Filed under Polaitíocht (Politics) …

May 21 2012
2 Comments
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Living Inside The Pale – Or The Contemptible Nature Of Irish Journalism

On June 18th 1994 in the small Irish village of Loughinisland a number of Irish men and women gathered together in their local pub to watch the Irish national soccer team compete in a match against Italy which was being broadcast live from the World Cup in the United States. Encouraged by statements issued by several politicians from the British Unionist community in the North of Ireland condemning ”provocative” public displays of support for the Ireland team by the Irish Nationalist community in the north-east of the country, two gunmen from the British terrorist organisation the Ulster Volunteer Force entered the bar and opened fire with automatic assault rifles. Several people were wounded and six killed outright. They were Adrian Rogan (34), Malcolm Jenkinson (53), Daniel McCreanor (59), Patrick O’Hare (35), Eamon Byrne (39) and Barney Greene (87), the latter the oldest person to die in the northern conflict. Within hours of the attack rumours spread amongst local people, politicians and the press that elements of the then British paramilitary police force in the North, the Royal Ulster Constabulary or RUC, had facilitated the assault by terrorists from their community, allegations which continue to the present day.

Now the Football Association of Ireland (FAI) has announced that it has agreed to a request by family members and survivors of what is known as the Loughinisland Massacre to allow members of the Ireland team to wear black armbands at their match against Italy in their scheduled Euro 2012 game in Poznan on June 18th, the 18th anniversary of the atrocity. Niall Murphy, a solicitor for the families of Loughinisland, has expressed the gratefulness of his clients to the FAI:

“The families are touched that this tragic event can be commemorated on such a poignant day, the 18th anniversary of the atrocity. We would like to thank the FAI and UEFA for their assistance in providing a forum to recall the awful event that took place on that fateful day when Ireland played Italy.”

But what has been the reaction of the “Irish” media to this news? How have our “journalistic” classes responded?

Louis Jacob in the Irish Independent:

“It’s taken me a while to get my head around the FAI’s announcement that the Irish team will wear black armbands against Italy next month to commemorate the Loughinisland massacre in 1994, when six people were shot dead in a bar where they were watching the Ireland v Italy US World Cup game on TV.

I’m sure I’m not the only one who was taken aback.

But even though I know how popular this gesture will be with a large section of the Irish public, to me it smells like cheap tokenism on the part of the FAI.

But what’s worse is that no matter how much you feel for the families of the victims and no matter which way you look at it, the wearing of the black armband brings with it distinct political undertones… undertones which have no place at a major sporting event.

Anyone who believes otherwise should take a long, hard look at the following statement, released by Niall Murphy, solicitor for relatives of the victims of Loughinisland: “We would like to thank the FAI and Uefa for their assistance in providing a forum to recall the awful event that took place on that fateful day when Ireland played Italy.”

The word that alarms me in that sentence is ‘forum’ because a forum is a place where things are discussed. Surely, if it’s a forum they are looking for, then the nature of this gesture should be considered as entirely political.

On Thursday, FAI chief executive John Delaney stated: “I would like to thank Uefa for assisting us in commemorating this atrocity and take the opportunity to remember all those who lost their lives in the Troubles.” I wonder if the victims of Omagh and London and all the other places where innocent people lost their lives will buy this statement? I seriously doubt it.

The FAI should ask themselves if ‘divisive’ is really the business they want to be in.”

Eoghan Harris in the Sunday Independent:

“The FAI is foolish to back the wearing of a black armband to mark the anniversary of Loughinisland. To single out the suffering of one community in Northern Ireland will inevitably be seen as tribal by the other. Put yourself in the shoes of victims of IRA terror, exercise some empathy and you will find your feelings about the armbands are more complex.

The FAI decision dodges a number of serious questions. Why does the FAI single out Loughinisland, apart from the anniversary? Will the FAI facilitate black armbands on the anniversaries of IRA atrocities like Enniskillen, Omagh and the murder of Garda Jerry McCabe?

As my friend Tom Carew points out, June 18 is also the anniversary of the Provo bomb which murdered a Protestant police officer, John Harrison, while he was checking for bombs. Harrison was only 30 and married. Are his widow, his family and friends any less deserving of being remembered by the FAI?”

Brian O’Connor in the Irish Times:

“The depths of inadequacy that allowed human beings walk into a pub in Loughinisland 18 years ago and shoot dead six people watching the Ireland-Italy World Cup match just because they were Catholic can only be guessed at. Remembering the victims is an entirely good thing. The FAI’s decision to commemorate them by wearing black armbands for the Euro 2012 match against Italy next month isn’t.

Also on June 18th it will be 40 years since the IRA planted a bomb in a derelict house in Lurgan which killed three British soldiers. And since this is Ireland, with our nasty, bitter history of sectarian division, an obvious conclusion for those admittedly aching to arrive at it will be that the FAI views one group of victims as more important than another.

In the circumstances the football link is too tenuous. Yes, it’s Italy, and yes, it’s the same date. But this is Ireland. Politically every move is parsed to within an inch of its life.

It’s hard to credit the FAI hierarchy didn’t think of those wider political implications before going to Uefa with the idea. It’s even harder to believe UEFA didn’t twig the precedent being set.”

There is more like this but I’m sure you get the general point. Yet I wonder, has anyone forgotten Iceland in September 6th 1997 when the Ireland team unexpectedly wore armbands at an international match to mark the accidental death of Princess Diana in France, a member of the British royal family? Have you forgotten the reaction of the Irish press pack? Look it up. To say that they were effusive in their praise is to put it mildly.

It would seem then that in the view of the Irish print media some lives are worth more than others: especially if those lives are Irish ones taken at the hands of British terrorists or British soldiers. Then they are utterly without value.

So… you still want to buy that “Irish” newspaper?

Related articles
Tagged , , , , ,
May 20 2012
2 Comments
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Stars Come Out For Scotland

From the Scotsman:

“SOME of Scotland’s “leading stars” will lend their support to the campaign for Scottish independence when it is officially launched this week.

The campaign, to be titled “Yes Scotland”, will try to appeal to a broad church by reaching out to those beyond the SNP.

Friday’s launch is to be held in Sir Sean Connery’s old stomping ground in Edinburgh, prompting speculation that the star, an SNP supporter, will make an appearance to boost Alex Salmond’s cause.

The “Yes Scotland” campaign will begin on Friday at Edinburgh’s Cineworld complex in Fountainbridge, near where Connery grew up. The launch invitation states that “Scots from all walks of life will join some of our leading stars and community and political figures” to sign a “Yes Declaration” setting out why being independent offers the best future for Scotland.

Yesterday, SNP sources refused to disclose who the “leading stars” were but Fountainbridge was chosen over more obvious symbolic sites such as the Bannockburn battlefield or Arbroath Abbey, where Scots noblemen declared Scottish independence in 1320.

On the invitation, Friday’s launch is described as “the start of the biggest community based campaign in Scotland’s history, designed to build a groundswell of support for an independent Scotland ahead of the 2014 referendum”.

Friday will also bring the unveiling of the campaign’s website and official anthem plus contributions from “some of Scotland’s leading cultural figures”. Other prominent SNP supporters and donors have included Sir Brian Souter of Stagecoach and, from the world of films, Brian Cox and Alan Cumming.”

Hmm…

Related articles
Tagged , , , ,
May 19 2012
5 Comments
An Ghaeilge (Irish Language), Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Minding Your Language In Derry

A new survey of local secondary students by Derry City Council has found a fair degree of both use and support amongst pupils from both communities for the Irish language while providing scant evidence for the existence of the so-called Scots-Ulster language (the dialect of English invented by certain fringe elements from the British ethnic minority in Ireland which has contributed, amongst other things, this gem as the official term for children with intellectual special needs: “wee daftie weans”).

None of the children surveyed from either community could speak Ulster-Scots and only a handful of respondents said anyone in their family could speak it either. 88% stated that they had not heard or were unaware of hearing Ulster-Scots in relation to music, 62% said they hadn’t seen Ulster-Scots on road signs, 57 % said they hadn’t seen Ulster-Scots in place names and 56% said they hadn’t seen Ulster-Scots in use by politicians or in any publications. The majority, 55%, believed that Ulster-Scots should not be treated as a language in the same way Irish or English is.

In relation to the Irish language 72% of those who spoke and read Irish came from Irish-speaking families. Meanwhile 64% of all students believed the language was relevant for Roman Catholics and Protestants, another 64% had encountered the Irish language in classes, 46% said they had heard Irish in conversational use, 50% had seen it in use in publications and 35% had seen it on the internet. 84% of all pupils were aware of the influence of the Irish language on people’s names and place names.

I’m awaiting the details of the raw data from the survey and will publish them here when I can.

In the meantime a new website, Connect 3, has been launched by the city council in Derry based on the results of the poll to provide further resources for students and teachers engaging in language learning and training in the region.

Related articles
Tagged , , , ,
May 16 2012
1 Comment
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Cogaíocht (Warfare), Léirmheasanna (Reviews), Leabhair (Books), Polaitíocht (Politics), Stair (History)

History And Counter-History In Ireland – Confronting The Apologist Historians

Just a quick post to highlight Protestant Cork 1911-1926, one of the best resources I’ve seen so far on the issue of the alleged decline in the numbers of Protestants living in the region of Cork City and County in the closing years and aftermath of the Irish Revolution. The reason this issue is so important is because of the claims made in relation to it by apologist historians and journalists on behalf of British rule in Ireland (the misnamed “revisionists”). This site is no simple Irish Nationalist or Republican one but follows a neutral line between both sides in order to maintain objectivity and scholarly standing. Meticulously researched, analytical, and with a host of primary sources both old and new, it is essential reading for anyone interested in this artificially contentious subject.

“It has been claimed that the Irish War of Independence from Britain in Cork turned into an ethnic pogrom driven by fear of mostly Protestant outsiders.

This site shows that the story is far more complex and nuanced that this simplistic view.

The Population declined by 14470 in 15 years, but 10,714 non-Irish-born Protestants lived in Cork in 1911.

Most were military, or government. Has this story been told properly?”

The conclusion is fair and balanced – even to a Republican:

“This article aims to correct our understanding of the issue through using new resources online to improve older research. As much written about this topic has either been incompletely researched, unverifiable, or supposition dressed up as fact, it is difficult to winnow out the fact from the fiction. It has often been necessary to return to the original source to examine its accuracy. To their credit those who have followed standard academic referencing to a verifiable source allowed this process to happen; the unverifiable sources should not be treated as being anything other than hearsay.

The War of Independence was driven by nationalism, and as 1921 continued it descended into the mire of a bloody war of reprisals. While this may revolt some people, and others may question the need for it, the people involved at the time had no idea if they were going to win or lose. If they had known the outcome they may have stayed their hand. Equally, if they had not pursued the savage course they took would the British have offered a truce? Was the impetus for truce the fact that the Ulster Unionists had secured partition? These are the questions that need answering.

The Dunmanway killings are different in that they occurred after independence. The Irish State failed to protect its citizens. No evidence has been produced to suggest that the IRA garrison attempted to leave the barracks and take control of the town, and at the very least this was a dereliction of duty. All we do know for certain is that 16 Protestants, and one Catholic, were shot or disappeared in West Cork over a three day period. Others of both main faiths were shot at or targeted for shooting. We know who shot four of them in Macroom, and we can suspect who may have shot the others. However, there was insufficient evidence to charge anyone with the killings. The murders were denounced by both sides of Sinn Féin, and vulnerable citizens were protected by the local Anti-Treaty IRA. Civilians and military were warned they would be shot if they didn’t hand in all guns to the local IRA commanders throughout the area. The killings resulted in the emigration of a small number of native Church of Ireland and other Protestant members from the county, but the contemporary Protestant sources stubbornly refuse to suggest a sectarian pogrom: Bolshevik certainly, agrarian definitely, nationalist undoubtedly but sectarian exceptionally.

There is no justification for the actual Dunmanway killings. Even if each and every one of the men shot were informers they had been granted amnesty by the Truce. If they had breached the Truce then they should have been brought before a court of law and tried. Whatever the reason for their killings, if the IRA were involved then it was a betrayal of their oath to the Republic. However to use this event to argue that there was a sustained campaign against Protestants because of their religion is not supported by any of the evidence from the time: Protestant, Catholic or Dissenter.

It is important neither to understate nor overstate what happened in the revolutionary period. This was a savage period in Irish history. A vicious war, using methods which eschewed the norms of war up to that point, was fought to a draw in July 1921. This was followed by an even more savage Civil War which led to a complete breakdown of law. Those with property, and known Treaty supporters were most at risk, and ex-Unionists fell into both these categories. The new Irish state did its best to protect all of its citizens, and yet there were appalling atrocities committed. The evidence does not support the theory that Protestants were targeted because of their religion. Historians are entitled to speculate, but in this case has the speculation run away with the story? Is it time to stop this pointless debate, and write true history?”

Some more analysis below.

Niall Meehan:

Irish Political Review, Vol. 27, No. 2, February 2012,  ‘The Further One Gets From Belfast’, a second reply to Jeff Dudgeon

Irish Political Review, Vol. 26 No 11, November 2011,  Reply to Jeffrey Dudgeon on Peter Hart

History Ireland, November-December 2011, Vol. 19 No 6 History Ireland letter on second edition of Gerard Murphy’s The Year of Disappearances

Spinwatch 24 May 2011, Distorting Irish History Two, the road from Dunmanway: Peter Hart’s treatment of the 1922 ‘April killings’ in West Cork

FINAL 16 NOV 2010 1 An ‘amazing coincidence’ that ‘could mean anything’: Gerard Murphy’s The Year of Disappearances

Spinwatch November 2010, Distorting Irish History, the stubborn facts of Kilmichael: Peter Hart and Irish Historiography

Irish Times Monday, October 12, 2009, Sectarian gloss on State’s early years is flawed

Dublin Review of Books, Issue Number 11 – Autumn 2009, Frank Gallagher and land agitation – A response to Tom Wall’s ‘Getting Them Out, Southern Loyalists in the War of Independence’ (drb, Issue 9 Spring 2009)

History Ireland, Vol 17 No 4 July August 2009, A response on use (and non-use) of sources to Professor David Fitzpatrick (TCD)

Irish Political Review, Vol 23, No3, March 2008, After the War of Independence, some further questions about West Cork, April 27-29 1922

Counterpunch, November 11/12, 2006, “The Wind That Shakes the Barley” Sends Revisionists Yapping at History’s Heels

Pádraig Óg Ó Ruairc:
Tagged , , , ,
May 15 2012
Leave a comment
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Polling The Future

Following on from yesterday’s post about the effects of the right-wing policies of Canada’s Tory-led federal government on the separatist-inclined province (or should it now be nation?) of Québec, some more news on recent polls there. With provincial elections in Québec expected before the end of 2013 or earlier, the province’s government, currently in the hands of the federalist (or as we would say, unionist) Liberal Party, may pass into the control of the nationalist Parti Québécois (PQ), albeit with a narrow majority or in coalition with other Francophone groupings in the regional assembly.

However nothing is certain and the turbulence in Québec politics witnessed over the last twelve months has only recently abated. From The Globe and Mail:

““Dogged by student strikes and the looming inquiry into construction-industry corruption, [Liberal Party premier in Québec] Jean Charest is nevertheless in a neck-and-neck battle with the Parti Québécois as the remaining lifespan of his government can be counted in months.

According to ThreeHundredEight.com’s seat and vote projection model, the Parti Québécois currently holds a narrow lead over the Quebec Liberals with 33.1 per cent to 32 per cent support. While this represents a significant gain for both parties since the end of February, with the PQ picking up 3.7 points and the Liberals three, it is a far closer race than was recorded by the polls only a few weeks ago.

Throughout March and the first half of April, the PQ was averaging a lead of almost seven points over the Liberals. A remarkable turnaround after almost a year of being on the brink of catastrophe, the PQ was on track to form the province’s next government with a majority. But with current levels of support, Pauline Marois [PQ leader] would have a tough battle just to land a minority.

François Legault’s Coalition-Avenir-Québec has dropped 6.8 points since the end of February and trails in third with 20.4 per cent support, though some recent polls show that the right-of-centre party might have a little more life left in it.

Québec Solidaire stands at 7.5 per cent while the provincial Greens are projected to have 3.9 per cent support. Other parties, including the hard-line sovereigntist Option Nationale, pull together 3.2 per cent support.

Based on these numbers, the Parti Québécois would likely win 60 seats in the 125-seat National Assembly, putting it three seats short of an outright majority. The Liberals would win 53 seats, down 11 from their current crop of MNAs, while the CAQ would win 10 seats and Québec Solidaire two.

A close result like this has the potential to make for a complicated post-election period. Both the Liberals and PQ could look to the CAQ for support in order to govern, while if the PQ and Québec Solidaire, both left-of-centre sovereigntist parties, managed to win an extra seat or two they alone could command a majority of seats.

Political support in Quebec has swung widely for the last 12 months, ever since the New Democrats demolished the Bloc [Bloc Québécois, the nationalist party at the federal level] and the PQ’s internal troubles sent them on a downward spiral (which only reversed itself earlier this year). The CAQ has gone from the government-in-waiting to also-ran and now to kingmaker status. Through it all, the provincial Liberals have staggered from crisis to crisis. Jean Charest has been waiting for an opportune moment to call an election, but with things so tumultuous in the province there is no telling which way the wind will blow when the next window opens.”

Meanwhile the National Post has some very interesting letters from a host of readers debating the merits, or otherwise, of Québec independence, or the breakup of the Canadian federation if you prefer (thanks to Laurent Desbois for the heads-up and link to the video featured below). Some pretty blunt stuff here, and quite a bit of it spells out the nastiness that lurks underneath the great debate in Canada (particularly it must be said on the federalist or unionist side: that is from Canadian Nationalists), but a few perceptive thoughts too. And here is a familiar one for Irish readers (and now some Scottish ones, too):

“Provided the conditions of the Clarity Act are met, some areas of Quebec may be allowed to secede from Canada. However, the majority of Quebec’s current landmass was added to the province by the British Crown long after New France/Quebec was ceded to Britain by France in 1763. These lands would certainly stay in Canada, as would other regions where federalist votes prevail. The issue is not the separation of Quebec, but its partition.

Michael Peacocke, Ottawa.”

And this:

“I’m not sure that a velvet divorce is in Canada’s future but more in all likelihood would be a rocky divorce. So let’s get on with it as Canada’s and Quebec’s future would best be served just like what happened with Czechoslovakia. Canada should keep the mostly English south shore and Quebec would get Baffin Island in return? Wouldn’t be nice not to be a bilingual (questionable) nation any longer as they will always be 95% socialist and we just 15%.

Charles Steele, Vineland Ont.”

Troubles ahead?

Related articles
Tagged , , ,
May 14 2012
7 Comments
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

The Canadian Right Pushes Away The Québécois Left

There’s a recent article in the Global Post examining the actions of the Conservative Party government in Canada and the fallout from its increasingly unpopular policies, particularly in the autonomous province Québec.  This time last year the nationalist movement in Québec looked like it had taken a major step backwards with the collapse in the vote of the province’s Bloc Québécois (BQ), the nationalist party at the federal level. There were very real worries that this would have a knock-on effect on its sister party, the Parti Québécois (PQ), which operates at the provincial level within Québec itself as it faced its own troubles (many of them down to internal rivalries or debates about the party’s future direction). 

Now things have turned around somewhat after a period of considerable (and at times turbulent) change within Franco-Canadian politics. BQ is no longer looking the spent force some believed (or in the case of Canadian federalists, hoped) it to be, and may be ready for a comeback as some Québécoise voters seem to be already disenchanted with the federalist National Democratic Party (NDP) who they unexpectedly turned to in droves last year, in preference to their traditional BQ loyalties. At a local level some polls are predicting a strong showing for the PQ in expected provincial elections in Québec this year or next, and the target of retaking the government of the province may be back in the party’s sights again. 

Meanwhile the Canadian federal government under right-wing Tory leader (and unapologetic Amerophile) Stephen Harper, celebrating a year in power on the back of a parliamentary majority, is continuing to enact a series of measures that seem almost purpose-designed to aggravate the traditional centre-left and social-democratic impulses of Québec’s population, both nationalist and federalist in nature. 

“Harper celebrated his anniversary with a speech vaunting policies he said will “sustain the economy of tomorrow.” Many in Quebec beg to differ. They see an attempt to remake the country into an austere capitalist bastion, where the interests of Big Oil trump environmental concerns, where “tough on crime” means soft on gun control, and patriotism involves reverence to the British monarchy.

It’s a version of American Republicanism meeting the European welfare state. The difference is that in Canada, the clash involves a province the federal government estranges at the country’s peril — one that has already held two referendums on independence, the last one, in 1995, coming within a few thousand votes of making Quebec a separate country. 

The warning signs are many, some coming from high-profile “federalists” — the term used for those who want to keep Canada united. The most noteworthy is Justin Trudeau, a federal politician from Quebec with the opposition Liberal Party. His father, the late Pierre Elliott Trudeau, was a long-time prime minister and stalwart in the battle for national unity. 

“There is a way of viewing social responsibility, openness to others, a cultural pride here in Quebec that is necessary to Canada,” the younger Trudeau told the public broadcaster, Radio Canada. “And I always say that if I ever believed Canada was really the Canada of Stephen Harper and we were going against abortion and going against gay marriage, and we were going backward in 10,000 different ways, maybe I’d think of wanting to make Quebec a country.” 

The statement made headlines across the country, largely due to Trudeau’s pedigree. He’s also touted as a potential future leader of the Liberal Party, which last ran the country from 1993 to 2006. That ended when Harper first gained power with a minority government. 

Separatist forces in Quebec sang hallelujah, while some federalists were shocked. In a later interview, Trudeau didn’t back down. 

“The separatist option is not the bogeyman it used to be,” he said. “You ask me what the bogeyman is? It’s the one sitting in our prime minister’s chair right now.” 

Quebec’s independence movement grew out of the so-called Quiet Revolution of the 1960s, a period when the province’s French-speaking majority shook off cultural domination of the Catholic Church and economic domination of the English-speaking minority. Since then, support for sovereignty has rarely dipped below 40 percent, and politics have been decidedly left of centre. 

Harper spent years wooing Quebec, recognizing that winning many of the province’s 75 seats in the federal House of Commons has historically been the ticket to majority government. He even passed a law describing Quebec as a “nation” within Canada. 

For almost two decades, Quebecers sent left-wing separatists with the Bloc Quebecois to parliament. Then, in the May 2011 federal election they suddenly gave most of their seats to the federalist New Democratic Party, which has socialist roots. Conservatives won only six seats in Quebec, but formed a majority government by capturing Ontario and the Western provinces. And the clash of visions began. 

Needles to say, Harper’s fascination with the British monarchy — restoring the “royal” designation to Canada’s air force and navy, hanging the Queen’s portrait in federal buildings and celebrating her diamond jubilee — doesn’t go over well in Quebec. It’s a province where license plates read “je me souviens” (I remember) — a reference to England’s 1759 victory against France in a battlefield near Quebec City, which turned Quebec into an English colony. 

The most bitter fight is over Harper’s new crime law, which imposes minimum mandatory sentences and gets tougher with young offenders. Quebec’s government, which prefers to stress rehabilitation and a more lenient approach to young offenders, has been scathing in its criticism. 

“I don’t recognize myself in this Canada,” fumed Quebec’s justice minister, Jean-Marc Fournier, after a recent meeting with his federal counterpart. 

All this is music to the ears of Quebec separatists, already honing their arguments for a provincial election that could come this year. “Quebec no longer exists for Ottawa,” said Bernard Drainville, a key politician with the Parti Quebecois, which held two independence referendums when it was in power. 

Harper’s majority government has only been in power one year. Already, many fear his greatest legacy may be the breakup of the country.”

Related articles
Tagged , , ,
May 12 2012
2 Comments
An Ghaeilge (Irish Language), Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Gay Rights And Gael Rights. Facing Down The Bigots

The Irish Examiner has an editorial, presumably reflecting the newspaper’s official view, which yet again shows the extraordinarily warped reasoning of the anglophone media in Ireland. While justifiably decrying the lack of full equal rights before the law between all citizens regardless of sexual orientation, in particular the right to same-sex marriage, it manages to drag in a whole lot of frankly unrelated issues, in an argument whose logic is beyond stupid.

The greatest irony of the piece is that the writer, while demanding proper legal entitlements for some men and women in this country, is quite happy to trample over the rights of others by attacking the Irish-speaking citizens and communities of Ireland. For be in no doubt: an attack on the Irish language is an attack on those who speak the Irish language. The two are inextricably linked.

“We pretend that Irish is our national language and lavish hundreds of millions a year on trying to revive what is a linguistic dodo. Wasting that money is bad enough, but the time spent in schools pushing an increasingly irrelevant language on disinterested pupils is almost criminal.”

Civil rights for gay men and women in Ireland: as long as they are English-speaking gay men and women? Pathetic, petty-minded bigotry. Those who speak Irish as their language are citizens of this Republic. They are not a non-people, however much some anglophone supremacists may wish it to be so. They are taxpayers too and have every right to access or receive the same resources of the state as their English-speaking peers.

The simple, inconvenient truth is that they do not get the same access or receive the same resources. On the contrary they face a state whose anglophone intolerance is built into the very foundations of the state, with anti-Irish discrimination fully institutionalised within the organs of government, from top to bottom.

Take the words of veteran journalist Pól Ó Muirí in the Irish Times:

“One of the more disturbing aspects of the language debate – or, more often, argument – is the way in which those who have no interest in Irish characterise those who do as “fanatics” or, almost as bad, “enthusiasts”. We speak English, goes the line, and have no need to spend time or money on a “dead” language. (It says much about contemporary Irish values that having two cars, two homes or two holidays abroad is good while having two languages is bad.)

Yet many countries use more than one language. Our nearest neighbours – who were kind enough to, ahem, gift us English – also have native communities of Welsh and Scots Gaelic speakers and other language communities from former colonial holdings. Continental Europe is awash with regional, lesser-used or minority languages – take your pick – and some of the same boast far more speakers than Irish. Those languages speak of a different and older Europe, one that predates the borders of many of the modern states drawn with such finality in the school atlas.

…the next generation of young native speakers could well be the last and that, once they die, Gaeltacht Irish will go with them.

…English is becoming more central to every aspect of Gaeltacht life and that Irish is being pushed out. As a consequence, the opportunities young native speakers have to engage fully with Irish is gravely lessened…”

The era when the LGBT community in Ireland was forced to hide behind closed doors has thankfully long passed. Adult citizens of this republic are legally entitled to live their lives as they wish and with whom they wish. We have a way to go in our general society and culture before sexual orientation is no more noteworthy than one’s hair colour but in time it will happen.

But the Irish-speaking community remains one of second class citizens with second class rights. Discrimination against Irish-speakers in Ireland is not just acceptable – it is positively promoted.

The Irish people, as a nation, have moved beyond the influence of the Roman Catholic Church or of any other faith, and increasingly see the separation between church and state as a necessary component of modern Ireland. Indeed, as simple normality. However when will a  sizeable section of the anglophone media in Ireland, and the public services of this state, move beyond the influence of 800 years of foreign colonial rule? When are they going to think as Irishmen and Irishwomen rather than insipid British clones? Or would they rather remain caricatures of Irishness aping a foreign language and culture, indeed an identity, because they believe it to be superior to their own?

For some the choice is simple. Speak Irish, read Irish, think Irish, be Irish. Or continue to follow the alternative path. Speak English, read English, think English, be English. But the choice is ours to make. All of us. And whether we choose to live in Éire or Ireland we should not be subject to abuse or ridicule for taking one path or the other. We should not, by the choice of the language we use for our name or our address or simply how we communicate, be reduced to the status of lesser citizens.

In that, at least, Ireland’s Gael community has much to learn from Ireland’s Gay community.

Related articles
Tagged , , , , , ,
May 10 2012
3 Comments
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Support Austerity Treaty Says Pat Cox Megarich European Politician. Sorry! I Meant, MEP

Ah, the upcoming referendum on the Austerity Treaty has the Golden Circle all of a-quiver as they face the outside prospect that the Irish citizenry, unruly rump of ignorant proletariat that they are, might have the temerity to say no to our betters in the European Union – and thereby upset the lucrative gravy train for the reborn Redmondite ranks of Fine Gael, Labour, Fianna Fáil and the Greens.

So what hove’s into view but the grandly titled “Alliance for Ireland”. Hooray! But who are they you might ask? Why none other than a collection of the great and the good. Well, not so great, and not so good, but what the hey: loosers can’t be choosers when you’re desperate. And boy do those Pro-Treaty folk reek of desperation.

From the Irish Examiner:

“A clutch of senior GAA figures, including Cork football manager Conor Counihan, his Dublin counterpart Pat Gilroy, and Kilkenny hurling manager Brian Cody, are supporting a yes vote in the fiscal treaty referendum.

They have agreed to be patrons of Alliance for Ireland, a civil society group of political, business, NGO, trade union, and sporting figures campaigning for treaty ratification.

The alliance, whose director is former European Parliament president Pat Cox, launched its campaign in Dublin yesterday.”

Pat Cox? The Pat Cox? Back again, like Lazarus from the dead. Or in his case from a cushy job in Brussels.

“Chairman Brendan Halligan said the alliance was an entirely voluntary one and that its budget would be “under €10,000″.

Mr Halligan, a former Labour general secretary, expressed himself satisfied with the yes campaigns being run by the coalition partners.

Mr Halligan, meanwhile, said that he stood over language in the alliance’s leaflet which referred to members of the no campaign who wanted to stop gay marriage and abortion as “fundamentalists”.”

Funny people these Yes-To-Poverty types but at least they can claim some fame for being on the side that is willing to stand up for the rights of their fellow citizens, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender.

Ooops, the again, it seems not:

“Shabby Seanad antics by Fine Gael, Labour kill gay Bill.

THE sheer spinelessness of the moment was summed-up by the remark: “Would we really be wasting time consulting with the Catholic Church if they could discriminate against black people in this way?”

Fianna Fáil Senator Averil Power was speaking after her bid to end the fear felt by gay teachers and medical staff who can be sacked on the grounds of their sexual orientation was voted down by Fine Gael and Labour in a nakedly cynical move.

Jerry Buttimer may be out but that did not stop his Government colleagues going in to kill a bill aimed at ending official discrimination against gay people working in schools and hospitals under the direction of a religious body.

Ms Power told the Seanad the threat of being fired is very real in an Ireland that is not as liberal as it likes to pretend.

With 92% of national schools under the direction of the Catholic Church, Ms Power revealed she had received numerous letters from teachers, as well as medical staff in genuine fear of losing their jobs.

One, who can only be named as Mary, is too frightened to even socialise with her partner in the town where they live together.

Such matters left Justice Minister Alan Shatter unmoved as he said the Bill needed to go because he was unsure it would “pass constitutional muster”.

While my view that Shatter does not pass ministerial muster would take up a whole different column, his judgment is highly questionable — especially as Senator Power merely asked for the Bill to be put forward to committee stage so that any problems with the wording could be ironed out.

Instead, Fine Gael and Labour killed it — cementing discrimination and fear in our schools and hospitals for at least another 18 months.

Shatter said the delay was needed for “consultations” with the Catholic Church and others.

The move was particularly craven in Labour’s case as it has long advocated getting rid of this clause — and its parliamentary party is made up of so many ex-teachers.

The grand sounding, but impotent bleatings of Labour Education Minister Ruairi Quinn in the Seanad only added to the spineless nature of the occasion.

Fine Gael may have a more hostile, right-wing agenda regarding getting rid of discrimination, but Labour voted the reform down simply because it did not want Fianna Fáil to be able to claim political credit for it.

Labour would rather gay people have to continue to live with prejudice at work because it suits its petty party interest.

It was the same story with the recent United Left Alliance bid to legislate for abortion rights in line with the Supreme Court’s X Case judgement.

Despite there being nothing in the ULA Bill that was not in Labour’s manifesto — not to mention the despair caused by seven successive governments failing to implement the Supreme Court ruling — Labour joined with Fine Gael in throwing out the reform to prevent the opposition getting credit for something Labour has promised, yet failed to deliver.”

The Alliance for Ireland? Or the alliance for another 90 years of the same old crap?

Related articles
Tagged , , , ,
May 10 2012
Leave a comment
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Bad Blood In The Massachusetts Senate Race?

There is a minor firestorm in US politics at the moment (and no, I don’t mean the jaw-droppingly medieval law passed by Christian fundamentalist voters in the state of North Carolina). This particular controversy is swirling around the contest for a US Senate seat in Massachusetts between incumbent Republican Scott Brown and Democratic candidate Elizabeth Warren. The Brown campaign has jumped on media reports that Harvard University advertised Warren as a minority professor in the 1990s due to her alleged Native American heritage. It now turns out that the indigenous American heritage part of the story is actually true and she’s 1/32nd Cherokee (which hardly makes her Wilma Mankiller). However the storm-in-a-teacup shows no signs of abating with all sorts of accusations flying, which, given the bigger picture in Massachusetts and US politics at the moment is more than a little puzzling.

Is it that Elizabeth Warren may have used her very distant and hitherto unpublicised Native American heritage to further her academic career? Or is that she has a Native American heritage in the first place? Read the articles in the regional and national US press and you would think the former. Dig down a little into the right-wing websites and blogs and you would think the latter.

In either case it certainly has the trolls of American cyberdom in fine and fettle form.

Related articles
Tagged , , , , ,
May 10 2012
5 Comments
An Ghaeilge (Irish Language), Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Ignorance Is Bliss

In the Scotsman newspaper columnist Fiona McCade has contributed to the world of journalism one of the most selfish, self-centred, unimaginative and myopically stupid articles I’ve ever had the sorry misfortune to read.

“According to scientists at Pennsylvania State University, between 50 per cent and 90 per cent of the world’s languages will disappear over the next 100 years. They think this is terrible news. I’m not so sure.

Anybody who has tried to learn another language knows that diversity can be overrated, especially when it means you have to learn irregular verbs.

The languages most likely to perish over the next century will be ones spoken by a couple of hundred people.

The big hitters, like English, Spanish and Mandarin Chinese, aren’t going anywhere and to be honest, if everyone on Earth spoke one, two, or ideally all three of these, wouldn’t we get on with each other a whole lot better?”

Not with philistines like you to share the planet with. How any civilized person can greet with happy equanimity the loss of entire languages and cultures from the story of the human race is beyond me.

And how any intelligent person can believe that sharing the same languages will affect how we “get on with each other” is baffling. Has this woman ever read a history book? Ignorance may be bliss but this is just sheer idiocy.

“It’s always worth studying another language – but let it be a useful one.

My husband, who speaks some Manx Gaelic, wants our son to learn Goidelic. If the kid agrees it’s fine by me, but let’s be brutal here, it won’t do him much good outside Scotland and Ireland, will it? And it’s useless for visiting warm, exotic places.”

Is it just me or does this feel a little like voyeurism? It tells me more about Fiona McCade’s personality (and relationships) than I’m really comfortable knowing (“the kid”?). I wonder has she copped that her surname is of Gaelic origin. Probably not. What would the functional utilitarian point of that be?

“If my child’s second language is Gaelic, I’m going to insist on a more globally-beneficial third, like Spanish, which instantly opens up the sunniest country in Europe, almost all of South America and a fair chunk of the southern states of the US.

Also, as I understand it, with Spanish you get Italian almost-free. It’s practically a two-for-one offer.”

She’s going to “insist”? I’m sure she is (shiver…). And learning to speak Spanish means you can “practically” speak Italian, too? Really?

“My main concerns are the sort of environmental changes that cause languages to become extinct. I’d rather we concentrate on saving people and the ecosystems that they are part of, and let the languages look after themselves.”

Are you sure that “saving people” is your main concern? Or are you one of those foofoo environmentalists who would quiet happily move the proposed site of a hydroelectric dam 50 miles up the jungle to inundate a tribal village or two in order to save a particularly pretty flower?

“Diversity is fine, but I think I prefer unity and the things that bring us closer together.”

Closer? In this case: no thank you!

Related articles
Tagged , , , , ,
May 08 2012
Leave a comment
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

The Dragon In The East

The Irish political classes. What a work of man they are. Throughout the 19th century they clung parasite-like to the tail of Imperial Britain, accepting of any humiliation, any degradation, so long as they could line their own pockets, enriching themselves, their families and friends. It all began with Daniel O’Connell, the “Emancipator” himself. A revered figure of Irish Nationalism? The man who corrupted Irish nationalist politics irredeemably while pursuing more power and opportunities to acquire wealth and respectability for his class and “reform” of British colonial rule in Ireland – while not actually wishing to bring it to an end. The man who defended the British system of landlordism in Ireland, who served as an officer in the British Forces when the Irish people took up arms to free themselves in 1798 and 1803, who co-operated in the destruction of the Irish language and culture, who defended the virtual enslavement of Irish children in factories and businesses…

The list goes on and on.

Those political descendants who followed them are cut from the same tarnished cloth. Wrapped in the cover of the Green Flag they have pursued their own sectional interests while using the Irish people as their playthings, beasts of burden to be exploited when need be, wayward savage beasts with which to threaten when things did not go their own way. Corrupt and corruptible their sway ran throughout the 1800s and into the early 20th century until a revolutionary upheaval threw them to one side. But it was not to last. Slowly but surely they snaked their way back into power, the instigators of a civil war where they waded through Irish blood to retake the governance of the Irish people (and not for the first time). Eventually they found another foreign political class and institution to sell out to, a quasi-imperial teat to suckle upon. The European Union gave them a new home, a new source of corruption and sycophancy.

Yet that too wasn’t to last. Always looking for more, the next big make, they sought out international corporations, international finance, anything to fulfil their insatiable lust for more. And now to this.

The Dragon in the East rising above the horizon. But there will be no knights errant riding out to confront the all-devouring worm but greedy village elders ready to sacrifice their young to feed its insatiable hunger in the hope of stealing their own share of the dragon’s gold.

And doesn’t this, from the Guardian, sound all too familiar?

“China’s sacred text is not a holy book like the Torah, the Bible, or the Qur’an. Instead, it is The Art of War by Sun Tzu. Sun’s core belief is that the “ultimate excellence lies not in winning every battle but in defeating the enemy without ever fighting.”

Nowadays, we are witnessing the application of Sun’s ideas in Africa, where China’s prime objectives are to secure energy and mineral supplies to fuel its breakneck economic expansion, open up new markets, curtail Taiwan’s influence on the continent, consolidate its burgeoning global authority, and clinch for itself African-allocated export quotas. (The Chinese takeovers of South African and Nigerian textile industries are good examples of this strategy. The textiles exported the world over by these industries are deemed African exports when in reality they are now Chinese exports.)

…excluding oil, Africa has a negative trade balance with China.

Making matters worse, African exports to China are even less technology-intensive than its exports to the world. China’s share of Africa’s unprocessed primary products was more than 80% of its total imports from Africa. Equally, imports consist of cheap Chinese products of appallingly poor quality.

The level of Chinese FDI flowing into Africa at present is staggering. But this Chinese FDI is bundled together with concessional loans, and there is much double-counting, with the same ventures being recorded both as aid flows and as inflows of FDI. Given the heavy volume of concessionary loans provided by China, concern about African countries’ future debt burden is growing. And no matter how much China publicises its record in Africa, the greatest contributor of financial inflows to the continent is the African diaspora. Indeed, South Africa, not China, is the country making the largest investments in the rest of Africa.

China’s credo of “non-interference in domestic affairs” and “separation of business and politics” is, not surprisingly, music to the ears of African leaders, who fall over each other to sing the praises of Chinese co-operation with their countries. These leaders’ attitudes recall the worst behaviour of their predecessors, many of whom engaged centuries ago with the west’s rising imperial powers to halt the growth of indigenous industry. Instead, these potentates of the past chose to import manufactured goods from Europe in exchange for their own subjects, whom they exported as slaves.

When slavery was abolished, the terms of partnership with western colonisers changed from trade in slaves to trade in commodities. After independence in the early 1960s, during the cold war, they played the west against the Soviet bloc for the same purpose.

Today, many African leaders pursue similar policies with China, which has struck bargains across Africa to secure crude oil, minerals, and metals in exchange for infrastructure built by Chinese companies. Hence, the import of Chinese labour into a continent not lacking in able-bodied workers. Indeed, within a mere decade, more Chinese have come to live in Africa than there are Europeans on the continent, even after many centuries of European colonial and neocolonial rule. With apartheid-style practices – including the gunning down of local workers by a Chinese manager in Zambia – Chinese managers impose appalling working conditions on their African employees.

Today, China has seized control of a huge swath of local African industries, in the process grabbing their allocated export quotas. As China’s global economic role increases, its labour costs will rise and its currency will appreciate, eroding its competitiveness. Might Chinese manufacturers then look to Africa as a base for production, using the facilities they have built and the hordes of workers they have been steadily exporting there?”

Now imagine Ireland in twenty years. How many Chinese colonies, sorry, “trade hubs” will it contain? And how many Irish people will be employed in them? Well, I suppose they will need waiters and cleaners.

Related articles
Tagged , ,
May 05 2012
5 Comments
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Cogaíocht (Warfare), Polaitíocht (Politics), Stair (History)

Bobaí Ó Seachnasaigh

The British version of the Huffington Post, which strangely I’ve always found a wee bit right-wing given its liberal US origins, carries a lengthy article on Roibeárd “Bobaí” Ó Seachnasaigh or Bobby Sands, Volunteer of the Irish Republican Army and elected representative of the people of Fermanagh and South Tyrone in the British Occupied North of Ireland. What’s more extraordinary is its tone:

“”I am standing on the threshold of another trembling world. May God have mercy on my soul.”

With these words, written 31 years ago, Bobby Sands began the hunger strike which culminated in his death after 66 days on May 5 1981.

It was followed by the deaths of nine others who made the same sacrifice: Francis Hughes, Patsy O’Hara, Raymond McCreesh, Joe McDonnell, Martun Hurson, Kevin Lynch, Kieran Doherty, Thomas McElwee and Michael Devine.

Just over three decades on it is perhaps difficult to appreciate the significance of the sacrifice made by Sands and his comrades, which even if you disagree with the aims for which they gave their lives remains a monumental testament to the power of the human spirit.

By the time of his death in 1981 the ‘troubles’ in the Six Counties in the North of Ireland had been raging since the late 1960s, when the Provisional IRA emerged from the failure of successive British governments to reform the sectarian and gerrymandered province, in which the minority Catholic/Nationalist population were regarded as second class citizens, denied the same political and civil rights as their protestant/unionist counterparts.

Young, otherwise ordinary working class Catholics such as Bobby Sands were forced to make a choice between acceptance of a status quo under which they and their families were persecuted, intimidated, and forced out of their homes by loyalist mobs backed up by a bigoted police force, or resistance.

Sands chose the path of resistance and was arrested and imprisoned twice as a result. Upon his second arrest in 1976 he was interrogated, tortured, and sentenced to 14 years in prison in a trial presided over by three judges with no jury. During his first period of incarceration – 1972 to 1976 – Sands had used his time well, immersing himself in books and study groups with his comrades to learn about the history of the Irish liberation struggle, national liberation and anti-colonial struggles throughout the developing world, literature, and the Irish language.

The removal of the political status of the prisoners had begun in 1976 under the then Labour government led by James Callaghan. This was timed to tie in with the construction of the new purpose built Maze Prison just outside Belfast, where both Republican and Loyalist prisoners were to be transferred from the existing Long Kesh Prison Camp nearby and other detention facilities across the province. Margaret Thatcher and the Tories, replacing Callaghan’s Labour government in 1979, were determined to continue the policy of criminalization of Republican prisoners as part of a new offensive against Irish Republicanism in general.

As determined as Sands and his comrades were to see their hunger strike through to the end, Thatcher was equally determined not to budge one inch from the policy of criminalisation. This continued even after Sands was elected as a British Member of Parliament in the midst of his hunger strike in a local by-election, and even in the face of growing international condemnation over the British government’s unwillingness to compromise.

The prisoners had five demands:

1. The right not to wear a prison uniform;
2. The right not to do prison work;
3. The right of free association with other prisoners, and to organise educational and recreational pursuits;
4. The right to one visit, one letter and one parcel per week;
5. Full restoration of remission lost through the protest

The enormity of what Bobby Sands and his comrades who died along with him on hunger strike achieved was reflected in its global impact. Upon Sands’s death, opposition MPs in the Indian Parliament observed a minute’s silence. Protest marches were held against the British government and in tribute to Sands and his comrades.

Following their example, Nelson Mandela led a hunger by prisoners on Robben Island to improve their own conditions. In Tehran the name of the street in which the British Embassy was located was changed to Bobby Sands Street, forcing it to relocate its entrance to avoid the embarrassment of Bobby Sands Street appearing on the letterhead of its stationery and official documents.”

Given the left-wing credentials of the author of the piece, journalist John Wright, perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised but the British media have spent so much of the last 50 years fighting the good fight on behalf of the Pax Britannica in Ireland that its still shocking to see an article telling the truth. And not simply more of the same old lies and propaganda.

Related articles
Tagged , , , , ,
May 03 2012
Leave a comment
An Ghaeilge (Irish Language), Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Gaelic North America


I’ve discussed the popularity of the Irish language in North America before but it’s not the only Gaelic tongue enjoying a renaissance there. In Canada they take their Gaelic heritage, Irish and Scottish, very seriously and in recent years it is the Scottish language that has seen substantial investment by the regional government in the easternmost province of Nova Scotia.

Halifax Newsnet reports that:

“Nova Scotians interested in improving their understanding and use of the Gaelic language will be able to further their study with a new bursary program funded by the government of Scotland and administered by Gaelic Affairs.

The bursary will support five Nova Scotians attending language training in Scotland with travel, meal and accommodation costs. Individual bursaries will be valued at about $3,100.

“Language learning can occur more quickly through immersion and this new bursary program from the Scottish government will provide this opportunity for Nova Scotians,” said Gaelic Affairs Minister Maureen MacDonald. “The province is pleased to help promote the program through Gaelic Affairs and its community partners.”

Recipients will enrol in Gaelic-language study at Sabhal Mòr Ostaig, a national centre for Gaelic language and culture, in Alba, Scotland. They will choose a Gaelic dialect as a focus for their study and interview a native Gaelic speaker of the dialect to learn more about the language and its related cultural customs, practices, values and beliefs.

“With links between Scotland and Nova Scotia so strong, it made perfect sense to open up Gaelic language training in Scotland to a small number of Nova Scotians,” said Scotland’s Minister of Gaelic Alasdair Allan. “I will be delighted to welcome the successful candidates to our shores later in the year.”

Applicants must be at least 18 years old and permanent residents of Nova Scotia to qualify for the bursary.”

Meanwhile The News carries an article on new funding being made available for Nova Scotia’s popular Gaelic College:

“Students attending classes this summer at the Gaelic College of Celtic Arts and Crafts will see a significant improvement to their accommodations.

With $117,667 in funding provided by the federal government, the Gaelic College Foundation is undertaking a number of improvements to the college site to meet the current and future needs of its students and visitors. These include renovations to the residence, construction of new classrooms, indoor stage improvements and upgrades to the outdoor performance centre.

“Our government is focused on jobs and growth and through key investments to help communities build on their strengths, we are supporting local and regional economic development and jobs for Atlantic Canadians,” said Minister of National Defence and Regional Minister for Nova Scotia Peter MacKay, in a statement Monday. “The Gaelic College has a significant impact on tourism in Cape Breton. That’s why we’re pleased to support the college in its efforts to preserve and promote the language, heritage and culture of Nova Scotia’s Gaels.”

The total cost of these enhancements at the Gaelic College is $309,987.”

And now this from the Cape Breton Post:

“The Nova Scotia government is developing a new interactive website to promote and preserve the Gaelic language and culture.

Minister David Wilson says the site will offer samples of local Gaelic dialects, songs, stories, music, dance and customs.

The site is called “An Drochaid Eadarainn,” which means “the bridge between us.””

Related articles
Tagged , , , ,
May 03 2012
Leave a comment
An Ghaeilge (Irish Language), Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Shining A Light On Institutional Discrimination?

Following on from the revelations of serious breaches by a significant number of public bodies in relation to their legal obligations under the Official Languages Act of 2003 (contained in the 2011 Report by An Coimisinéir Teanga), an Oireachtas committee is to bring a number of civil servants before it for questioning. While the deliberate obstruction of the state’s official policy of bilingualism (dating from 2006) by a large group of state employees came as no surprise the levels of illegality shocked many observers. Now the Oireachtas has finally been forced into action after a prolonged period of inactivity and indifference.

RTÉ reports that the committee has stated that:

“Representatives from An Garda Síochána, The HSE, the Depart of Social Protection and National Museum of Ireland will all be asked to appear.

They are also seeking to ask Minister for the Gaeltacht Jimmy Deenihan to discuss with them the failure of his department to oversee the implementation of language schemes in Public bodies.

105 such schemes have been implemented by the Minister since the Language Act was enacted but 72 of these have since lapsed.

Only one new language scheme was confirmed by the Department of the Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht in 2011.

The Irish Language Commissioner Seán Ó Cuirreáin told the joint committee today that he believes a recruitment policy which would discriminate positively with regard to Irish language speakers for a certain period would be a way of overcoming the difficulty the state system has in providing Irish language services and would also save money.

The Language Commissioner also told the Oireachtas committee that he had not been consulted beforehand or since the announcement was made that his office is to be merged with the Ombudsman’s office.”

In the interests of equality between Ireland’s Irish and English speaking citizens and communities let us hope that this is more than mere window-dressing. But I wouldn’t hold my breath if you’re waiting to see real and concrete action being taken against the culture of anglophone supremacism that permeates Ireland’s civil service.

Related articles
Tagged , , , , , ,
May 01 2012
7 Comments
An Ghaeilge (Irish Language), Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Surprise Results For New Irish Language Survey In The North

The northern regional Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL) has published a new study, ‘Public Attitudes towards the Irish Language in Northern Ireland: Findings from the Northern Ireland Omnibus Survey January 2012’. A medium size document (available in PDF format) it lists a number of topics covering a wide area of language usage in the North of Ireland.

Two things stand out immediately. One is the surprising level of support or acceptance amongst those who identify themselves as “Protestants” for the Irish language (14%). However this is also coupled with an attitude amongst “Protestant” correspondents of no firm opinions either way (an unexpectedly high 40%). Barely over half of all “Protestants” surveyed opposed the language outright (54%), considerably lower than expected.

Though the figures should be approached with caution (as with all surveys and polls in the north-east of the country), it does offer some signs of encouragement for the Irish-speaking communities and citizens of the North of Ireland.

The headline details are as follows:

“Of all respondents surveyed:

35% in favour of Irish language usage in the North of Ireland.

29% against.

35% no opinion.

A considerably higher proportion of Catholics than Protestants were in favour of Irish language usage (66% and 14% respectively). However, two-fifths of Protestants (40%) and around a quarter of Catholics (27%) were neither in favour nor against the usage of the Irish language in the North.

44% would like to see and hear more Irish being used in the North of Ireland.

46% would like to see and hear less.

Around three-quarters of Catholics (76%) and a fifth of Protestants (21%) would like to see and hear more Irish being used. Around two-thirds of Protestants (67%) and a sixth of Catholics (16%) would like to see and hear less Irish being used.

56% thought that Irish should be offered as an option on documents, leaflets, notices etc. where other languages are offered.

Three-quarters of Catholics (75%) and just over two-fifths of Protestants (41%) said they would like to see Irish offered as a language option in documents, leaflets, notices etc. where other languages are offered.

24% felt Irish was important to personal identity.

52% felt that it was not important.

23% no opinion.

Around one out of every two Catholics (52%) said Irish was important to their personal identity compared with one out of every twenty Protestants (5%). Almost three-quarters of Protestants (74%) and a fifth of Catholics (21%) said that Irish was not important to their personal identity; while a fifth of Protestants (20%) and a just over a quarter of Catholics (26%) said it was neither important nor unimportant.

49% agreed that Irish is important to regional culture of the North of Ireland.

32% did not agree.

19% no opinion.

Three-quarters of Catholics (75%) and almost three-tenths of Protestants (29%) agreed that Irish is important to culture in the North, while a half of Protestants (50%) and a tenth of Catholics (10%) disagreed. However, around four in every twenty Protestants (21%) and three in every twenty Catholics (15%) neither agreed nor disagreed.

46% disagreed with the statement: “Irish is not relevant for Northern Ireland today”.

32% agreed.

21% no opinion.

Around three in every twenty Catholics (16%) and nine in every twenty Protestants (45%) agreed with the statement “Irish is not relevant for Northern Ireland today”. Just under a third of Protestants (31%) and two-thirds of Catholics (66%) disagreed with this statement, while 24% of Protestants and 18% of Catholics neither agreed nor disagreed.

52% agreed that it is important that the North of Ireland does not lose its Irish language traditions.

26% disagreed.

22% no opinion.

More than eight in every ten Catholics (83%) and almost three in every ten Protestants (29%) agreed that it is important that the North does not lose its Irish language traditions. Four-tenths of Protestants (40%) and under a tenth of Catholics (7%) disagreed, while three-tenths of Protestants (30%) and just over a tenth of Catholics (11%) neither agreed nor disagreed.

42% agreed that Irish makes a valuable contribution to promoting the North of Ireland’s identity overseas.

36% disagreed.

21% no opinion.

Just over two-thirds of Catholics (68%) and a fifth of Protestants (22%) agreed that Irish plays an important role in promoting the North abroad, while around eleven out of every twenty Protestants (54%) and three out of every twenty Catholics (14%) disagreed. There were similar proportions of Protestants (22%) and Catholics (17%) who neither agreed nor disagreed.

24% disagreed with the statement “Irish is only relevant in certain parts of Northern Ireland”.

56% agreed.

18% no opinion.

Around a half of Catholics (51%) and three-fifths of Protestants (62%) agreed that Irish is only relevant in certain parts of the North, while two-tenths of Protestants (20%) and three-tenths of Catholics (30%) disagreed. Similar proportions of Catholics and Protestants neither agreed nor disagreed that Irish is only relevant in certain parts of the North (19% and 17% respectively).

81% agreed that pupils, who wish, should be able to take Irish as a subject at school.

8% disagreed.

10% no opinion.

Around nineteen out of every twenty Catholics (93%) and fifteen out of every twenty Protestants (73%) agreed that those pupils, who wish, should be able to study Irish at school. The same proportions of Protestants disagreed and neither agreed nor disagreed (13%). For Catholics, the respective proportions were 2% and 6%.

53% agreed that there should be more opportunities for people to learn Irish across the North of Ireland.

20% disagreed.

26% no opinion.

Almost four-fifths of Catholics (79%) and over a third of Protestants (35%) agreed that there should be more opportunities for people to learn Irish across the North, while 30% of Protestants and 6% of Catholics disagreed. However, amongst Protestants, similar proportions agreed, disagreed and neither agreed nor disagreed that there should be more opportunities for people to learn Irish across the North (35%, 30% and 34% respectively).

41% agreed that the use of Irish should be supported and encouraged throughout the North of Ireland.

35% disagreed.

23% no opinion.

Almost three-quarters of Catholics (74%) and less than a fifth of Protestants (18%) agreed that the use of Irish should be supported and encouraged throughout the North. Over a half of Protestants (54%) and a tenth of Catholics (10%) disagreed, while 27% of Protestants and 16% of Catholics neither agreed nor disagreed.

The most frequently cited factor that would encourage more use of Irish was: “More opportunity to study Irish in schools and further education” (18%).

Approximately five times the proportion of Catholics than Protestants agreed that more should be done to encourage and promote Irish in the North (71% and 14% respectively). Around eleven out of every twenty Protestants and two out of every twenty Catholics disagreed (56% and 9% respectively). Two-tenths of Catholics (20%) and almost three-tenths of Protestants (29%) neither agreed nor disagreed that more should be done to encourage and promote Irish in the North.

When shown a list of nine elements which are contained in language acts in other jurisdictions, 52% selected at least one that they thought should be included in an Irish Language Act in the North of Ireland.”

The survey also contains some interesting comparisons between public attitudes towards Scottish (Scots Gaelic) in Scotland and Irish in the North of Ireland:

“Some of the same questions were asked in a similar type of survey on attitudes to the Gaelic language in Scotland 2011 (West and Graham, 2011). Therefore, comparisons can be made between the attitudes towards Irish in Northern Ireland and towards Gaelic in Scotland. The respondents in Scotland were more in favour of the usage of Gaelic than the respondents in Northern Ireland were in favour of the usage of Irish (51% and 35% respectively).

The biggest differences between attitudes to Gaelic in Scotland and to Irish in Northern Ireland were in relation to the importance to their country’s culture and traditions. Over three-quarters of the Scottish respondents (77%) felt that Gaelic is important to their country’s culture while just under a half of the Northern Ireland respondents (49%) felt the same way about Irish. Similarly, four-fifths of the Scottish respondents (81%) agreed that it is important that Scotland does not lose its Gaelic traditions whereas just over a half of the Northern Ireland respondents (52%) had similar views about Northern Ireland’s Irish traditions.

Similar proportions of respondents in Northern Ireland and Scotland believed that Irish and Gaelic respectively are important to their personal identity (24% and 22% respectively). In addition, similar proportions from the two countries thought that the respective language is not relevant.”

More analysis later.

Related articles
Tagged , ,
Apr 30 2012
14 Comments
An Ghaeilge (Irish Language), Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Scotland Moves Forward – While Ireland Goes Into Reverse

In Ireland a significant number of government departments and other public bodies, along with many public officials, have spent much of the last decade actively opposing the nation’s Official Languages Act of 2003, a piece of legislation introduced eighty years after independence with the objective of ensuring some form of limited equality for Irish-speaking citizens with their English-speaking peers when accessing state services and resources. As the 2011 report by An Coimisinéir Teanga on the workings of the Languages Act has revealed, the institutional discrimination towards Irish-speakers in our culturally English civil service is as virulent as ever.

In Scotland they have their own problems trying to gain equality and respect for their indigenous Gaelic tongue, in the form of the Scottish language, but the willingness of much of the body politic in Scotland to support the Gaelic Language Act of 2005, particularly the governing Scottish Nationalist Party under Alex Salmond, has led to an increase in the social and cultural standing of Scottish-speakers. Though there is still far to go before true equality and equal access to the resources of the state is reached it is a promising start. But just a start.

Along the way there must be more actions like this one, reported by the Stornoway Gazette:

“Sabhal Mòr Ostaig’s Gaelic Language Plan, which was recently published, aims to further promote and strengthen Gaelic in every area of the work and operations of the college, which is the National Centre for Gaelic Language and Culture.

Sabhal Mòr, along with a number of other colleges and universities, was asked by Bòrd na Gàidhlig to prepare a plan under the auspices of the Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005. The Plan was created by the College’s Language Development Officer, Janni Diez, and other college staff who are expert in the field of language development and planning.

It builds on the College’s Language Policy and strengthens Gaelic usage among students and staff at the College. The Plan increases the already-strong status of Gaelic at the college, and will enable Sabhal Mòr to introduce projects and initiatives which will encourage even greater use of Gaelic in a variety of settings and situations.

Bòrd na Gàidhlig Ceannard (CEO), John Angus MacKay, said: “Bòrd na Gàidhlig congratulates Sabhal Mòr Ostaig on the publication of its first Gaelic Language Plan. This is another significant milestone in our journey to achieving the aim of the Gaelic Language Act of seeing the status of the Gaelic language as an official language of the whole of Scotland, commanding equal respect to the English language.

The plan was submitted to Bòrd na Gàidhlig for approval last year following a public consultation where people could submit opinions on the plan. The plan will last five years before being reviewed.

A copy of the Gaelic Language Plan can be viewed at: website”

Following on from earlier news about the petty discrimination faced by some Scottish speakers this report is particularly welcome.

Related articles
Tagged , , , , ,
Apr 30 2012
2 Comments
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Éamon Ó Cuív – Republican Dissident?

Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin in government together? Something surely to send the Seoníní elite at the Irish and Sunday Independent newspapers into a bug-eyed frenzy of outrage and opposition to a new “Pan-Republican Front”. Yet here is Éamon Ó Cuív in the Oirish Mail on Sunday:

“Éamon Ó Cuív has called for Fianna Fáil to consider coalition with Sinn Féin in a move that would reunite the parties split by his grandfather, Éamon de Valera.”

Did Éamon de Valera split the revolutionary era Sinn Féin? I thought it was the Pro-Treaty faction who split from Sinn Féin and formed Cumann na nGaedheal, the forerunner of Fine Gael, in 1923? Oh well. History and journalism in Ireland doesn’t really go together. Er, Irish history that is.

“Mr Ó Cuív insisted that Sinn Féin’s recent history would not be a problem, declaring: ‘They’d be as acceptable as were the Workers’ Party, which now runs the Labour Party.

‘They have a bit of history and one of them is Tánaiste now,’ he said, referring to Éamon Gilmore’s past as a Republican Clubs [Official Sinn Féin/Official IRA] and Workers’ Party member before Democratic Left merged with Labour.

However, Mr Ó Cuív acknowledged that there would be major ideological and policy differences.

Asked if a coalition with Labour remained a possibility, Mr Ó Cuív was dismissive.

‘I don’t think Fianna Fáil are compatible with Labour at all. The one time we were in with them it didn’t last long. I don’t think we’re compatible with Fine Gael either,’ he said.

‘What’s the difference between Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin when it comes down to it – except that it took them 70 years to recognise the Dáil? We’re both republican parties and we both come from the same stable.’

Fianna Fáil has 19 seats in the Dáil and Sinn Féin has 14. The Fine Gael-Labour Government has an overwhelming majority.

However, Sinn Féin surged in the most recent polls – to 21% – on the back of its opposition to the water and household charges and the coming referendum.”

Flag flying by Ó Cuív on behalf of the few Republican dissidents left in a political party that has all but divested itself of any pretence of Republicanism? Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin in coalition? Unlikely (and given the ferocity of Micheál Martin’s continued – and increasingly anti-historical - attacks on SF he certainly believes so) but a breakaway faction of FF under Éamon Ó Cuív?

Or is Ó Cuív lining himself up for a tilt at the leadership of Fianna Fáil itself, with an appeal to grassroots that are considerably greener than the party’s elected representatives? He seems to have a vision for the future of FF; and its not just one of crude survival and precious little else.

Related articles
Tagged , , , , ,
Apr 25 2012
3 Comments
An Ghaeilge (Irish Language), Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Institutional Discrimination In The Irish State – The Culture Of An “Anglophone Stormont”

If you’ve been wondering just exactly why the Fine Gael – Labour coalition government seems so utterly determined to scrap the office of An Coimisinéir Teanga or the Language Commissioner, despite a torrent of criticism and opposition both at home and abroad, read on. Seán Ó Cuirreáin has released his 2011 Annual Report on the adherence to the regulations governing the Official Languages Act of 2003 by public and state-funded bodies throughout Ireland, and it has proved yet again to be an absolute indictment of continued institutional discrimination within the Irish state towards the nation’s Irish-speaking citizens and communities.

“The year 2011 was a busy and eventful one for the Office of An Coimisinéir Teanga.

At the same time, my Office laid two special reports before the Houses of the Oireachtas with regard to cases where public bodies had breached their statutory language obligations but then failed to implement the commendations made to ensure compliance. The organizations involved – the Health Service Executive and the National Museum of Ireland – did not appeal to the High Court against the decisions reached in the relevant investigations, but they did not implement the recommendations made by the investigations. This was the first time since its establishment that my Office had to take such action.”

This relates to serious breaches of the Official Languages Act by two branches of the civil service, both of which astonishingly continue to flaunt the law despite being publicly named and shamed before Oireachtas Éireann. The absolute arrogance of elements of the Irish civil service in relation to their legal obligations when it comes to Irish is breathtaking.

“During the year, my Office dealt with 734 cases of difficulties or problems accessing state services through Irish – the largest number of complaints from the public to the Office since its establishment. This represented an increase of 5% on the number of cases in the previous year.

Particular significance attaches to an investigation which found that An Garda Síochána stationed a substantial number of members of the force, who did not speak Irish, in the heart of the Donegal Gaeltacht in breach of statutory obligations. Only one of the nine Gardaí stationed in the parish of Gaoth Dobhair spoke Irish. This occurred at a stage when the status of Irish as a community language in the Gaeltacht is more vulnerable than at any time in the past. The State can hardly expect the Irish language to survive as the language of choice of Gaeltacht communities if it continues to require people in such areas to carry out their business with the State through English.”

If one had any queries on the status of the Irish language in modern Ireland it’s place is made quite clear by the fact that in 2011 An Garda Síochána, our national police service, continued to provide non-Irish speaking Gardaí or police officers to serve in Irish speaking communities. One is left wondering if anything has changed since the days of the Royal Irish Constabulary, the former British colonial police force in Ireland?

“As a result of two other investigations it was found that the Department of Social Protection failed to correctly award bonus marks for competence in Irish and English in internal promotion competitions. The system, which is in operation since 1975, was set up as a replacement for ‘compulsory’ Irish, and it was designed to ensure that Irish-speaking staff would be available at all grades in the Civil Service. The Department of Social Protection did not appeal the decision of the investigation to the High Court, but neither did it implement the recommendations. That in itself is a matter of concern but the situation is made worse by the knowledge that the practice of failing to award bonus marks correctly is common throughout the Civil Service.

If bonus marks are not awarded for proficiency in the two official languages in internal promotion competitions at a time when little recruitment is taking place in the Public Service and at a time when the work of Gaeleagras, the Irish language training body for the Public Service has been all but terminated, it is very difficult to see how the quantity and quality of state services through Irish could be improved.”

Again, what is this but institutionalised discrimination and the determination of anglophone supremacists within our state services to remove Irish as a language of government?

“In 2011, my Office continued a programme of detailed audits of public bodies in order to monitor compliance with the provisions of the Official Languages Act. The monitoring capacity of the Office was mainly focused on the implementation of language schemes. It is clear from the completed audits that the majority of public bodies do not succeed in fully implementing all commitments given in their language schemes within the lifetime of the schemes. Often, the commitments that are not implemented are the very ones most likely to be of benefit, such as the availability of Irish language versions of websites and online services and interpersonal services in Irish.”

Do people understand what is happening here? This is deliberate and wilful criminality by sections of the civil service. These are public officials who have abrogated to themselves the right to ignore the law. Indeed to act outside it.

There then follows one of the most condemnatory parts of the entire report:

“The system of language schemes is at the very heart of the legislation and we rely on the language scheme system to improve the quantity and quality of much of the services provided in Irish by public bodies.

During 2011, the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht confirmed only one new language scheme.

In total, 105 language schemes have been confirmed by the Minister to date, but by the end of 2011, 66 of these had expired. This means that no second scheme has been confirmed for two thirds of public bodies, a development that would have increased the supply of services through Irish that could be expected from those public bodies.

At least 20% of the language schemes had expired for more than three years and a further 20% for more than two years.

The following were among the public bodies whose language schemes had expired for long periods at the end of 2011: the Office of the President (three years and eight months), the Arts Council (three years and six months), Office of the Ombudsman (three years and six months), the Courts Service (three years and five months), Galway County Council (three years and four months), the Revenue Commissioners (three years and three months), and the Department for Education and Skills (three years and one month).

In addition to the above, 28 other public bodies had been asked to prepare a first draft scheme but by the end of 2011 these schemes were still not confirmed by the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht. In the case of ten of those, more than five years had elapsed since they were initially asked to prepare a draft scheme, in two other cases four and a half years had elapsed. It is of particular significance that four years and seven months had elapsed since the HSE was requested to prepare a draft language scheme; this is an organisation with very close ties to the community and where almost a third of public sector employees work. It is almost three years since An Post was asked to prepare a draft language scheme and more than two years since the Office of the Houses of the Oireachtas, RTÉ and the National Roads Authority were asked to prepare schemes.

By year end, no language scheme had been confirmed for the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, which was formally established on June 1st 2011.

Last year’s statistics show that matters have undoubtedly been allowed to slide out of control and that the system for the confirmation of language schemes appears now to have failed completely. I regret to say that I am of the opinion that it will prove next to impossible to re-establish confidence in that system.”

Considering that the language schemes were regarded as the minimal method for implementing some form of limited equality between the nation’s Irish and English speaking citizens in the eyes of the state, the decision by large sections of the state to conspire to deny those rights by simply refusing to implement full or adequate language schemes is a scandal. Furthermore the hundreds of complaints by Irish citizens in relation to discrimination at the hands of public servants or other breaches of the law by public bodies come from right across the country, 79% from outside the Gaeltachtaí or Irish-speaking regions, with 50% in Dublin alone (an increase of 9% from 2010).

What is required by the Irish state, and the civil service that comprises so much of it, before it will recognise and accept the right of Irish-speaking citizens, Irish men, women and children to full equality under the law with their English-speaking peers? When will the culture of an “Anglophone Stormont” in our public institutions be faced head on?

After 90 years of waiting, and some might say centuries of waiting, what will it take for equality between Irish Ireland and English Ireland to be reached in our lifetimes?

Or do the Irish-speaking citizens of this nation need their own Derry March of 1968 or their own Burntollet? Will it take a Gaeilgeoirí Battle of the Bogside before anyone will take notice?

There is more information on this at Galltacht – The Hidden Ireland.

Related articles
Tagged , , , , ,
Apr 24 2012
8 Comments
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Québec Independence – Only A Matter Of Time?

Two fascinating reports today on the independence movements in Québec and Scotland and the effect both are having on each other. The first article is from The National Post:

“Former Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff says Quebec “eventually” will become an independent country and that a victory for Scottish separatists in an expected 2014 referendum will launch a new effort by Quebec nationalists to fulfil their sovereignist dream.

Ignatieff, an author and academic who left the Liberal leadership after his party was badly beaten in the 2011 election, made the comments in an interview being broadcast Monday on BBC Scotland.

He also said Quebec and the rest of Canada have little to say to each other and that the two already are “almost” separate countries.

Ignatieff told BBC Scotland that devolution of central powers, whether from London to Edinburgh or from Ottawa to Quebec City, likely will be only temporary.

“It’s a kind of way station. You stop there for a while, but I think the logic eventually is independence — full independence,” Ignatieff said in an interview in his home last month.

Asked by interviewer Glenn Campbell if he was referring to Quebec as well as Scotland, Ignatieff replied: “I think eventually that’s where it goes.”

The only area where “the union still holds together” is in fiscal and monetary policy, he said.

“But the problem here is we don’t have anything to say to each other anymore,” he added. “There’s a kind of contract of mutual indifference which is very striking for someone of my generation.”

Noting that he speaks French, Ignatieff said he couldn’t imagine Canada without Quebec.

“But that’s not the way most English Canadians now think of their country. They might have done 30 or 40 years ago when we thought we could live together in this very strange hybrid country called Canada.

“Now effectively . . . we’re almost two separate countries. Although Quebec does not have sovereignty it acts domestically almost as if it did, and that I think has produced this strange reality that I don’t think most Canadians I’m thinking of are happy about.”

Ignatieff, describing the United Kingdom as one of the oldest multinational states in the world, said a ‘yes’ vote for independence in Scotland will have reverberations around the world.

“I think if Scotland goes independent a lot of other smaller nations in Europe will start accelerating their quest for independence,” singling out national minorities in Spain and Belgium.”

Meanwhile the BBC is reporting that the:

“…SNP has sought advice from Quebec nationalists ahead of the referendum on independence for Scotland.

The SNP’s Westminster leader, Angus Robertson, travelled to Canada last summer to consult key figures in the Parti Québecois, which wants independence for the province.

The Quebec nationalists have fought and lost two referendums.

The last one was in 1995, where they fell just 53,000 votes short.

The SNP is keen to learn lessons to help the party win in 2014.

Two former premiers of the province say they were consulted, but it is not just the SNP which is drawing on the Quebec experience.

A senior Downing Street adviser also visited the dominion as the UK government considered its response to plans for a vote on Scottish independence.”

Related articles
Tagged , , , ,
Apr 23 2012
4 Comments
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Native Americans – Trapped In The USA

Unexpected but welcome news in the Guardian as a United Nations (UN) committee is about to carry out an investigation into the treatment of the citizens of the Native American nations within the United States of America.

“The human rights inquiry led by James Anaya, the UN special rapporteur on indigenous peoples, is scheduled to begin on Monday.

Many of the country’s estimated 2.7 million Native Americans live in federally recognised tribal areas which are plagued with unemployment, alcoholism, high suicide rates, incest and other social problems.

The UN mission is potentially contentious, with some US conservatives likely to object to international interference in domestic matters. Since being appointed as rapporteur in 2008, Anaya has focused on natives of Central and South America.

A UN statement said: “This will be the first mission to the US by an independent expert designated by the UN human rights council to report on the rights of the indigenous peoples.”

Anaya, a University of Arizona professor of human rights, said: “I will examine the situation of the American Indian/Native American, Alaska Native and Hawaiian peoples against the background of the United States’ endorsement of the UN declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples.”

Apart from social issues, US Native Americans are involved in near continuous disputes over sovereignty and land rights. Although they were given power over large areas, most of it in the west, their rights are repeatedly challenged by state governments.

Most Americans have little contact with those living in the 500-plus tribal areas, except as tourists on trips to casinos allowed on land outside federal jurisdiction or to view spectacular landscapes.

Anaya is originally from New Mexico and is well versed in Native American issues.

He will visit Washington DC, Arizona, Alaska, Oregon, Oklahoma and South Dakota, and will conclude his trip with a press conference on 4 May. He will present his findings to the next session of the UN human rights council.”

Following on from a period of unprecedented rapprochement between the indigenous peoples of the US and the government in Washington under President Barack Obama, this is a very promising development, even at this most partisan of times in American politics. However even a casual examination of the facts on the ground shows how truly abysmal life is for the vast majority of Native Americans in the “Reservations” (itself a terrible and all too revealing word: wild animals are kept in reservations not human beings). It is difficult to see how this can change without a radical transformation in the political and judicial fortunes of each of the individual Tribal Nations in relation to the United States.

Related articles
Tagged , , , , , ,
← Older posts
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 356 other followers