A perfect example of this can be found in the support for
the paper's anti Welsh attitude garnered from Paul Murphy: who warns against 'excessive' spending on Welsh
language schemes!
The very word bilingual suggests something to do
with TWO languages so any perceived cost of bilingualism should, surely, be
shared between BOTH languages. A monolingual transcript of Assembly proceedings,
in either language, would have a price tag attached. So how much of the £400K bilingual
waste of money is actually being spent on JUST the Welsh
Language?
Does English come free of charge?
However I am willing to agree with the Western Mail,
translation costs money and in these straightened times money is short. When witnesses
appear before committees of the Assembly and present their evidence in Welsh,
or when members address those committees in Welsh, translations are a waste of money;
they are unneeded and cost too much; after all those of us who can understand
Welsh can sacrifice that wasteful spending on English in order to put
that wasted money into more worthy pots! Translating those contributions into English
is expensive, a waste of money and shouldn't be allowed!
I have attended many hundreds of bilingual meetings in Wales
during the past forty years, without ever using any translation facility – as a
fluent user of both Welsh and English I don't need translators – those who need the translation facilities are the mono-linguist English, not us bilingual Welsh speakers!
Translation, in Wales, is primarily, spending on the English Language!
Translation, in Wales, is primarily, spending on the English Language!