Letter to the Editor – Eric Little of Ottawa Ontario On Habs Coach Linguistic Protest – Jan 16, 2012

CFN – We apologize for being late in publishing this letter to the Editor.

Dear Taxpayer

Over the weekend Montreal area residents were upset and protested in the streets over a unilingual hockey coach, the media and fans have been at this constantly since mid December. We have Canada’s Language Commissioner sending out secret shoppers to assess language skills in Ottawa and other news makers asking for a 7up in French from Air Canada. A push for Supreme Court Justices to be bilingual, and with the Ottawa City Police Chief leaving, there will be a push for a bilingual chief I imagine.

Rarely do we see the same compassion from English Canada, yes we do have Mr. Brisson and Mr. Galganov going to the Ontario Court of Appeal over the Russell Township bilingual sign bylaw on February 1st , there also is a Canadian Language Fairness group, but why does English Canada not push for language fairness on a sustained basis with similar enthusiasm? People are busy working or with families and elect people to look after things for us, right? How is that working for you?

A quick look through jobs ads in the Ottawa Citizen and federal job boards would leave a visitor to assume Ottawa residents must all be bilingual; of course the Stats Can numbers do not reflect that. Almost 500,000 of the 801,275 residents list English only as their official language, about 13,000 are French only and 10,300 do not speak either English or French. In 2006, Cornwall is listed having 46,000 residents, of which 935 are French only and 23,100 are English only. Of course, we do not how well the remaining people actually speak either language, as census takers do not assess the accuracy.

There has been some government skewing, perhaps not on purpose to get justifiable numbers, listing numbers as Ottawa-Gatineau, even though they different cities in different provinces for example, or provincially in 2009 making a definition change. This wording alteration added 50,000 to the Francophone definition in Ontario. The Ontario government’s own website states this change will go from 4.4% to 4.8%, or 580,000 people. Using these numbers, Ontario was able to add Designated Zones to total 25 now.

With government getting involved, departments and goals are created; money will be spent then for staff, buildings, pensions and other associated costs. Money that comes from you and me to pay for each level of government plus to service deficits and debt, Ontario alone has an annual interest payment of 10.3 billion just to service that debt.

In no way do I suggest we should not provide safety nets or services to English or French taxpayers, we need to be smarter about it though. Stopping government employees from working and being supervised in the language of their choice would be a start, returning then to providing service to the taxpayer, using technology if needed. How many languages do some ATM’s provide, or Internet websites? Doubling of building, staffing and associated costs to provide a French only clinic takes money from all patient services and increasing wait times and effectiveness of our overall tax dollar. It is time for a discussion on all issues / costs for each; let’s start with stopping the constant push for these language services and leave the people decide. Is anyone really not being taken care of with the present rules and laws? Are we getting the best person for the job or the best bilingual person?

(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.)

JL Computers

9 Responses to "Letter to the Editor – Eric Little of Ottawa Ontario On Habs Coach Linguistic Protest – Jan 16, 2012"

  1. Furtz   January 17, 2012 at 9:40 PM

    Scary stuff for sure. People speaking two languages just isn’t right!
    Those bilingual bums think they are better than the rest of us.
    You go get ’em, Eric. We’re counting on you to save us real Canadians.

  2. Eric   January 18, 2012 at 8:06 AM

    This is not us against them. Bilingualism, health care and immigration for the future of Canada are all subjects that people just don’t want to have a discussion on, and the cost is staggering. We sure need to! Ontario residents are paying something like 49 dollars each to “promote” the minority language and Quebec is somewhere around 7 dollars to promote theirs. Could that money be spent better helping seniors, yes. Is English not worth saving, Quebec seems to think French is. Why don’t English people stand up for themselves better?
    All I ask for is fairness in hiring, promotions, and a return to serving the public, which has been greatly reduced as of late because employees are “encouraged to work and be supervised” in the language of THEIR choice. Everyone has to pay tax, not everyone gets a fair shake to work for the government they pay for though. Canada has hundreds of thousands more English speakers than French, and discrimination is obvious.

    The federal Liberals 2 years ago wanted all Police along major highways across Canada to be a bilingual. Besides the cost, where would these people come from? Not many from their own province!

  3. Furtz   January 18, 2012 at 6:38 PM

    You’re flogging a dead horse, Eric. Even your beloved Stephen Harper knew he had to be able to speak both official languages to get where he is in a bilingual country. If he can do it anybody can, even you. If you seriously worry about the English language being eliminated in Canada, you have far more urgent issues to deal with.

  4. Eric   January 19, 2012 at 7:38 AM

    Glad your not my commander Furtz, the fight can still go on with a dead horse. LOL Mr Harper, like other politicians will do what enough people want, man made the rules, man can change them.However, many people prefer apathy as their party of choice.

    Canada is not a bilingual country. 1867 saw the joining of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and the Province of Canada, all British colonies. Since that time, we have one bilingual province, one unilingual French and the others English, no matter what the corn flakes boxes say.

    Anyway, I am not woried about the international language of business dying, I am concerned for the people who have difficulty learning languages to get decent work, plus the increasing French “need” for bilingual services taking over 2 billion per year from little things like health care and CPP benefits.

    Many of the issues in this country are connected to money, where do you want to start Canada?

  5. Furtz   January 19, 2012 at 12:04 PM

    You win Eric. Canada is a uni-lingual country. The Official Languages Act was never enacted in 1969. And all the info here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_bilingualism_in_Canada , is just pure BS.

  6. Eric   January 19, 2012 at 1:52 PM

    Can’t find the passage in the Official Languages Act that states we are a bilingual country. But while we misdirect around the original subject, there was a royal commission in the early 60’s that the OLA stems from, which discussed a bilingualism and biculturalism strategy to promote both languages.
    However the OLA, now over 40 years old, only made English & French official languages in Canada. Since then there has been many changes and additions, but the English minority in Quebec are not treated as equals, and certainly worse than the French minority in Ontario.

    Changes, additions, and requirements to the Act have not been stopped once a reasonable level of service federally was attained, bringing us back to my concerns. Vast departments creating wonderful spreadsheet matrix’s and working towards expanding bilingualism without cause or need. Why did the province of Ontario change the definition of Francophone if not to “create” more need to add, alter and expand?

    Currently, we all lose, financially.

  7. Furtz   January 19, 2012 at 7:52 PM

    Eric, Hakim Optical has really good deals on reading glasses almost every week.

  8. Eric   January 20, 2012 at 7:43 AM

    I am not surprised that others are staying away from this topic, that is how special interest groups “are allowed” to take over. Furtz, I am not going to keep going back and forth with you until you pinpoint in law, or show proof of any issue I raised being false.A wikpedia quote listing a comment from a royal commision does not a law make.

    Ask Mr Chretien about proof, you know, the proof is the proof, and when you have good proof it is because it was proven…..LOL

  9. Furtz   January 20, 2012 at 6:16 PM

    I’m not surprised either, Eric. This BS has been argued about (discussed) on this site, and a million others, for years. Enjoy your cause.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.