Sir, - The ill-advised decision by the Queen's University Students Union to remove bi-lingual signs from the Union building poses another obstacle in the path of those seeking community recognition for the legitimacy of Gaelic in Northern Ireland.
For a Unionist spokesman to describe the use of bilingual signs - incidentally with the English version significantly larger than the Irish - as "the epitome of sectarianism and cultural imperialism", is no more than predictable yahoo nonsense. More disturbing, however, is the reported view of Bob Cooper, chairman of the Fair Employment Commission, who reportedly maintains that such bilingual signs are incompatible with a neutral working environment. "There is no way they facilitate the spread of the use of the Irish language", he states. Mr Cooper deserves respect for the valuable contribution he has made to the building of a fairer society in Northern Ireland, but he is simply wrong on this issue, both on the practical academic utility of such bilingual signs and, more specifically, in his disregard of the need to fully recognise Irish usage as an integral part of an equitable society here.
To equate, as Mr Cooper appears to do, bilingual signs in English and Irish advising the location of the snack-bar with the UVF gunman poster recently removed in a Belfast factory is manifestly ridiculous. What advice will Mr Cooper proffer to local district councils such as Newry and Mourne and Derry which also use bilingual signs? He appears to have adorned himself with a decaying, Irish-speaking albatross.
Similarly ill-considered is the reported opinion of Ray Mullan of the Community Relations Council, who stated that "while the Irish language should not be politicised, it was a fact that Protestants felt alienated by it". The fact is, of course, that the latest ban on the simple use of the Irish language inevitably politicises the issue further. The mere fact that some Protestants, or Catholics, or any other sect, feel "alienated", in Mr Mullan's opinion, by the straightforward use of bilingual signs cannot be a valid justification for such biased proscription. If his opinion genuinely represents the considered view of the Community Relations Council, that body is clearly destined for the historical dustbin, to join similarly-named groupings which uselessly preceded it.
The Irish language, despite the misrepresentations of some unionists and nationalists, is not a Catholic or Protestant cultural property and should not be used as another cause of conflict in our community. Unfortunately, in ensuring that it be seen as such, the Students Union, the Fair Employment Agency and the Community Relations Council have made a considerable and disastrous contribution, whatever their intentions.
In counteracting their ill-considered view, it is important that the demand for recognition of the everyday use of Irish in Northern Ireland be raised by individuals other than those supporting the language as part of the sectarian and politically-divisive agendas of Sinn Fein etc. I know that considerable numbers of fair-minded Protestants support such recognition on commonsense grounds. Their voices should be prominent among those who speak out on this important issue. Yours, etc., JOHN HUNTER,
Belfast.