Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 10 Nov 1965

Vol. 60 No. 4

Public Business. - Páipéar Bán um Athbheochan na Gaeilge.

Dónall Ó Conalláin

Molaim:

Go dtugann Seanad Éireann an Páipéar Bán um Athbheochan na Gaeilge dá n-aire.

Tá an tairiscint seo ar Pháipéar an tSeanaid le fada ach, bíodh is go raibh orm fanúint, tá mé buíoch den Seanad as uch am a thabhairt dúinn anocht í a phlé. Gabhaim buíochas, freisin, leis an Aire Airgeadais faoi theacht anso, agus é chomh gnóthach agus atá sé chun a bheith páirteach sa dhíospóireacht.

Tuigeann gach éinne ón bhfoclaíocht atá ar an dtairiscint seo nach ag iarraidh aon rud a áiteamh ar an Rialtas ná ar Aire Stáit atá mé ach díreach le caoi a thabhairt don Seanad tuairimí a nochtadh faoi cheist seo Athbheochan na Gaeilge atá ag déanamh imní dúinn go léir le fada an lá. Is ceist í atá beo beathaitheach inár measc le breis is trí scór blian agus is léir ón aighneas agus ón gconspóid ag roinnt leis agus ón méid atá ráite agus scríofa ina thaobh le blianta beaga anuas gur ceist bheo fós é agus nach bhfuil aon laghdú tagtha ar spéis an phobail i gcoitinne ann.

Tá cúis ar leith le go gcuirfí tairiscint mar seo ar chlár an tSeanaid san am a cuireadh, sé sin, i dtosach na bliana seo. Bhí céim nua ar fad tar éis a thabhairt in iarracht na hAthbheochana trí eisiúint an Pháipéir Bháin. Chuir an Páipéar Bán crot nua ar fad ar iarracht na hAthbheochana nach raibh riamh air cheana. Bhí glactha ag an Rialtas mar chúram air féin cuid mhór de mholtaí an Choimisiúin a chur i bhfeidhm. Bhí siad tar éis cuspóir na hAthbheochana a ghlacadh chucu mar pholasaí náisiúnta, ar aon chéim, d'fhéadfaí a rá, lena bpolasaí faoi fhorbairt talmhaíochta nó tionsclaíochta. I bhfianaise na dtoscaí nua seo b'fhiú liom an tairiscint seo a thabhairt ós bhur gcomhair le go bhféadfadh Seanadóirí breith a thabhairt ar bheartas nua seo an Rialtais agus le treoir agus comhairle a thabhairt dóibh i bhfeidhmiú an bheartais sin. Is é is trua liom nach raibh an deis seo againn sé mhí ó shin nuair a bhí an scéal úr-nua ach sin rud nach raibh neart agamsa air.

Más linn léargas ceart d'fháil ar thábhacht an Pháipéir Bháin, ní mór dúinn dul siar píosa ar nua-stair na Gaeilge agus a mheabhrú dúinn féin an spleodar agus an díograis chun na teanga a cothaíodh i measc muintir na hÉireann i mblianta tosaigh an chéid seo trí imeachtaí Chonradh na Gaeilge. Níor mhiste dúinn a mheabhrú gur as an spleodar agus an díograis sin, don chuid is mó, a d'fhás an réabhlóid pholaiticiúil agus íobairt 1916; gur mhair an spleodar céanna i gcroíthe na ndaoine le linn cogadh na saoirse, rud is furasta a léiriú ón spiorad fíor-Ghaelach inar ionsaigh an Chéad Dáil a gcuid gnótha. Is mairg go deo nach é an spiorad céanna atá i nDáil an lae inniu, ach b'fhéidir nach bhfuil an lá caillte fós.

Le teacht na saoirse, pé saoirse a tháinig, laghdaig ar an iarracht deonach. Níor ghá aon iarracht feasta, dar le daoine. Bhí an síol curtha agus thiocfadh an barr i mbláth leis an aimsir dá acmhainn féin. Ach ba é an cogadh cathartha a bhuail an buille marfach ar fad. Ní hamháin gur mhúscail sé easaontas i measc Gaeilgeoirí fhéin ach bhain sé súile agus croí agus intinn an phobail Ghaelaigh den leath ba thábhachtaí den aidhm náisiúnta mar cé déarfadh gurbh fhearr Éire saor gan a bheith Gaelach ná í Gaelach gan a bheith saor! Ba mhó ag daoine san am Treaty versus Anti-Treaty ná Gaelachas versus Galldachas.

Ar ndóigh níor ligeadh ceist na Gaeilge i ndearmad amach is amach. Ar an leibhéal oifigiúil rinneadh na forálacha cuí do réir an Bhunreachta chun a chinntiú go mbeadh an teanga á múineadh go forleathan sna scoileanna agus go mbeadh cumas éigin Gaeilge ag státseirbhísigh. Ach tá faitíos orm nach raibh croí an phobail san iarracht agus ní dearnadh aon mhór-iarracht ar chroí an phobail a bhogadh chun na Gaeilge. Bhí obair na scoileanna á diomailt trí patuaire agus nea-shuim an phobail. Ba léir go raibh taoide na Gaeilge ag trá ainneoin dícheall na n-eagraíochtaí deonacha agus na ndaoine nár chaill an creideamh ariamh. Sin mar a bhí an scéal nuair a bunaíodh an Coimisiún um Athbheochan na Gaeilge sa bhliain 1958 chun taighde a dhéanamh ar staid na Gaeilge agus moltaí a chur faoi bhráid an Rialtais faoin gcaoi ab éifeachtaí chun cuspóir na hAthbheochana a thabhairt i gcríoch.

Is fiú dúinn ag an bpointe seo féachaint ar na téarmaí tagartha a

Ag féachaint don chéim atá sroichte faoi láthair leis an iarracht chun an Ghaeilge a athbheochan, breithniú a dhéanamh agus comhairle a thabhairt faoi na bearta ba cheart don phobal agus don Stát a dhéanamh anois d'fhonn go rachfar ar aghaidh níos tapúla chun na cuspóra sin.

Tugtar faoi deara nach é a cuireadh ar a gcúram féachaint arbh fhiú nó arbh fhéidir cuspóir na hathbheochana a bhaint amach ach comhairle a thabhairt faoi na bearta ba cheart don phobal agus don Stát a dhéanamh anois chun an chuspóir a chur i gcríoch chomh tapaidh agus ab fhéidir. Mar sin in aon phlé a bhéas againn ar an bPáipéar Bán, ina bhfuil breithiúnas an Rialtais ar mholtaí an Choimisiúin, níor cheart go mbeadh cead aon cheist a thógáil faoi cheart nó faoi éigeart prionsabal agus polasaí na hathbheochana. Ní le ceart nó éigeart na hathbheochana a bhaineann Tuarascáil an Choimisiúin ná an Páipéar Bán ach le na bealaí agus na bearta trína ndéanfar an polasaí sin a chur i gcríoch go héifeachtúil.

Tá na cúiseanna lér cheart dúinn cloí leis an nGaeilge agus bualadh ar aghaidh le hobair na hathbheochana mínithe go háiritheach agus go héifeachtach ní hamháin i dTuarascáil an Choimisiúin ach freisin sa Pháipéar Bán féin. Ní gá domsa mar sin aon athaithris a dhéanamh orthu fiú amháin dá mbeadh sé in ordú sin a dhéanamh, rud a bhfuil mé in aimhreas air. Breithnímis an Páipéar Bán mar cháipéis ina bhfuil tairiscintí an Rialtais leagtha amach chun polasaí, a bhfuil glactha leis ar leibhéal náisiúnta, polasaí an Rialtais a chomhlíonadh. Scrúdaímis agus iniúchaimís é féachaint an leor é nó an lochtach é don chuspóir atá leis. Tá gné amháin de ar a laghad nach féidir locht d'fháil air sa mhéid go soláthraíonn sé dúinn sain-mhíniú sásúil ar pholasaí an Stáit i leith na teanga agus cruthaíonn sé go bhfuil glactha ag an Rialtas air féin an polasaí sin a chur i gcríoch. Tá talamh slán déanta de go bhfuil an Rialtas á cheangal féin le polasaí dearfa i leith na Gaeilge agus is mór an chéim ar aghaidh an méid sin féin. tugadh don Choimisiún, mar atá:

Tá tairiscintí an Rialtais leagtha amach faoi chinn-teidil éagsúla. Baineann an chéad cheann le Córas Riaracháin Phoillí agus tá an roinn sin sásúil go maith ar pháipéar. Braitheann éifeacht na dtairiscintí sa roinn seo, agus i ngach roinn eile chomh maith, ar cé chomh dáiríre is atá na húdaráis faoi. I gcás na státseirbhíse de, mura bhfuil an tAire féin agus a phríomh-oifigigh lán dáiríre faoi chur chun cinn na Gaeilge, ní féidir bheith ag súil le toradh fónta ó na fo-oifigigh. Cén mhaith é ceann na státseirbhíse, an tAire Airgeadais atá anseo againn anocht, treoir nó ordú a chur chuig Roinn Stáit eile faoi seo nó siúd a dhéanamh ar mhaithe le cur chun cinn na Gaeilge sa Roinn sin agus b'fhéidir Aire na Roinne sin gan a bheith báúil le Gaeilge in aon chor. Tá a leithéid d'Airí ann, creidim. Is é tá mé ag iarraidh a chur in iúl go bhféadfadh an Rialtas a rá go raibh gach aon rud dá raibh geallta acu sa Pháipéar Bán seo á ndéanamh acu agus gan toradh dá laghad a bheith air, mura gcuirtear córas cinnte ar bun chun, a chinntiú go mbeidh leanúnachas ag baint leis an iarracht, go mbeidh duine nó daoine i ngach Roinn a mbeidh sé mar shain-dualgas orthu féachaint chuige go gcuirfear gach treoir agus gach ordú i bhfeidhm agus go gcoinneofar i bhfeidhm é. Sin é an laige is mó a fheicimse sa Pháipéar Bán. Cé gur fianaise láidir é ar dheá-thoil an Rialtais, fágann sé bealach sleamhnaithe acu as an gcuid is mó de na geallúintí atá tugtha acu. Tá an leabhar breac le habairtí mar: "Spreagfar" daoine chun é seo a dhéanamh; "Molfar é seo" do dhaoine áirithe; "Déanfar é seo más féidir"; "Cuirfear an moladh seo i gcomhairle do" dhaoine áirithe. Tá an easpa chinnteachta seo intuigthe i gcásanna áirithe ach sa mhéid a bhaineann le Radio agus Telefís agus le comhlachtaí Stáit eile bheifí ag súil le gealltanas cinnte údarásach nach mbeadh aon dul siar air. Mura dtugtar go dúthrachtach faoin gcóras riaracháin phoiblí a Ghaelú, beidh sé fánach bheith ag súil le toradh fónta ó eagrais nó ó chomhlachtaí atá a bheag nó a mhór neamhspleách den Rialtais.

Tá de locht agam ar an roinn a bhaineas leis an gcóras oideachais go dtugann sé le fios nach gá aon mhórathrú a dhéanamh. Shílfeá air go bhfuil an Rialtas sásta le staid na Gaeilge sna scoileanna. Má tá, tá a lán eile nach bhfuil sásta ná leathshásta. D'fhéadfainn a lán laigí a lua. Cuir i gcás an córas atá ann chun múinteoirí a oiliúint. Tá sé sin anlochtach ó thaobh na Gaeilge de. Níl aon leor-iarracht á dhéanamh chun soiscéal na Gaeilge a chur abhaile ar na hábhair mhúinteoirí agus tá fhios ag an saol gur cuma cé chomh oilte is atá duine in ealaíon na múinteoireachta, mura bhfuil an creideamh go daingean ina chroí, nach dtabharfadh sé dá dhaltaí ach oumas scrúdú a phasáil. Ní leor le duine ar bith againn é sin.

I gcás na meán-scolaíochta, tá geallta dúinn go gcuirfear béal-triail ar bun don Mheán-Teistiméaracht i gceann cúpla bliain agus go gcoinneofar béim ar labhairt na teanga as seo amach. Céim mhór ar aghaidh é sin agus cuirimid fáilte roimhe. Tá geallta dúinn freisin go gcuirfear neart téacsleabhar ar fáil i nGaeilge do na meánscoileanna agus go n-ullmhófar leabhair nó tráchtais oiriúnacha ar thábhacht agus ar stair na Gaeilge mar chuid den chlár léinn don mheán-scoil. Is breá liom go bhfuil glactha ag an Rialtas le na moltaí sin ach ní léir dom go bhfuil aon fheabhas fós ar scéal na dtéacs-leabhar agus ní heol dom go bhfuil aon cheo déanta fós chun na leabhair eile a sholtáthar ach an oiread. B'fhéidir go scaoilfidh an tAire lena theanga ar ball agus an t-eolas sin a thabhairt dúinn.

Tá roinn eile den Pháipéar Bán ag plé le slánú na Gaeltachta agus aguisín leis an leabhar ag cur síos ar a bhfuil déanta cheana ag an Rialtas ar son na Gaeltachta. Caithfidh sé gur soiléir don Rialtas nach leor a bhfuil déanta cheana agus go gcaithfear tabhairt faoi slánú na Gaeltachta ar bealaí eile seachas mar bhí á bhfeidhmiú cheana. Tá tús maith déanta sa mhéid go bhfuiltear tar éis Gaeltarra Éireann a chumasú chun tionscail nua a bhunú agus chun dul i bpáirt le comhlachtaí eile taobh amuigh den Ghaeltacht chun na críche céanna. Níl ach ceithre mhí ann ó chuireamar go léir anseo fáilte roimh an mBille sin. Tá súil agam go rachfar ar aghaidh láithreach chun an cumas nua sin a úsáid mura bhfuil sin déanta cheana. Is mór a rachadh sé chun sásaimh do mhuintir na Gaeltachta agus ba mhór an tógáil croí dóibh dá gcuirtí tionscal nó dhó ar bun láithreach. Ba chruthú praicticiúil dóibh é go raibh cúram á dhéanamh dá gcás agus go raibh iarracht dearfa á dhéanamh chun obair a sholáthar dóibh ina dtír agus ina ndúiche féin. Mar adúirt mé anseo cheana, is mó de thubaiste liom aon chainteoir dúchais amháin a dhul ar imirce as an tír ná deichniúr as an nGalltacht.

Níor cheart dom gan an Rialtas a mholadh freisin as an gComhlacht Comhairlaitheach a roghnaigh siad go gairid tar éis don Pháipéar Bán a theacht amach. Is dream iad a bhfuil lán-iontaobh agam astu go gcuirfidh siad comhairle cheart chúntach ar an Aire Airgeadais. Ach ní thuigim cén fáth ar cuireadh gobán orthu agus nár chuala éinne ó shin céard tá ar siúl acu. Tá a lán daoine ann ar suim leo fhios a bheith acu céard iad na gnéithe den athbheochan a bhíonn á n-ionsaí acu ó am go céile. B'fhéidir nár mhiste don Aire tuarascáil uatha a chur ar fáil go tráth-rialta mura mbeadh ann ach lena ngníomhaíocht a chionneáil os comhair an phobail, mar táspéis ag an bpobal ins na h-imeachtaí a bhíonn ar siúl acu.

Ní fhéadfainn, agus a laghad am atá ar fáil againn, gach aon chuid den Pháipéar Bán seo a phlé. Fágfaidh mé faoi Sheanadóirí eile plé níos mine a dhéanamh ar ghnéithe eile de. Beidh suim ag Seanadóirí éagsúla i ngné amháin de thar gné eile. Ach níl aon leisc orm a rá go bhfáiltím ó chroí roimhe mar gur plean é, rud nach raibh againn cheana. Creidim freisin gur iarracht macánta é ag an Rialtas chun comhlíonadh polasaí na hathbheochana a chur ar bhonn rialta. Ach feicim contúirt mhór amháin ann, rud a chuirtear i gcuimhne dom leis an athrú meoin a thárla sa bhliain 1922, go mbeidh daoine ag rá leo féin nach baol don Ghaeilge anois ó tharla an Rialtas a bheith ag déanamh lánchúraim di feasta agus nach gá aon iarracht ón ngnáth-phobal chun í a chur ar láimh sábhála. Ar ndóigh a mhalairt ar fad atá fíor. Níl aon uair is mó a raibh iarracht ag teastáil ón ngnáthdhuine ná an t-am i láthair. Daoine a ghríosú agus a mhisniú chun na hiarrachta sin is mó atá a dhíth anois. Agus is sa chuid sin den obair is fearr is féidir le Seanadóirí agus le daoine meastúla eile sa phobal cabhrú leis an iarracht trí dheá-thoil a léiriú agus deá-shompla a thaispeáint.

I should not like to think that any Senator would feel inhibited or in any way precluded from expressing himself freely on this motion because of inability to do so in the Irish language. I would naturally prefer to see the position in which everyone could feel equally at home in both languages, which is the position to which we aspire. But in the discussion which is to follow, I hope that Senators will bear in mind that the White Paper deals with the means whereby the Irish language is to be restored and not with the desirability or feasibility of attempting the work of restoration. The terms of reference of the Commission on whose report the White Paper is based precluded consideration of everything except the means by which the restoration might be expedited. We must take it at this stage that the policy of restoration is an accepted one and that our function under this motion is to discuss the wisdom or otherwise of the proposals set out in the White Paper in the context of the objectives they are designed to achieve. I have much pleasure in placing the motion before the House.

Professor Quinlan

Ba mhaith liom cuidiú leis an rún seo. Tá a bhfuil ann ag teacht leis an bPáipéar Bán a foilsíodh timpeall mí ó shoin. Sé tá i gceist anso ná go mbreithneoidh an Rialtas moltaí Choimisiún um Aithbheochan na Gaeilge. Do chuir an Rialtas an Coimisiún sin ar bun a chúig nó a sheacht de bhlianta ó shoin agus d'oibríodar ar feadh cúig mblian. Dheineadar a gcuid oibre go cúramach agus tá a lán eolais sa tuarascáil a chuireadar amach.

Tá seans againn anois í a phlé go cúramach i dteannta leis an bPáipéar Bán a chuir an Rialtas amach. Sé tá uainn an beart is fearr a dhéanamh chun aithbheochan na Gaeilge a chur chun cinn agus tá sé ar intinn ag an Rialtas fé mar atá leagtha amach sa Pháipéar Bán, í chur chun cinn lé gríosadh agus le spéis a mhúscailt in ionad bheith a dtaobh le smacht nó rud ar bith den tsaghas sin.

Tá sé tráthúil freisin aithbhreithniú a dhéanamh ar an gceist faoi láthair siúd is go bhfuil ceisteanna fíorthábhachtacha á bplé ag an Rialtas— ceisteanna a bhaineann leis an EEC agus leis an free trade area. Dá bhrí sin, tá sé tráthúil go leor breithniú a dhéanamh ar an gceist chun an dlúbhaint atá idir na cúrsaí seo, idir aithbheochan na Gaeilge agus gach a mbaineann leí a mheas.

To continue, the White Paper sets out the objectives and the methods proposed by the Government to implement the recommendations of the Commission on the Restoration of the Irish Language. The general recommendations were accepted by the Government and some steps have already been taken to ensure their implementation. We have already noted in Bills here the beginning of this work, including the Bill on the Gaeltacht which passed through the House in recent months.

Looking at the part we can play in this work, first of all the necessity for creating a proper environment for the language development is recognised on all sides. A fostering of love for the language, as shown in the White Paper, seems to rely on encouragement and inducement rather than compulsion. That is as it should be but much more is necessary to foster a proper environment for the language because to me it seems that the development of the Irish language is only part of the general development of Irish culture as a whole—that we cannot expect the language to develop unless our Irish culture develops step by step with it.

Consequently, I believe there should be more emphasis on Irish music, Irish songs, Irish dancing and Irish games. It seems rather strange that we still have schools in this country where there is no provision for Irish games. It would be regarded as amazing in any other country. Certain reasons have been advanced for this but the reasons do not justify the position and the Government should see to it that Irish games are not downgraded in any of our schools. If schools want to participate fully in grants and other schemes of Government help, they should at least put Irish games on an equal basis with other games.

As I have said, there should be more emphasis on Irish songs and Irish music. Those who are keen on these aspects of our culture will naturally be keen to use the Irish language and to spread it as part of our general culture. I particularly welcome the insistence in the Commission's Report on the teaching of the spoken rather than the written language in early school days. There has been too much preoccupation with grammar and the written word and this, I believe, has given a detestation for the language to young children whereas if early language training were along modern lines, using modern methods—stories, pictures and so on—young people would associate the language with pleasant days in school.

Such teaching methods could, naturally, be developed with equally pleasant days in the Gaeltacht or on special excursions which have as their object the fostering and the encouragement of the language. In time would come a command of the language and the ability to carry on the language, to develop naturally from the spoken to the written word. I find it hard to learn from a perusal of the report of the Commission or of the White Paper what precisely is the attitude to teaching other subjects through Irish. A great deal of our failure in the past has been associated with attempts to use the language to teach other subjects in schools where children have not got the proper command of the language. It has resulted in the other subjects being poorly understood while at the same time it committed the cardinal crime of getting the children to dislike the language.

I wonder if a realistic appraisal could be made of what has been gained by teaching other subjects through the medium of Irish. It is doubtful if any gains could be shown except in schools where the children had developed such fluency in Irish that they took the language naturally in their stride. We should set ourselves realisable objectives and one of these realisable objectives should be to concentrate on the spoken language. Then, when we are able to report very substantial progress there it might be possible to take other subjects such as history through the medium of Irish. We must first of all be satisfied that the demand for it came from the children themselves, that they were anxious to develop the language by studying other subjects through it. Bilingualism might mean a sharing of subjects, using Irish in the teaching of a subject and interspersing it with English where necessary, as the ability of the pupils indicated. That would put our teaching of the language on a scientific basis. We must be prepared to pass on from any past prejudices and misconceptions and be prepared to have cold, scientific appraisal of our progress and of children's reactions at all stages.

One thing that occurs to me quite a bit, especially since Telefís Éireann came in, is this question of dialect. Frankly, it seems to me that we are trying to attempt the impossible when we have three or four dialects receiving equal weight. It seems that if we were to be ruthless and to decide on one dialect and to let that be the official dialect—the one that comes across Telefís Éireann or Radio Éireann— we would make far greater progress and would get greater uniformity in the result. I know, of course, that the spelling has been standardised so that the written word can substantially be the same in all directions: it just depends on the pronunciation. But, thinking on that, it seems that the written word, after all, is used only for a very small amount of our communication: most of the communication is done orally and consequently I think that stresses the necessity for the standardising of one dialect.

Again, perhaps it is due to upbringing on that but, having been brought up on the Irish script, I can never get used to this Roman script with all those h's cluttering up the words and masking the beauty of the word itself. It may be that the only reason that can be advanced for it is an economic one in relation to printing. Yet, to me, at any rate, Irish writing loses a great deal when it does not stand in its native setting, that is, in the Irish script with the síniú fada, the séimheadh and the urú.

There are some parts of the commission's report which have only lightly been touched on as yet by the Government but which no doubt are under active consideration by them. I think we might profitably look at some of those. I should like in a short time —I do not wish to take up too much of the time of the House because I am sure many other Senators are anxious to speak—to touch on the recommendations on page 76 as they apply to the constituent colleges of the National University. I take it that Senators have read those recommendations. Running through the recommendations there is a very strong insistence on a great number of courses and subjects through Irish in the university colleges. Well, now, frankly, I think this is a mistaken policy. I think the job of the university, especially in the professional schools and the scientific schools, is to turn out scientists and to turn out professional men who are equipped at the highest level at which we can equip them and imbued with patriotism and a determination to work in this country; in other words, practical patriotism. That practical patriotism means that the highest service they can discharge to the country is to keep abreast of their profession and they keep abreast of their profession by studying the literature of that profession and the current periodicals and the current reports on it. These, let us face the situation, are, first of all, in the English language coming from England and America. After that, we go to the Continent——

Tomás Ó Maoláin

And Russia.

Professor Quinlan

And Russia, but you can at least get very good translations in the English language. The point I am making is that I cannot see for one moment how a man is a better Irishman because he spends a good deal of his time in creating terminology in Irish, translating scientific work and scientific results into the Irish language. Let him use Irish, by all means, in his ordinary contacts of business, speaking to students, speaking to colleagues, and so on; in other words, let him have a general practical approach to the developments of the country and be prepared to work long hours for it and be prepared to play his part as a citizen. But, having reached that stage, if we have bilingualism, it is no slur to say that we quite accept that a course should be done in the most efficient manner in which it can be done, that is, using the text books available, training the students into thinking in the terminology in which they are going to read it in the text books, not having a question of double terminology and, generally, seeing no conflict whatsoever between this practical bilingualism and their duties as citizens of this State which the aim is to make bilingual in that sense. You will see contradictions running through here.

It is accepted that science can be done bilingually, a Degree course in Science given through Irish, but not courses in Engineering—in other words, in University College, Galway, the recommendation here is soft-pedalled. Why? I do not see any difference between the difficulty in giving a course in engineering through Irish and in giving a course in physics, chemistry or botany. Neither do I see any advantage in it. I might say in relation to all the young scientists we have in this country, men who have come up since the war and gone abroad and studied in the best graduate schools in the world and come home with honours and the highest degrees, and so on, that, if you get their frank opinion on this—and some of them are the finest Irishmen in this country and, furthermore, I know this from some University College, Galway, graduates whom I know quite well— they feel they could do far more for Irish by playing a full part in Irish Week and using Irish where the opportunity arises, in discussions with students, and all the rest. They do a first-class professional job and such is their contribution. It is ridiculous at the moment, when our university system is so under-staffed, to suggest that we have any spare resources that can be used.

We are hard-pressed enough to give the courses that have to be given at the moment. In fact, any realistic comparison of the facilities available here and the facilities available in universities generally in England or in Queen's will show that we have less than half the resources per 100 students for our teaching and general development they regard as necessary. Consequently, the first and obvious claim on the Government for the practical development of this country is the development of its resources and the further development of our teaching profession to try to bring our present resources up to something near what is accepted as the international standard. Our resources, as I say, are less than 50 per cent and it is a tribute to the standing and the dedication of the men in our faculties today that the value of their degrees bears no relation to that 50 per cent, that our students can, on graduation here, take their place in the graduate school anywhere in the world and compete more than favourably with their confrères coming from more heavily endowed and much better class institutions.

We have the scheme of Gaeltacht scholarships to encourage students to do their courses through the medium of Irish. It is a pity that those we regard as the most idealistic of our students should be concentrated in one centre. It would be far better if our dedication and idealism for the language were used to aid the work in all institutions; in other words, that they should go to the university of their choice and play their full part there in developing the Irish spirit, the Irish language and Irish speaking in that centre. It is a mistake to channel all the idealism, as it were, into one region.

I might mention perhaps, in this regard, the example of Finland, a small country fighting for its national identity and bounded by Russia and Sweden. Finland recognises that it is a small country and that it has not got the text books or the resources to enable to be available in Finnish science, engineering, medicine and so on, but excellent text books and other facilities in Swedish are available. All the courses in the Finnish universities are, to my knowledge, given in Swedish, even though there is no love whatsoever lost between Finland and Sweden and the Finnish do not in any way regard this using of the excellent facilities and this access for their students to the scientific resources of Sweden as in any way taking from their position as an independent nation. I could cite many other such examples.

We have to look at the Irish language as a very essential part of the whole matter of our national development and the exploitation of our resources, and what we need at the moment, as we need at all times, are dedicated men in all walks of life working unselfishly for the good of the country. I have no doubt, if they are doing that, they will be imbued with a proper attitude to the Irish language, to our culture in its finest and its best flower, and to everything that goes to make us a nation. We have got to keep the larger objective, the building up of the nation, always in view and to fit everything into that mould and see the Irish language as a component part in that build-up. We should also see the Irish language as one part of our culture.

In conclusion, I believe our Irish games, our Irish music and our Irish dances are at least as important in keeping the spirit of the country Gaelic and in giving us the national consciousness without which we cannot hope to achieve full economic development.

Mrs. Ahern

Ní fheicim ó thalamh an domhain cad an thaobh gur gá an tairiscint seo a phlé. Ar an gcéad dul síos, do h-iarradh ar na daoine go raibh tuairimí fiúntacha acu iad a chur go dtí an Coiste Comhairle. Ar an dara dul síos tá gach Páirtí polaitíochta ar aon fhocal gur ceart agus gur cóir an Ghaeilge a shlánú agus a chur á labhairt go foirleathan ar fud na tíre. Tá a fhios againn go léir go bhfuil dream beag bídeach, seóiníní beaga anseo agus ansúd ach ní fiú aon áird a thabhairt ar na daoine sin.

Tá sé ráite agus sean-ráite agam cheana go bhfuil an iomad cainte ar fad againn agus dá ndéanaimís níos lua cainte agus níos mó oibre go mbeadh níos mó Gaeilge ar fáil againn sa tír. Do cuireadh de mhilleán ar an Rialtas cheana go raibh siad ag dul ró-thapaidh. Anois tá de locht orthu go bhfuil siad ag dul ró-mhall. Sin iad na tuairimí a chloisim ar aon chuma ar fud na tíre.

Sa Pháipéar Bán tá 288 moltaí agus ins na moltaí sin tá na rudaí go léir gur ceart don Rialtas a dhéanamh agus cad is ceart don cléir a dhéanamh. Is chuma sa tsaol cad í an teanga a labhrann an Taoiseach nó cad í an teanga a labhrann an teaspag nó an sagart paróiste is orainn féin atá an t-ualach, mar a déarfá. Tá sé ar choinsias gach duine a chionn féin a dhéanamh agus gan a bheith ag fanacht leis an Taoiseach nó leis an easpag nó leis an sagart paróiste an rud a dhéanamh agus an dea-shompla a thabhairt de bhrí gur léir do gach duine nach ar leibhéal Dháil Éireann nó ar leibhéal Magh Nuadhat a shlánófar an teanga ach ar leibhéal an pharóiste. Sin é an fáth nach bhfuil an Ghaeilge ag dul ar aghaidh chomh maith agus ab fhéidir, go bhfuilimid go léir ag brath ar na daoine thuas agus gan ár gcionn féin á dhéanamh thíos. Dá mbeadh leath-dhosaen daoine againn i ngach contae nó, fiú amháin, i ngach cúige ar nós Pádraig Ó Cearbhaill agus An Gabha Gaolach as Áth Threasna, ni bheadh aon ghá le Páipéar Bán nó páipéar d'aon dath eile.

Níl aon amhras ach gur ar mháithreacha na tíre atá aithbheochan na Gaeilge ag brath. Is mithid é sin a admháil. Is cois teallaigh a shlánófar í. Is aiseach, mar sin, nach bhfuil níos mó ban le feiscint ins na heagraíochtaí Gaeilge mar Chonnradh na Gaeilge in a bhfuil daoine ag gabháil leis an nGaeilge. Is beag ban atá ionta. Is ró-annamh a chítear bean ar an coistí a chuirtear ar bun, fiú amháin ar an gcoiste atá ar bun i láthair na huaire. Sílim nach bhfuil ach bean amháin air. Rinneadh taghairt don telefís agus is fíor nach bhfuil cothrom na Féinne á fháil ag an nGaeilge ar Telefís Éireann agus tá súil agam go ndéanfaidh an Rialtas rud éigin faoin dream sin.

Maidir leis na scoileanna, siad na bunscoileanna agus múinteoirí na bunscoileanna an dream is mó a dhein obair ar son na Gaeilge i gcónaí. Muna mbeadh iad sin is olc an bhail a bheadh ar an scéal. Is taréis na bunscoileanna a fhágaint a chailltear an Ghaeilge. Caithfear smaoineamh a dhéanamh ar conas is féidir an bhearna sin a líonadh. Timpeall ceithre bliana ó shoin nuair a bhíos ag plé ceiste na Gaeilge le hUachtarán na hÉireann, dubhairt sé go raibh trí dreamanna sa tír seo: an dream a deireann nach fiú an teanga a shlánú; an dream a deireann nach féidir an teanga a shlánú; agus an dream a deireann gur fiú an teanga a shlánú agus gur féidir. Ní gá mbacaint leis an chéad dream. An dara dream a bhfuil sá de thuairim aca nach féidir an teanga a shlánú, níl ortha sin ach lag-mhisneach; ach an dream a cheapann gur féidir agus gur fiú dá ndéanfaidís sin níos mó oibre agus níos lú cainte, bheadh an lá linn fadó. In a lán dena gluaiseachtaí Gaeilge, sin é an rud a bhíonn ar siúl aca, caint, caint agus síorchaint.

Rud amháin atá ag déanamh buartha do dhaoine ná go bhfuil an Ghaeilge ro-cheangailte le h-éirim aigne is le h-airgead. Agus sa chás sin sé an rud atá i gceist ná na scoláireachtaí agus ceist na gColáistí Gaeilge. Na daoine a gheibheann na scoláireachtaí sin, sin iad na daoine leis an éirim aigne, ach tá comhairle ag teastáil nios mó óna daoine laga, na daoine nach bhfuil chomh h-éirimiúil. Tá fhios agam go gcaithfimid an Ghaeltacht a shabháil. Sí an Ghaeltacht Ollscoil na Gaeilge. Mar sin féin, ba mhaith liom, mar thosnú, go gcuirfí cúrsa Gaeilge ar siúl i gach paróiste. Dá ndeanfaí é sin ní bheadh lag-mhisneach ar na túismitheoiri nach bhfuil an t-airgead aca agus nach bhfuil éirim aigne aca nuair a chíonn siad na comharsin ag bailiú leo go dti na coláistí agus mar sin de.

Aontáin leis an Seanadóir Ó Conalláin nuair a dubhairt sé gur cóir atmasféar ceart a bheith sa cheantar. Chuige sin bheadh sé oiriúnach ionad a chur ar bun in ngach paróiste, áit ina mbeadh ceol agus rincí agus eolas ar stair na h-Éireann, as Béarla ar dtús. Caithfimid an t-atmasféar atá lasmuigh a thabhairt isteach i dtosach. Is é an Béarla an teanga atá ag an chuid is mó de mhuintir na h-Éireann. Nuair a thagann siad isteach agus nuair a thuigeann siad cad tá ar siúl againn maidir leis an nGaeilge, beidh níos mó meas aca ar an dteanga. Sin rud ba chóir do bhoird Stait cosúil le Bord Fáilte a dhéanamh nuair a bhíonn scéimeanna forbartha áu gcur ar bun aca. Ní dóigh liom go bhfuil sé riachtanach dul isteach go mion sa Pháipéar Bán, mar fé mar a deirtear ann, aon duine go bhfuil smaointí fiúntacha aige is cóir dó iad a chur go dtí an Coiste Comhairle atá curtha ar bun chuige sin.

Professor Stanford

Our debate tonight is about one of the great languages of Europe, and Irish has been one of the great languages for longer than all except one of the existing great languages of Europe. Our problem is that this languages has been declining now for the best part of 150 years. One of our difficulties is the surprising fact that this great language has never produced a single writer of European stature.

Mr. Lenehan

That is not true.

Professor Stanford

I would be grateful if I were enlightened by Senator Lenehan as to who this writer of European stature is or of whom he is thinking. I listen for Senator Lenehan's instruction.

Mr. Lenehan

He would have to be in Trinity College before the Senator would accept him.

Professor Stanford

I notice he has no instruction whatever on this, and I regard his remarks as irrelevant.

Mr. Boland

Cad mar gheall ar an Athair Pádraig de Brún?

Professor Stanford

I am drawing attention to one of the difficulties of establishing the Irish language not only in Ireland but throughout Europe. The sad fact to me, as I gather it is also to Senator Lenehan, is that there is no writer of European stature. I am thinking, in comparison, of writers like Cervantes, Racine, Goethe and many others. It is our misfortune; we do not rejoice in this. During the early 19th century there was a short while when the attention of Europe was directed to an Irish writer, only one. This, I would inform Senator Lenehan, is common knowledge to every civilised person in this country. I shall say a little about this, the one occasion when our country was favoured rather indirectly with a European reputation on account of a writer in the Irish language. It was when the poems of Ossian, as they were called, swept through Western Europe. They even attracted the attention of a man like Napoleon who would quote Ossian as his favourite writer. That unhappily is the only occasion when all Europe fixed its attention on an Irish writer. Unfortunately, it was rather devious, because these so-called poems of Ossian were in a very third-class translation by a Scotsman whose knowledge of the original sources was very small. It is a remarkable fact, all the same, that even though this translation was so inadequate, and his knowledge so inadequate, for a moment an Irish tradition penetrated the whole Continent of Europe. Unfortunately this did not occur since. One of the ways in which we will restore the language brilliantly is by producing a writer of the stature of Cervantes or Racine who writes only in Irish.

This great language has been in decline for over a century. There have been, I think, four main reasons. The first and obvious one is British policy through the centuries. The second one, which is not so much emphasised but is just as powerful, is the influence of Daniel O'Connell, who in fact said: "Cease to speak Irish, learn to speak English." He was a great man of European stature, and that was his considered verdict. The third reason was lack of liturgical use. Wales has always had services in Welsh in the churches to keep the language going. Irish has never had that, and it has suffered much from it. The fourth, and this is the one that really concerns us now, because we are not going to deal with past history in this debate, we want to deal with the present, is the presence to our east and to our west of two dynamic worldwide languages. I mean English and American English.

This last is the only opposing force that we have to reckon with now. The others are part of the past, part of our past and unhappy history. How can we preserve the language from this tremendously powerful pressure from the east and the west? It seems to me that there are three main methods of doing this. The first is by appeals to patriotic sentiment. The second is by positive inducements. The third is by negative inducements, which are the ones I do not like, and I will explain what they are and why I do not like them in a moment or two.

Let us consider these methods, very briefly, because I believe that the future of the language turns on these things. First of all, patriotic sentiment. By this I do not mean appeals to nationalism, and I will tell you why. Nationalism is a declining ideal in the world as it is today. It has served its purpose and has done much for this country. But we are now turning towards internationalism, to supranationalism. I and, I know, others in this House look towards a United States of Europe. To link the language with a declining ideal like nationalism in the sense of separatism, keeping away from other nations and from other languages, is to link it to a declining ideal. I personally, deny, though this may provoke one or two in the House, that a nation cannot be truly a nation without a distinctive language of its own. If I may venture to say four words in Irish, gan teanga, gan tír. I am sorry that my pronunciation is not very good but that is the best I can do.

Tomás Ó Maoláin

Not bad at all. Keep it up.

Professor Stanford

I frankly do not believe that this matter is true if it means that a nation cannot be a true nation without a distinctive language of its own. I point to Austria, to Switzerland, to all the Arab nations, to the great nations of North and South America. I think it is a great mistake to try to persuade young, critical people that this is so when in fact it is obvious to them that it is not so.

But this is not what I think we mean when we hope for appeals to patriotic sentiment. What we need is appeals to genuine patriotic affection. I mean loving one's own country in the fullest sense. Every one of us here, and I should think almost all of the people of this country, are in favour of that.

I turn now to the two more materialistic methods of encouraging Irish. Undoubtedly we need materialistic methods. The British Government were obviously from the fourteenth century and even further back offering material inducements and material pressures to undermine Irish. Let us look first at what I call positive inducements—prizes, scholarships, rewards and encouragements of various kinds. I see several pleasing examples of them through the White Paper. I do not think we are going to argue about that kind of thing in this House. The only question is how much money we can afford for it. These things can be expensive. But most of us agree that up to considerably high limits it would be money well spent.

Now to come to what I call negative inducements. These I wholeheartedly disagree with and deplore. They are aimed at encouragement of the language mainly by imposing disabilities on those who do not learn Irish or who do not learn as much Irish as official policy dictates. For example, there is the case of the Leaving Certificate which, as has just been said, imposes a disability. You cannot get the certificate without some knowledge of the language. Again, the entrance to one of our universities for residents of this State is, I understand, prevented without a knowledge of the language. I regret this kind of negative inducement. I even deplore it, because here the price we pay is not merely monetary. We are paying in terms of inefficiency, of dislike, of cynicism and of emigration.

Let me explain inefficiency. I will quote an example that happened to me a few years ago. I was honoured to be an extern examiner in our sister university. I went to one of the constituent colleges to examine in Greek and met a very charming young candidate who conversed with me in English. When the time came for the viva voce one of the lecturers was called in as an interpreter. She sat in the middle, I sat on her right and the candidate sat on her left. I asked a question in my native language, which happens to be English. That is an accident of fate. The interpreter turned it into Irish. The candidate who had now heard the question twice, which of course is a help sometimes, replied in Irish and the interpreter, who was a lecturer in this college, translated it back into English. That is not efficient. Is it desirable? Does it really help the language? I shall give another example. As a professor I tend to think in terms of examinations these days. They are very much in my mind at the moment. One of my colleagues was examining in medieval history. A paper was submitted, quite legally, in Irish. She, again not having the language with any great fluency, applied for an interpreter, a very good Irish speaker. He said: “This is not very good Irish; I do not know what a good deal of it means”.

Mr. Lenehan

It might not have been very good English either.

Professor Stanford

I am talking about Irish. That opens the door to inefficiency. There are worse instances than that. I love this country. People of my name have been here for over 700 years. I do not like to see it exposed to hypocrisy, as it sometimes is. I am sad when I see ambitious young men and women, idealistic young men and women, who have got the belief that in some cases the worst qualified person is preferred to a better qualified person because of language qualifications. I cannot prove this. But I know it is a prevalant view. I have heard the language described, perhaps wrongly, as a Trojan horse for mediocrity. I asked the person who said that what he meant. He meant that inside this noble language mediocre people, unsuitable candidates, were able to get jobs in the citadel of national efficiency which he identified with the city of Troy.

This kind of negative enthusiasm for a language exposes the language to cynicism. And it causes emigration. There are many young Irish men and women who want to teach science or mathematics in this country but cannot unless they qualify in Irish, or could not until recently when there may have been some relaxation. We are losing good Irish people in that way. That is sad.

Now let me quote chapter and verse from the White Paper, illustrating what I have been saying. I shall confine myself to the recommendations in the sections dealing with education, those which call for greater positive inducement. I gladly support them, with a few reservations, provided the taxpayers are prepared to bear the cost of them and the cost may be considerable. I welcome, for example, the recommendations on providing refresher courses for teachers and for encouraging linguistic research into the problems of reviving a declining language. I welcome the recommendation that Irish grammar should be taught less formally and that there should be less emphasis on writing in the early stages. I agree with Senator Quinlan that the loss of the national alphabet is a considerable one. There is a foolish view that children do not like different alphabets. I know from my experience of Greek that they delight in learning a new alphabet. The Greek alphabet has a fascination that the Latin alphabet does not have. We have lost something exciting for children in discarding a beautiful alphabet.

Everybody will be pleased to see these efforts to make the language more attractive and more stimulating. I welcome the recommendation that modern teaching aids should be used more widely and that set courses should show more variety. I especially welcome the positive encouragement that is demanded of the universities. The only thing I regret is that there is a kind of segregation of Trinity College from its sister university in this White Paper. I do not see the need for that. With limited exceptions, we should like to stand side by side with the other national university. Perhaps Senator Lenehan, who has been making some inarticulate remarks, would be enlightened if I reminded him that the record of Trinity is not so bad in the last 150 years in regard to the Irish language.

Mr. Lenehan

Not so bad. Dona go leor.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Ní ceart don Seanadóir our isteach ar an gcainteoir

Professor Stanford

Davis was one of ours, Douglas Hyde was ours and the man who left a most considerable sum of money in early times for the encouragement of the Irish language, Flood from Grattan's Parliament, was one of ours. We have produced perhaps 50 per cent of the great Irish scholars. Perhaps what Senator Lenehan has in mind is that about 60 years ago deplorable remarks were made about the Irish language by people in Trinity. One of my functions here is to try to live down those and other foolish remarks like them. I shall not quote the things said by Sir John Pentland Mahaffy or Professor Atkinson. They said stupid, hateful things about the language, and Trinity has been trying to live them down for 60 years but has not yet entirely succeeded.

That is an unfortunate part of our historic heritage. But I repeat that Trinity has done a lot for the Irish language in the past 150 years.

I am all in favour of positive inducement but not negative ones. One in particular I would pick out. It is on page 136, recommendation 220 of the White Paper which says that Irish should be an essential subject for entrance into the University of Dublin. In other words it is recommended that it should be compulsory for entrance. If this were done what would happen? I shall link this with similar recommendations in respect of technological and vocational colleges. If Trinity and the technological and vocational colleges made Irish compulsory for admission what would happen? Hundreds of Irish children who either do not want to learn Irish or to learn any more Irish would be compelled against their will to do it. Would they like the language more as a result? No. Would they use it more as a result? No. Some of them would emigrate to a university outside the State rather than do that. Others would unwillingly conform and have a grudge against the language forever afterwards.

Until fairly recently, Latin was compulsory for entrance to Trinity. We abolished it some years ago because we found it was impossible to expect high or right standards from people compelled to take it, and that this compulsion was engendering a chronic hostility to Latin. It was abolished, and Trinity is all the better as a result. How can you expect idealistic young students, eagar to do well in mathematics or science or philosophy or a dozen other subjects, to have to study a language that has not the slightest relevance to their vocations?

Now I have probably said too much on this motion and there are other Senators who wish to contribute. Of course the safest thing to do on a motion of this kind is to say nothing. However, I believe the right thing for a Senator from Trinity is to speak his mind on an occasion like this. If I have said anything wrong I am open to correction and rebuke. I insist that you will find 95 per cent of the people— including a fair proportion of the notorious five per cent—in favour of positive inducements but a great many who deplore negative inducements.

Mr. Lenehan

I understand that at the time of the druids Irish was the spoken language of this country. It continued to be the languagae of this country until it was invaded. Of course the position still is that there are places in the country where Irish is still the spoken language. I still believe that any steps we can take to preserve that language must be taken. Now, an extraordinary state of affairs prevails. We can use anybody we wish in our arguments. It is strange that our children in secondary schools do not come back to us and say that the master will cause trouble about the learning of Latin, Greek, French, and so on. The only time that anyone comes back to us and says anything is wrong is when somebody is asked to learn Irish. How is it, in all fairness to everybody, that the only language that you are not supposed to learn is Irish? Is that not quite true? You can use all the arguments you want to use, up, down, back and over, but is it not quite true that we are the only people in the world who throw what I am going to call droch-mheas on their own language? Did anybody ever hear the French say they did not want to hear their own language, or the Dutch or the Belgians?

Mr. P. O'Reilly

(Longford): The Belgians have two languages. It is a pluralistic state.

Mr. Lenehan

We are the only people in the world who can, and who try, to cast, what I will call again, droch-mheas on their own language. Our language was an old language before Trinity College was ever heard of and it will exist after Trinity College has disappeared from this country, as well. Let nobody in this House have any doubts about that: there is no question or doubt about it. If we are to be that type of people who will sit idly by and not take the necessary steps to put our language back on the map again, then there is something wrong with us.

Now, I want to give a few examples in regard to the language. It is quite true that it is down in the West of Ireland and probably in parts of the South and North-West that we have the Irish language and it is also quite true that it is from these areas, mainly, that our people emigrate. I want to point out that when they go over to Britain not only are they not asked what their language is but they are not asked what their religion is, either, and that is a very entertaining point. When our people go over there, they are not asked what their language is and they are not asked what their religion is and, so long as they are able to work, and good workers they are, that is all that is required. Then somebody gets up in this House and says that our language, just because it is the Irish language, is some kind of an impediment. That is not true: it is completely and entirely wrong. I am sure there are many Senators who will uphold what I am saying now. It is not true. People in the West of Ireland, the best of workers, find, when they emigrate, that the British do not ask them what their language is.

Let us go further afield. Let us go to the United States where there are hundreds of thousands of Germans and all kinds of Europeans. Does anybody here seriously suggest that they are asked what their native language is? They are not, and, so long as they are able to go in and work, that is all that counts. I do not give one highland hoot whether it upsets the professors of Trinity one way or another whether or not we have to maintain our language. As a people, and as a people with a future, it would be completely unrealistic for us—we are a small people with a small population but with a great past and a great future— to subscribe to the dictates of Trinity College and I am one of the people who will not in any circumstances do that.

We have fought for over 700 years for our language and our identity. Unfortunately, we have not got as far as we expected but we have gone ninetenths of the way and I believe that, with goodwill, the generations coming after us will support us and we shall get the rest of the way and take over the whole country. It would be unrealistic if I did not say that when we do take over this country, while Irish may not be the language of every man in the country or every woman or child in the country, our aim must be that our children and those who come after us will know Irish—and I have no hope at all for the people who do not know Irish.

We send our children to secondary schools to learn Latin and other languages, and they learn them. They do not come home and say: "Daddy, I got beaten today for not doing this", but they come home and say: "Daddy, I got beaten for not knowing Irish". Certainly, that is a fantastic situation. Is it not a lunatic situation? Supposing we went to any other country in the world, would we find a similar situation? Supposing we went to Belgium or France. Supposing a French gasúr came home to his father and said: "Daddy, I got a beating today for not knowing French", would he not be a right fool? But an Irish gasúr can come home and say: "I was beaten today for not knowing Irish", and his father would be inclined to agree with him. Have we any sense at all? What kind of a country are we, at all? That is the position and the people in Trinity College and any other place——

Mr. P. O'Reilly

(Longford): May I raise a point of order, please?

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Senator may do so, providing it is a point of order.

Mr. P. O'Reilly

(Longford): May I submit to the Chair that I feel I have a duty—or that somebody has a duty —to say I think the contribution of Senator Lenehan is not really related to the White Paper and, further, that it is not accurate in that the Senator is imputing words and viewpoints that were not expressed by previous speakers?

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

On Senator O'Reilly's submission, while I regret that some of Senator Lenehan's remarks are not more directly devoted to the motion, I have so far not heard enough to rule him out of order.

Mr. Lenehan

Thanks. The Chair has commonsense. Am I not right in this? If a gasúr in France came to his father and said: "I was beaten today, Daddy, for not knowing French——"

Mr. Garret FitzGerald

What would happen if he were a Breton? Are Bretons to be beaten for not knowing French?

Mr. Lenehan

I shall come to that. Supposing a German gasúr comes home to his father and says: "Daddy, I was beaten today for not knowing German——"

Mr. Garret FitzGerald

Supposing he is a Danish-speaking German from Schleswig-Holstein?

Mr. Lenehan

If you want a bit of fun, you can have it with me.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Chair wants debate rather than conversation. Senator Lenehan will continue and I trust he will endeavour to move closer to the actual motion.

Mr. Lenehan

Now, Sir, will you not agree with this? I do not want to be irrelevant but I have heard all the arguments against the Irish language. When the English lad came home to his father and said he was punished by the teacher for not speaking English——

Mr. Garret FitzGerald

Supposing he was Welsh?

Mr. Lenehan

——he said: "The teacher beat me today because I did not know English". What is the answer to the young Irish fellow who comes home and says he was beaten by the teacher because he did not know Irish? Is the Irish gasúr not as much entitled to know Irish as the young English gasúr is to know English? I have six children myself, one of whom is 20 years of age. I never found that any of them had any difficulty, good, bad or indifferent, about learning Irish. When I was at school, I had to learn Latin and Greek, and there was no quibbling about it. If we did not learn it, we got a shoe on the backside. There was no question of getting it taken off. We might as well be realistic about this. People come into this House and will not be fair about the Irish language. We have our answer here. The English gasúr comes home and says to his daddy he was beaten because he did not know English.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Senator is travelling over ground he has travelled over several times already.

Mr. Lenehan

We have to be honest about this. This is our language. Have you got a copy of the Constitution, Sir?

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I have Standing Orders, and that book is sufficient for me.

Mr. Lenehan

According to the Constitution, the Irish language is the first language of the country. If my gasúr came to me tonight, if I were at home, and said he was beaten today because he did not know Irish, I would give him a shoe on the backside. So should anybody else who had respect for his country or for our language. I do not for one moment hold with the kind of codology that goes on. It is thrown at us that we cannot get proper scientific terms, that we do not know what this or that is. I want to be quite straight about this. How is it the Irish are the only people who do not know scientific terms in their own language? How do the Germans, the Czechs or the Russians go about it?

Tomás Ó Maoláin

Even the Chinese.

Mr. Lenehan

Yes, how do the Chinese go about it? Does anybody in this House seriously suggest that we are a crowd of nincompoops? We are not. The Belgians went into the Congo. They took it over and decided to keep the Congolese entirely untutored. The British came in here some hundreds of years ago but they could not keep us untutored as we were tutored before they came. We were better taught than they were. That is a very important point. We were, at that time, 1,000 years ahead of them. That was the only reason they could not bring the Irish down to earth: we were already a tutored people. We knew a good deal more economically than they did. I hope there are some people on the far side of the House who will uphold me in this. The fact that we tried to keep the language is thrown at us as a reason for our failure to advance further. I want to point out quite clearly that our language has nothing at all to do with it. Our language has taken us a step forward and put us ahead in the world. No matter where an Irishman goes, he takes his language with him. It is not because of the language but because we are a small country that we have not been so progressive. I want to point out, and I think I am only fair in doing so, that when people come in here casting reflections on our language, it is important to understand that we can look back and see that before those who are trying to cast reflections on our language were ever heard of, we were an important people.

Professor Stanford

May I draw Senator Lenehan's attention to the fact that I stated that 20 to 25 minutes ago? I stated precisely that.

Mr. Lenehan

I did not hear what the Senator said.

Mr. J. Lynch

Dúirt sé go ndúirt sé an rud céanna a dúirt an Seanadóir.

Mr. Lenehan

I hope I shall never see the day when Trinity College is taken out of that bloody corner and brought straight into the street.

Professor Stanford

Is that Parliamentary language? There are certain points at which I must protest.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I would like to say I did not clearly hear the last remark of Senator Lenehan.

Mr. Lenehan

I did not hear what the Senator said.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Senator Lenehan, to continue on the motion.

Mr. Lenehan

After so many interruptions, it is not easy to continue. I am sure that most of the Irish oriental Senators in this House will still agree that no matter what our attitude is, we should do our best to get our children to learn Irish. I have six of them, as I say, and I never found they had any serious difficulty in learning Irish. Remember, it is much harder to get them to learn the catechism. That is what a lot of people forget and there is not any word about that. Nobody would come in here and say you do not know your religion but they will say you do not know Irish or, if you do, you should not know it or something of that type.

There is a lot of balderdash talked about learning the Irish language. When I was a young fellow, Irish was not very popular, I can assure you. I am 50 years of age, and when I was going to school 40 years ago, it was not very popular. Some of the Senators on the far side will agree with me on this. Everything was against it then, but the point is that we learned it and it was never any burden to us. When we went into the secondary school, we went through our courses in Irish and it was no great burden to us. It was much more difficult at that time, 40 years ago, than it is today. For the past 40 years, the Irish language has been taught to everybody and if there is any youngster today who will say he does not know anything about the Irish language, I will not accept it as true. He has got his chance.

Debate adjourned.

The Seanad adjourned at 10 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 11th November, 1965.