A Chara - I refer to Íte Ní Chionnaith's letter of June 14th and to the many other letters I have read in your paper on the status of the Irish language in Europe. I am an Irish citizen, raised bilingually in Dublin, living in Brussels and dealing with EU institutions every day in my work. There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding in Ireland about the meaning of a European "working language".
Ms Ní Chionnaithe uses the expression "official working language" four times in her letter. Which is it? Irish is an official language of the European Union and is not a working language. This implies that the historical linguistic importance of Irish and its important status as the official language of the State are, in fact, recognised.
The status of working language has no relevance to the perceived cultural importance of a language. Working languages are in fact a necessary hindrance to the work of the institutions. Every single draft, non-paper or paper issued within an institution must now be translated into 20 languages. In addition simultaneous translation must be provided in all 20 languages at every official meeting. This is all at great cost to the taxpayer.
While translation has always caused unacceptable delays in the European process, the increased number of languages will delay the publication of important proposals for directives up to a point where their implementation dates are threatened.
This is not in the interests of the European citizens whom the legislation is designed to protect.
Furthermore, both the Commission and the Council (member-states) are used to working in the three main languages of the Union (French, German and predominantly English). The other 17 working languages are, therefore, of primary importance to the democratically elected body, the European Parliament. While I am sure that a number of the newly elected Irish MEPs are fluent in Irish, I find it difficult to accept that they would prefer to read complex legal documents in Irish rather than English or that they intend to make interventions in committee meetings on the technical details of livestock transport or the capital adequacy of credit institutions as Gaeilge.
Finally, Ms Ní Chionnaith suggests that the Taoiseach should use the final summit of the Irish presidency to raise the issue of the status of the Irish language. The President of the EU is essentially the chairman of an important committee. I am sure that as Iar-Uachtarán of Conradh na Geailge Ms Ní Chonnaith must have chaired many meetings and is aware that it is not within the mandate of a chairman to raise issues of self-interest which do not feature on the agenda.
If the Taoiseach were to raise this issue in the context of the Irish presidency, he would firstly detract from the success of the presidency over the last six months and secondly give the other heads of state a good laugh. - Is mise,
CAITRÍONA O'KELLY,
Rue Américaine,
Brussels,
Belgium.