Open letter regarding Gaelic community development and the Scottish Languages Bill
To: Kate Forbes MSP (Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Gaelic). Jenny Gilruth MSP (Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills) and all Members of the Scottish Parliament.
A chàirdean,
We are heartened by the recent remarks by the Deputy First Minister that she is considering strengthening the provisions for areas of linguistic significance (ALS) in Section 4 of the Scottish Languages Bill. We also greatly appreciate the increased funding for Gaelic in the last budget.
However, we are concerned that the Bill as it stands does not sufficiently clarify how areas of linguistic significance will operate in practice. In particular, we risk missing an opportunity to put Gaelic community development on a firmer footing in terms of policy and institutional frameworks, resourcing, and empowering local leadership.
The BBC’s recent report on Shawbost in Lewis last week highlighted the crucial importance of local community language plans and language development officers working in the community, and the damage done when support is cut to these schemes.
The lack of a robust statutory basis and institutional framework for community language planning is a clear weakness in current public policy for Gaelic. If this is not addressed in the Scottish Languages Bill, it is likely that Gaelic community development will continue to be the poor relation of more established and better-resourced areas of Gaelic policy such as education and broadcasting.
As highlighted at Comunn na Gàidhlig’s recent conference, community development work is critical for boosting Gaelic use in families and among young people, alongside Gaelic medium education. This is important both in Gaelic heartland areas in the islands and in other parts of Scotland with significant concentrations of Gaelic speakers and Gaelic educational and cultural activity.
In its initial consultation document for the Scottish Languages Bill, the Scottish Government referred to ‘the potential to create local community Plans’. Furthermore, in the policy memorandum which accompanies the Bill, the Government notes that ‘[a] number of pilot initiatives are in place, in areas such as Staffin and South Uist, where groups in local areas are working together with the support of Bòrd na Gàidhlig to articulate their language planning needs and strategy for their local areas’. The document claims that areas of linguistic significance ‘will contribute to and consolidate these local initiatives’.
However, nothing in the Bill explicitly indicates how areas of linguistic significance will interact with community language plans and community organisations.
A step in the right direction is provided in an amendment to Section 6 of the Bill added at Stage 2 which lists ‘community planning’, ‘community development’ and ‘economic development’ as matters which must be addressed in ‘standards and requirements relating to promoting the use of the Gaelic language’ issued by the Scottish Government. However, these standards will apply to public bodies (such as councils, health boards, and Bòrd na Gàidhlig) and will not necessarily provide for more localised language development.
Furthermore, the Bill does not address the geographic extent of areas of linguistic significance. This is a particularly significant issue in the Western Isles, where the Comhairle has already indicated that it intends to designate the whole of its territory. This is very much to be welcomed, but we believe it would be appropriate to designate multiple areas of linguistic significance each with a local community language plan, overseen by a local community organisation and language development officer. In effect this would consolidate the existing network of language officers and the pilot initiatives referred to above, and give their work increased status and sustainability.
One potential model is the statutory language planning system in Ireland introduced in 2012. This breaks up the Gaeltacht (Irish-speaking heartlands) into multiple language planning districts (many of them contiguous), as well as allowing for the designation of areas outside the Gaeltacht as Irish language networks. Under this system, 47 community language plans are currently in operation across Ireland in both rural and urban areas, providing a wealth of practical examples of best practice in addition to an institutional framework which could be adapted to the Scottish Gaelic situation.
Any system for community language planning should also work in close co-operation with Comunn na Gàidhlig’s Gaelic youth initiatives, as well as the Gaelic centres operating or in development in Stornoway, South Uist, Inverness, Glasgow, Edinburgh and elsewhere.
It should be stressed that these proposals are intended to complement the other functions intended for areas of linguistic significance, and are not opposed to them.
We look forward to further engagement with you on these matters ahead of Stage 3 of the Bill.
If you would like to add your name to the letter, please do so here: change.org/scottishlangua
We are supported only by our readers. We don't have corporate backers and we don't take advertising, so we rely entirely on your support.
Help to support independent Scottish journalism
What a fine contribution to the debate. It recognises strengths in the proposals and then identifies areas where it feels strengthening is needed, making plausible proposals exemplified by references to various places in the Gaeltacht.
What a refreshing change from the sourly negative and unconstructive countering of the unionist parties, especially ‘Scottish’ Labour which has not had a positive thought in 20 years. Their contempt for Scots and Scottish culture is almost palpable.
good points but any plan for language has to be at least 40 years to be honest, and overlapping is a set of 3 to 4 cycles, so a 120 to 160 year process. It can’t be separated from social policy in regards to support in housing or outreach to culturally dispossessed communities of Scotland. and has to have a economic and social policy that facilitates it’s progress, I put a more detailed version of this process to the public consultation led by the Scottish government a few years back, it also has to involve the diaspora, as this process is critical in any real progress for decolonisation of Scotland and areas colonised by descendants. it has a big scope, but it has to also walk a a political tightrope. Fortunately Gaelic has a great deal of goodwill behind it now among the Scottish public and beyond the independence movement, as well as internationally, so it’s time to capitalise on this feeling.
Well said Stuart, I agree completely. We are in the process of social cleansing in terms of the rural housing crisis and any language plan needs to be strategic and integrative.