Published On: Mon, Aug 26th, 2013

Letter to the Editor – Cory Cameron of Timmins Ontario on Discrimination – August 26, 2013

LTEDiscrimination

 

Discrimination.  The big D word.   A word most readily used by many though rarely meritable in its’ use.   In our contemporary world of political correctness, discrimination is one of many ‘buzzwords’ that forms a politicians’ lexicon of verbal spaghetti.  Political figures love to throw around the idea that one group of people are often discriminated against by another group of people or even by a nation’s laws.  It is a fantastic vote grabber for those most instrumental in the art of politics.  The truth however, in this day and age, is that rarely are modern-day laws discriminatory in their practice, right?

 

Wrong!

 

Have you ever heard of the concepts of affirmative action or what we like to call employment equity in Canada?  These are concepts that were instituted into Canadian law to help level the playing field for those who have traditionally suffered the ill consequences of discrimination; especially in the job market.  Under the Constitution Act of 1982, containing the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; equity legislation is detailed therein.  The Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) is enforced by the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) and it is this commission that deals with whether or not discrimination has taken place in the workplace.

 

The following details the issue of Prohibited Grounds of Discrimination in Canada: (Belcourt, Bohlander, &  Snell, Managing Human Resources, 5th Canadian Edition, 2008).

 

Race or colour

Religion

Physical or mental disability

Dependence on alcohol or drugs

Age

Sex

Marital status

Family status

Sexual orientation

National or ethnic origin (including linguistic background)

Ancestry of place of origin

Language

Social Condition or origin

Source of income

Assignment, attachment or seizure of pay

Based on association

Political belief

Record of criminal conviction

Pardoned conviction

 

While appearing like a fair and equitable approach to the issue of fairness in hiring practices; employment equity actually creates the framework for unfair hiring criteria – whereby the best qualified person may be the most successful candidate but may not be chosen due to government imposed employment equity legislation.  Case-in-point; consider the possibility of two highly qualified candidates applying for the same government or private sector industry, job.  One candidate, a qualified counselor who, as a child, was raised in the atmosphere of a same sex marriage; understands the very real social challenges faced by his/her same sex parents.  One could surmise that not only is this individual qualified as a counselor; but has the added experience of being raised in a non-traditional family setting, outside of the traditional nuclear family.  The other candidate is also a highly qualified counselor but is a homosexual.  By the very definition and reasoning for employment equity, chances are that the successful candidate will be chosen due to his/her sexuality and not necessarily for his/her skills.

 

Another scenario if you will.  Imagine an Aboriginal couple fostering a non-Aboriginal child who is raised and immersed in Aboriginal culture.  He/she has a university/college education associated with his/her chosen field; speaks an Aboriginal language, is well-versed in the culture and customs associated with the First Nation and has all the credentials required of someone who could work for a government or non-government Aboriginal organization.  The other candidate also has some or most of these qualifications but has one added qualification.  Their ethnicity or race is of a First Nation.  Once again, by the very definition and reasoning for employment equity, chances are that the successful candidate will be chosen due to his/her ethnicity or race and not necessarily for his/her skills.

 

Sound like rare or improbable cases and scenarios to you?  I can attest that they’re not.  They’re increasingly happening everyday in Canada and Human Resources professionals have had to contend with the issue of unfair hiring criteria that these laws have created since at least 1995 with the Employment Equity Act.

 

If you think at this point that our Canadian employment laws are unfair and unjustified then I have even more bad news for you.  Consider the above information I’ve provided about Employment Equity.  Add to this the increasingly unfair bilingual language requirements as well and you can see where things are headed.  A politically correct society where in the quest for fairness we’ve permitted a very unfair system to flourish unchallenged by the people themselves.  We need to ask ourselves if Canada’s employment and language laws are really a reflection of what we encompass and value as a society or if our various levels of government are attempting through social engineering, to shape and mould the people’s consciousness to the system itself.  In other words, do the people work for the system or should the system work for the people?

 

Ever heard of the concept of a ‘bona fide occupational qualification’?  Believe it or not, this concept currently exists in Canada and it allows for discrimination in hiring!  That’s right folks.  You read that correctly.  In the very ‘Act’, the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) whose existence is to prohibit discriminatory hiring practices there exists government-sponsored discriminatory hiring!  As Belcourt et al. reports (2008):

 

The act applies to all federal government departments and agencies, to Crown corporations, and to other businesses and industries under federal jurisdiction, such as banks, airlines, railway companies, and insurance and communications companies.  For those areas not under federal jurisdiction, protection is available under provincial human rights laws.  Provincial laws, although very similar to federal ones, do differ from province to province.  Every province and territory has a human rights act (or code), and each has jurisdiction prohibiting discrimination in the workplace.  The prohibited grounds of discrimination in employment include race, religion, sex, age, national or ethnic origin, physical handicap, and marital status…Employers are permitted to discriminate if employment preferences are based on a bona fide occupational qualifications (BFOQ) or BFOR (bona fide occupational requirement). A BFOQ is justified if the employer can establish necessity for business operations.  In other words, differential treatment is not discrimination if there is a justifiable reason.  (106)

This sounds an awful lot like Orwell’s, Animal Farm, where Commandment #7 which originally stated that:

 

“All animals are equal”

 

Was eventually changed to,

 

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”

 

Is this the kind of Canada we want to live and work in?  Surely the ideology of an individual’s rights should trump group rights in all respects.  Should it not?  Otherwise, we need to ask ourselves if we truly live in a democracy where all citizens enjoy the same rights and privileges as all others.  As of this writing, the majority of our citizenry cannot work for their civil service or hold the highest office of the land due to nothing more than a lack of knowledge of one of Canada’s minority languages.

 

Please keep in mind that,

 

“All Canadians are equal, but some Canadians are more equal than others”

 

Cory Cameron

Timmins, On

Sunday August 25, 2013

 

(Comments and opinions of Editorials, Letters to the Editor, and comments from readers are purely their own and don’t necessarily reflect those of the owners of this site, their staff, or sponsors.)

Please click the banner below and subscribe to CFN.  We need 100 subscribers by September 2013 to bring back Seaway Radio!

subscribe to cfn

Displaying 849 Comments
Have Your Say
  1. English Lassie says:

    I’d like to know why there are job postings for “bilingual” bus drivers in Cornwall with Student First company.Cornwall has a French only population of 500, where’s the need??
    Are they getting funding to promote this??
    More job immobilization for English only citizens of Cornwall, who by the way are the whopping majority.
    !!!
    On a side note, I called St.Lawrence High School recently & was greeted with hello/bonjour…
    WTF is going on in Cornwall???

  2. Edudyorlik says:

    @David Oldham
    RE: POST on October 6, 2013 at 11:48 am”ADMIN “reasonable” is the operative word.
    My neighbour is an example of a french speaking individual born in Quebec who went to Ontario in the sixties to learn English and make a better life for himself. As he approached retirement he returned to Quebec but found to his dismay the people and the politics to be repulsive. He moved back to Ontario and states proudly that he is simply a Canadian with french ancestry.”

    WELL SAID but sadly NOT representative of the majority of the French powers that be.

    And even sadder than that, that majority of the French that i refer to — ARE LIKE THAT — because they have been brainwashed over several decades to believe they must hate the English language and the English culture as they are told it is a threat to them which IT IS NOT.

    They are a very proud and vein culture (just look at their women :-)) they don’t like to loose and are VERY BAD LOSERS and thus they will NEVER GET OVER the defeat they suffered to the British.

    Je me souviens

    If they were 1 / 10th as gracious in defeat as the British / English were in victory this would be a wonderful country filled with French and English and everyone would just get along. You know, sort of like it was before Pierre and Rene began “the big twist.”

  3. Furtz says:

    @ gqo. You and a few English rights freedom fighters might want to break up Canada because the current (and recent past) political situation in Quebec is not to your liking. Dream on, my friend. Are you seriously suggesting that Canada, one of the most successful democracies on the planet, be broken up because your “life experience” in Quebec wasn’t 100% happy?
    @ Cory. You have a soul-mate in gqo. Yous should get together for a coffee and b!tchfest about how unfair life is and all that stuff.

  4. admin says:

    Furtz Scotland may leave England. Is it a crime to separate? There’s a growing movement for Montreal to become a City State and leave Quebec. Is that also wrong?

  5. Furtz says:

    Scotland and North Ireland have wanted to be out from under British rule for hundreds of years. Not sure what that has to do with breaking up Canada because a few whining ex-Quebecers want it to happen.

  6. Edudyorlik says:

    Furtz, the French are the ones who began this whole idea that we cannot live together. I remember the phrases well coming from the French as i was growing up. Phrases like this is a marriage gone bad, and we MUST divorce. Etc..

    Beyond that, knowing the character of the French, i ask you, how much backlash and hard feelings do you think there would be in this country if it had been the English who were organizing these OUI / NO — we want to separate from the French — as in we want nothing to do with their language and culture — ?

    Seriously .. We’d never hear he end of such a thing. It would be daily news in the French media. Les Anglais ne veulent pas nous autour. Les Anglais ne nous aiment pas etc etc etc…

    Fact is, the French were the ones that blatantly made it clear that they deemed themselves different and not compatible with les Anglas…

    They have simply done enough of these negative type things now to warrant the English taking a step back to re-examine this little imbalanced arrangement.

    The French have outlawed the English language and culture in the province of Quebec.

    Knowing how they want NOTHING TO DO WITH ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND CULTURE doesn’t it seem normal to use how they treat the English in Quebec and apply that precedence to wherever they end may end up with a majority French population?

    They will do the same and outlaw the English and simply make that area French only. They are actually showing this NOW in Eastern Ontario and New Brunswick. To them it is NOT a nice harmonious “let’s all live together” as one it’s we WANT FRENCH ONLY.

    They already carry on like Quebec is a separate country with their own embassies etc. And, unlike other provinces, the run their own kind of legal system and also run their own immigration with different policies than the country they reside in. They don’t even want to fly the Canadian flag for crying out loud. For all intents and purposes they are a separate country.

    THE ONLY THING they seem to want to keep flowing from the rest of Canada are the jobs and the transfer payments, and I for one have had it up to here with giving my money to this “petulant child like little entity” that only spits in my face every time i believe i deserve something from this little “arrangement / relationship.”

    I can pretty much — guarantee you — that THERE ARE MANY Canadians tax payers who are fed up with this little one sided arrangement also.

    You know, back when i was a boy growing up in Quebec with my French Mother and my English father I desperately wanted Canada to stay together. I believed in that possibility but… having seen one side constantly give (the English) and one side constantly take (the French) it would seem to me that fairness is NOT a two way street with these people and it is simply insane for anyone to wish to continue to be used and abused while forking over billions of dollars in the process.

    It just NO LONGER MAKES ANY SENSE to appease that petulant child (the French powers that be) who seems to have decided that they are simply going to do whatever they damn well please regardless of how degrading and negative it is to the others involved.

    My experience In life has shown me that harmony means there is a give and take and NOT — A TAKE TAKE TAKE all the time.

    That is SIMPLY NO LONGER ACCEPTABLE.

    And on that note i would like to wish you a “i have a feeling we’d get along much better as separate entities” kind of day eh :-)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9Yh5yikJ08

  7. admin says:

    What it means dear Furtz is that not all places “Separate” for acrimonious reasons.

  8. Edudyorlik says:

    English Lassie
    October 6, 2013 at 3:24 pm
    Our federal government is slowly being taken over also EL.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxHI4-ZLpxs

    They just moved this CRTC office to the “Quebec side” at a cost of 30 million dollars to the tax payers. According to the “rules” –

    (god knows who implemented these rules – my guess is the last name must have been jean Claude or something like that)

    – that now means they can post their web site in French dominant French first.

    This is like a cancer and it MUST BE STOPPED.

  9. highlander says:

    Do they separate or not ?

    I believe the country is at a coming of age and change is on the horizon.
    The ill feelings toward Quebec is of thier own doing in how they treat their minorities as well as their dreaded ethnics .
    Canadian’s have always thought of themselves as fair minded and when a province and a people behave like that it badly reflects badly on those fair minded people,in particular internationally.

    Many ,many Canadians are fedup with the spoiled child of co.federation,I look forward to the future in the hopes our Country finally comes to terms with itself and perhaps harmony may evolve when equality is reinstated.

  10. Edudyorlik says:

    On October 6, 2013 at 8:18 pm highlander wrote, ”
    Do they separate or not ?”

    Unfortunately, at this stage, and given the desires of the French to have EVERYTHING in FRENCH ONLY there is NO OTHER CHOICE.

    We MUST go our separate ways.

    When i look at what the French have done in the province of Quebec and how they have created a French ONLY zone in a legal way which now is seemed into the psyche of the people in a moralistic way.

    When i look at what the French are now bringing to areas outside Quebec, i hear warning bells.

  11. gqo says:

    @ frutz,

    First off, quebec WILL separate, not because of our “life experiences” but because they are as Stephen Harper referred to them , A NATION

    quebec, has their own immigration system, their own language ,their own culture and their own DISTINCT way of looking at the world in general and quebec and in particular, none of which has any commonality with Canada.

    Canada, lost its designation of being one of the best democracies in the world, when it sacrificed half a million anglo quebeckers.

    People are very cognizant of this fact and they have very long memories.

    So your characterization of Canada is faulty and very naive.

    I believe that a nine province Canada would be far better off without a quebec that is anti-English and anti-democratic.

    First off, without quebec, bilingualism would be gone. the savings ( billions each ) year would then revert back to Canada, perhaps for health or education or to address the enormous debt, that quebec ensured we had because of quarter of a trillion dollars sent there since 1958, in transfer payments and grants.

    Secondly, the constant fights and conflicts that have taken place for over 400 years, with no end in sight, would disappear, and with this the costs incurred by such conflicts.

    Thirdly, quebec, would be Totally FREE to do as she wished regarding her language ,culture and heritage, and thus be able to COMPLETELY PROTECT what they always claimed was threatened, their language.

    Fourth, quebec, fears of loosing their language would be gone, they would total and complete control over this, their reason for existing

    Fifth, they would control their own economy, and now can only blame themselves if things go array

    Sixth, they could be free to develop and PAY FOR their economic expansion as they see fit.

    Seventh, their charter of values could be applied in any manner they wish and this could and would conform to their own values as outlined in bill 101 WITHOUT INTERFERENCE from any nation.

    So frutz, these are but a few reasons why quebec MUST AND SHOULD leave. the only commonalty to my experiences there, is that I do not want any part of their nationalistic society, as currently exists and that will flourish, thanks to a Canada, that allows quebec to do as she pleases.

  12. Furtz says:

    It won’t be happening any time soon.
    Here’s an interesting piece for your consideration.
    http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/time+tell+truth+about+Quebec+separatism/8611777/story.html

  13. admin says:

    Furtz an interesting read, but I think the authors interpretation isn’t 100% dead on. If a clear majority of Quebecers truly wanted to leave they would. The fact is that a clear majority of Quebecers have never wanted to leave Canada. As difficult as it can be to be an Anglophone in Quebec, it can also be difficult to be a Francophone Federalist.

    That’s what happens when extremists on both sides are allowed to take over a debate.

    The problem that Quebec has to face is the simple reality of looking into the mirror and beating the extremists back to where they should be; the fringes. For the population to give someone like Pauline Mariois a government; even a minority shows how messed up Quebec really is because I think deep down if the Liberals had not corrupted themselves to death they still would be in power. I admire a lot of the values that Quebec has that Ontario doesn’t. I live in Ontario because “I FEEL” that those values for the most part only extend to “pure laine”. Ignorance and Arrogance are never a pleasant cocktail. Quebec may never look in that mirror, but the days of Federal appeasement may finally be coming to an end.

  14. bella says:

    So hungry, how long must I wait for you to acknowledge your own words?

    Are you ashamed of your post? Embarrassed maybe? It’s okay if you are. I would be too.

    Do you truly believe what you typed?

    Or are you hoping if you ignore it long enough, I’ll go away? Good luck with that!

    Regardless of your reasons it is ignorant and rude to continue to ignore me, when all I did was quote you.

    Tell me to go to hell or stand up for yourself. The longer it takes, the less value your words hold for everyone. You will soon be nothing but a windbag that no one will take seriously.

    PS Let me know if you need me to repost your post from July 21. I know it’s been awhile, perhaps you’ve forgotten. I’ll find it for you if you’d like. *s*

  15. bella says:

    Couldn’t help myself! Here you go!

    Hungry for the Truth….
    September 21, 2013 at 3:44 pm
    highlander September 21, 2013 at 3:17 pm

    “I do not blame the French people for our language apartheid but the governments for setting up the conditions for it to thrive.”

    You should run for politics. The French people are represented by their FRENCH government. It’s kind of hard of not blaming one without the other.

    The French people =The French Government. = The same.

    ~

    bella
    September 21, 2013 at 6:11 pm
    Hungry for the Truth….
    September 21, 2013 at 3:44 pm

    The French people =The French Government. = The same.

    Your equation would lead one to believe that this new fancy Quebec Values Charter that is being put forth by the Quebec government, has the support of all French people. WOULD YOU MAKE SO BOLD A STATEMENT??? OR DOES THE EQUATION ONLY WORK IN CERTAIN INSTANCES AS NEEDED??

  16. highlander says:

    Thanks Furtz ,

    An interesting article .Quebecer’s really have no understanding what the reality of Quebec as an independent state would be after separating.

    I had talked to a retired very senior diplomat(answered only to deputy minister) a number of years ago .
    He advised me that Gatineau had been ear marked and upon seperation it would be an entity within itself such as Washington D.C.
    Quebec would be its original size prior to confederation after large vast land had been granted to the province.

    Quebec would be a thin sliver along the north St.Laurence 100 miles by 600 miles.

    The separatist with their ideologies inform their people of these realities and as well the economic depravity which would sure to follow.

    Think of this reality :upon separation it has been estimated that near 1million will leave the province this not only reduces the tax base but property values would plummet.

    admin October 7, 2013 at 5:25 am

    ” Quebec may never look in that mirror, but the days of Federal appeasement may finally be coming to an end.”

    Yes very true ,the writing is on the wall ,but if the Feds continue along the same path the future of the country will not be very promising.

  17. highlander says:

    Hungry we are eagerly waiting for your response from this oct 6 posting:

    “you see Hungry its not just CCH ,do you plan as well to change the health units 100% bilingual policy ,or CCAC’s 80% bilingual hiring ,what of the 65% provincial bilingual hiring ?”

    So how do you plan on addressing the other provincial entities ..please do tell how you plan to change this systemic problem.

  18. David Oldham says:

    UNBELIEVABLE ! To HFTT and others with an apparent mind block. Official bilingualism was and still is a piece of federal legislation. New Brunswick and Manitoba have adopted official bilingual status at the provincial level.
    You rant on about having some “right” to being able to communicate in Ontario in the official language of your choice. You ask why paramedics are not all fluent in both FEDERALLY OFFICIAL LANGUAGES.
    The simple and direct answer that seems to be elusive to some individuals offering their opinions here is that it is not necessary!
    OHIP and medical delivery services are not federal programs. The FLA enters into the provincial arena to provide french language services in areas designated to be where numbers warrant.
    This is a concept that is not reciprocated in all parts of CANADA.
    You all come across as small minded, single purpose extremists that have no consideration for needs other than your own.
    I read the comments and opinions here regularly and often hope that a true debate would break out and I could join in. However as long as the facts are severally twisted or simply absent from the dialogue it would serve no purpose, for the issue could ever have a resolve. Sad.

  19. Eric says:

    Michael Ignatieff in 2012 – says a few things gqo is saying.
    http://www.vigile.net/Quebec-will-eventually-become

    He suggested that Quebec gained “radical” new powers after the federalists’ razor-thin 1995 referendum victory, though most of the powers he listed were under Quebec authority before that dramatic vote.

    “We had a near-death experience in 1995,” Ignatieff said.

    “What we learned from that was that the way to keep the show on the road is pretty radical devolution. And effectively Quebec is master in their own house.

    He pointed out that Quebec runs its own immigration and natural resource development policies and has control over health and education systems.

    The only area where “the union still holds together” is in fiscal and monetary policy, he said.

    “We’ve kept the show on the road by giving Quebec essentially mastery in their own house,” he said.

    “But the problem here is we don’t have anything to say to each other any more. There’s a kind of contract of mutual indifference which is very striking for someone of my generation.”

  20. edudyorlik says:

    @ALL,
    I agree with admin. Interesting read Furtz however, we have now come to a point where we not only have a slew of Quebec separatists but we also have a slew of ROC separatists who are fed up with being literally screwed and taken advantage of in some of theeeeee most devious and dishonest of ways.

    So… Let’s put it this way. If this “little union or arrangement” IS TO CONTINUE then we MUST deal with certain realities head on.

    A) The reality that the province of Quebec IS NOT IT’S OWN COUNTRY. And, if it wants to continue to act like a separate country… THAT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.

    They cannot, on the one hand take cash from the ROC as if it is a province, and then on the other hand make demands from the “real country” as if they are a separate “nation” if you will. There can only be — ONE RULING NATION/COUNTRY –

    Sure, this “state of being” in Quebec has been allowed to go on for quite some time yes, but that “erroneous state of being” WILL NOT and CAN NOT be allowed to continue unchallenged and unabated.

    There is too much money being tossed around, the other provinces are loosing out and the Anglophone people DO NOT DESERVE the second and third class treatment in their own country..

    B) Countries like Canada with “sub parts” like the “province” of Quebec MUST HAVE some rules where by ALL the citizens under “the main umbrella” that call themselves Canadian can live in their own country without openly and blatantly (like we see on a constant basis in the province of Quebec) get treated like second and third class citizens. That is simply NOT ACCEPTABLE.

    Sure this has gone on now for a while within an odd sense of acceptance but, it’s all coming to a head right now in the year of our lord 2013 and the “push-back” is about to begin.

    Let’s face it, it’s actually amazing that this second and third class negative treatment of the Anglophone Canadian people in the province of Quebec has gone on for as long as it has without any real push-back. isn’t it?

    A true testament to the accepting nature and easy goingness of the English culture, I would strongly argue.

    My take on it is that once the other provinces begin to push-back because they are getting shafted regarding how much of the pot of Canadian money that is going to the province of Quebec, combined with the Anglophone people waking up and deciding enough is enough with regard to the despicable treatment of their fellow Anglophone Canadians in the province of Quebec, that will force the changes that are needed. And frankly, those changes SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED A LONG TIME AGO.

    Now, I am NOT comparing things on a direct basis but, one must admit, when we look at examples of how quickly and drastically things can indeed change in this world like say, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Muammar al-Gaddafi in Libya. NO ONE would have predicted a month prior to the people deciding they had had enough, that these two dictators would be taken down the way they were, and would no longer be lording their power over the people, right?

    All I am saying is that, once the people do get fed up enough, then it’s a DONE DEAL.

    You throw in a little economic strife and there is no telling how quickly they can go from “putting up with certain cr@p” for decades to finally deciding ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. We have had it with this arrogance and sense of self entitlement that has spewed from these oppressors for all this time.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AIg11uJw94&hd=1

    After all, how many more —

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GUkNVjM4Gc&hd=1

    nice women asking for directions on a bus then being treated like pure cr@p by this French bus driver who obviously believes (and is taught this behavior by her own government) that her language has more rights and is superior to the nice lady’s language

    – does it take for people to finally stand up and say, wait just one second here. I am a Canadian citizen and I am — in MY OWN COUNTRY RIGHT NOW — YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TREAT ME LIKE THIS.

    Or, how many men being embarrassed in front of their wife and child in a license bureau by some front line government employee who is supposed to deal with people in “both official languages” (but again, has been taught by their government &laws like bill 101 that this is OK) will it take?
    http://youtu.be/DdwZOewd-hg?t=3m53s

    Or, how many more times while Canadian tax payers are sending our hard earned tax money to what we believe, and are being told, is “a Canadian province” do we have to hear someone like Pauline Marois

    http://youtu.be/o_MG8z_9P6Y?t=34s

    refer to that “province” of Quebec as the “country” of Quebec?

    How long can this go on before THE PEOPLE get fed up?

    Now, we ALL KNOW what the answer to this question would be if the reverse were happening. Imagine for a moment if a bus driver were recorded speaking to a French person in this manner.

    And before you say, bus drivers often don’t speak French OUTSIDE OF QUEBEC.

    Firstly — (and most importantly) unlike a bus driver in “the province” of Quebec WHO, as a public servant in a “province”, MUST BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO CANADIANS IN Canada’s main “common LANGUAGE (ENGLISH).”

    Where as the drivers outside of Quebec DON”T HAVE TO know French as French is NOTHING BUT a regional / province of Quebec language. PERIOD.

    Secondly — most often, “if” and “when” this does happen outside of Quebec, the driver will politely say, sorry, I don’t speak French. They normally DO NOT treat the French people with such disdain as the bus driver in that clip treated that nice English lady. The English are generally more polite and “accommodating” which is exactly what got us into this mess where by we are being taken advantage of so badly to begin with. It seems that when the French detect this kindness they mistake it for weakness and they JUMP RIGHT IN and take full advantage.

    ALL THIS TO SAY THAT

    — THINGS MUST CHANGE.—

    and THAT does NOT mean MORE FRENCH in the rest of Canada.

  21. edudyorlik says:

    @David Oldham RE:POST on October 7, 2013 at 7:59 am

    I agree with what you said in your post David and i am completely on your side with regard to this issue.

    Thing is… We are not all well versed in — ALL ASPECTS — of this issue. We each have our strengths and weakness which we bring to the table.

    This is why it is good to have a diversity of people like yourself and gqo for example. gqo brings an historical element to this debate which many of us are not as familiar with but we are all VERY grateful that he brings this to the table as it offers me (speaking for myself) the opportunity learn more and more.

    I guess what it comes down to it, it’s like building a house. We all come to the job site with a little knowledge of the individual steps that need to be taken to complete ultimately the task and in the end, when combined, all these individual pieces of knowledge and steps come together to produce the end result, which is,

    all of us gazing at the completed house.

    Please share your individual knowledge and challenges with all of us here as there will either be people reading who will simply learn from what you have to say or others that perhaps will challenge and give you the opportunity to present further arguments that bring even more depth to your arguments so we can ALL learn EVEN MORE.
    Remember, thousands of people read but don’t post and these people deserve to see challenges like YOURS HERE

    On October 7, 2013 at 7:59 am David wrote,
    UNBELIEVABLE ! To HFTT and others with an apparent mind block. Official bilingualism was and still is a piece of federal legislation. New Brunswick and Manitoba have adopted official bilingual status at the provincial level.
    You rant on about having some “right” to being able to communicate in Ontario in the official language of your choice. You ask why paramedics are not all fluent in both FEDERALLY OFFICIAL LANGUAGES.
    The simple and direct answer that seems to be elusive to some individuals offering their opinions here is that it is not necessary!”

    to the absurdness of some of what is being said by others.

    Well said btw…

  22. gqo says:

    @ Et AL

    If the article frutz referred us to , is to take hold, then I agree wholeheartedly with edudyorlik, things MUST CHANGE BIG TIME

    Meaning bill 101 and similar such legislation must go. Language cops must go.

    English, as well as any other group in quebec MUST BE AFFORDED THE EXACT SAME RIGHTS REGARDING ALL AREAS LANGUAGE, CULTURE, HERITAGE,RESPECT as the french have in quebec.

    if these are not met, then I believe CANADA should have a referendum to pose our own question to quebec regarding separation.

    Either follow the norms of Canada with respect to the items listed above or LEAVE.

    quebec , and the nationalists that control this entity, have shown their true colors, and if this article is to become reality, then the DEMANDS OF CANADA MUSTY BE MET OR NO DEAL>

    Canadians have reached the point they don’t care and if quebec wants to go, then go

    REMEMBER!!! in the last quebec provincial election, 66% of quebeckers, voted for a party that espouses to separating quebec from Canada.

    The CAC, under Mr. Legault, has NEVER ruled out separation. What he wants is to make conditions RIGHT so a vote on separation would be convincing enough that Canada would have to enter into negotiations regarding separating quebec from Canada.

    Although the article has an interesting take, I think if quebec ever voted to separate, regardless of the margin,the clarity act, would not be respected by the new quebec government, because if it did , there would be riots in the streets.

    Can you imagine, quebec votes to separate, and Canada says it can’t because of the federal clarity act. Think how that would play in quebec.

    Every moderate nationalist, would immediately jump on the radical and separatist bandwagon. the chaos would be mind boggling.

    I have always said, if we had a 10 year moratorium on separation, so all of the big issues could be addressed, money, borders, trade etc. and after 10 years quebec gradually goes its own way. No blood shed, no hard feelings and a cooling off period, so both sides can adapt to a nine province Canada.

  23. edudyorlik says:

    Thanks for sharing the Ignatieff article Eric,
    I thought these two quotes were rather telling…

    Ignatieff wrote, “But that’s not the way most English Canadians now think of their country. They might have done 30 or 40 years ago when we thought we could live together in this very strange hybrid country called Canada.”

    AND

    “Now effectively, effectively, we’re almost two separate countries. Although Quebec does not have sovereignty it acts domestically almost as if it did, and that I think has produced this strange reality that

    – I don’t think most Canadians I’m thinking of are happy about.” —

    SO VERY TRUE
    And this is SO VERY unfair and uneven as they are acting like a separate nation yet still receiving “status” and billions of dollars from “the host nation” Canada.

    This in turn allows them (as a pseudo nation) to out-compete the host nation — Canada — on the world stage. SAD SAD SAD indeed.

  24. Eric says:

    David Oldham, I don’t see where Manitoba has made it’s self officially bilingual, certainly not to the level of New Brunswick. We have gotten away from “where numbers warrant” at such a great expense financially and to entire families and communities.

    Official Languages in Canada’s Provinces and Territories
    Province/Territory
    Official Language(s) and Status
    Alberta English (de jure), but bilingual legal system
    British Columbia English (de facto)
    Manitoba English (de jure), but bilingual legal system
    New Brunswick English and French (de jure)
    Newfoundland English (de facto)
    Nova Scotia English (de facto)
    Ontario English (de facto), but bilingualism is recognized
    Prince Edward Island English (de facto)
    Quebec French (de jure), but bilingualism is recognized
    Saskatchewan English (de jure), but bilingual legal system
    Yukon English and French (de jure), but ambiguous status
    Northwest Territories English and French (de jure)
    Nunavut English and French (de jure), Inuktitut and Inuinnaqtun (de facto)

  25. stellabystarlight says:

    Lassie wrote: On a side note, I called St.Lawrence High School recently & was greeted with hello/bonjour…
    WTF is going on in Cornwall???e…….

    That is terrible…….do like cory call or write to the language commissioner.

    Just a reminder lassie….this country has two official languages.

  26. Furtz says:

    It’s a good thing they didn’t say bonjour/hello.
    There would be hell to pay!

  27. Highlander says:

    David Oldham
    October 7, 2013 at 7:59 am

    Thanks for your input.

    You’ve written:

    “OHIP and medical delivery services are not federal programs. The FLA enters into the provincial arena to provide french language services in areas designated to be where numbers warrant. ”

    The FLA is implemented in 25 regions of Ontario and encompasses 90% of the population .

    If a area has 3000 francophones or 5% of the population no matter of the population it is deemed under the FLA ,the question has always been what is justified as “where numbers warrant “?

    So 3000 people in a population of hundreds of thousands or millions justifies these” where numbers warrant”?

    There is a little over 450,000 Francophones in Ontario (by the way much less then Anglophones/Allophones in Quebec).

    Of those 450,000 80% of them live along the Ottawa river therefore why implement the FLA TO THE MANITOBA BORDER for 90,000 population spread across this vast province?

    David I have always believed the best approach would be representation by population ,as locally french represents 21% of the population why not hire accordingly but we as a group have realized that the hiring for provincial entities ranges from 100% bilingual to as low as 65% much more then the required need to provide that service to 21%.

    Now why would that be ?
    Why hire so grossly disproportionate of those needs?
    What government service is monitoring the needs versus supply aspect regarding the implementation of the FLA?

    THIS IS THE WHITE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM!

  28. Highlander says:

    stellabystarlight
    October 7, 2013 at 2:51 pm

    “That is terrible…….do like cory call or write to the language commissioner.

    Just a reminder lassie….this country has two official languages.”

    Once again antagonistic ! Can you throw a few words together or is it that you only have the ability to antagonize and not have a response that considered at least some use of cognitive ability .

    In all this time your responses have been to antagonize ,never have I seen any facts /research from you!
    This is what David is talking about when he said :

    “However as long as the facts are severally twisted or simply absent from the dialogue it would serve no purpose, for the issue could ever have a resolve. Sad.”

  29. edudyorlik says:

    Furtz October 7, 2013 at 3:40 pm

    It’s a good thing they didn’t say bonjour/hello.
    There would be hell to pay!

    Hey Stella and Furtsie, it’s also a good thing they were not in Quebec where even the words ON & OFF on Microwave ovens and START AND STOP on the photo copier

    http://youtu.be/6AIg11uJw94?t=1m47s

    Oh my gosh that would mean an inspection from the language police and a … Da da da daaaaaaaaa…. A DOSSIER

  30. Furtz says:

    I have a serious question re the impending heave-ho of Quebec from Canada. Outside of Quebec, is there a legitimate political party or organization with wide spread support that is dedicated to the expulsion of Quebec from Confederation? Apart from the usual twelve or so proponents who post on this site, I can’t find any organized support for the break up of Canada. Any links would be appreciated.

  31. David Oldham says:

    ERIC this may seem like a minor point but it is in itself at the root of the situation regardless of which perspective you share.” Where numbers warrant ” Leave it to lawyers to create a mechanism within a legal framework that creates total ambiguity of interpretation . Where numbers warrant is completely open ended, zero is only a place holder and one cannot be either too many or too few therefore where numbers warrant could simply mean two or more.

    When HIGHLANDER speaks of the (white) elephant in the room, every politician knows that a debate on where numbers warrant cannot be resolved. So no one goes there except those with a political death wish ! So we spin out of control until common sense rules ( don’t hold your breath ).

    Manitoba has been officially bilingual about one hundred years longer than New Brunswick and from a constitutional perspective offers far more protection for the french language then any other province or territory.

  32. Furtz says:

    @ David. Manitoba isn’t officially bilingual as far as I know. When I lived there in the 70s, an acquaintance of mine, George Forest, took the Manitoba government all the way to the Supreme Court re French services. As a result the French Language Services Policy was introduced that guaranteed access to provincial government services in French and English. That came in around 1980.

  33. Furtz says:

    Pretty funny, Kilroy, but that doesn’t cut it.

  34. edudyorlik says:

    @ Furtz

    How do you know?

  35. David Oldham says:

    FURTZ Manitoba is definitely the “other” officially bilingual province . In 1870 when Manitoba entered into confederation concerns over the future of english immigration to the region (it was dominantly French and Native at the time) saw that it joined as officially bilingual. It remained as such for approximately a hundred years when it became English only after reviewing its need for “official bilingualism” status. In 1985 the court ruled that its original status as “officially bilingual” must be reinstated. This ruling has not been over turned. Official bilingualism in Manitoba has nothing whatsoever to do with “where numbers warrant” it simply goes back to the constitutional state of having offered protection to the French when joining “CANADA” in the first place. This is why in the last post I said, “from a constitutional perspective (Manitoba) offers far more protection for the french language then any other province or territory”.

    All this information is readily verifiable FURTZ so now we all know that a challenge to the withdrawal of official services was successful and in this particular case not on the merit of “where numbers warrant”.

    Here is another tidbit easily verified that again we can all know, understand and accept and as a result move forward. It is virtually impossible from a constitutional perspective for Quebec to unilaterally decide to exit or withdraw from its union with Canada. While Quebec could simply announce to the world its self proclaimed independence from Canada international law would unhold and recognize that regardless Quebec was legally still part of Canada. It therefore could not legally conduct business of any kind as a singular entity separate from Canada. From this point it simply gets rather technical and boring all this to say that approval is required and negotiation with the other provinces and territories is mandatory to bring about legal separation of the country as we now all know it. This process because of the complexity could stretch on for a generation or longer. Best move on to a more viable solution well rooted in a common goal. United strong together.

  36. Furtz says:

    @ David. Pardon my brain-fart. You are correct. Should have known that considering I knew the man who fought to have it restored. It was all over a traffic ticket

  37. Furtz says:

    Too funny. My simple question gets a -4 rating!
    Still waiting for an intelligent answer.

  38. edudyorlik says:

    David wrote, “It is virtually impossible from a constitutional perspective for Quebec to unilaterally decide to exit or withdraw from its union with Canada.”

    A) what if Canada and the Canadian people decide they have had enough and want Quebec to go while at the same time the people of Quebec agree with 50% +1?
    —————-
    David wrote, “Best move on to a more viable solution well rooted in a common goal. United strong together.”

    B) United strong together? “a common goal?” Is this really possible when one group (The French) are constantly and constantly rejecting the English language and the English culture.
    To the degree that, in their “strong hold area” (the province of Quebec) they pass laws outlawing the use of the English language which in effect does away with the use of English altogether and, in other areas OUTSIDE the province of Quebec wherever they gain a majority (IE: Rockland and Vanier Ontario) we see the same sort of procedure that basically does away with the use of the English language. Granted it is not with laws like bill 101 but, the “end result” of a FRENCH ONLY area seems to be achieved to practically the same degree. With French first, French dominant and French ONLY signs etc…

    In other words, it is VERY OBVIOUS to even just the casual observer that the French want FRENCH ONLY wherever they may be.

    In the province of Quebec they use bill 101 and other “tactics” to achieve this, and outside of Quebec they use the “buzz word” bilingualism pretend that this is what they want (otherwise it would be too obvious) until they gain a majority foothold and then voila, French ONLY health care clinics, hospitals and universities become the norm and the English people be damned when it comes to getting jobs and, running for Prime Minister or advancing in their own military.

    “United and strong” a goal maybe, but definitely not “common” goal from the perspective of the English/British culture and language

    As, it is ONLY achievable if — WE ALL — speak French which in effect means THEY WIN and achieve what they have been trying to achieve from the beginning. AN ALL FRENCH CANADA.

    Boy, the British men who fought and died for victory over France so many years ago are probably turning in their graves at even the suggestion of English being secondary language and culture in Canada (any part thereof).

    Imagine, all this because the English were trying to be generous, kind and accommodating and also trying to create harmony with “BOTH LANGUAGES INVOLVED” in Canada only to find that the potential for the RULING LANGUAGE in Canada to end up as the one we helped give a leg up to.

    Wow !! — The ultimate — in being taken advantage of, don’t you think?

  39. edudyorlik says:

    @ALL
    First we had bill 101. A bill that had (and still has, as — it has NOT BEEN OFFICIALLY CHANGED — ) exemptions for large corporations and their trade mark names.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzD9rqbFWW8&hd=1
    “English ONLY names offensive?” IN Canada?

    However, the French zealots in the OQLF are still trying desperately to force NEW RESTRICTIONS and DEMANDS upon these large companies like Wal-Mart even though “the law” itself does not back up their threats of fines and so on. NICE !!!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_a5nrP3qRyU&hd=1

    In other words they don’t want to “try” to change or amend the law because once they open it to change it it will then become vulnerable for more legal challenges so they just do things on a — “as they please” — basis. You know, make it up as you go, kind thing. That’s the way of the French powers that be for ya.

    AND — IF THAT WASN’T the epitome of shameful behavior and not playing by their own freakin rules. Get a load of this despicable piece of work.

    Actually, this story reminds me of our old pal Hungry for lies.
    I seem to remember him strongly maintaining that since bill 14 had not passed the legislature yet, IT WAS NOT LAW and should be dismissed as “NOTHING.” Yeah RIGHT !!! Maybe when dealing with ethical people who are not corrupt to the core.

    It would seem that the French powers that be could care less (typical) as to whether a “”suggested law” got passed or not.

    They will just damn well “decide for themselves” to go ahead and “stand tall in defense of the almighty French language” at all cost.

    http://putbacktheflag.blogspot.ca/2013/09/canadian-soldier-told-that-his-daughter.html

    SAD SAD SAD…

    Those French bureaucrats. Give em an inch and they take a mile ;-) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvyifj557p8&hd=1

    Nothing like hounding our military people into complying with a law that does not exist.
    When all they want is to educate their children in English — IN CANADA —
    (NOTE: (something for you to pick on Furtz) every time i see this kind of stuff in the media or think of what is happening, or type these posts i am filled with a sense of disgust for what the French are doing (and getting away with) in this — MY COUNTRY — CANADA)

    Moudit. How can we h’allow such a ting.

    “if we don’t do nuting then we will have a bilingual Montreal.
    http://youtu.be/eZBlynkVDDQ?t=43s
    And i don’t think that it’s a good thing for nobody in Quebec.

    Ah but, ya’ll want EVERYONE ELSE in the rest of Canada TO BE BILINGUAL / French DON’T YOU?

    Yup, we get “it”… And we’re fed up with “it”

  40. gqo says:

    Et Al.

    Regardless of law, and I say this very seriously, if quebec voted to separate, especially if the numbers were say 55% or 60% for separation, how do you think this would play in quebec, if, as David states, they were informed, BTW, you can’t separate under Canadian law for the reasons mentioned by David.

    Do you actually believe this would or could stop them

    Now you risk MAJOR revolt the likes of which Canada has never seen before.

    Another point ,why would Canada force the issue and use all legal means to stop quebec from going????

    This ,to me makes NO SENSE. If they really want out, and it was voted on , and the outcome clear , then why force them to stay.

    This is similar to having french forced on us, only on a much larger scale.

    I lived in quebec for 40 years, and know the quebecois, pretty well. If this ever took place they would openly revolt and make the bombings of the 60`s look like kids play.

    Remember there many ,many radical groupsd in quebec, including the FLQ

    And who would enforce law and order. Certainly today`s Canadian military consists of a large percentage of francophones.

    Where would they stand if this occurred.

    No David, I believe if they voted to go and the percentage ,say 55-60 % for separation, then this result would have to be worked out so quebec could leave. Remember, the first referendum was 60% against leaving and this percentage has now set a precedent.

    @ frutz:

    although nothing official has emerged to this point, it is becoming increasing clear, if you were to travel west of Prescott, that the tide and climate is changing in that there are many, many more people ( English Canadians) that are now so fed up with quebec, that there is a real possibility they will vote to have quebec leave.

    This type of movement is growing and organizations like the CFL is only a start.
    There is a large silent majority out there, and it would not take mush for this to snowball.

    If marios had a majority and bill 14 was to pass in its present form that could be a catalyst. This P.Q. government should it ever attain a majority in quebec , could and probably would pass this type legislation and much more.

    English Canada can only take so much of this, and when their patience runs out

    Well !!!!!!!!!

  41. Furtz says:

    You folks might not want to read this, but here’s how my latest dealing with the Quebec government went. A month or so ago, I got a notice from OHIP indicating that I had to apply for a new health card. For that I needed a birth certificate, which I don’t have because I was born in Quebec. So I downloaded the appropriate forms from the Quebec government website (in English) and filled them out (in English) and mailed them in. A week and a half later (today) I received my new birth certificate in the mail. Pretty good service (in English) by any standard!
    This comment should be good for a -10 rating. No?

  42. Furtz says:

    @ gqo. I live well west of Prescott and travel across Canada fairly regularly. Giving Quebec the boot out of Confederation never comes up in political conversations I have with people I know. Most people seem more concerned with local issues and the endless BS emanating from the Harper government.
    I ask a small favour of you. Please post a link to the CFL organization you referred to. I only come up with the Canadian Football League.
    Thanks.

  43. Edudyorlik says:

    ON October 8, 2013 at 12:56 pm Furtz wrote, ”
    “So I downloaded the appropriate forms from the Quebec government website (in English) and filled them out (in English) and mailed them in. A week and a half later (today) I received my new birth certificate in the mail. Pretty good service (in English) by any standard!”
    Maybe so Furtz but, you should have heard all the “moudit Anglais” talk going on in that office as they were shuffling those papers to send you. My friend works in that department and she told me of — YOUR REQUEST– “in English.” Oh boy what a kerfufle you caused. All’s i can say is… It’s a damn good thing there was only one such request that week or they would have stuffed it in the envelope upside down just for added excitement and “FU&^% YOU value. :-)

    Oh and btw, i notice you didn’t have much to say about everything being said recently. What’s up? cat got your tongue/fingers?

    Too much irrefutable chit going on?

    Do tell us what you thought of how that military father was lied to and how they tried to SCARE him into pulling his daughter out of school.
    C’mon Furtz. Such an articulate gent like you. We are all anxious to hear what you thought of that.

    Or, maybe you can share your thoughts about the on / off buttons on the microwave and the start/stop buttons on the copy machine deserving of a visit from the language police. I am sure you have some opinions on that one. I mean considering you think it’s such a travesty that we English get upset when we see HUGE Franco flags marking French territory behind enemy lines over here in ONTARIO CANADA.

    I’ve fetched my popcorn and waiting for a good read. Don’t go an disappoint now :-) Oh wait, this is where you come back with either no answer or a one word smart remark isn’t it. Oh well. I tried.

  44. Furtz says:

    @ Kilroy. You are totally nuts in an entertaining sort of way. I don’t care what your imaginary friends said about me or my request for a birth certificate. I got prompt and excellent service in English from a Quebec government agency. Now, doesn’t that piss you off?
    Carry on.

  45. Edudyorlik says:

    Well, at least it’s in an “entertaining sort of way.”

    And no, sorry to disappoint but, It doesn’t piss me off. But hey, ya know what might piss me off though eh?

    If you could tell us all out here hanging on your every word about what you thought of how that military father was lied to and how they tried to SCARE him into pulling his daughter out of school.
    http://putbacktheflag.blogspot.ca/
    C’mon Furtz. Such an articulate gent like you. We are all anxious to hear what you thought of that.

    Maybe you could tell us how it made you feel to know how Mohamed H Amin was refused service in English and embarrassed in front of his wife and child by a French Quebec government worker at the auto bureau in Quebec.
    http://youtu.be/DdwZOewd-hg?t=4m21s
    You MUST have an opinion on THAT.

    Or, maybe you can share your thoughts about the on / off buttons on the microwave and the start/stop buttons on the copy machine deserving of a visit from the language police.
    http://youtu.be/6AIg11uJw94?t=1m47s

    I am just SURE you MUST have some opinions on that one. I mean considering you think it’s such a travesty that we English get upset when we see HUGE Franco flags marking French territory behind enemy lines over here in ONTARIO CANADA.

    Of how your language ENGLISH is an insult to the a group of French people
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBc5gzuHbKI

    You MUST have some thoughts on these important issues du jour.

    Or is it only when English people complain about “trivial things” that you jump all over them?

    Yes, i guess it’s safe to say you are nuts as well in a sort of an entertaining kinda way.

    And on that note i would like to wish you a “whole lot_a_zero_real substance” kind of day eh :-)

  46. David Oldham says:

    @ gqo Quebec cannot separate from Canada merely because they held a vote and received majority support. This occurrence could however trigger the basis for a constitutional vote to be opened. Under the rules to bring about constitutional change 7 provinces or territories representing a minimum of 50 % of the population must be in agreement.

    Further it is not a question of whether we would want to force them to stay. There is a very specific constitutional mechanism to deal with the process of withdrawing from confederation. Realistically, in my opinion, it would counterproductive to the common good to attempt to stymie their retreat. Best to negotiate the terms of their exodus and move on.

  47. English Lassie says:

    @Furtz
    Maybe your imaging your birth certificate story, remember the pizza story…
    Shazam!!!

  48. gqo says:

    @ David,

    the legalities notwithstanding, if you will excuse the pun here, I am thinking in terms of the reality of quebec, and the radicals that control the agenda there.

    How would you like to be in downtown Montreal , in the event of a yes vote to separate, say in the neighborhood of 60% for, and then Canada states that they cannot leave based on what you have said.

    Don’t you think there may more than a little disruption, to say the least ????

    I am not questioning your reasons, which are sound, but what would the reality look like.???

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these html tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

jvc