FULL VERSION - European Commission - Europa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

1.6 Sub-group feedbackThe responses showed broad agreement with establishing EU level language planning andpolicy. The most detailed response came from EFNIL and CILT. Their main points are:EFNIL supports a language plan for the EU, which should not be a language plan by theinstitutions of the EU only, but also by the institutions and the responsible policy bodieswithin the EU Member States, given that each Member State (or regions within these states)is responsible for language policy.A language plan for Europe as a whole can only be successful if there is a permanentdialogue and co-ordination between local (national/ regional) and supranational levels, inorder to negotiate tensions and establish common objectives. Such a need brings to thesurface the need for a consultation and co-ordination organisation, which would ensure linksbetween EU institutions and national policy bodies, while it may also facilitate the exchangeof information, collaboration and convergence of opinion on issues between the national andregional bodies in the Member States.CILT, The National Centre for Languages, state that it is important that such a policyshould lead to the elaboration of a plan with a clear timescale for implementation. It shouldbe:a) Comprehensive and inclusive. It should take account of the true extent of multilingualismin Europe (as documented by the VALEUR project) 23 and recognise that the benefits of amultilingual society can only be realised by having plurilingual individuals within it.b) Citizen-centred. It should take into account the wishes and needs of citizen in economic,social, educational, cultural and religious spheres as well as the needs of the wider society.c) It should link with other policies and objectives (e.g. policies for economic competitivenessand social cohesion). It should not be a policy which only interests linguists oreducationalists.2 Linguistic rights and ending language based discrimination,current issuesOverview: the existing rights baseMeasures to support lesser used languagesLesser used languages still in danger in the EUImmigrant languagesSub-group feedback2.1 Overview: the existing rights baseThe European Union’s stance on multilingualism is based on respect for linguistic diversity.The Union has 23 official and working languages – far more than international organisationssuch as the UN, which has only six.At the time of the Maastricht Treaty an article was introduced on education which recognised:‘…the responsibility of the Member States for… their cultural and linguistic diversity. (Article149) and one on culture which declared that:‘ The Community shall contribute to theflowering of the cultures of the Member States, while respecting their national and regionaldiversity…’ As we saw above, this has now been enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty, Article 2.3of which states that the Union ‘…shall respect its rich cultural and linguistic diversity, andshall ensure that Europe's cultural heritage is safeguarded and enhanced’.23www.ecml.at/mtp2/valeurCivil Society Platform on Multilingualism: 20Policy Recommendations for the Promotion of Multilingualism in the European Union 06/06/10 – FULL VERSION
A similar provision can be found in Article 22 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights whichaccompanies the Treaty: Cultural, religious and linguistic diversity The Union shall respectcultural, religious and linguistic diversity.In short, the Union has a moral and legal imperative to respect and promote linguistic andcultural diversity.Lisbon Treaty and a new ‘human rights architecture’The Lisbon Treaty and the accompanying Charter of Fundamental Rights which came intoforce on 1 December 2009 acted to embed linguistic diversity as a European value.Charter for Fundamental Rights (CFR)The discrimination prohibition of Article 21 of the CFR 24 has already been mentioned. Whilethe Charter’s competence is only operative when states implement EU law and whennational legislation transposes EU law, it marks a step forward because it sets out the EUstandard and expectations on this issue. It makes the CFR the benchmark in the treatment oflanguages and national minorities.European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)The accession of the EU to the ECHR, currently under negotiation, will further augmentlanguage and national minority rights (e.g. Article 14). Taking the new treaties together thecurrent term in the European Parliament is of a ‘new architecture’ to European human rightsand of Europe-wide standards of rights.Council of Europe ECRML and the FCNMThe two Council of Europe treaties concerning languages are the European Charter forRegional or Minority Languages (ECRML) and the Framework Convention for the Protectionof National Minorities (FCNM). Together these treaties set the standard for RML protection inthe EU.2.2 Measures to support lesser used languagesContributor Dónall Ó Riagáin (Abakan Action) comments: “Thanks to the efforts of EuropeanParliamentarians in the late 70s and early 80s, especially Gaetano Arfé MEP and JohnHume MEP, resolutions were passed in the European Parliament which led to theestablishment of a dedicated budget line to support lesser used languages – Budget Line B3-1006, the establishment of the European Bureau for Lesser Used Languages [EBLUL] andthe Intergroup for Minority Languages, now known as the European Parliament Intergroup forTraditional Minorities, National Communities and Languages. Many positive actions flowedfrom these developments e.g. exchanges of information and expertise among RML groups,joint projects, study visits, pilot schemes and a raising of awareness of linguistic rights acrossEurope. Above all, it led to a sense of solidarity among users of these languages.Undoubtedly, the development of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languageswas another by-product.“Unfortunately, the judgement of the ECJ on Case C-106/96United Kingdom and others v.Commission [1998] ECR 1-2729 AT 2755, para. 26 ended this progressive period. Theresponse of Commissioner Viviane Reding was to ‘mainstream’ all languages in EUprogrammes. Hence, in rules and criteria governing EU educational and cultural programmes(e.g. Lifelong Learning Programme), there is no expressed discrimination against LULs.Regrettably there is, however, implicit discrimination in that the rules and criteria governingthese programmes were prepared with large communities and institutions, especially thoseenjoying the backing of member-state governments, in mind. Those working for LULs oftenfind that they cannot meet these criteria. For this reason, there is a need for positive24See: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdfCivil Society Platform on Multilingualism: 21Policy Recommendations for the Promotion of Multilingualism in the European Union 06/06/10 – FULL VERSION
Page 1 and 2: Civil Society Platform on Multiling
Page 3: 1.3 Post-Lisbon scenario: a "new ri
Page 8 and 9: languages, and on best practices in
Page 10 and 11: On Translation and Terminology*Full
Page 12 and 13: Recommendations1 EU language plan t
Page 14 and 15: Introduction“(The Union) …shall
Page 16 and 17: flower. The popularity of a garden
Page 18 and 19: Concern that multilingualism was be
Page 22 and 23: discrimination in favour of RMLs. S
Page 24 and 25: 3.3 Sub-group feedbackGroup members
Page 26 and 27: Slovenian or the RMLs. In this resp
Page 28 and 29: 5.3 Linguistic ObservatorySeveral o
Page 30 and 31: Work group on Language Diversity an
Page 32 and 33: understand people from other cultur
Page 34: target groups are not exclusive amo
Page 39 and 40: 1 Defining the task of the Work Gro
Page 41 and 42: 2.2 Work methodologyWG1 was initial
Page 43 and 44: articles. 69 The only other languag
Page 45 and 46: education in European schools is ca
Page 47 and 48: The question of what role language
Page 49 and 50: trainees; Offer training mechanisms
Page 51 and 52: investigating expectations and asse
Page 53 and 54: learning. The key of course is the
Page 55 and 56: As a pedagogy this education promot
Page 57 and 58: mechanism to disseminate best pract
Page 59 and 60: 3 Education and training Mobility g
Page 61 and 62: In order to facilitate the circulat
Page 63 and 64: target groups (content creator or c
Page 65 and 66: Civil Society Platform onMultilingu
Page 67 and 68: WORKING GROUP ON LANGUAGE PLANNING
Page 69 and 70: (6.2) Linguistic rights for all EU
Page 71 and 72:
cost-benefit analysis comparing Eng
Page 73 and 74:
(a) Constantly insisting that its i
Page 75 and 76:
Hicks, Davyth 2005 Cornish: languag
Page 77 and 78:
WORKING GROUP ON LANGUAGE DIVERSITY
Page 79 and 80:
4.1 In which way do you think this
Page 81 and 82:
8 What should the European Union do
Page 83 and 84:
10 What are the most common barrier
Page 85 and 86:
Additional questions concerning lan
Page 87 and 88:
References 8EU official documentsEu
Page 89 and 90:
WORKING GROUP ON EDUCATIONANNEX 6.1
Page 91 and 92:
27. In which way are there constrai
Page 93 and 94:
8. On what topics is your instituti
Page 95 and 96:
Annex 6.4 GROUP MEMBERS′ POSITION
Page 97 and 98:
water, and one begins skiing on the
Page 99 and 100:
Cor van der Meer - Mercator Europea
Page 101 and 102:
supported study completed in 2006 (
Page 103 and 104:
Finally, one of the greatest challe
Page 105 and 106:
Marta Lottes - European Association
Page 107 and 108:
o More flexible provision of langua
Page 109 and 110:
) An international THEATRE YOUTH FO
Page 111 and 112:
Pasporta Servo http://www.pasportas
Page 113 and 114:
interpretation and reporting system
Page 115 and 116:
proficiency in a particular languag
Page 117 and 118:
of mediating competence. This will
Page 119 and 120:
Annex 6.5 BEST PRACTICE EXAMPLESBES
Page 121 and 122:
extended and systematic research on
Page 123 and 124:
BEST PRACTICE EXAMPLE 2: Laying see
Page 125 and 126:
- Bonjour, monsieur l’facteur, av
Page 127 and 128:
BEST PRACTICE EXAMPLE 3: Non formal
Page 129 and 130:
BEST PRACTICE EXAMPLE 4: Multiplica
Page 131 and 132:
Possible follow-up Project:The even
Page 133 and 134:
Foundation Holdler ‘68Main reason
Page 135 and 136:
dialogue.Possible follow-up Project
Page 137 and 138:
WORKING GROUP ON TRANSLATION AND TE
Page 139:
Sutton, Geoffrey, 2008. Concise Enc
show all

FULL VERSION - European Commission - Europa

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?