The attempt to change the status of Irish in the EU is modest but worthwhile, writes Denis Staunton
Sean O Neachtain was less than halfway through a speech in the European Parliament yesterday when the Vice-President, Ms Dagmar Roth-Behrendt, interrupted him.
She told him that, because he was speaking Irish, which is not an official working language in the EU, almost nobody could understand him.
Mr O Neachtain was aggrieved, not least because he had supplied the parliament's interpreters with an advance text of his speech. Ms Roth-Berendt was, however, correct. Nobody has a right to address the European Parliament in Irish.
The news that the Government is seeking a change in the status of Irish in the EU has evoked loud snorts of derision from most of the Irish elite in Brussels.
The intensity of the response from some Irish EU officials (usually expressed in private) is surprising in view of the fact that the Government's proposal is a modest one that has attracted little hostility elsewhere in Europe.
The official use of languages in the EU is governed by a regulation agreed in 1958 and amended each time new countries have joined. Any change in the regulation to improve the status of Irish, which is already classified as a treaty language, would require unanimity in the Council of Ministers.
The regulation states that citizens can write to any of the EU institutions in any official language and receive a reply in the same language. All EU directives, laws and regulations must be translated into all the official languages and any instruction sent by an EU institution to a member-state must be in the language of that state - if that is an official working language of the EU.
The regulation allows individual EU institutions, such as the Commission, the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament, to work out their own rules of procedure for the use of languages.
In practice, most of the EU's 20 official languages are used very little within the institutions, where most business is done in English, French and German. These three languages are the only ones used within the Commission and at official level within the Council of Ministers.
Interpretation is available for all official languages at meetings of EU ministers and leaders and at European Parliament sessions.
Major press conferences are interpreted in every language, but most regular briefings - such as the one held by the Commission at noon each day - are interpreted in only three languages. If any journalist asks for interpretation into his or her language, it is provided.
Despite the fact that Irish is not an official working language, citizens can now write to the EU institutions in Irish and receive a reply in the same language. This is only true, however, if you write a proper letter and post it - it does not apply to e-mail communications.
Mr O Neachtain's experience in the European Parliament yesterday is unusual - MEPs may usually use Irish if they notify the interpreters in advance. All EU treaties are translated into Irish, but EU laws, directives and regulations, known as the acquis communitaire, are not.
If Irish were to become an official working language of the EU, the Government could demand that all 80,000 pages of the acquis communitaire be translated into Irish.
Officials say, however, that they will not make such a demand, despite the hours of lucrative, if mind-numbing, employment such an undertaking would provide for Irish-speaking translators.
The Government may not even insist that all new regulations are translated into Irish but is likely to ask that all important laws and directives should be. Other changes could involve the formalisation of current arrangements at the European Parliament, so that MEPs could use Irish if they notified their intention to do so.
The Government may also ask for interpretation to be made available to MEPs, on request, at committee meetings.
Similar arrangements could apply in the Council of Ministers and at major press conferences, such as those at EU summits.
Such modest changes are unlikely to encounter much opposition from other member-states and would add relatively little to the cost of EU translation and interpretation services.
The EU already supports minority languages in Europe, helping to fund such bodies as the European Bureau for Lesser Used Languages, which has offices in Brussels and Dublin.
EU resources directed towards minority languages are modest, however, and the complicated rules governing the funding of EU projects - which include a minimum project size and number of partners from different member-states - often make it difficult for the small communities that speak minority languages to participate.
Some opponents of a change in the status of Irish in the EU argue that the revival of the language is the responsibility of Irish people and that we should not ask other Europeans to pay for our own neglect.
There is merit in such an argument, and an enhanced status for Irish in the EU will be of little value if Irish society remains indifferent to such cultural scandals as the continued under-funding of Irish studies at university level.
However, the Irish language is part of a broader European heritage, too, and it is in Europe's interest that one of the continent's oldest languages should flourish.
Language vitality requires the ability to use the language and the desire to do so but it also requires opportunities to use the language.
The Government's campaign for an enhanced status for Irish in the EU represents a modest but worthwhile attempt to increase those opportunities within institutions that affect the lives of all Irish citizens, regardless of the language they speak.