Hansard

Bob Irvine has been called away on other business and is unable to attend. Thank you for inviting us to give evidence on the Gaelic Language (Scotland) Bill. I will make an opening statement that I hope will amplify, to an extent, the comments in the submission that I sent to the committee in November. From the evidence that the committee has heard so far, it is evident that there is widespread support for a more secure future for the Gaelic language in Scotland. I state unequivocally that that is my aim, both personally and as a minister. Reports that I have read indicate that there is support for a Gaelic language bill. However, notwithstanding the considerable support that there is for the bill, which I acknowledge, there are some reservations about it. I want there to be no doubt that I believe the Gaelic language in Scotland has official recognition and official status. Several points signify that. I am appearing before the committee as the first Cabinet minister with responsibility for Gaelic. I say that in all modesty, as I am speaking about the post, not the person. To an extent, the post may be responsible for the progress that has been made on Bòrd Gàidhlig na h-Alba—the Gaelic language board. Further evidence of official support within the Executive for Gaelic is found in the establishment of Bòrd na Gàidhlig, which has conferred significant status on and recognition of the language and culture. I can produce more evidence to support that claim; I will refer to some of that evidence directly and to other parts of it in response to questions. The subject of secure status for Gaelic has generated much discussion and debate. A wide-ranging and ambitious paper produced by Comunn na Gàidhlig in 1999, entitled "Draft Brief for a Gaelic Language Act", which is often referred to, outlined what a language bill might contain. It is fair to say that if we measure the provisions of the Gaelic Language (Scotland) Bill against the proposals outlined in the paper, they fall short of expectations in some respects. However, if we measure the action taken by the Executive against those same proposals, we can demonstrate considerable achievements. I will not detail those achievements, but there is evidence that we have delivered on several of the proposals, such as access to Gaelic-medium education, support for Sabhal Mòr Ostaig and Bòrd na Gàidhlig and developments in Gaelic broadcasting. As the committee knows, the first meeting of Bòrd na Gàidhlig took place in Glasgow last week. I was pleased to attend and to wish Duncan Ferguson and the board members every success in their work. That meeting demonstrates significant additional status for and recognition of the language because it represents the formation of a non-departmental public body, or quango, when there is a clamour for them to be disbanded and when many are being disbanded. I had to win that argument with Cabinet colleagues and, based on support for Gaelic language and culture, I am pleased to say that I did so.Those were last week's developments. Yesterday, as many members will have seen in today's newspapers, the Executive gave approval for the deployment of bilingual Gaelic/English road signs in the Highlands. That decision will make a positive contribution to the Executive's Gaelic language policies and will supplement the efforts that are being made already.I asked my civil servants to prepare for the committee a list of achievements and successes since the formation of the Parliament in 1999. They supplied me with a list of 16, but members will be glad to know that I will not go through them all. The list ranges from the establishment of Bòrd Gàidhlig na h-Alba to the opening of the Glasgow Gaelic School, which is outgrowing its premises as a result of the continuing upward trend in the number of children being taught in Gaelic-medium education at pre-school, primary and secondary level. The list also includes the publication of "An Leabhar Mòr"—the "Big Book of Gaelic"—and the establishment of Ionad Chaluim Chille—the St Columba Centre on Islay, which I was proud to open last August. In addition, Sabhal Mòr Ostaig was honoured with a Queen's anniversary prize, and the Scottish Parliament has appointed a second Gaelic officer.Those achievements are indications of the extent to which progress has been made since the establishment of the Parliament. Some people ask what difference the Parliament has made—if anyone wants to see 16 differences that it has made to the Gaelic language, I would be happy to make the list public.I repeat my comment—I accept that it will be seen as controversial in some quarters—that the Gaelic language has official recognition and status. I also repeat that the Executive has delivered in the ways that I outlined.Let me highlight some of the Executive's difficulties with the bill. Since I wrote to members outlining our reasons for not supporting the bill, others have given evidence to the committee. I have not read all the evidence in detail but I note that various groups have expressed reservations about the bill.Gaelic is available at all levels of education, with improved resources and materials that were allocated in this financial year, and is included in the framework of national priorities in education. The Executive monitors and measures the extent to which education authorities respond to parental demand for Gaelic. Those measures were secured through legislation, and I understand that, with one or two exceptions—largely due to the remoteness of the schools concerned—there is no evidence that parents who want their children to be educated in Gaelic-medium schools have been disappointed. I want the number of children in Gaelic-medium education to increase. I am not suggesting the Executive is complacent.It would be inappropriate for the Executive to commit to particular legislative proposals before Bòrd na Gàidhlig has the opportunity to consider in more detail what could be achieved through legislation. Last Friday, I discussed the bill with members of Bòrd na Gàidhlig, who also expressed reservations about the bill as introduced. It is a proper acknowledgement of the role and status of Bòrd na Gàidhlig that it should be allowed to offer a view on this important matter, and it has not had the opportunity to do so yet. If the Executive gave its support to the bill just as Bòrd na Gàidhlig was being established, that would undermine the importance that the Executive has attached to the board and to Duncan Ferguson and his colleagues. I note that several groups, including Western Isles Council, the ministerial advisory group on Gaelic, which has since been disbanded, and Comunn na Gàidhlig, have also referred to that issue in their evidence.I will not dwell on the geographical provisions in the bill, which I mentioned in my submission. However, there has been considerable Gaelic development and activity in areas not listed in the bill, not least of which is Glasgow.From my point of view, the bill is removed from current Executive priorities for the Gaelic language and culture. The Executive wants to increase the number of trainee teachers, which is the only way that Gaelic language will have a future. If more teachers are trained, more young people and adults will learn Gaelic. That is where the bulk of the resources that the Executive is putting into Gaelic are going. Next year, the resources will increase by 20 per cent on this year's figures, and the trend will continue in the following year. The year after that, there will be further increases. The Executive has been involved in a number of developments, which shows that we are positive about Gaelic and that we want to prioritise it. The main function of Bòrd na Gàidhlig will be to produce the Gaelic language plan. I have asked for the plan to be with me—or with my successor, should that be the case—within six months. The language plan will show a way forward on which Bòrd na Gàidhlig will certainly want to consult.For the reasons that I have outlined today and in my written submission, the Executive is unable to support the Gaelic Language (Scotland) Bill. As I said, the bill runs contrary to our current priorities and has the potential to cause division within the Gaelic community, some of which has been evidenced already. I have not gone into the financial and technical uncertainties, which will affect bodies such as the Scottish public services ombudsman, and the bill does not give due recognition to the role and functions of Bòrd Gàidhlig na h-Alba.For those reasons, the bill does not reflect current developments in Gaelic. I am aware of public statements that show a greater awareness of the need for a Gaelic language plan. The board will have responsibility for producing the plan, which will be the most effective way of achieving the secure future for the Gaelic language and culture that I, all members of the committee and everyone else in this room want to see.