Na hUncail Tomáis
By Laurence McKeown
When the panel of speakers on Questions and Answers, a discussion
held during Féile an Phobail, were asked if they thought that a
united Ireland would only be achieved once Catholics were in the
majority, Norman Porter, representing the unionist tradition,
said that if such were to happen it would signal the death of
politics. It would be so because it would mean that change in
attitudes, customs and practices would be reduced to whoever held
the majority, and just as it was wrong that Protestants today in
the north should dictate events to the exclusion of Catholics so
too it would equally be wrong if the tables were turned and
Catholics dictated to the exclusion of Protestants. I may have
paraphrased somewhat there but that was the gist of his point and
I think it a very valid one.
I thought of this - the idea of majorities - the other day when I
learned that Queen's University Student Union had reversed its
policy regarding the Irish language and the use of bi-lingual
signs in the Union. The previous policy had raised the hackles of
unionists ever since its introduction and not just those who were
attending university and frequenting the Union's premises.
Many attempts were made to reverse the policy but because
Catholics/Nationalists were in the majority in the Union, or at
least better organised, those attempts never were successful.
Which is why a new angle to have the policy reversed was adopted.
This time the issue was raised under the guise of fair
employment. The manner in which that was done, the way it was
timed (the University closed during the summer) and the
suddenness of the announcement shocked many. Not suprisingly
there was much justified anger among nationalist people. Let's
remember that what we were talking about was a total of 16 signs,
not ones as Gaeilge even but bi-lingual ones. Signs that told us
where we could find the toilets, for instance, Fir agus Mna.
Hardly threatening. In fact, quite helpful when the need is upon
us. Not to be compared with the loyalist flags and graffiti which
adorn many a workplace for the benefit of Catholics.
The comments that have been voiced in the past week in support of
the new policy and regarding the Irish language in general have
been nothing short of racist, though only to be expected given
the quarters and mindset from which they emanate. What is more
interesting though is the silence from those who have in the past
raised their public profile on the issue of discrimanation
against Catholics/Nationalists at Queens. I'm thinking in
particular of Alex Attwood of the SDLP who sits on the Queen's
Senate as a nominee from the Belfast City Council. Alex's ticket
onto the Senate in the first place, let's recall, was on the
issue of discrimination.
d what of his colleague, Cormac Bakewell, President of the
Students' Union and fellow SDLP member? It turns out that the
boul Cormac, as part of the union executive, accepted and then
enacted the consultative report that the bi-lingual policy be
dropped. Not a vote taken among students mind you - to hell with
that oul democracy lark - but an executive decision. Strange that
Cormac should feel so strongly that the Irish language was
threatening to any of the employees of the Union - the argument
that is being voiced for the change in policy - given that there
has never been any litigation on the matter never mind a
successful prosecution by any Union employee regarding the
bi-lingual policy.
I think that the SDLP should now clarify its position regarding
the Irish language. It's not good enough for Patsy McGlone, their
spokesperson on cultural issues, to voice his criticisms of
Queen's Student Union if senior members of his own party are
colluding in a policy which helps demonise the language. We can
at least understand, if not accept, the bigoted attitudes of
unionists. What is more disgusting is the active collusion of our
own home grown `Uncle Toms' in assisting and strenghtening that
bigotry when it should be resisted and challenged.
Norman Porter is right when he says that politics should not
simply be about majorities and minorities, but neither should it
be about small appointed groups who overturn the democratically
expressed view of the majority when all that majority seeks to do
is give equal parity to another spoken language.
![[An Phoblacht]](http://republican-news.org/graphics/title_gifs/aprn.gif)