge breathnú ar an leagan Gaeilge, comparáid a dhéanamh idir é sin agus aon leagan in aon teanga eile agus argóintí a bhunú ar sin. Mar sin, beidh éileamh ar dhaoine le mion-eolas ar an dteanga. Creidim nach mbeidh lá ar bith díomhaoin acu siúd a dhéanfaidh an t-ard-chúrsa, má tá maith ar bith leo. Beidh éileamh ag daoine ar an tseirbhís seo, ó tharla go mbeidh cinnteacht ann ó thaobh chaighdeáin de.