Hansard

I will begin where Rob Gibson began and reflect on my experience of interacting with the Gaelic community and coming to recognise just what a precious part of the fabric of our national life Gaelic is. I defy anyone to go to an event such as the one that Rob Gibson talked about, or any gathering of Gaels anywhere in Scotland, and not be touched and deeply moved by their ability to enter into storytelling, to recite poetry, to sing unaccompanied or to play musical instruments and to do so, as Rob Gibson said, with such ease and confidence. Dave Thompson mentioned his granddaughter's ability to sing in Gaelic. Going to any such gathering or event gives one the sense that one is getting access to an entire culture and set of values that are both ancient and very modern at the same time.

No Government of any complexion at any time could ever watch the language begin to die. Every Government in recent times has taken action to help Gaelic. I pay tribute to the work that the Conservative Government of the latter part of the last century did—I do not often do that—to what we did and to what the present Government is now doing. Every Government must do everything that is possible to ensure that the language does not just survive but has the chance to grow and thrive. We all know that the number of people who speak Gaelic is still declining but, as I have said in previous debates, I am more optimistic than ever that we can turn that situation round.

I regarded it as an enormous privilege to have the chance, as a minister, to help design the Gaelic Language (Scotland) Bill and to take it through the Parliament, but I always knew that it would not be the final legislative word on Gaelic. The Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005 was a piece of legislation for a particular moment in time and a particular stage in our development. I fully expect that, in years to come, further Gaelic language acts will be passed in an effort to reflect developments, and I hope that that happens.

At the centre of the 2005 act is the notion of language plans and language planning. That is not an end in itself; it is simply a vehicle to drive progress on a shared objective by requiring public organisations, which play a huge part in our private and public lives, to take the lead in beginning the process of further normalisation of Gaelic in everyone's experience. In that context, the position of the Scottish Executive in its language plan is vital to what happens in all other parts of the public sector. The Scottish Executive plan needs to set the standard. If it fails to do so, other people will use the excuse, "The Scottish Executive didn't do that, so we won't do it either."

The Executive's plan is extremely important. It has the benefit not just of impacting on the central administration of the Executive but of having an influence on health, transport, education, the arts, law, housing, policing and so on. I know from my experience as a Government minister that there are many Gaelic enthusiasts in the civil service. Among them are two of the officials who supported me as a minister, whom I can see at the back of the chamber. They are among the genuine enthusiasts who would fight Gaelic's corner in the civil service.

However, it would be unwise not to recognise that in the civil service there are also deep pockets of scepticism about Gaelic and the whole mission on which we are embarked. Some people are completely unconvinced by the arguments for Gaelic, as I have experienced, but they are outweighed by the enthusiasts. The Government's plan needs to make it clear that the present Government is acting, and that successive Governments will act, to promote Gaelic, and that it expects the civil service to deliver on that agenda. The minister needs to set the tone, to take the lead, to drive progress and to brook no foot-dragging on the road along which we need to travel.

The question that needs to be asked about the plan that we are discussing is whether it is ambitious and aspirational enough. I would not seek to take anything out of the plan. All the ground that it covers is extremely encouraging and it makes steady and regular progress. The slight criticism that I have is that it is quite modest in its ambitions. There is a lot of talk about guidance and audits of various things. That is fine and I welcome it, but we need to translate all that into action. There is a lot of talk of maintaining funding, but little about growing activity in the way that Ken Macintosh suggested.

I will suggest five areas in which I hope that the Government will consider strengthening its plan. The first is road signs. Some people think that we get obsessed about Gaelic on road signs, but it is important that the language is visible in our nation, because it gives people a sense of place and cultural identity. I acknowledge that the plan talks about making progress on the signs on the trunk roads leading to the islands. That is fine and I welcome it, but we have to go much further than that. The report goes on to talk about research on the economic, social and environmental effects and the effects on safety of having Gaelic road signs. With great respect, I do not think that we need any more research on that; we need action on it. In my previous life as a councillor and more recently as an MSP, I have seen 20 years of resistance to the adoption of trunk road signage in Gaelic. We have to move beyond that point. As Rob Gibson said, there are costs involved, but we also have to replace road signs and there is a way of doing that without adding to the cost.

We have to take a sensible approach, as Ted Brocklebank said. It is unwise to force Gaelic signage on communities that are sceptical about it or who do not feel an association with Gaelic. However, all the evidence suggests that there are plenty of places in Scotland where we could make progress without offending anyone. I hope that the minister will simply overrule the roads department and ensure that we make further progress on that issue.