I would like to make the argument, if I can, that if we want to save Gaelic, we have to start talking more about language rights. I think that it has become very clear now that begging from year to year for more funding is not working. It is exhausting, and I would argue, for a small language revival movement with limited resources of time and energy, it is also a dead end. In contrast, I believe that a focus on winning language rights would be a far more effective and sustainable tactic for our movement because rights would give us a way to short-circuit the endless neo-liberal wrangling about funding levels. With clear language rights, we could simply demand that our rights be enforced, and it would be up to the government to find the money to fund implementation.

True, governments around the world routinely ignore statutory rights, but when they do, rights give activists clear and compelling interests to defend and multiple routes by which to defend them: they can rally around them; they can make moral arguments in their support; and critically, they can go to the courts and force governments to act.

The fact the Scottish Government has been so reluctant to create any enforceable language rights for Gaelic speakers should tell us all we need to know. The Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005 passed unanimously, at least in part, because it was so weak, because it conferred no new rights. The current legislation under consideration, the Scottish Languages Bill, also contains no significant new rights, and apparently, that was by design. Politicians know that explicit language rights would give us powerful tools to force the government to spend real money on behalf of the language, and they aren’t about to give us such tools without a fight.

Successive governments of all parties have been content to allocate relatively small amounts of funding to Gaelic development, but nothing near what is required, while all governments of all parties have consistently failed to bring forward any new language rights that might drive greater spending. Specifically, for almost thirty years, Gaelic activists have been fighting for a parental right to Gaelic-medium education, and again and again, Scottish governments have simply refused meet our demands.

The Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005 was itself the result of a long and impressive grass-roots campaign by Gaelic activists to ensure secure statis for the language, and a key element of that campaign was a call for a right to GME:

It is recommended that statutory provision be put in place requiring local authorities to make available Gaelic-medium school education where reasonable demand exists. It is recommended that ‘reasonable demand’ be defined to mean ‘demand made on behalf of five or more pupils’.

Comunn na Gàidhlig 1997

To activists’ great disappointment at the time, no such right was included in the act as legislated, and while GME has continued to slowly grow over the last 20 years, it is certain that provision would be far stronger now if we had a statutory right in place.

So, I would argue that there are clear tactical reasons to make our movement more about rights in the future, but I would also contend that the moral arguments are at least as compelling, particularly with regard to a right to GME. It is simply wrong that families in Glasgow, for instance, are being excluded from Gaelic education for their children. Scotland is more than wealthy enough to provide GME for any family that wants it. It is a scandal that it isn’t doing so already, but until we secure a clear, enforceable right to GME, we will keep running up against this same problem of anaemic funding and insufficient provision.

The consultation on the current draft of the Scottish Languages Bill will runs until the 8^th of March. We have an opportunity now to argue for significantly strengthening the Bill before it comes before the Parliament for a vote, and I believe that we should continue to push hard for new rights in the legislation: a right to GME certainly, but  also perhaps new rights connected to the proposed areas of linguistic significance. This may be our last chance to influence legislation for Gaelic at this level for a generation, and I fear that if we don’t secure rights for Gaelic speakers now, we will spend another twenty years begging a reluctant establishment for cash for our increasingly threatened language.

Source: Comunn na Gàidhlig, Inbhe Thèarainte dhan Ghàidhlig (Inbhir Nis: Comunn na Gàidhlig, 1997)

PS: For a cool-headed and detailed discussion of the strengths and (considerable) weaknesses of the Scottish Languages Bill as it stands, check out Professor Wilson McLeod’s excellent recent article in Bella Caledonia: The Scottish Languages Bill: prospects for strengthening and challenges for implementation.