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.
maybe when admin writes a biased point of view we should also read as well .the opinion of admin is based on his own and does not reflect the opinion of cornwall free news or its employees.
@Patrick Boucher: Your mindless prattle and proinsanity franco attitude are perfect examples of why minority franco rule has never been successful – you are control freaks, nazi policy lovers who want no opposition whatsoever, whether it is legal, warranted, or fair. Any irrational argument you can find is your rationale for the crime against the Canadian majority you and yours are perpetrating.
Patrick…..New Brunswick is bilingual on paper. It stands at approx 68% english speakers 32% french. They like to up the numbers as I have explained to you before by including french immersion students. Do some research, it is known that kids in the program are most bilingual from 15 to 19 (High School) then lose what they had as it is not used, however they include these 15 to 19 year olds to make it look higher % bilinguals.
There are 750,000 in nb and about 75,000 who cannot speak english. I happen to know one of these 75,000, he is an extended family member and I would never ever want him to end up with medical needs and not be able to communicate with anyone, however, that does not mean the entire medical field of New Brunswick has to be bilang. Does it?
As far as conversations, I can assure you my two sons in high school have impeccable english grammar skills in both spoken and written and they understand french. It is the french school system that pumps out those that struggle in both.
As far as conversations, I can assure you my two sons in high school have impeccable english grammar skills in both spoken and written and they understand french. It is the french school system that pumps out those that struggle in both.
What numbers are you disputing? Typically when one disputes something they provide information showing why.
because the french language is one of the two founding languages of this great country.
Your two founding languages theory is false, this country was founded by many different cultures including Scottish,Irish, Welsh and most importantly First Nations etc. Following your theory, all groups other than frenchmen are lumped together, how is that for respect. Where are the links for the funding for saving these languages?????
We can’t include Quebec in your numbers of francophones as they have laws prohibiting one of our official languages and language police. In the real world (ROC) francophone percentages stand at around 4% of Canada.
The majority of the country want it that way?
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/2507
Kaede…as I stated above….why are just three cultures recognized by the charter? You might want to ask yourself that question. There are many Irish, Scotts, Welsh, Polish, Chinese, Italians, Greeks etc. that have helped make this country what it is today and fought in wars for our freedom.
Just because something was done to appease Quebec, does not make it right or just.
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.
Endless research shows that a person who is taught in the french system have lower literacy scores than those taught in the english system, french immersion or no french immersion. The fact that a child is taught in a full french school, francized and spoken to at home and still produces less then scholar results is the fault of a system that is more concerned with upping their numbers for funding then caring about their children. Nothing more , nothing less. In the northern part of new brunswick, they are the majority french, same results, can’t blame that on assimilation. In fact when I get emails from people taught in the french system, it makes me angry as a parent to see people that are completely illiterate when it comes to a language that people from India, China, Vietnam etc. have mastered, just like our ancestors.
They have received millions and millions of extra funding for over two generations now and still no improvement. Don’t blame that on the people moving forward. It certainly has had time to correct itself.
Historically, this is related to assimilation policies which called for eliminating these cultural and linguistic groups. These were historic human rights abuses.
16.1 (1) The English linguistic community and the French linguistic community in New Brunswick have equality of status and equal rights and privileges, including the right to distinct educational institutions and such distinct cultural institutions as are necessary for the preservation and promotion of those communities.
The french have a school system that aside from a simple english class are taught fully in french.
The english have to take french immersion or sign a waiver stating they are aware of the employment implications for their child in a bilingual province.
You see anything wrong with this picture shouldn’t it be a parental choice?
Again, concerning your relatives, I have an francophone aunt that just retired from the federal government after a long successful career and happen to be friends with one of the most successful Acadians in new brunswick. He is now in his 80’s and had a long successful business and career, why because he worked with english speakers as they were his friends not his enemies. Surprisingly, contrary to your assimilation theory, he is still speaking french and is still Acadian. You see these people are not stuck in the past, living in their hatred, they have moved forward and evolved, just like everyone of the other 99 cultures in Canada
We won’t talk about the mass exodus of english speakers, both citizens and companies from Quebec.
I suggest you do some research on how Quebec treats the english speakers, financially speaking, employment wise and even banning bilingual information in predominant english areas.
I also suggest you look at the linguistic make-up of Canada, when you respect the individual cultures…….. are francophones really THE minority?
Your two founding languages theory is false, this country was founded by many different cultures including Scottish,Irish, Welsh and most importantly First Nations etc. Following your theory, all groups other than frenchmen are lumped together, how is that for respect. Where are the links for the funding for saving these languages?????
We can’t include Quebec in your numbers of francophones as they have laws prohibiting one of our official languages and language police. In the real world (ROC) francophone percentages stand at around 4% of Canada.
The majority of the country want it that way?
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/2507
“There is no way two ethnic groups in one country can be made equal before the law….and to say it is possible is to sow the seeds of destruction”. Pierre Trudeau, 1966.
Now, Pierre, rip what you saw.
Poor child, concerned citizen:
“It is fine to recognize language but to financially support only one language and not promote any others is called elitism!”
You just said it.
I have lived in NB my whole life. I come from a bilingual family. My mom is English, my dad is French. I had to move from my hometown of Campbellton to Riverview NB because French Quebec and Acadians have completely “taken over” my hometown.
The best job I could get being bilingual in my hometown was McDonald’s. I couldn’t gain any meaningful employment. I’m not French enough to get a gov’t job. But it seems to me someone who speaks like “Ow may hi elp you?” is perfect English and has a gov’t job… Something is wrong.
So what if my French isn’t perfect, that should not be another hurdle to jump over among the hundreds of people looking for jobs. A select few people are able to get a government job and the rest have to suffer with below poverty line jobs just to pay their bills.
If you look at the majority of French communities you see huge houses and all kinds of money coming into the household. If you look at English communities, you see majority living on welfare or working at Tim Hortons just to get by. It’s not fair that a language should determine what kind of job you get. It should be how hard you are willing to work. I would be willing to take an entry level government position tomorrow if I was offered it. But instead here I sit not French enough, living on e day to the next with little hope of anything changing, despite the fact of my education and qualifications.
“…should French-speaking people concentrate their efforts on Quebec or take the whole of Canada as their base? In my opinion, they should do both; and for the purpose they could find no better instrument than federalism” – Pierre Trudeau, Page 31, “Federalism” (1968).
(2) In the case of French-speaking pupils who are unable to speak and understand the English language well enough for the purposes of instruction and communication, the following provision is hereby made:
Regulation 17 Ministry of education in Ontario (from 1913 to 1927)
(a) As soon the pupil enters the school he shall begin the study and the use of the English language.
(b) As soon as the pupil has acquired sufficient facility in the use of the English language he shall take up in that language the study of English.
This illegal thing happened in Ontario.
Even though that happened years and years ago we are still feeling the effects of it. I just have to laugh when some people from ontario say they are being discriminated against in Québec considering what happened in Ontario.
THank god we are passed that, and some negative people out there don’t represent the majority of Canadians.
– 77 % of recognize the importance of preserving our status as a bilingual country.
– 74% of anglos and 93 % of francos thing it is important for their kids to learn the other official language.
http://www.ocol-clo.gc.ca/html/biling_f.php
Did a little shopping today, went to sportcheck, galaxy, and wallmart. I got service in french.. Good for C-wall ..keep it up
–
Patrick, it’s awful nice of you to patronize those big bad Anglo owned and named businesses.
and those big bad anglo places hire BILINGUAL employees, I guess they have good business sense. If you kinda think of it, hiring a bilingual person is good business, and cheaper….bilingual people can serve more people.
Now I have a question for admin. Do you want Québec to secede from Canada? Are the opinions that you post here your own, or those of CFN? Are you a member of the same organization as beth trudeau and howard galganov, CLF ? Dont you think you should keep your personal opinions to yourself considering it might hurt advertising on CFN ? As a francophone, if i had a business in c-wall, why would I advertise in CFN since its admin doesnt seems to be against francophones rights in eastern ontario.
he just wants us to conform to the majority anglophone speaking population.
Dearest Patrick. If it weren’t for the Voyageurs shooting it out with nasty Americans in BC there would be no Canada. My Canada includes Quebec. Does yours? 🙂
That being said Quebec has to decide if ultimately she wants to be in Canada. There’s been a lot of bad blood by the unfairness of Quebec to Anglophones and the price paid by the majority in Canada to placate Francophones across this great and amazing country that has survived IN SPITE of its differences.
Like Lennon & McCartney with the Beatles, there would be no Canada without both of its great founding nations. Neither party would be better off individually rather than as a whole whether they admit it or not.
j
Concerned Citizen agrees once again in the equality of cultures and linguistic groups! Splendid! In that case, there can be no domination of English over the others. Thank you!
“in a Democracy all cultures /linguistic groups should be considered equal”
My Canada does not include Quebec anymore and rejects the French as official language. I wish Quebec separate. My Canada is ONE NATION, one official language and many different cousins.
Patrick…..your thought process is a big part of the problem. Why is it that the french suffer from post traumatic stress disorder from their ancestors. I don’t see that following any other culture. It clearly is a defect.
There is not a culture in the world that was not discriminated against at some point in history. Thankfully most of us have evolved.
If I followed your thought pattern, Women would hate men because they did not allow them to vote until 1920…..see how ridiculous that sounds.
Regulation 17 Ministry of education in Ontario (from 1913 to 1927)
As soon the pupil enters the school he shall begin the study and the use of the English language………..This illegal thing happened in Ontario
New Brunswick English school Board (2012)
Children in the english school system are required to take french immersion in their DISTINCT English Educational Institution or their parents have to sign a waiver stating they are aware of the employment implications of living in a bilingual province…….now would this be legal???
Bud,
There is funding for Aboriginal languages in Canada, and though they are not official languages in “Canada” – which is a political entitity and an occupation of this continent – Aboriginal languages and groups are protected under the Charter and the constitution adn in provincial laws. Most importantly, these language ARE official in sovereign Aboriginal nations which have separate governments other than the colonial provincial and federal governements.
There is also funding for Irish, Scottish, German, and other ethno-cultural and linguistic groups. The funding is not for health care as such and government services are not dispensed in these languages, which are currently not official languages. However, it is legal for a province to determine that a language other than French or English should become official. For example, British Columbia could decide to make Punjabi and Chinese official provincial languages, just like Nova Scotia could choose to make Irish or Scottish or Miqma’q an official language.
I have not been exposed to a discourse such as the one in this thread… ever in my life. I have vague memories of my childhood in Cornwall. But I have left them and Cornwall behind and lived across English Canada and never been exposed to such ugly antagonism between linguistic communities. I realise, however, that I have been in highly educated circles in universities and in the federal and provincial governments among people who are very open-minded to the Other. I had many professors of French literature who were Anglophone. I am chagrined to discover this antagonism at home. At the same time, I am not really surprised. It is not only Franco-Ontarians and Mohawks who are underprivileged in Cornwall, it is everyone. Cornwall has very low literacy rates, low levels of high school completion, high unemployment, few professionals and few holders of university degrees. It is not surprising then that this embarrassing campaign which should be about maintaining the dignity of unilingual nurses in pursuing their careers and leading the fulfilling life they seek to live, has been transformed into something very different. This campaign expresses more concern about limiting or eradicating federal and provincial bilingualism than about the nurses in the local hospital. The wording of the Language Fairness for All campaign contains strong antagonism towards Francophones which paradoxically has the impact of marginalising Francophones, who are already marginalised, underprivileged, and progressively being assimilated to the majority.
The reality is that the leaders of this campaign do not understand the real source of social injustice and marginalisation going on in the region. This sense of frustration felt by a minority of Anglophones in Canada – though perhaps a more significant number in this impoverished region – is related to social class, unemployment, poverty, inadequate education, bleak career prospects. Blaming the French Language Services Act of Ontario, the Official Languages Act, and Francophones themselves is transferring the problem. This is not about linguistic or ethno-cultural communities and their perceived advantages. It is about class and privilege in general. Those partaking in the Language Fairness for All campaign are clearly frustrated with their inability to advance in their careers, accumulate wealth, and feel a sense of worth, dignity, belonging, and perhaps even prestige in the community. This is fair. But blaming Francophones for the educational and professional difficulties of the protesters is not fair. The majority of Francophones in this region, who are also mostly from the working classes, probably feel the same sense of limitations as their Language Fairness counterparts. Neither the Language Fairness protesters, nor the bilingual Francophones who have jobs working with the public, are part of the 1%. Both the Language Fairness protesters and the majority of Francophones in this region are part of the 99%, but not only that, they are probably in the lower 50% or even 30% due to the economically depressed region they live in. The majority of Language Fairness protesters are not predominantly from the professional classes. The accusations of elitism express frustration towards those who hold power, such as legislators, lawyers, and administrators implementing the law. This is certainly frustrating for those who do not have access to power at various levels. It is also frustrating for those with limited education and limited funds to access college-level or university-level education and high quality second language training. That is one reason why it might be frustrating for some that bilingualism is highly recommended for better job prospects and especially for access to legislative power nowadays. Hence, anger towards elitists emerges, which is typical of class struggles. But how many elitists can there actually be in Cornwall? Anglophone elitists would likely have sent their children to private schools, or at the minimum, immersion schools. Some managed to get them in the French system. Francophone or Anglophone elitist parents might have sent children to French lycées in Ottawa or Montréal (France’s high school system). An elitist parent would have forseen the necessary education for a wide range of potential careers with access to power in order for their children to become part of the elite. But there are few such elitists in Cornwall. Why would they live in Cornwall? There are not many elite jobs to be had in Cornwall. Elites are mostly in Toronto, Ottawa, Montréal, etc. Most Cornwallites, whether Francophone or Anglophone, have not been so privileged. Part of this lack of privilege involves inadequate education, which might explain why the available French language education was not explored sufficiently. Perhaps the family of origin held old prejudices towards Francophones and thought French would not be useful since English was the language for the many factories in town. This is very different from the Mulrony children who went to Lycée Claudel high school and learned to speak outstanding French. These are the elites who were born into privilege. So few Cornwallites can comprehend that kind of privilege because the majority of Cornwallites, whether Francophone or Anglophone, are from the working classes. A Francophone from the working class would likely have adopted English as a preferred language but have maintained an oral knowledge of French. And so an Anglophone from the working classes would naturally be frustrated that his inadequate education, which did not include sufficient French, and probably did not include university and professional degrees which could have led to a high salary job, has been left him behind his working class Francophone counterparts who know English but also privileged and educated Anglophone and Francophone bilinguals alike. And so the professional classes and their affluence as well as the legislative and corporate power are out of reach.
The antagonism should not be towards Francophones, who are for the most part equivalents in terms of socio-economic background, but towards class inequality and access to equitable public education regardless of social classes. The gradiated value of Core French versus immersion is not fair. It is not fair that privileged Anglophones can afford to send their children to private schools, hire French language tutors, and send them to university where they can then participate in the Official Language Bursaries Programme by going to Québec for five weeks to improve their French. It is not even fair that some Anglophone families were privileged enough to have enough insight to foresee that immersion would be the best way for kids to become bilingual, at the state’s expense, and other Anglophone families were shortsighted and thought French would not be necessary for a factory job. Two many Francophone parents also thought their children would need to learn English in order to get a job in a factory and that’s how the majority of Francophones residing in the factory town of Cornwall became bilingual. To get factory jobs working for English employers. Not because they were elites… certainly not elites when they were from the working classes and farming communities.
From this perspective, the Fairness that protesters are calling for is not related to Language, but rather, equity for the underprivileged : a smaller gap between social classes in terms of education and job prospects.
wow Kaede, you should end that with, in your face jack, Just a joke. Thank you for clearing up alot of stuff now maybe some will understand our struggles. Ever thought about running for politics kaede, you should. And you’d probably be alot cuter then Stephen harper.
The judges unanimously upheld the municipal language bylaw enforced in Russelll… three cheers for respecting both language sides of this issue………..the judges decsions were based on acceptance of the majority french population of the township and the minority english speaking population both will benefit.. even if your business is not providing english language service ,it still can display a communication to both it shows respect for both equally.. if you choose to run your business as anglophone only that is still maintained, the judgement did not say anything about language services of the businesses , just signage and proper respect for the bylaw. Howard Galganov …Add a note to your bilingual sign that says “All business is conducted in english in this establishment” in a predominantly french community of the municipal demographic you are antagonizing, ..
@Kaede…. erudite and exemplary….thank you again …the social diversities between regions in Canada are the cause and effect of some of the grass roots movements that seek to sway the perceptions to extremism…no place is without its poor regions but to blame a whole cultural revival on the conditions is ludicrous as you have eloquently essayed…. merci!
Keade, your elitism skirt is showing by suggesting if you are educated and SMRT, you coud understand the plight of the poor Francophone. Mr Thibideau, a perfectly bilingual federal government worker in Ottawa(who only has a French voicemail by the way) sues Air Canada, gets 12,000 because of a Sprite 7up issue, proves how courts are ensuring Francophones service.
The amount of money being thrown to Francophone associations and causes, and the number of bilingual job ads does not help your case.
French immersion education is not for every kid, I have seen that personally, and the teaching methods are seperating more than just kids from future jobs. I have been in Eastern Ontarion my whole life and not seen such a wedge issue as this Ontario French Languages Services Act (maybe Dalton McGuinty is) and the Official Languages Act supported by a few pushers and advancing legislation.
I do agree with your premise of language training for government workers, we need a country wide discussion on it’s need though. And being managed and able to work in the language of your choice does not sound like it is helping the Taxpayer Customer.
“There is no way two ethnic groups in one country can be made equal before the law…and to say it is possible is to sow the seeds of destruction”. Pierre Trudeau, 1966.
Now, Pierre, rip what you saw.
Put bilingualism to referendum
To The Editor:
I have a remedy for the continuous linguistic tension in New Brunswick. Put the Official Language Act to a vote…..ask the people to decide.
Until the 1960’s, NB was run in a very fair and equitable way utilizing a single internationally-standard language for administrative purposes. There was equal recognition and promotion of all cultures and linguistic communities, everyone was free to speak the language of their choice and practice their traditional cultural values/practices. No one was being discriminated against; just the contrary. Everyone was equal. Then an Acadian gets elected Premier, and promptly abuses that power/privilege by using it to pursue his own personal agenda by entrenching special rights for his language and culture (and his alone). This is done under the guise of “equality”, yet no other cultures or languages are recognized and any attempts to do so in the future are fervently opposed by the very people who are purporting “equality”.
This legal wording in the Official Languages Act is then used as a weapon to gain financial and political advantages/benefits/domination over all the other people/cultures.
I urge all politicians to stand up for democracy and organize a popular vote on removing the wording in the OLA that requires bilingualism. Either that, or add equal recognition for all other languages and cultures, or scrap the OLA entirely.
I urge readers to petition government for the right to vote on this issue. But, let the question be clear and unclouded by propaganda. No one is being discriminated against by removing this wording. The French community is free to practice its language and culture the same as they are today (and the same as any other culture in NB is). French Immersion programs will not be halted. Bilingualism will not suffer or die, the only difference will be that it will not be legislated and forced on everyone else. It will be up to individual choice.
T.Williams
Moncton
Robert I agree lets have a referendum -let Canadians decide the future of their jobs , their choices and their future generations.
It would be great to see Canada a democracy again.
But |I believe the elitist class would not let that happen –
When I say elitist this is not a reference to politicians!
May god save Canada
@concerned citizen2
If you don’t believe, it won’t happen. Let optimist plebs do the job.
There is no need for a referendum to cost anything.
It could be tagged onto the next federal election in 2012.
Correction
There is no need for a referendum to cost anything.
It could be tagged onto the next federal election in 2015.
Moncton to use friendly and subtle arm-twisting to encourage bilingual business signs
The City of Moncton won’t force bilingual business signs… yet.
For now, the city will take an ‘in your face’ approach by offering free business signs showing days and hours of service. A group will be making the rounds of local business to offer these signs hoping that their presence alone will compel the owners to accept the signs. No pressure here, no none at all.
One one will be forced to accept them although some where in the bowels of city hall, no doubt a record will be kept. ‘So and so’ refused an bilingual sign.
This sounds an awful lot like a version of the military way of doing things.As in ‘We may not be able to make you post bilingual signs, but we sure as hell can make you wish you had.’
Main stream media erroneously claimed that francophones make up 40 % of the city. In fact, that number is closer to 32% or if we are rounding off, 30%.
Ward 3 councilor Brian Hicks was the only one who dared oppose the new plan of action. The vote was nine to one with one councillor absent.
http://www.topix.com/ca/moncton-area-nb/2012/06/moncton-to-use-friendly-and-subtle-arm-twisting-to-encourage-bilingual-business-signs
Robert: if you repeat yourself more then ounce, it doesnt make your affirmation true. So false numbers and false facts, this isnt math, two negatives don’t make a positive.
Feel free to check the stats Patrick Boucher, you know, just to be sure.
NB has 719,650 people
English – 463,190
French – 232,900
Moncton has 124,055 people
English – 77,345
French – 42,920
A business should not be told by a local / provincial / federal government what signs should say (within reason and common dignity) or a minimum of which languages.
By your own numbers, your saying that 32% of the population deserve no rights. They should not be served in their own language. Us, true canadians don’t think like you, we include minorities and want to protect their rights and recognize the benefits of having a bilingual country.
What the heck is the LFA ? People are legal languages are not ? THAT MAKES NO SENSE !!
TYpo, people are equal languages are not, that makes even less sense then what I mistakenly wrote in my previous post.
Patrick -because you cannot argue numbers you will start to differ your comments to the LFA group.
There is no representation by population -32%-well 32% french -remaining English!
But that is not how it works -100% bilingual -gov jobs.
solution=gov hires 32% French only -68% English only
1/3and 2/3 solution.
would that be fair and equitable?
Patrick, there is a difference with helping people who really need it and what these language acts are doing now. There is no shortage of French services right now, people are not dying in the streets for lack of health care or welfare payments. There is more money going into everything French than a team of auditors could locate.
Can you explain your idea of a “true Canadian”?
…I don’t have to dispute the numbers, the fasified numbers speak for themselves. Even if your numbers were true, and I’ m not saying they are true, you can’t have representation by population when you are talking about individual rights. Whats next, 90 % white anglo, so they hire 90 % anglo.
Eric, a true canadian is for inclusivness, is open to other cultures and is doesn’t mind bilingual signs. Eric is making it up as he goes along, thats a shame… he doesn’t realise the benefits of a our canadian nation as it is, multicultural and officially bilingual.
Patrick -obviously by that true Canadian comment inclusiveness is open to other cultures and doesn’t mind bilingual signs –
CERTAINLY your not reflecting on Quebec here?are you?
We know how inclusive Quebec is ! YA -Quebec is very accommodating right?
Very few care about Quebec anymore -they have cried wolf many times that people have become numb to it!
go smoke another one -YOU NEED A REALITY CHECK!
Take the language off the FLSA life support!
I was born with a Laurentide bière in one hand, a lacrosse stick in the other, a beaver tattoo on my butt and the Queen in my heart while singing God Save the Queen and Oh Canada off key. I don’t need a GPS to find smoked meat in Montreal and work very well with members of the United Nations our society has, either born or recently traded. ( I mean traded in the hockey sense of the word)
Did you say Canadian or comedian?
I still don’t think so many jobs need to be bilingual!
For those supporting the argument about representation by population, you would best service yourselves by not writing anything at all. It is self-evident through comments made above that people will stoop to any level in defending their arguments. The real question, or perhaps the more important one we should ask ourselves is this: Do they really believe what they are saying/writing or are they defending their statements knowing full well what the truth is? I’m not sure which is more frightening!
For instance, Patrick Boucher writes, “…I don’t have to dispute the numbers, the falsified numbers speak for themselves.” Exactly what statistics would you believe then, Patrick? If you cannot accept factual Canadian government stats and studies, then what is the point in even attempting to justify your position? So far, those advocating for a fair and democratic approach to this bilingual issue have backed up their positions with numbers/stats garnered from highly reputable sources. Advocates of bilingualism on these blogs tend to ignore said arguments all together and form their opinions generally based on what little emotion the Anglos can summon on the issue. More than once, I’ve seen Anglos get frustrated about their counterpart’s argument as they’ve tried to point out how ridiculous they sound. In other words, one side of this argument is presenting facts/figures/numbers to warrant their position whereas the other side generally presents an emotional response to perceived ethnocentrism on behalf of the Anglos reputiating the idiocy of official bilingualism.
Patrick, if on a sunny day, you and I stood shoulder to shoulder outside, and I looked up and said to you, “wow, look at how nice of a blue that sky is,” you would probably disagree with me for the sake of it and claim that storm clouds were rolling in and that the sky looked black!
Every single time we try to convince you advocates of official bilingualism and how idiotic this very issue is, we stab ourselves in the foot because you simply harp on other things. Patrick, since when did Eric dispute the concepts of individual rights or for that matter, inclusiveness? No man, you’re grasping at straws here, again! Instead of debating what should be bilingualism you’ve skirted the issue and shot back with, “…a true Canadian is for inclusiveness.” You don’t get it and never will, man. A pity, really.
Folks, I say we stop trying to convince advocates of this very unfair and one-sided issue that is bilingualism. We’re simply wasting our time here and we’d get better results if we repeatedly smashed our heads against the walls!
You cannot convince zealots, Cory. Francos are on a mission to preserve and expand their elevated status in Canada that OLA and FLSA gave them. They will twist any argument and deny any statistics that stand in their way.
They do a good job to fuel our RAGE. Rage is a good motivation to change things…
I have tried the “let’s appease them”, the “let’s be fair” and the “rah rah we want equality” avenues.
I even rallied on the parliament hill (with pictures to prove it) to keep Quebec as part of this country during the last referendum they held as to whether they wanted to succeed from Canada because i truly believed Canada was stronger and better with them as part if us but, you know what?
At every turn all i see is them demanding more and more French in the “province” of Quebec while at the same time
taking more and more rights away from my fellow English speaking Canadian citizens who live in the “province” of Quebec.
Hounding English companies with the premise of their draconian laws to “comply” to their “French only this, and French first that” rules, forcing small businesses to “comply” to their “French only this, and French first that” rules while at the same time demanding more French this, and more French that everywhere else in the rest of this country.
And, if that was not enough to send your blood pressure to the moon
The total repression of English schools and English language etc etc etc in that “province.”
***
AND BTW, just a footnote…
DON’T KNOW IF YOU HAVE NOTICED BUT WHENEVER I MENTION QUEBEC I PUT QUOTES AROUND THE TERM “PROVINCE.”
THE REASON FOR THIS IS SIMPLE AND STRAIGHT FORWARD. IT IS my way to highlight the fact that Quebec is STILL “JUST A PROVINCE” WITHIN THE COUNTRY OF CANADA yet THEY seem to feel free to carrying on TREATING IT
AS IF IT’S THEIR OWN LITTLE “French” COUNTRY and in doing so it lulls the rest of into this sense that it’s a done deal and we no longer use their repression of English “THERE” as a comparison.
***
Anyways, back to what i was saying…
We have obviously tried to make nice, be open, and to be understanding.
We have also, (to use one of their own familiarly overused phrases, tried to be “accommodating”) but, it seems the more we have tried to be accommodating the more we are being used and abused and taken advantage of.
I personally have no more use for “trying to be fair” with those who have no idea what fairness is all about.
After all, didn’t we “allow them” to exist after the defeat on the Plains of Abraham only to find them complaining and whining that they are being “hard done by” after the fact.
It’s time we stood up as they do… And said, “no, THIS IS an English dominated country and our prime minister, ministers of government, as well as government employees DO NOT have to have French as a pre-requisite to having those positions.
Our English ONLY children should definitively have the right to ply for those positions without having to know a language that constitutes a mere 20% of this population.
We can apply this restrictive against the English concept to most other job opportunities OUTSIDE OF THEIR “Province” of Quebec as well.
We should no longer allow this weeding out of “the majority English speaking citizens” for job opportunities highly sought after positions within our own government.
We will also no longer accept this inequity of “bilingualism at the 100% rate” which they seem to be demanding, in areas where at best, we should only offer offer a 20% ratio (and i am being generous again considering this is no where near what “they” offer or provide in “that place” … You know… The “province” of Quebec which they have determined to be their own private French only country.)
“They” HAVE “the province” of Quebec for all intents and purposes so, let them BE HAPPY with that. We (I mean our politicians) seem to have abdicated any efforts to protecting our English compatriots there in “that province” against all the unconstitutional anti English rhetoric and laws and so on so it seems we must just accept it as a done deal there.
Sure, we will continue to accommodate “them” to a certain degree yes, but we should no longer allow the 20% minority to dominate and rule (or continue writing the rules, for that matter) for the 80 % majority of this country.” PERIOD.
And, if they don’t agree then tough.
At that point the response should be that the majority of this country would hold a referendum as to whether WE WANT “them” this time instead of whether they WANT TO BE PART OF “US.”
I can just imagine the whining and the outcry from them if we were to do such a thing. It seems just like with the issue of how they treat the English language over there compared to how they expect their language to be treated everywhere. There is the same type of complete obliviousness of understanding of how that type of reverse situation would feel if it were thrust upon them or their language.
Oh my, a referendum as to whether we want to boot them out ? Shesh. That would be the ultimate insult to them yet, them holding several referendums as to whether they should separate from us is well, just peachy keen and fine to them and should not be viewed by us as an insult. Right !!!
No, I take it back. It’s likely better if we simply just give them the ultimatum. That’s it, we’ve had enough of this 20% pushing around the 80% and demanding this and that. It’s over. You decide. Do you want to be part of this country and respect the Canadian flag? Also, let them know that they MUST sign onto the constitution and be rid of the not withstanding clause. No longer acceptable. These things along with the fact that public service jobs in our Federal system will only be (and I am being generous here) subject to a 20% rule where by there should only be a 20% representation of French in the Federal government system and our main elected officials DO NOT have to have French as a pre-requisite to be able to be in those positions as we can simply provide interpreters and translators.
That way, it’s them deciding so they can’t blame anyone else.
Believe me, in today’s Geo political and financial climate the folk in that “province” that believe the Canadian flag is not worthy of their respect,
the English language should be completely outlawed, and the language demands which they seem to think are justified outside that
pitifully bankrupt “province” had better think long and hard before they make their final decision.
And, despite this… If they DO choose to separate and go, then fine… But, be rest assured, “WE” will be writing the rules as to how that “separation process” will take place.
And, let them be mindful that the demands that are rightfully due to to Canada will not be akin to the free ride they have been used to with this
three decade old gradual attempted French take over of this country.
However, I doubt if they would separate. I have a strong feeling they would agree to our terms and sign onto the constitution removing the not withstanding clause and accepting our terms.
Historically speaking, the time for this ultimatum is RIGHT NOW. And I believe they know that. I believe they have ratcheted down their separation rhetoric because they realize two main things.
1) they pretty much have everything the way they want it. Their own little French bastion called “the province of Quebec” which they have cleansed of most English, set up their own rules and yet can still have the benefit of the Canadian dollar and the mounds of transfer payments that allow them to provide 7 dollar a day child care and have electricity rates 40% less than the rest of Canada.
AND
2) They have everyone else outside of the “province” of Quebec brainwashed into believing that French immersion is absolutely necessary and all jobs should go to only those who are bilingual thus, providing the “stairway” if you will, to an eventual situation where by everyone will have to be French in some way.
Then, it’s just a simple case of all those French folk in the federal system and all the other jobs we have allowed them to claim as bilingual essential positions (ie: all the rest of the jobs) using French most often in most areas and voila a completely French Canada.
With this in mind and knowing how manipulative and cunning they have shown themselves to be up to now, why in heavens name would they even contemplate separation at this point? It would not make any sense at all.
And thus, Trudeau did his job well. He was shroud indeed. When he opposed Leveque back in the day it came off appearing to the rest of Canada (mostly the English Canadians) as though he were a tough staunch Federalist. It seems Rene may have provided Trudeau with a perfect situation (providing of course that he was never able to garner enough votes in Quebec to actually pull off the separation) considering what appears to have been Trudeau’s “future vision” which we almost have to admit seems very likely to have been what he WAS contemplating given “the proof” of what we see happening today in Canada and how such a small French minority is dominating the 80% majority of this country.
To quote a famous line from yet another French Prime Minister we were responsible for electing in this country, Jean Chretien, “a proof is a proof is a proof.”
It would seem that Trudeau’s’ vision was much grander and more encompassing than Rene’s vision. And, in light of how that “vision” seems to be proving itself to be the case it sure must have been frustrating for Trudeau at some points to have Mr. Leveque constantly attempting to persuade the masses in Quebec to separate and have their own little “French only bastion” where he could rule as king while Trudeau’s vision was 30 years down the road but ALL ENCOMPASSING concept where by the French would rule not just, “the province of Quebec” but, if all went well according to the vision, the French would (may still if we sit idly by) rule of ALL OF CANADA.
http://www.ocol-clo.gc.ca/html/biling_f.php
77 % of canadians recognize the importance of preserving our both official languages.
90 % of canadians recognize that in keeping our official languages it will make us more competitive on the world market.
…Québec gives more rights to its minorities then all the other provinces put together. The province is even more bilingual then NB.
..Cory, you asked for figures, i’m giving you some. Out of all the post on this thread I have been called an idiot, a moron, ignorant and then some…whats a pity here is that if i’d call you, or most of these posters the same names in french, most of you will think i’m talking about the weather.
Patrick, you wrote:”…Québec gives more rights to its minorities then all the other provinces put together. The province is even more bilingual then NB.”
Minorities? Sir, I’m a little confused as to your intended statement. Are you saying that Quebec gives more rights to it’s minorities; as in newfound immigrants to the province who speak little to no French or English and have another first language? Or are you speaking of minority ethnicities who were born in the province of Quebec? Or are you saying that Quebec boasts more of a bilingual populace than NB and by that you are referring to a minority population? I’ll assume (if not corrected) that you’re refering to the situation of ALL minorities in Quebec. Perhaps you’re referring to something else all together though? I don’t want to misinterpret what you have to say and that’s why I’m asking for clarification.
There was no offence intended when I wrote that I felt it was a pity you’d never understand. I have moved from the emotion of anger towards zealotry to a sincere study in attempting to understand why it takes place. I guess it originates from a combination of a few things including feeling a sense of nationalism for one’s background or seeking out vengeance for the mistakes of the past. Obviously, as history proves, the relations between the English and French speaking people’s of our nation have not always been kosher. But, for the most part, we’ve been able to get along well enough not to have constant, continual civil wars that unfortunately take place elsewhere everyday in the world and kill far too many people.
I hit a nerve when I wrote I felt pity for you. You know, I still do. You wrote, “Out of all the post on this thread I have been called an idiot, a moron, ignorant and then some…whats a pity here is that if i’d call you, or most of these posters the same names in french, most of you will think i’m talking about the weather. That is probably true sir. Perhaps most people wouldn’t understand if you’d call them an idiot, a moron, ignorant or something else in French. But I would understand it. And it would hurt me the same way, shape and form in any language. The question is, the principle of what you’re saying. Would it hurt you Patrick, in the same level of intensity, to be called hurtful things in French as in any other language?
Getting back to the issue of minority rights in Quebec; other than the Oka Crisis, French language police, sign laws, unfair treatment of Quebec Cree people in construction of the James Bay Power Project, recent student protests involving police brutality and the government treatment of said protests; there are other cases that warrant recognition to prove my point. There is the issue of religious freedom in Quebec. I’m not referring here to the practice of state Roman Catholicism either, which is practiced by the majority. Minority religious freedom is dangerously in peril in Quebec. Copy and paste this link into your browser,
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/invited-to-quebec-legislature-sikhs-then-barred-for-carrying-kirpans/article1874725/
The article discusses how a group of Sikhs were banned from wearing their traditional religious kirpans (ceremonial daggers) in the Quebec legislature. At first glance, this may seem like an overplayed security issue but do take a glance at a one Louise Beaudoin’s (Parti Québécois member as of 2011) comments as quoted by the Globe and Mail:
“Religious freedom exists but there are other values. For instance, multiculturalism is not a Quebec value. It may be a Canadian one but it is not a Quebec one,”
Monsieur Boucher, I don’t think it could be easier said then the above comment made by a fervent Quebecois!
Well Patrick I know for a fact that these instances won’t convince you of what we’re trying to say. For us, the OLA, FLSA, bilingual signs, unfair hiring advantages for Francophones and recent court decisions in Russel are just the beginning of a new Quebec state of affairs in Ontario. Something that French language advocates are pushing more and more at an alarming rate and something we don’t want to see for obvious reasons (see above Quebec minority rights).
In closing Patrick, I hope we can at least agree to disagree.
Thank you, Merci, Meegwetch (especially in honour of Aboriginal Day today Happy Aboriginal Day to everyone!).
Bonne chance monsieur,
Cory
The hospital has at the moment 100% bilingual hiring policy for 20% of the population .
Under the federal government these policies would be deemed illegal as they do not follow:
#1treasury board -chapter 3-1-read unacceptable measures
-establishing or implementing quotas(numerical goals or targets )that prescribe the number of Anglophones or Francophone or both that shall be appointed to a given number of positions over a fixed period of time.
-Identifying language requirements of positions arbitrarily to favour the recruitment of members of only one official language group.
-Using imperative staffing to achieve equitable participation objectives
#2-official languages for human resources management
Equitable participation of both official language communities Comment
-the method used to select employees is based on language
-English and french-speaking Canadians have equal equal opportunities for employment and
advancement while respecting the merit principle
-Their workforce tends to reflect the presence in Canada of the two official language communities.
So the Cornwall Community hospital has not followed these rules set forth by federal government.
This being said Ontario is yet to be deemed an officially bilingual province -Therefore hospital should follow federal Gov policy .
The Liberals where the ones that implemented french services language act and have yet to follow up on the discrimination that occurs in OUR community hospital .
Can one imagine when the LIBERALS push for official bilingualism -as Mr.McGuinty said “he will be proud to be the leader of the next official bilingual province”
Sir I ask you all this for 4% of the population at the cost of 623 million every year!
Cameron:
Many of ideas are interesting. Thank you.
Multiculturalism as policy is complex. As a concept or value, it is fine. However, as policy, it can involved support for things such as sharia law, subsidizing hymen reconstruction operations, etc. Québec and France are highlighted in English media as being “racist” but the same secular laws exist in “Muslim” Turkey. In Turkey, Islamic religious garb was not permitted for most of the 20th century. In Morocco, some companies do not hire veiled girls. I worked for a lawyer who tried to defend the right of veiled Moroccan girls. In Tunisia, women are not to wear veils in universities. In Iran, the veil might be required, but the niqab is banned. In France, the laws devoted to secularism date back to the Revolution and the 1905 law which prohibits religious garb in the public sphere was designed to limit the influence of the Catholic Church. English media depict it as an attack on Muslims. However, crucifixes and crosses are also banned in public institutions. Muslim French feminists warn that Islamists try to get the support of the left in accusing the government of oppression. These Muslim feminists push for secularism in order to limit the influence of Islamists. Funding Tamil or Punjabi terrorist groups which are other problems we have had in Canada. So multiculturalism as a policy needs to be treated with caution as it is important to balance religious rights and secularism in democratic countries. As a concept or value, it is honourable (my love of multiculturalism has moved me to study and live all over the world). That said, in the academic and arts communities, we are now speaking of new concepts in order to replace multiculturalism: interculturalism, pluriculturalism, and the most exciting and postmodern, transculturalism. These adherents of these movements feel that multiculturalism does not go far enough as it involves a juxtaposition of cultures without meaningful dialogue, interaction, and understanding. Québec does have a pluricultural movement which is different from Canadian multiculturalism. I learned a lot of this in academia and literature as opposed to newspapers. Newspapers should be treated with caution because they are not peer-reviewed. Québécois media also make a lot of fun of the very disgusting racist things you are referring to. Many Québécois are disgusted by the very same things that disgust you. The coverage in newspapers and particulary in English Canadian newspapers depict Québec events in a very particular light. And vice versa.
Anyway, I am not Québécoise, and it looks like Patrick is not either, so I am not sure why there are constant references to Québec. I also experience prejudice from some Québécois as a Franco-Ontarian, but I realise that these are attitudes held by certain people and not by all. Just like I realise that the attitudes in this thread are held by some, but not by all. Patrick points to the support of bilingualism in Canada in certain polls. Personally, I have only been exposed to positive attitudes. As for the oppression and persecution of Anglo-Quebeckers, my Anglo-Quebecker friends love it there… but then, they are all educated and have a good knowledge of French. Yes, there are attitude problems… but there attitude problems here too.
Tracy,
I appreciate and respect your narrative and your frustration. It must be very discouraging to have difficulty finding meaningful employment and feel that you have narrow prospects. It must be even more frustrating to be bilingual and bicultural with a parent of French and English ethno-linguistic communities and be told your language skills are not sufficient to pass the bilingualism tests for government jobs. I am also the child of one Anglophone parent and one Francophone parent. I am Franco-Ontarian – perhaps you are Acadian or half Acadian? – and I completely understand how hard it is to achieve the professional proficiency both languages. Speaking is one skill; reading and writing proficiency are another. It takes years. This is true in one’s first language too. Study starts in childhood and can be improved endlessly throughout one’s entire life. The federal government has a high standard not only for bilingualism but also for simply passing the Public Service exam. There are math, logic, and vocabulary questions, and they are all difficult.
I have taught language at the School of the Public Service of Canada. The test is difficult in both languages. It sounds like you have adequate oral skills in French and English but it is the reading and writing which is difficult? It may seem as though a person with an accent is not fluent but accents can be deceiving. A person with a strong accent might read and write impeccably. I know Anglophones with very strong accents who, if you forget the accent, have impeccable grammar and write perfect French. And vice versa. Bob Rae, Michael Ignatieff, Stephen Harper, etc. all have strong accents and if I were young and immature I might have laughed but nowadays I have nothing but respect because the subjects they speak about are deep and they do it well, even if they make mistakes.
If the federal government job you seek requires CCC level bilingualism, then you have to pass the full bilingualism test. Not all jobs require CCC, others require different combinations such as CBB perhaps. For some jobs, if you have specific qualifications, you CAN be hired as a unilingual and you can qualify for second language training once you are hired. These are the government workers I taught. Now, in your region, it sounds like there are many bilingual people available for the local jobs who might already meet bilingualism requirements. However, they also need to be qualified for the actual job itself. If you are qualified for a job that requires only a B level in reading and writing and a C in speaking, you might get it. If you are interested in a job which corresponds to your specific qualifications, you might apply to work in another region of Canada. I don’t know if the bilingualism requirements for the same job vary according to region. It must depend on the job, the region, and obviously, the job contest. I do know that although the federal government is required to serve the public in French, not all employees have to be bilingual in all regions for all jobs. That’s why unilinguals get language training after they are hired.
Sometimes, you just need to get your foot in the door with the government, and then you can move around. It is hard though and now the government is offering a lot of contracts instead of permanent jobs these days…
The School of the Public Service of Canada was responsible for teaching civil servants who are already working for the government and who are not bilingual or who wish to improve their level of bilingualism. In order to get a promotion, they need to become bilingual. Their professional development can include second language training. They apply and if they qualify, their language training is paid for. (The School is no longer teaching civil servants directly, they are now outsourcing to private language companies.)
Some might argue that it is not fair for taxpayers to pay for the language training of civil servants. This is a fair critique. If the education system produced bilingual citizens, taxpayers would not have to pay for civil servants’ second language training. Then again, at the moment, it is possible for unilinguals to qualify for a good deal of governments jobs, and then receive professional development language training by their employer which is the government. This is good for unilinguals. But in regions where there is a high concentration of bilingual residents, the competition gets more intense and so applicants need to be aware and prepare for that.
It sounds like the Francophones in your region are more affluent. However, this is not the case in Canada generally. Only recently are Francophones outside Québec entering the professional and business classes. Francophones were traditionally agricultural people and then labourers. But perhaps in your region there are many who work for the government and who are more affluent. Not all Acadians are so privileged. On the East Coast, and in Eastern Ontario, almost the entire population is underprivileged.
I hope you can find meaningful work. Since you already speak both languages, maybe you could find a job which only requires oral bilingualism? Or maybe for the reading and writing tests, you just need a few courses to meet the government’s required level of proficiency? Maybe there is an adult school which offers business French and communications courses. My Mom taught that at an alternative adult school for both Francophones and Anglophones.
I hope you find a good job, whether it is with the government or another employer.
All the best.
Monckton, regarding the rate of assimilation of Francophones and “we need to do more”:
Despite the private member’s bill supported by the Tories to repeal Section 13 of the Human Rights Act of Canada (which has yet to be passed by the Senate), hate speech remains criminal in Canada. In particular, it is criminal to advocate the elimination of an identifiable group. Whether it is the federal or provincial commissions or the police and the courts who investigate and deal with a case, hate speech remains criminal.
Bud,
There is funding for Aboriginal languages in Canada, and though they are not official languages in “Canada” – which is a political entity and an occupation of this continent – Aboriginal languages and groups are protected under the Charter and the constitution. Most importantly, these language ARE official in sovereign Aboriginal nations which have separate governments other than the colonial provincial and federal governments.
There is also funding for Irish, Scottish, German, and other ethno-cultural and linguistic groups. The funding is not for health care as such and government services are not dispensed in these languages, which are currently not official languages. However, it is legal for a province to decide that a language other than French or English become official. For example, British Columbia could decide to make Punjabi and Chinese official provincial languages, just like Nova Scotia could choose to make Irish or Scottish or Miqma’q an official language.
Many countries have language laws regarding signs, either private or public or both. In Wales and Ireland, the same issues arise regarding fluency in both Welsh and Irish for government jobs, or signs, etc. The same in Belgium, Switzerland, Cameroon. Many countries require civil servants to speak the different language spoken in that country, and many countries have laws require bilingual or multicultural signs in the business sector.
There is a theory that in countries where there is a history of imperialism, colonialism, invasion, and conquest of other peoples, the citizens tend to be unilingual (i.e. USA, Japan, France). Conquered peoples tend to speak the language of their conquerors. For example, Aboriginals in Canada, the USA, Australia, and New Zealand speak English; Africans from various countries speak English, French, Portuguese, German, or Arabic; Korean elders spoke Japanese; Filipinos speak English; African Americans speak English; Berbers speak Arabic; and French Canadians speak English.
To hold on to the idea that a conquered people should be governed in the language of the coloniser is, well, colonial, even militaristic…
OMG the people never voted bilingualism in a party did.
Let the people decide this, other then a political party pushing an apolicy that a represents a small fraction and supported by interest groups.
THAT IS NOT DEMOCRACY WHEN CHOICES ARE FOR MINORITY GROUPS AS LANGUAGE IN CANADA.
PSEUDO DEMOCRACY-ELETISM
TIME TO VOTE ON THIS – THE TIME HAS COME FOR CANADA TO BECOME A DEMOCRACY