The most radical law on the Irish language is beginning to bite but no one has much of an idea what it will cost. Liam Reid investigates.

Politicians tend to be careful about what they say in public. Their speech writers and handlers ensure there is rarely a raised eyebrow in the audience.

But one June night in Spiddal two years ago, Minister for the Gaeltacht Éamon Ó Cuív said something extraordinary about what was then a fairly obscure piece of proposed legislation.

"The English speakers of the country do not know about the Bill and if they did there is a good chance that we would not succeed in putting it through," he is reported to have told a group of Irish language activists.

A month later, with little attention, the President, Mrs McAleese, signed into law the Official Languages Act. The Minister says his comments had a context: the people he was addressing wanted even more stringent regulations while the English-speaking public, especially the media, had failed to engage in debate on the legislation.

And now the effects of the Act are beginning to become apparent. It is clear that if a wider public had been aware of what was proposed, the Minister's bald statement may well have been correct.

To its supporters, the Official Languages Act is reasonable, practical and necessary to give the right to Irish speakers to do business with the State in their native tongue or for some their language of choice.

To its critics the Act is a waste of resources that will produce mountains of expensive unread documents, emphasising the language of bureaucracy rather than supporting a living language.

What all sides agree on, however, is that the Act is one of the most far-reaching pieces of legislation to have been passed into law in Ireland in the last decade. To date the biggest storm it has caused has been Ó Cuív's decision to remove the word Dingle from all road signs and replace it with An Daingean.

But the Dingle/Daingean debate could well be a drop in the Atlantic compared to the financial implications of some provisions.

Six-hundred-and-forty two bodies, from the Department of Finance and large State firms such as the ESB and Aer Lingus, right through to small town councils, are covered under the legislation.

Both sides of the debate accept that the State's use of the Irish language had lapsed. Despite its Constitutional place as the "national" and "first official language" its official use has been in decline for decades.

In the 1950s almost all Irish legislation was published in both languages, but by the 1980s this was happening with just a fraction of Bills.

Labour's Michael D Higgins attempted to address the issue during his time as minister with a voluntary programme for State bodies. But by the late 1990s little progress had been made. In April 2001 a Supreme Court case defined the right to access State services in Irish.

Despite the Supreme Court decision the legislation was still a low priority until after the 2002 general election when Fianna Fáil TD Eamon Ó Cuív, a Connemara resident for most of his life, became Minister. By 2003 the legislation was in place.

Eoin Ó Murchú, political editor of Radio Na Gaeltachta believes the legislation provides a basic human right. "It's a fundamental civil right of any Irish speaker to have access to public services in Irish," he says.

Seán Ó Cuirreáin is the State's Irish Language Commissioner, a new watchdog post created last year under the legislation to ensure the Act is complied with and to deal with complaints from the general public.

Ó Cuirreáin believes the legislation is absolutely necessary and says native Irish speakers have often had no access to basic services in Irish, even in Gaeltacht areas. His first annual report last year highlighted a case where children in a Gaeltacht area with speech and language difficulties had no choice but to get their speech therapy through English.

"I would hope [ the legislation] will create a space in Irish society for the Irish language," he says. "It's definitely a slow process. It's not something that will change overnight."

Labour spokesman on Gaeltacht Affairs Brian O'Shea has been one of the legislation's most outspoken critics. He believes cost is a fundamental issue, and has tabled numerous questions to various Government departments in a bid to establish a proper figure, but to no avail.

"I would like to see more honesty about the debate," he says suggesting that many people who have reservations about the legislation "are afraid to speak out because Irish is such a sacred cow".

Many officials in Government departments and other public bodies who expressed concerns to The Irish Times about aspects of the Act, were unwilling to do so publicly.

Cost and the legislation's practicality are the two primary concerns. Neither the Department of the Gaeltacht, nor the Department of Finance has costed the legislation.

Last week European ministers decided to make Irish a working language in the European Union. Estimates in conjunction with Brussels were that it would take 20 translators to produce the various documents and services required, at a cost of €3.5 million a year.

The first requirement of the Ó Cuív Act, already in force, is that all 642 public bodies must produce their major publications, such as annual reports and statements of policy, in Irish, or in English and Irish. Correspondence with the general public has to be provided in Irish if requested. This means that many forms will also have to be available in Irish.

Last week at an Oireachtas Committee, the Minister for Social and Family Affairs revealed that his department would be spending €500,000 on translation services and printing this year.

Séamus Brennan's department may be one of the larger bodies covered by the Act, but smaller agencies are also facing stiff costs. One local authority, Monaghan County Council, has set aside €40,000 in translation and printing costs to publish some of its documents in Irish, including its new policy on disability.

Last year, provisional estimates by the local authorities management services board put the costs for county and city councils of the act at an additional €8 million a year.

The Courts Service saw the cost of its annual report rise significantly last year. The production of 500 copies of the English version cost just over €24,000 while fewer than 20 copies of the Irish version cost over €10,000 to produce.

Public relations specialists working on literature for local authorities have said the costs of producing leaflets have risen by a third.

Independent senator Joe O'Toole, a fluent Irish speaker, has spoken against the Act, and believes this aspect is especially problematic.

"It's on practical things they should be spending resources, as opposed to forcing unwilling authorities to publish documents nobody wants to read. It's nonsense to believe that is going to help the Irish language."

Mr Ó Murchú rejects this argument. "There are thousands of unread copies in English stuffed into dungeons. You could use the same argument, why produce them in English?"

Publishing major reports in Irish may well just be the first tranche. By the end of the year, all email and electronic circulars to the general public, and printed public notices will have to be in both languages.

There are further potential costs with the planned introduction of bilingual advertisements.

Many Government departments already adhere to this with advertisements appearing in both languages. But it will have significant implications for smaller bodies and State companies such as Aer Lingus, which engage in very limited Irish language advertising.

The regulations will require that companies or bodies must at least ensure that an Irish version of an English advertisement appears in Irish media outlets. A spokesman for Aer Lingus said it opposed the move as it would increase its costs but not that of its competitors.

Now that the Act is law its biggest potential costs are contained in the future possibility that every public body will berequired to have an Irish language element in all its dealings with the public.

This could mean public bodies would have to provide Irish language speakers to take calls from members of the public who want to have their queries dealt with in Irish. County councils, the gardaí and other bodies could be required to install computer systems able to cope with queries in Irish. The costs are unknown, but the cost potential is significant.

So far the Minister has asked just 25 bodies, including several Government departments, councils and other bodies operating in Gaeltacht areas, to draw up schemes covering all services they intend to provide in Irish.

For example Government departments have been asked to ensure all press releases are eventually available in Irish. This measure alone could cost Government departments, some of which produce 500 releases a year, €50,000 in translation costs or to employ another civil servant to carry out translations.

Chairman of the General Council of County Councils Bill Carey says there are rising concerns among local authority members about the Act's financial implications.

He is experiencing this first-hand in his own council Co Meath, which is one of the 25 bodies currently finalising its scheme for Irish language provision. Meath was chosen to be in the first batch as it has two small Gaeltacht areas.

"It's going to come into force in November, and I'm told by officials that the effect is going to be awesome, It's not just a question of appointing a few Irish officers," Cllr Carey says.

"It's all very fine saying that you can grin and bear it, but how is it going to be paid for? We have to bear the cost, so something else is going to suffer."

Senator Joe O'Toole believes the legislation's biggest failure is that it does not target resources where the language needs the most help, such as in the Gaeltacht, where census figures have shown the number of daily speakers to be declining.

"I think it reflects the lack of practicality in dealing with the Irish language since the foundation of the State," he says.

"It's people who are pushing it down the throats of people who are not interested when we should be looking at the Gaeltachta."