Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…
Chamber and committees

Procedures Committee, 29 Oct 2002

Meeting date: Tuesday, October 29, 2002


Contents


Language Policy

The Convener:

Item 3 on the agenda, for which we are now joined officially by Stephen Hutchinson, is the language policy of the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body. This is essentially a report back to the committee on the comments that it made when the matter was previously discussed. Does Stephen Hutchinson want to highlight any points?

Stephen Hutchinson:

I want to say only that I hope that the committee is content with the policy and the action plan. The language policy group is grateful to the committee for the comments that members made at the meeting that I attended. I hope that the committee feels that we have taken the spirit of those comments on board.

Members will see from the papers that we have thoroughly discussed these matters before, but this is an opportunity to comment and to make any further observations. If there are no further observations, we shall simply note the paper.

Mr Paterson:

I would like to make a couple of comments. I was speaking particularly about the Scots language and I think that there has been a significant move forward in the paper, which treats the language as any other language. There may not have been moves afoot to exclude Scots, but it would have been remiss not to include it in a normal fashion.

I am a bit disappointed that there are no moves forward on signage for the Scottish Parliament buildings. It seems strange that we have a Scottish Parliament but we do not want to use Scots when we title it. I hope that my comments will bring about a rethink on that issue. It is good that Braille is to be used. I cannot remember that being mentioned before, so that is excellent. However, I hope that somebody somewhere will take note of the fact that this is the Scottish Parliament and that it would be a good idea if it were titled in Scots.

That is not our decision. I know that the matter has been debated many times, but Gil Paterson's point is on the record once again.

I welcome the paper, which is a helpful and balanced report. I am especially grateful that my hobbyhorse—access points to the Parliament—has been directly addressed. I appreciate that.

Do members agree to note the paper and the action plan?

Members indicated agreement.