Parties restate Irish language positions after Trimble interventions

Sinn Fein and the DUP have responded to a former first minister's suggestion for compromise on the key issue stopping the restoration of devolution by simply restating their positions on an Irish language act.
Lord Trimble said that the term Irish language act was now toxicLord Trimble said that the term Irish language act was now toxic
Lord Trimble said that the term Irish language act was now toxic

On Monday the News Letter reported comments from Lord Trimble who said that the phrase ‘Irish language act’ has become “toxic” within unionism but it is “not really sensible” to say there will be no language legislation here when there are statutory minority language provisions in Scotland and Wales.

Sinn Fein’s stance has been to insist that there must be a standalone Irish language act, while the DUP has variously either rejected that entirely or insisted that there must be accompanying legislation to protect Ulster-Scots.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

When asked if Sinn Fein saw any room for compromise on even the naming of the legislation, a party spokesman said: “The vast majority of people, including many unionists, recognise the need for legislative protection for the rights of Irish language speakers.

“David Trimble’s acknowledgment of this, in line with protection available everywhere else on these islands, is welcome advice to which the DUP leadership should pay close attention. An Irish language act is the obvious and appropriate vehicle for Irish language legislation.”

A DUP spokesman reiterated how last August Arlene Foster offered to bring forward legislation “within a time-limited period but the offer was rejected within hours by both the SDLP and Sinn Fein”.

He added: “To move forward in Northern Ireland there must be a fair and balanced settlement. Unfortunately, the most recent talks failed because Sinn Fein wanted a one-sided deal.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

UUP leader Robin Swann said that his party “does not fear the Irish language; we respect the Irish language but we do not believe that there is any need for an Irish language act”.

He said there were sufficient protections under the Belfast Agreement for both Irish and Ulster-Scots, with the creation of language bodies to “take language out of the hands of politicians and avoid the type of conflict we have seen recently”.

He added: “Where we now seem to differ from Lord Trimble is that we believe that the fundamental issue is a lack of respect and tolerance. You can’t legislate for respect and tolerance.”