Gaelic requires a roadmap for radical change

​The ECYPC’s evidence-gathering suggest that it is unclear what change will look like, and whether additional meaningful mechanisms will audit and track progress against planned priorities and actions. If a laissez-faire approach is taken to Gaelic development and the application of policy measures, it is questionable as to the purpose of any new legislation, and whether any positive material change to Gaelic’s long-term viability as a community language will emerge.

Any competent new legislation purporting to strengthen the 2005 Act requires thorough consideration of various factors to ensure it is effective and serves the public interest, alongside the interests of the various communities it ought to support. Debate participants should:

(a) consider whether the proposed Scottish Languages Bill has clear objectives and achievable goals. Evidence provided to the ECYPC suggests ambiguity in the framing of several clauses which could engender confusion and unintended consequences;

(b) understand that new legislation and subsequent policy measures should be based on reliable data. Evidence-based legislation is more likely to achieve intended outcomes but, since 2005, there have been four National Gaelic Plans by Scottish Government and Parliament with Gaelic Language Plans from around 60 public bodies. Few of these Plans have been sufficiently evaluated to ascertain whether Gaelic public policy priorities have positively impacted Gaelic language outcomes. This is particularly critical for Gaelic when public policy implementation deals with fine margins of risk and reward;

(c) consider that the proposed additional clauses to 2005’s Act should pass through the prism of a comprehensive impact assessment to understand how the legislation will affect various community groups in terms of learning, speaking and using Gaelic across different domains;

(d) note the importance of Scottish Government clarity on how proposed legislation as set out in the current draft Bill will be applied and enforced.

The application of any new measures requires adequate resourcing, defined mechanisms for enforcement, and clarity on the consequences for non-compliance. Any legislation should have a robust and appropriate auditing system to measure progress against priorities being funded through language plans and the projects managed by Gaelic organisations. Unfortunately, the Bill’s newly-introduced clauses are not supported with an adequate financial model. This effectively builds failure into the proposed new Bill before enactment, which can only lead to conflict with the public service delivery mechanisms.

Gaelic in Scotland remains in a challenging position in relation to language speaker fluency and community use, irrespective of recent headline numbers from the last Census. Gaelic’s overall national policy framework should recognise that the necessary environment for cultural and linguistic survival is to be found in a society that uses it as a living vernacular.

Gaelic’s fate will be determined by families and individuals who learn it, speak it and transmit it to future generations. Currently, national Gaelic policy discounts the importance of the native-speaking Gaelic community as the key social current of language and culture. A radical change in policy direction is required if Gaelic is to survive as a community language.

This proposed Bill is, instead, likely to strengthen entrenched public sector positions particularly as Scotland enters an era of financial constraints which should raise concerns regarding how Gaelic learning, teaching and development can be adequately supported.

Legislation will not save Gaelic, but well-framed, competent legislation will support the policy channels necessary for development. A primary problem with the Bill is that it appears to shift the focus away from Language Plans of official bodies to a Language Standards approach which does not indicate how fluent Gaelic speakers will emerge via legislation, or how societal benefits to Gaelic communities, traditional or urban, will accrue. The Bill’s bureaucratic requirements must be paired back, reworded so as to align with the practical reality of current Gaelic development challenges, or removed if there is no clear evidence of added value to existing Gaelic policy. It is unclear how the introduction of Areas of Linguistic Significance offers much support or benefit to any community; rather, it could create policy confusion and a reduction in resource allocations to those locations where priorities should be focused.

The Scottish Government indicates that there is a public sector funding challenge, however, an assessment of the current funding model, and the priorities set by Scottish Government, is imperative. The Bill should introduce two specific clauses which target existing grass-root challenges: (a) a reprioritisation of development activities towards more structured and funded domains associated with community-based work; and (b) the strengthening of support structures for learning and using Gaelic from early years through to university. A particular focus and funding emphasis is needed for regeneration involving families and young children entering Gaelic early years support systems.

Both dimensions reinforce each other and are rooted in the regeneration of Gaelic learning and use at the family level and with the younger generation. Gaelic’s future should flourish here, rather than competing with the current emphasis on the often-symbolic public agency language planning seen as the panacea for Gaelic’s social survival.

If “radical” means anything for Gaelic development, it means a resetting of priorities and complete transparency regarding existing challenges which will not be solved by the approaches set out in the draft Scottish Languages Bill. Gaelic development and learning require a collective approach across communities, set within a framework of realistic expectations, rather than bureaucratic processes which will not provide a pathway towards the Gaelic’s survival as a living language within Scotland’s diverse communities.