MP Guy Lauzon & Minister Moore Confronted by Cornwall Ontario LFA Protest in Chesterville by Don Smith HD VIDEO

Mayor Eric Duncan & Chris Cameron chat.

CFN – Members and supporters of the local newly re-branded Language Fairness for All – LFA group were joined by members of the Ottawa based umbrella group Canadians for Language Fairness outside of the Chesterville Legion this Wednesday evening. . The delegation was there in anticipation of an opportunity to bring their cause before James Moore, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, who would deliver the keynote address to Conservative supporters at the $50 per plate fundraiser dinner about to take place inside and hosted by Stormont, Dundas and South Glengarry Member of Parliament Guy Lauzon.   Upon his arrival, North Dundas Mayor, Eric Duncan, was approached by CLF president Chris Cameron and continued to be engaged while our camera was rolling. He told Cameron that: “it’s a free country and you have every right to be here.” When asked by Cameron if he feels that the percentage of bilingual service should be in accord with language demographics, Duncan agreed that is the democratic way. In spite of Cameron’s assertion that 80% of the population is being discriminated against, Duncan was adamant that he saw no issue with Cornwall Community Hospital’s interpretation and application of the provincial French Language Services Act, saying: “I’m satisfied with what we have now and how it works out.” Cameron inquired if Duncan is comfortable with the Health Unit being 100% bilingual, to which Duncan responded: “I don’t know about the Health Unit in that regard.”   Some members of the local Richelieu Club arrived for the official function in order to hear the minister speak. On the way in, Jean Lecompte, president of the La Société pour la Promotion du Bilinguisme (Society for the Promotion of Bilingualism), sporting his signature bilingualism pin, asked if he could join the LFA/CLF delegation and was greeted warmly. He then attempted to turn the event into his own personal press conference and opportunity to enlighten the group, until eventually bidded “Au revoir.” Lecompte’s rhetoric included asking the group if they’d taken any (mandatory or otherwise) French classes in grade school and insisted that this makes them and all Ontarians officially bilingual (whether or not they can communicate effectively in French). The group wasn’t buying it and pointed out that bilingualism has one meaning when funding is being sought by special interest groups and another meaning when people are being blocked from jobs for which they are otherwise well-qualified. At various times during the interaction, Lecompte said that he agreed with the protesters that the situation is not right and not fair, yet he continues to advocate for bilingualism. CCH nurse Darlene Walsh, who’s been passed over for promotions for not being sufficiently bilingual demanded of Lecompte:

“Tell me, sir, if you fall down right now with a heart attack, do I have to speak French to save your life?” His response: “you do.”

M.P. Guy Lauzon initially circumvented the delegation by slipping in a side door just ahead of Chris Cameron, declining to respond to Cameron’s request to talk. Just prior to the minister’s arrival, members of the delegation were given access to the building to use the Legion washrooms. On the way back to the parking lot, Cameron and CFN’s Don Smith crossed paths with Lauzon just inside the building. With the camera rolling Lauzon was very hospitable, greeting both men with a smile and handshake and agreeing to speak briefly on camera. The conversation was cut short with the announcement that Minister Moore had arrived and was in the parking lot. According to reports from those in attendance and consistent with a demonstration which began earlier, when Minister Moore arrived, he was greeted by protesters dressed in black, carrying a makeshift coffin declaring the death of democracy and some two dozen protesters carrying signs declaring that forced bilingualism is divisive, discriminatory, and demanding that hiring policies should be based on merit, not on language. . One of the protesters cried out: “Canada is in distress” while carrying an upside down Canada flag as a statement of how inverted language policy has become in this nation. Reportedly as Moore exited his car, he was confronted with a demand to know why he and the Commissioner of Official Languages, Graham Fraser, had not accepted requests to meet with CLF previously. No explanation was offered.


As we returned to the protest outside, Moore was already in dialogue with members of the delegation. Moore told the assembly that:

“Everybody should have the same rights and opportunities across the board.” He went on to add that: “The issue of language policy is not meant to be a barrier to the citizens themselves.” The crowd quickly enlightened him that it is indeed a huge barrier, citing numerous examples. Later the minister acknowledged: “I understand how divisive language policy is and how frustrating it can be on all sides and in all parts of the country and that’s not what language policy should be about.”

Some members of the group called for a Canada-wide referendum on language policy. Although not at all outwardly hostile towards the crowd, it was clear that the minister was unprepared to address a delegation. In the midst of heated dialogue, Lauzon calmly advised the crowd that moments earlier he’d suggested that he and Cameron meet privately at another time to address and resolve concerns. Lauzon extended the offer to Minister Moore, who agreed to meet with representatives of both the CLF and the local LFA group in Ottawa. Business cards were exchanged with a promise to meet in the coming weeks while the House is still sitting.




  1. Bud,
    In response to:
    “Just because something was done to appease Quebec, does not make it right or just.”
    This is a gross misunderstanding of Canadian history and constitutional and legal history. The French explored and settled this land which was already inhabited by Indigenous people. There was a colonial government for the French colony, New France. In this sense, the land was occupied and the concept of land ownership arrived in North America. New France was conquered by the British. The French were ruled as a British colony in British North America. Indigenous people and the Canadiens (français) were colonised. Despite being colonised, the British permitted certain rights to their French subjects: language, civil law, religious practice (Catholicism)… So French has always been legally recognised despite British rule and despite Lord Durham’s report calling for linguistic and cultural assimilation of the Canadiens. There was the Province of Canada which included Canada East and Canada West. The Province of Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunwick united at confederation. Compromises were made during three conferences. These compromises included minority education for Catholics and Protestants and Francophones and Anglophones. And many other things. Both French and English would be official languages. Because of these compromises, the four colonies joined. This was in 1866 and 1867. There was no appeasing of Québec, as you suggest. All four colonies had to be appeased in order to agree to unite. Otherwise, there would have been no union of the colonies and no Dominion of Canada. The fact that some of the compromises were not respected in Canadian history has nothing to do with appeasing Québec. These compromises were already guaranteed in the constitution and the law. If you are referring to Québec not signing the repatriated Constitution in 1982 and Lake Meech and the Charlottetown Accord, these issues are different from bilingualism. Bilingualism predates this, although it was not always respected. The Official Languages Act clarifies and confirms what was already the law since confederation. The problem was that even though the law recognised two official languages, French did not have equal status in reality. This was illegal and unconstitutional. The Official Languages Act has had the impact of increasing equality and correcting the historical lack of equality which has always been illegal. For this reason, the Language Fairness for All’s slogan that “People are equal, languages are not” is not representative of what Canada ever was, even in the colonial times in British North America. There is no mythic English-only Canada and never has been.
    The fact that there were 1- Aboriginal communities or nations 2- and a French country or colony here prior to British Conquest is what makes these three groups Charter groups (it is not so much the “prior to” which matters, it is the “conquest” that matters). The concepts of war, invasion, and conquest are important here. The French were colonisers at first. After the Conquest, the remaining French – who became Canadiens – were colonised. Aboriginal people were conquered and then the French were conquered. The Irish and Scots were not conquered here, they were conquered in their own homeland centuries earlier. Indians (India) were not conquered here, they were about to be conquered in India. The Dutch were not conquered here (they were later conquerors in South Africa), Italians were not conquered here (they were later conquerors in Ethiopia), etc. There were no political Dutch, Italian, Irish, Scottish, or Indian (India) entities here to be conquered. But Aboriginals and the French were conquered. This is Aboriginal land and it is occupied to this day. The French had a political entity (on Aboriginal land) and was then conquered by the British. That’s why Aboriginals and the French have been dealt with legally (and later constitutionally): the British conquerors drafted treaties and laws to govern the people they conquered. This was colonialism.
    We live in a postcolonial time period. Colonisation is considered wrong and an abuse of human rights. It is not permitted in international law even though it still happens. In the sixties, countries which had been colonised by European countries achieved independence. India is free of British rule, African countries achieved independence, etc. The French have characteristics of both a colonising and colonised people. Identifying English as the only official language means imposing the language of the coloniser, the conqueror on colonised people (i.e. Aboriginal and French). This involves hierarchies of English over Aboriginal languages and French, of Anglophones over Aboriginals and Francophones, of conqueror over conquered. During colonial times, this seemed acceptable but in postcolonial times, this is not acceptable, especially not in democracies. (I wish to note that due to the colonial traits of the French, there has also been a hierarchy of French language and peoples over Aboriginal languages and peoples, and this was wrong and an abuse of human rights.)
    That is why Aboriginals and Aboriginal languages as well as Francophones and French are have equal status with the English, the language of the British conquerors. The language of the conquered have equal status with the language of the conquerors. And since we live in postcolonial times and colonisation is against international law, it would be very strange for Canada to impose the conqueror’s language over the conquered peoples. Though Hindi is the official language, India has retained the colonisers’ language, English, for official purposes. The states and territories of India are allowed to determine the official languages of their jurisdiction (like Canada).
    “You compare the two minorities, inside Quebec and out. Inside Quebec the english are discriminated against in all sectors of their lives….read some news articles. In ROC, the francophones are given funding for every single thing they want and threaten to sue when it is not given…. again…….read some news articles.”
    Anglo-Québécois enjoy the same minority rights as Francophons outside Québec, including funding. I am aware of hostility from SOME Francophone Québecois against Anglophones. There are ignorant people everywhere. I am also aware of SOME Anglophones in Canada who are hostile towards Francophones (whether they are conscious of it or not… as expressed by too many in this thread with disclaimers of “we are not racist,” “we are not haters”…)
    The frustrations that some Anglo-Quebeckers feel is recent since the late sixties. However, so many Anglo-Quebeckers are bilingual and very educated and privileged. History books – even the mainstream high school English version of history – includes the history of discrimination towards Francophones since the Conquest. This thread is hostile towards Francophones, not in its totality, but it contains extremely hostile sections, some of which might be considered hate speech. The Language Fairness for All have transformed the fair issue of concern for unilingual nurses, unilingual Canadians, and inadequate language education in Canada into hostility towards federal and provincial bilingualism (which is fair and legal but ignorant) and hostility towards Francophones (which is revolting).
    You are correct about lower literacy rates for Francophones in French (not English) but your analysis regarding the reasons for this is incorrect. The research you would have read about this would have been written by my colleagues in education and minority rights. Aboriginal peoples also have lower literacy rates and some Aboriginals have zero literacy in their parents’ or ancestors language. This does not mean that French education or Aboriginal education are inferior. Sociolinguistics and the sociology of education explain these issues (i.e. discrepancy between oral French and written French, the use and variety of English or French used by Aboriginals, code switching, the impact of socio-economic background on language). There is no “theory” of assimilation; assimilation and linguicide are part of Canadian history (and some Aboriginal activists point to genocide). Sociolinguistics address the impact of assimilation on the use of language.
    Whoever suggests that Francophones are less skilled in language learning does not understand the obvious. Since logic is the buzz word in this thread (which is a actually a very difficult philosophical skill and requires training), logic in this case dictates the following: If it is true that in Cornwall only 2% or 4% are unilingual speakers of French, and, say 28% or 40% (I cannot keep up with the pseudo statistics in this thread) are Francophone, then the majority of Francophones are bilingual. If those leading the unilinguals’ rights campaign are primarily Anglophone, then a greater number of unilinguals appear to be Anglophone since only 2% (or 4%) of Francophones are unilingual. This could imply that Anglophones have more difficulty learning a language, according to the comments (or “logic” which is not logic in this thread). But even this is false. The lower rates of bilingualism among Anglophones in Cornwall likely reflect correlation instead of causality: Francophones in this region have a higher likelihood of being bilingual than Anglophones (correlation: Francophone-bilingual). We would have to speculate about the causality and this speculation should not involve judgement (i.e. Francophones are “elitist,” “pushy” etc; one community “has trouble” learning a second language; “are Anglophones that much smarter than Francophones” etc. These are judgement which were stated in this thread). Instead of reflecting poor second language acquisition skills on the part of Anglophones, these numbers might point to the relationship between majority and minority (the minority language is less valued by the majority; minorities and-or conquered people tend to learn the language of the majority and-or conquerors). It might point to inadequate education and disinterest in second language acquisition (the book Sorry, I Don’t Speak French by Graham Fraser addresses this). It does not point to actual language learning skills.
    Bilingual and bicultural Francophones score just as high on English literacy tests as Anglophones, particularly educated urban Francophones. Regarding the retired elderly Acadians you know who held government jobs and speak both languages, that is understandable. Your elderly friends might have had excellent written proficiency in both languages which means they could have passed the government bilingualism test. They probably benefited from the traditional classic education offered by the clergy and reached a high level of education, perhaps even postsecondary. Literacy is related to socio-economic background. Since the Canadiens français were historically from the working classes, they would have lower literacy rates. Aboriginal cultures are oral cultures. In fact, historically, French Canadian culture was also an oral culture (in a different sense from Aboriginals). The elite French returned to France after the Conquest and the remaining elite was the clergy. French Canadians were agricultural people before moving to the city and joining the working classes. Anglophones from the working classes and less privileged backgrounds also have lower literacy rates (however, there is no history of assimilation, but there is a history of class oppression).
    Many contributors to this thread are Anglophones with lower literacy rates and would rank about 2 or 3 out 5 according to literacy evaluation tools used by Statistics Canada and other research organisations. It is likely than that the education levels are also low since the literacy level is low.
    I have read the newspapers. Newspapers are a very low form of communication. I read peer-reviewed research and produce publish peer-reviewed research. And I teach and write about the issues so I am aware of the complications of Law 101 in Québec and also the situation of minority Francophones. This is my first experience in communicating with anti-French or anti-bilingual people though.
    I have connections in academia, government, NGOs and human rights’ associations all over the world. They are watching this thread with great interest. A friend in Europe was utterly shocked by what he considers “extremism” and considers the thread to be “abject, false, extremist, disturbing, and destabilising.” It reminded him of the vocabulary and jargon of extreme right and supremacy groups. I responded, “They don’t understand that some of the things they are writing are extreme and hateful. They think they are standing up for their rights. What is ironic is that they are part of the Anglocentric hegemony of the world.” The minority under which many of the contributors of this thread would fall is that of the economically and educationally underprivileged. And although the economically underprivileged make up the numerical majority, they are socially a minority because they are oppressed. This struggle should be a class struggle, not a language struggle. A struggle for underprivileged Canadians to have access to better education and better employment opportunities.
    I think that unilingual Canadians are at a disadvantage and public education has not lived up to expectations since the OLA was passed. Dismantling official bilingualism will never happen in postcolonial times which value multiculturalism, minority rights, and the identity movement. Improving the education, training, and employment prospects for all Canadians is critical and this involves better language training. This makes Canadians competitive for national and international jobs and can be achieved without jeopardising federal bilingualism and provincial bilingual services in designated areas. Québec bashing is particularly useless because the current issue concerns Cornwall, Ontario (and New Brunswick).
    I am open to ideas about improving the situation of unilingual job seekers and there been a few good ideas in this thread, but not enough. The hate speech, anti-bilingualism, anti-French statements and Québec bashing (the latter being off topic) have had a harsh impact and dilute the potentially constructive ideas. The Nazi movement gained popularity through propaganda and hate speech regarding minorities, one of which was perceived to be privileged and have advantages. So it would be best to avoid negative statements towards the minority, it weakens any argument. Throwing around statistics and numbers is of limited use because it is the critical analysis of these statistics that matter. And talk of majority and democracy must also be expressed clearly. Majority rule does not involve squelching minority rights. Protecting minority rights is what healthy democracies do.

  2. Hey folks if you want to see how the majority views all this look at the globe and mail-over resounding no to bilingualism .over 1150 comments.

    national post -article over 600 comments – about 70-80 say no

    where the government decides to poll people -is reflective of the responses .

    Perhaps the GOV should take the hint from these 2 papers .

    Why is it now not allowed in Quebec for Tim Hortins to fly the Canadian flag? -Quebec do not bite the hand that feed you!

    Kaede -you viewpoints and how you ewxpress them give you an air of elitism .

    Please no books -I would prefer to purchase one with more insight then that gibberish -loooooong winded OMG I near fell asleep -little facts and warped perception .

    Let democracy prevail and vote on this -if we don’t we do a disservice to the country and prove that we are no longer a democracy!

  3. Kaede,

    Thanks for the awesome, refreshing outlook and view on what could become a possible contentious campaign issue with all levels of government. I speak of course about the issue of bilingualism…

    Again, awesome. I found the Marxist analogy most keen in understanding some of the historical aspects of Canadian history. Your uses of the terms, ‘class struggle’, ‘working class’ ‘class oppression’ and others go a long way in understanding some of the difficulties our nation has faced since Confederation and perhaps even earlier.

    You wrote, “The language of the conquered have equal status with the language of the conquerors.” I wish this was the case, sir. Because if it truly were, some of the people writing and commenting on this issue probably never would have taken the time to complain about the issue at hand. The laws of the Official Languages Act (OLA) and the French Languages Services Act (FLSA) I’m sure were created to give an equal footing of the French language with the English one. This is great. It is fantastic of course to receive services and work in one’s primary language. But I think what LFA advocates are wishing for here is to have Anglophones be granted an equal footing when applying for government grants and employment with the public (and increasingly) private sectors. Of course knowledge of a second language should be given weight when considering two or more potential job candidates. But I think Anglophones are upset over what they see as employers having mismanaged and misinterpreted these laws to grant Francophone job candidates jobs when Anglophones have clearly outclassed some of their counterparts on all other merits except, ‘languages spoken.’ To me, this appears to be both a human resources, legal and perhaps even social problem as I can attest this happens more frequently than not…

    Now, if per se, you had obtained a number of univeristy degrees, had an abundance of experience in your given field; had volunteered for a number of Board of Directors and lost out to a fresh high school or college graduate who was chosen for a job before you – because of their knowledge of a language, how would you feel? I can tell you that after parting from the anger and frustration, you’re left with trying to understand and comprehend the situation at hand. How did I lose out on that job? It surely can’t be just because of my lack of knowledge of a second language, can it? It most certainly is and but for the fact that there are hundreds or perhaps thousands of us in Ontario who have experienced the same situation, I would chalk it up to paranoia.

    You also wrote, “I have read the newspapers. Newspapers are a very low form of communication.” They most certainly are. As we both know, editors and journalists must deal with time constraints and give us as entertaining a piece as possible for digestion with the masses, right. Let’s be frank, too. Sex doesn’t sell much anymore, so much so as sensationalism! But let’s look at these newspaper reports from a macro perspective.

    Many of them detail signage laws in Quebec, French-only health clinics in Ontario and such. You’ve briefly highlighted that there are ignorant people on both sides of the fence who may come from lower socio-economical, political classes and perhaps not understand the full scope of the problem (to paraphrase you). Of which that much I agree. However, I’m led to the conclusion that the laws governing our nation seem to encourage this type of divisionary response between the two linguistic groups and create jealousy and hatred. Okay, so let’s say we do need a fully bilingual hospital system, a fully bilingual health clinic, a fully bilingual this and that to serve our citizens. But why do we need say, for instance, a French-only health clinic? Is this not elitism? Is this not a simple duplication of services that a bilingual centre could offer? If the problem was say, that bilingual health centres were overwhelmed with clientele, why not create another additional ‘bilingual’ health centre to cater to everyone and not just French-speaking clientele? Are there so many unilingual French speaking people walking through the CCH doors and health centres in Cornwall that this has warranted the creation of a French-only Health clinic? If this is the case, then where did all of these unilingual French-speaking people come from and why?

    Kaede, you have to ask yourself, why this? To me, this situation reeks of Jim Crow white and black drinking fountains and such. If anything, as you can see, all of this has led to division between English and French Canadians. Can you really blame Anglophones for feeling this way?

    Kaede, you have also written: “Majority rule does not involve squelching minority rights. Protecting minority rights is what healthy democracies do.” They certainly do. I have already expressed though that Anglophones feel that the pendulum has swung so far the other way now that in fact it is the majority that are now being oppressed. In Ontario, I have made an argument that this is done through the OLA and FLSA, whose original intention was to bring about an equal playing field. In Quebec, minority English rights are in fact ‘squelched’. As evidenced when describing sections of Bill 101:

    Other Charter provisions, though, deeply alienated English-speaking Quebecers[citation needed]. The Charter cut off access to English schools to all but children who had a parent who had received their education in English in Quebec. The Charter also eliminated the Constitutional guarantee to English legal proceedings, eliminated English translations of Quebec laws, and banned the use of languages other than French from commercial signs. The law has therefore polarized Quebec along linguistic lines to this day. (Taken from June 24, 2012)

    Further, the article describes Anglophones (minority) leaving Quebec:

    Young highly educated anglophones, despite high rates of bilingualism[citation needed] and increased contact and openness to francophones, cite limited economic prospects caused by perceived linguistic discrimination and an unsatisfactory political climate as the major factors in their departure. By 2001, 50% of mother-tongue anglophones had left the province. (Taken from June 24, 2012)

    Sir, this is exactly what Anglophones are worried about now in the province of Ontario. And I can personally attest that this is happening and has been for some time in and around the Cornwall and surrounding areas on a daily basis.

    Your comment that, “Québec bashing is particularly useless because the current issue concerns Cornwall, Ontario (and New Brunswick)” is only one side of the equation sir. What we clearly see occuring are proponents of Quebec style antics being played out here in our hometowns and we are tired of it altogether.

    My ancestry includes Scottish, French and Iroquois (Mohawk). I love the fact that I am bilingual. I love my wife, who is a Franco-Ontarian and we converse about 55% of the time in French. I love the fact that I can enjoy the wonderful Quebecois sit-com of ‘La Petite Vie’ and understand all of the comedic references. I travel to ‘La Belle Province’ as much as possible to enjoy everything it has to offer in both stunning scenery and friendly people. I stick to talking in French while visiting Quebec to both practice and respect the language and people while there. Unfortunately, my waistline can attest to the fact that I enjoy far too many poutines and rich French desserts to count. In many ways, Quebec also has more freedoms than what many people in most of Ontario enjoy. Beer can be bought at corner stores, (and is generally cheaper), people seem more inclined to friendly chit-chat and there is more of an abundance of cool and fun cultural things to do and enjoy. But it’s the politics that is the real kicker!

    I see what has happened in language and legal issues in Quebec already spilling about in Eastern Ontario now. Imperialism is classic in a sense. It just keeps coming back to haunt us all.


  4. Kaede…………..thank-you so much for your time and effort in telling it like it is. You certainly know what you are talking about and stated it so well. Once again thank-you, your knowledge is amazing!!!!

    Patrick et les habitants…..lacher pas… merci vous aussi pour votre collaboration. C’est toujours interessant et amusant

  5. Kaede,Patrick, les habitants, stella
    Please tell us what rights unilingual English have that unilingual French do not have in Canada? And want / need.
    Lets address each one! Start a letter to the editor if neccessary.

  6. Kaede, Patrick, les habitants, stella/carlita

    Yes, please tell me. According to the law you have a right to be spoken to in your language so tell me then if I understand you when you are speaking your language, but my hiring committee, is telling me I cannot reply to you in your language because I didn’t pass the test, then why do I not have the right to answer you in my language.

  7. Eric, Rosie.

    You see, no responses to yes or no questions, correct? Keep it as simple as possible, with no chance of escape and these advocates of unfair laws will always remain mum. When things are hot for them, they just return back to ‘following the laws of the land’; though they are discriminatory in practice.

  8. Rosie, first of all if your post made sense I could probably answer your question…….thinking you have to read it again.

    Eric…..remain mum???…..LOL Did you not read what Kaede wrote……no one can say it better then he did. Perhaps you can take a minute to read his post and all your questions will be answered…..we don’t want to be accused of dribbling ad nauseum like some have accused us of already. **smile**

  9. Your right stella, it is frustrating. Some have an answer ready before reading the comment or post..frustrating..but not suprising.

  10. Comme toi Patrick……..not wasting time meeting with Cory. Why???…… to get bashed and be told we are the minority. I know that already LOL Besides, I read enough of his posts here, I doubt he would have anything new to share and nothing he could say to convince me there is in fact discrimination hiring practises at the CCH. Either you are qualified or you are not. Who has the right to dictate to any organization how to run their business or has the right to change the organization’s hiring policies. If in fact there was discrimination, why didn’t the “leader of the pack” fight discrimination at the time of the occurence? That in itself speaks volumes. Thinking we all know the anwer to that one. Patrick……continue tes postes, ils sont parfois amusant et tres interessant.

  11. Stella obviously you don’t have the talent to read between the lines. Let me put it another way. If you spoke to me in French and I understood you but I chose to answer you in English, you would run to the Language Police, RIGHT and I would be fired..

  12. LMAO…………This is too funny, Thanks for the laugh Rosie not only would I run to the language police to get you fired, I would bring this to the Supreme Court of Canada for not respecting my rights to be served in French LMAO. Besides I would DEMAND an apology in writing and DEMAND that you learn to speak and write in French to enhance your resume and qualifications.

  13. demand? pshaw! Stella/Carltia, you’re a card!

  14. Oh Stella you are sooooo right !!!!! Thank you for showing me the way.
    Sad is that you are not that far from the truth.

  15. Not a laughing matter Stella but I think you got it.

  16. Gaelic used to be very predominant in Canada and surly their numbers -similar to french in size -why was Gaelic not supported as a minority language .
    Should that minority language get the preservation to the tune of billions a year -why did Canada not protect that minority language as they were the founding fathers as well-many Scots and Irish !

    That is right only one language has the privilege of government sponsorship……one can`t have bilingualism and multiculturalism at the same time …..true multicultural means all cultures are treated equally: funding should be spread equally for all cultures and their linguistic backgrounds -Clearly that does not exist in Canada!

    Now tell me is elitism still a democracy!

  17. Demand to be spoken to you in French? Sure thing ‘NotsoStellar’. Though I’m sure you wouldn’t volunteer to teach anyone here in Francais, eh ma fille? Anyways, you forgot to tell Rosie that you would seek some sort of financial compensation as well for the foreseen wrongdoing against you. Now Stella, I’m afraid that you may be remiss here a little with your mean ways? I’m concerned that you would forget to address Rosie with something so elemental as a financial retribution to your perceived wrongdoing? Are you losing your cry-me-a-wolf edge?

  18. Rosie no fear, eh? How could you be in trouble with someone that we’re not sure even exists? We don’t even know this person’s name? Moreso, perhaps Stella is an automated computer hate program designed by someone at MIT pulling all of our legs? Now that would be the ultimate in technology design, no? Much like linear computer analogies, Stella’s thinking is akin to this. Perhaps this is the case. No wonder the computer has no name, but a stage name to recount to it’s constant embittered edge. Before you laugh this off folks, consider that!

  19. Think of it this way. A computer can generate single use responses and sentences as well as acronyms such as LMAO and will use single focal points to captivate humans’ attention by capitalizing individual words such as ‘DEMAND’.

  20. Rosie, this has happened to me alot. I addressed the person in french, and they replied in english. To me, it seems like someone that understands french and can use it off and on, but, is too afraid to use french for fear of being laughed at. Practice makes perfect…I can almost guarantee, that if you try to reply in french…the person will be so happy..that you made an effort.

  21. Did this in Ottawa last year, I was in a restaurant and this kid really gave it a hell of a try. He spoke broken french, it too more time, but he made an effort…loved it. Gf congratulated him, I gave him a huge tip and told him to keep it up..

  22. you know folks

    Kaede,Patrick,les habitant,stella aka-carlita

    with the billions awash for bilingualism -It would not surprise me that you people benefit in one form or another financially to post on here!
    Hundreds of french language rights groups out there-at the cost to the tax payer to fight /lobby for their rights.

    $623,000,000 million reasons in Ontario alone…..2,400,000,000 billion reasons yearly Federally .

    We need to cut the umbilicus cord and let the french finance their own groups here .

    $110,000 heritage Canada gave to a francophone rapper who advocated laying bombs and killing Canadian soldiers.
    But as federal gov said 80 % of casualties are civilians!

    Therefore through funding francophone rights groups the government has advocated killing Afgan civilians ????


  23. Patrick thank you but I’m afraid you really don’t understand. All that some of us are asking for is the opportunity to practice what we have learned but as you know the level of French required is much higher than most of us have, therefore we are being denied the opportunity to apply for these bilingual positions. If these levels were lower and we were given the chance to try, and if there was a true need to be speak French, then of course, we would improve that skill, just as you would any other skill. For me personally, it’s not that I am afraid of being laughed at, it is that I am always being corrected. Not only that, being denied so many good job opportunities because my French is only intermediate and having to accept the fact that the person who got the job speaks French but has maybe 5/10 years less experience than you. Do you really think I would want to speak French for the fun of it. If all of the French citizens of Canada accepted the attempt made by the English to speak French or accepted the fact that some never had the opportunity to learn, then I don’t think we would be having these discussions. As you know it is very important for the French child to be educated in their mother tongue but for the English it would be to their advantage not to. Do you ever really think about that? So many times I read posts from bilingual bloggers who make ridiculous comments such as “I learned to speak both languages at a very young age so why can’t everyone else?” Do they ever really think about why that is?

  24. Oh but i do… You have that opportunity, its just its easier to speak english. Why not speak french for the fun of it..or for the cultural benefit. I started learning spanish.. I’d love to learn 2 more languages. There is no one stopping you but yourself… SOme bring up the experience, and at times it depends. If it was a doctor and I had just been in a car accident, and i’m unconscious …you could speak german, I don’t care. But there better be someone to explain in french what he did when i wake up.

    YOu wrote¨As you know it is very important for the French child to be educated in their mother tongue but for the English it would be to their advantage not to.¨ I don’t believe that. I have plenty of anglo bilingual friends that learned french at a later age…

  25. Highlander, the fraser institute did not add in the value of bilingualism and its return. I encourage you to read the following article that explains that the true cost of bilingualism is roughly 17 dollars per canadian per year…

  26. Patrick- -where is the return on investment for the $3,100,000,000,000
    $17 per person eh?now over 400$ per francophone though that’s just federally -and the reality as S.allen wrote its significantly higher.
    Forget about provincial obligations $624,000,000 -Ontario alone.

    Tell me why at national parks anywhere have to be bilingual in Alberta /BC ect….all hires to be bilingual for that .05 % of french that show up-talk about over representation or what !!
    What about the native person who wakes up -is there someone there speaking Mohawk-they were truly original people of Canada ?
    Do the french respect any other culture -I’m starting to think not! -but then just look at Quebec to get that answer..***smile***

    All peoples should be equal by the GOV -sadly we wouldn’t be on here if it was true!

  27. LOL, where do you come up with 3 trillion dollars ??? It doesnt add up. you can’t have complete equality in certain situation because its impossible. You need to have those guarantees in order to protect minorities.
    – should we not have elevators for handicap people ?
    -should we not hire more qualified women at reasonable salaries?
    – should we not be more inclusive in order for us to benefit from other cultures ? (that is respecting other cultures without losing ones own values)
    – and we should hire bilingual people because in a sense its cheaper… they can serve more 100 % of the customers while unilingual ones cant.
    “””one phrase im soooo tired of hearing is sorry sir i don t speak french..

  28. patrick said:

    “””one phrase im soooo tired of hearing is sorry sir i don t speak french..”

    Get used to it 83% of Canadians do not !

    Do you still enjoy getting people fired at Costco because you are in a bad mood?
    Did you feel empowered ?Did that feel good ?
    Or was it the arrogance that was taught to you by your separatist father?
    THE APPLE DOES NOT FALL FAR FROM THE TREE ….the future is now and times they are a changing……french elitism will become extinct.

Leave a Reply