Discrimination
Discrimination. The big D word. A word most readily used by many though rarely meritable in its’ use. In our contemporary world of political correctness, discrimination is one of many ‘buzzwords’ that forms a politicians’ lexicon of verbal spaghetti. Political figures love to throw around the idea that one group of people are often discriminated against by another group of people or even by a nation’s laws. It is a fantastic vote grabber for those most instrumental in the art of politics. The truth however, in this day and age, is that rarely are modern-day laws discriminatory in their practice, right?
Wrong!
Have you ever heard of the concepts of affirmative action or what we like to call employment equity in Canada? These are concepts that were instituted into Canadian law to help level the playing field for those who have traditionally suffered the ill consequences of discrimination; especially in the job market. Under the Constitution Act of 1982, containing the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; equity legislation is detailed therein. The Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) is enforced by the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) and it is this commission that deals with whether or not discrimination has taken place in the workplace.
The following details the issue of Prohibited Grounds of Discrimination in Canada: (Belcourt, Bohlander, & Snell, Managing Human Resources, 5th Canadian Edition, 2008).
Race or colour
Religion
Physical or mental disability
Dependence on alcohol or drugs
Age
Sex
Marital status
Family status
Sexual orientation
National or ethnic origin (including linguistic background)
Ancestry of place of origin
Language
Social Condition or origin
Source of income
Assignment, attachment or seizure of pay
Based on association
Political belief
Record of criminal conviction
Pardoned conviction
While appearing like a fair and equitable approach to the issue of fairness in hiring practices; employment equity actually creates the framework for unfair hiring criteria – whereby the best qualified person may be the most successful candidate but may not be chosen due to government imposed employment equity legislation. Case-in-point; consider the possibility of two highly qualified candidates applying for the same government or private sector industry, job. One candidate, a qualified counselor who, as a child, was raised in the atmosphere of a same sex marriage; understands the very real social challenges faced by his/her same sex parents. One could surmise that not only is this individual qualified as a counselor; but has the added experience of being raised in a non-traditional family setting, outside of the traditional nuclear family. The other candidate is also a highly qualified counselor but is a homosexual. By the very definition and reasoning for employment equity, chances are that the successful candidate will be chosen due to his/her sexuality and not necessarily for his/her skills.
Another scenario if you will. Imagine an Aboriginal couple fostering a non-Aboriginal child who is raised and immersed in Aboriginal culture. He/she has a university/college education associated with his/her chosen field; speaks an Aboriginal language, is well-versed in the culture and customs associated with the First Nation and has all the credentials required of someone who could work for a government or non-government Aboriginal organization. The other candidate also has some or most of these qualifications but has one added qualification. Their ethnicity or race is of a First Nation. Once again, by the very definition and reasoning for employment equity, chances are that the successful candidate will be chosen due to his/her ethnicity or race and not necessarily for his/her skills.
Sound like rare or improbable cases and scenarios to you? I can attest that they’re not. They’re increasingly happening everyday in Canada and Human Resources professionals have had to contend with the issue of unfair hiring criteria that these laws have created since at least 1995 with the Employment Equity Act.
If you think at this point that our Canadian employment laws are unfair and unjustified then I have even more bad news for you. Consider the above information I’ve provided about Employment Equity. Add to this the increasingly unfair bilingual language requirements as well and you can see where things are headed. A politically correct society where in the quest for fairness we’ve permitted a very unfair system to flourish unchallenged by the people themselves. We need to ask ourselves if Canada’s employment and language laws are really a reflection of what we encompass and value as a society or if our various levels of government are attempting through social engineering, to shape and mould the people’s consciousness to the system itself. In other words, do the people work for the system or should the system work for the people?
Ever heard of the concept of a ‘bona fide occupational qualification’? Believe it or not, this concept currently exists in Canada and it allows for discrimination in hiring! That’s right folks. You read that correctly. In the very ‘Act’, the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) whose existence is to prohibit discriminatory hiring practices there exists government-sponsored discriminatory hiring! As Belcourt et al. reports (2008):
The act applies to all federal government departments and agencies, to Crown corporations, and to other businesses and industries under federal jurisdiction, such as banks, airlines, railway companies, and insurance and communications companies. For those areas not under federal jurisdiction, protection is available under provincial human rights laws. Provincial laws, although very similar to federal ones, do differ from province to province. Every province and territory has a human rights act (or code), and each has jurisdiction prohibiting discrimination in the workplace. The prohibited grounds of discrimination in employment include race, religion, sex, age, national or ethnic origin, physical handicap, and marital status…Employers are permitted to discriminate if employment preferences are based on a bona fide occupational qualifications (BFOQ) or BFOR (bona fide occupational requirement). A BFOQ is justified if the employer can establish necessity for business operations. In other words, differential treatment is not discrimination if there is a justifiable reason. (106)
This sounds an awful lot like Orwell’s, Animal Farm, where Commandment #7 which originally stated that:
“All animals are equal”
Was eventually changed to,
“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”
Is this the kind of Canada we want to live and work in? Surely the ideology of an individual’s rights should trump group rights in all respects. Should it not? Otherwise, we need to ask ourselves if we truly live in a democracy where all citizens enjoy the same rights and privileges as all others. As of this writing, the majority of our citizenry cannot work for their civil service or hold the highest office of the land due to nothing more than a lack of knowledge of one of Canada’s minority languages.
Please keep in mind that,
“All Canadians are equal, but some Canadians are more equal than others”
Cory Cameron
Timmins, On
Sunday August 25, 2013
(Comments and opinions of Editorials, Letters to the Editor, and comments from readers are purely their own and don’t necessarily reflect those of the owners of this site, their staff, or sponsors.)
Please click the banner below and subscribe to CFN. We need 100 subscribers by September 2013 to bring back Seaway Radio!
@ roger
Read stellas last post at 9:39a.m. and I think you can see what I mean regarding the credibility of one’s comments and who makes them.
There are opinions based on nothing but bias and anger( stella, frutz, trembly HFTT ), and their are opinions based on fact, something that can be proven which results, in these opinions being transformed into truths.
RE: POST by stellabystarlight on September 1, 2013 at 9:26 am
Stella wrote, “This is Ontario, we really DON’T CARE about Quebec’s educational system. To each their own. If the immigrants don’t like the laws in Quebec, they can go elsewhere, it is their prerogative.”
AND …
“Why should any of the freedom fighters care if people are leaving Quebec? Does it have a personal impact on you?”
Brilliant LOGIC Stella… NOT !!
That’s right Stella, what happened in Magog Quebec had no personal impact on the lives of the other Canadians (both inside and outside Quebec) so, i guess (according to YOUR WARPED LOGIC) we’re suppose to sit back, DO NOTHING to help them and “NOT CARE” ?
I just love your “notwithstanding” Odd type of French logic.
But, have a nice ” look the other way” kinda of day eh 🙂
@ stella
My response regarding the education in quebec, was a response to HFTT ( your hero) when he posted on august 31st. at 8:06 p.m.
It was he who began to cite erroneous data regarding the federal charter and education.
He also misused the term PRE-REQUISITE as it applies to the eligibility to attend Englisih schools in quebec.
he was wrong on all counts and I have responded and pointed out, based on fact the errors of his ways
This is why quebec was referenced
stellabystarlight September 1, 2013 at 9:26 am
” This is Ontario, we really DON’T CARE about Quebec’s educational system.”
YOU may not care,but others do ,but you take offense when they do!
“Why should any of the freedom fighters care if people are leaving Quebec? Does it have a personal impact on you? It’s their choice…….WHAT IS THE BIG DEAL?”
They are CANADIANS ,no Canadians should be oppressed by their own government.
LANGUAGE APARTHEID hurts all Canadians and it effects are not isolated just in Quebec but across the country.
It is really amusing how you guys think you can change this country and dictate how every province should operate.
well knowing it doesn’t take much to amuse you :
We are the people of the country,advocating for positive change against LANGUAGE APARTHEID.
stellabystarlight September 1, 2013 at 9:39 am
“Opinions are just that……whether right or wrong, it is just an opinion.”
“No one person on the face of the earth has the right or wrong………IT IS AN OPINION”
What of expert testimony,their oppinions holh no value either.
The truth is there but one must look beyond the government propaganda for” OFFICIAL BILINGUALISM”.
Why implement bilingualism for a population of 4% nationally excluding Quebec as they do not agree or want bilingualism?
Is it worth the trillions spent for a net increase of 0.1 % over 43 years now?
To serve the francophone population of 20% ,why hire 65% + as a set standard?
Ontario has 4% francophones why systemically hire 65% + of all employees to be bilingual to serve 4%.
In most just societies this would be deemed” SOCIAL ENGINEERING” in Canada its called official bilingualism!
@stella
Tu perds ton temps a repondre a toutes les stupidites.
C’est la meme personne. Check mes posts de
Hungry for the Truth…. August 31, 2013 at 11:07 am
Hungry for the Truth…. August 31, 2013 at 3:05 pm
Hungry for the Truth…. August 31, 2013 at 8:24 pm
Toutes les noms c’est lui. Le grand manitou du groupe.
Check le style avec les ,,,,,,????!!!!!
BTW,,,,……. c’est un malade…… Il prend le monde pour des fous.
Moi j’ perds plus mon temps avec lui.
bella September 1, 2013 at 11:05 am
If this is how you truly feel, why are you so adamant in your pursuit to defame, belittle and insult anyone who’s opinion is different than yours? Why is your opinion the right one?
She has never said that her opinion was the right one. She said that all it is IS “AN OPINION”.
Why do you feel so threatened?
What are you so afraid of?
Why is your opinion the right one?
Why is it that you never have any good to say other than negativity and crying all the time about how someone has offended you. Grow up ……
How about Unfair hiring policies in Cornwall what’s you Opinion on Languages?
Something Constructive for a change. Why are you so scared?
The rest of you no need to reply just continue your business talking to yourselves. Especially you CC2, English Lassie, Highlander and the rest of your imagination.
Hungry for the Truth….
September 1, 2013 at 2:25 pm
~
hahaahahaahahahaahah
The excuses you find to back up your unwillingness to have discussions other than those you lead are freaking hilarious! wah! you’ve insulted me! you won’t listen! you aren’t who I want you to be! I don’t have to be right, I just have to be loud and obnoxious! Hi-freaking-larious! Time to take your ball and go home.
@Hungry for the truth (AKA: Lives for lies)
Just as it would be if you and your underling fan were among a group of people/Anglo’s sitting in a club sharing a drink and you wanted to talk bad and disrespectfully about one or more of them,
— (incidentally you are also the person who not long ago sat on his high horse and self proclaimed he was “respectful” to others — )
typing to, or speaking to that underling in French in order to speak disrespectfully of those nearby
IS COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY RUDE AND DISRESPECTFUL TO THIS GROUP AND to the nice people who share thoughts and ideas here.
But, i guess you don’t have much choice. All you can do is display “the type of behavior” THAT is familiar to you and as a result is what people have come to expect from the French, so why disappoint eh ?
But hey, go ahead and have yourself a “disrespectful to your fellow man (in either language)” kind of day eh 🙂
@HFTT…..je le sais, c’est le meme malade. Ca fait deja trois ans de stupidite et ca ne changera jamais. Souvent je viens pour leurs tomber sur les nerfs. L’histoire n’est pas mon fort…**sourire**
Je leurs trouve degueullasse……..mais je pense pas de lacher. Toi non plus tu ne devra pas lacher. Ils faut montrer qu’ont n’a pas peur d’eux.
@sean…….to be honest with you, I truly don’t care what you think. I have told you that before when you posted under another moniker.
CANADA THE LAND OF THE FREE
LET’S KEEP IT THAT WAY!!!!!
@yorlik…..we are fortunate to have freedom of speech in this country. Isn’t that one of the things you are fighting for?
This country has two official languages and French is one of them…..what don’t you understand? If I or any other person wants to speak in their mother tongue, that is our right to do so…..IT IS CALLED FREE SPEECH.
YOU just proved to everyone how you dislike the French. Back when Jamie started this site, there was a gentleman who always typed in Spanish. NO ONE EVER SAID ANYTHING NOR DID THEY NOR DID ANYONE PUT HIM DOWN. Why can’t you do the same?
I will tell you why, you HATE ANYTHING OR ANOBODY THAT IS FRENCH………except your mother. I thought I would add that before you did for the 100th time..
CORRECTION: NOR DID ANYONE EVER PUT THAT GENTLEMAN DOWN.
Eric September 1, 2013 at 4:44 am
“HFTT, the same rules or similar?”
There is nothing similar about these rules. They’re the same. Some Provinces call them “The Requirements.” others call it “Eligibility Conditions” Quebec has decided to call it “Certificate of Eligibility”. This process will save allot of headaches for parents in Quebec.
If a child changes schools the parents do not have to start producing all the individual documents required for admission to a new school . The “Certificate of Eligibility” is a document that is officially produced by the Quebec Government with the intent of
simplification. The process is an official permanent record, equivalent to a health card.
It has no date of expiration. If a child changes school 5 times during his education from Kindergarten to grade 12 this is the only document required.
In Ontario every time a child changes school the parent have to produce the required documents.
Ottawa Catholic School Board.
Documents required for registration
The Application for Direction of School Support (school taxes/proof of residence)
A copy of the child’s proof of age (e.g., birth certificate)
A copy of the child’s immunization record
A copy of the child’s baptismal certificate (or a parent’s, if the child is not baptized) from the Catholic Church or another denomination recognized by the Holy See
Proof of Canadian citizenship, landed immigrant status, or other valid legal status, as applicable
A proof of The CECCE registration form the child’s right to receive instruction in a French-language school, i.e., a document showing that the father, mother or guardian meets one of the linguistic criteria above or the other criteria in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, e.g., a report card for the father, mother or guardian from French-language educational institution
Other documents: court order/ruling regarding custody
“Ontario has 4 boards, English public, English Catholic, French public and French catholic.”
The Quebec English School Boards Association (QESBA)
09 member school boards,
350 English elementary and high schools. ( web site )
Population 9,979,663
Ontario French School Board ont.edu. web site
12 French-language school boards in Ontario,
425 French-language schools.
Population 13,372,996
“The amount of money per student, is almost double per French student, and you can see here, the numbers for all of Ontario from JK to grade 8 is about the size of Cornwall and area. Demand and perceived need is another chapter for the university thesis.”
One of the goals of the provincial funding formula was to make education funding more equitable across the province. Many adjustments have been made to the formula since 1997, but the basic structure of the formula remains. Per pupil funding and much of the education funding is tied to enrolment.
While a proportion of boards’ funding is based on numbers of students, there are other grants added to the “per pupil” base (Special Education, English or French language support,
Transportation, Declining Enrolment, Learning Opportunities etc.). Per pupil funding is not meant to be equal, as different boards have different needs. But it is meant to be equitable in
order to provide equal educational opportunity for all students.
(Ontario Ministry of Education web site)
“Quebec takes care of it’s own immigration”
Statistic Canada Study:
The evolution of English-French bilingualism in Canada from 1961 to 2011
Bilingualism rates were lower in the vast majority of provinces in1961. For instance, the proportion of people who were bilingual was 25.5% in Quebec (compared with42.6% in2011), 19.0% in New Brunswick (33.2% in 2011), and 7.9% in Ontario (11.0% in 2011).
In Quebec—contrary to elsewhere in the country—the immigrant population contributed to the increase in bilingualism, as immigrants in that province had higher rates of English–French bilingualism (51%) than the Canadian-born (42%). (Stats Canada)
ON September 1, 2013 at 4:09 pm stellabystarlight wrote,
“CANADA THE LAND OF THE FREE
LET’S KEEP IT THAT WAY!!!!!”
Please STOP misinforming people Stella.
Just because the rest of Canada has afforded you the luxury of demanding that they cater to you in French to appease you in all other parts of Canada DOES NOT MAKE ALL OF CANADA the land of the free.
BECAUSE …
As long as the Anglophone Canadian citizens living in the province of Quebec are flagrantly restricted from using their own ENGLISH language in “a province” which is within their own country then Canada is NOT, the land of the Free.” As you erroneously claim.
And if you want to know JUST HOW xenophobic the French in Quebec are then try this quote on for size.
“NO WHERE ELSE IN THE FREE WORLD ARE PEOPLE FORBIDDEN TO USE THEIR OWN LANGUAGE ON THEIR SIGNS.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2KSCxZ_JAY
And Stella, I AM VERY SURE
those people who are being restricted from using their language on a daily/hourly basis within their own country would be more than happy to
TELL YOU THAT RIGHT TO YOUR FACE that
YOU ARE WRONG and misinforming people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bc3wPtGDnNs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5EYxb9K6oM
Stella wrote, ”
“YOU just proved to everyone how you dislike the French. Back when Jamie started this site, there was a gentleman who always typed in Spanish. NO ONE EVER SAID ANYTHING NOR DID THEY NOR DID ANYONE PUT HIM DOWN. Why can’t you do the same?”
I HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT YOU SPEAK.
THIS verbal diarrhea of yours is
“MADE UP and CONVOLUTED ” AT BEST.
YOU HAVE CROSSED THE LINE…
I would appreciate if you didn’t accuse me of something without SHOWING PROOF of what you are accusing me of because whatever you wrote above regarding some Spanish fellow is news to me and DOES NOT PROVE that i dislike the French.
I HAVE SAID IT BEFORE AND I WILL SAY IT AGAIN JUST SO
— YOU — GET IT CLEAR —
I am not against the French !!! I do not dislike the French !!
i am for the English.
I am standing up for the English language and the English culture just like you and those others stand up for the French language and the French culture.
I / WE HAVE JUST AS MUCH RIGHT. Perhaps even more IN A COUNTRY WHERE THE BRITISH FOUGHT AND WON THE WAR and thus the right to decide what language should be dominant in this country..
We GAVE YOU QUEBEC and you couldn’t be happy with that.
We are — NOT GOING TO ALLOW YOU TO TAKE MORE THAN THAT — it’s NOW A DONE DEAL.
This whole charade STOPS WITH QUEBEC. ENOUGH!!
FURTHER MORE. I would like to WARN YOUTO LEAVE MY DECEASED MOTHER out of this. It is NOT UP TO YOU OR ANYONE else to bring her into this conversation. If i choose to do so then that is MY prerogative and my BUSINESS ONLY.
NOT YOURS.
YOU ARE TREADING on VERY THIN ICE with this accusation and the mention of my late mother. This is NOT TO YOUR discretion to bring into the fray.
ON September 1, 2013 at 4:30 pm
stellabystarlight CONFIRMED FOR ALL TO SEE
Stella wrote “CORRECTION: NOR DID ANYONE EVER PUT THAT GENTLEMAN DOWN.”
Which includes me as I had clearly said.
I WAS NOT EVEN INVOLVED IN this forum at the time THAT this Spanish gentleman was posting.
I am glad you made that clear Stella.
Your “CORRECTION:” got posted AFTER i posted my 7:03 pm response just so you know.
stellabystarlight
September 1, 2013 at 4:29 pm
@yorlik…..we are fortunate to have freedom of speech in this country
Quebec being still part Canada often restricts freedom of speech
and expression through bill 101…no excuse it happens!
“If I or any other person wants to speak in their mother tongue, that is our right to do so…..IT IS CALLED FREE SPEECH.”
Sure you can stella anywhere in Canada you can speak french ,but English remains restricted.now companies with 25 people or more cannot not speak English in their work place IT MUST BE FRENCH THANK YOU BILL 14.
We do not live in a free country when a government controls what language comes out of an apparent free persons mouth!
ARE YOU GUYS LIVING IN A DREAM WORLD OH THAT’S RIGHT:
THE NATIONALIST NOT ONLY DOES NOT DISPROVE THE ATROCITIES COMMITTED BY HIS OWN SIDE ,BUT HAS A REMARKABLE CAPACITY FOR NOT EVEN HEARING ABOUT THEN………………GEORGE ORWELL
“NO WHERE ELSE IN THE FREE WORLD ARE PEOPLE FORBIDDEN TO USE THEIR OWN LANGUAGE ON THEIR SIGNS.”
BUT IN CANADA, WE HAVE MORE RIGHTS THEN MANY OTHER COUNTRIES. WE HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, FREEDOM OF RELIGION, FREEDOM TO VOTE, FREEDOM OF LANGUAGE, FREEDOM TO CHOOSE AND FREEDOM TO BE.
AS FOR LANGUAGES ON SIGNS……NONSENSE. WHAT DOES LANGUAGE ON A SIGN CHANGE? Unless it affects you personally….don’t sweat the small stuff.
CANADA THE LAND OF THE FREE
LET’S KEEP IT THAT WAY.
WE DON’T WANT TO BECOME ANOTHER SYRIA WHERE PEOPLE THINK THEY CAN RULE AND CONTROL THE NATION.
Does louder make you righter? ’cause some folks are awful loud in here. I mean really? Obnoxious much?
RE: POST BY stellabystarlight September 1, 2013 at 9:44 pm
“NO WHERE ELSE IN THE FREE WORLD ARE PEOPLE FORBIDDEN TO USE THEIR OWN LANGUAGE ON THEIR SIGNS.”
Stella wrote, ”
BUT IN CANADA, WE HAVE MORE RIGHTS THEN MANY OTHER COUNTRIES. WE HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, FREEDOM OF RELIGION, FREEDOM TO VOTE, FREEDOM OF LANGUAGE, FREEDOM TO CHOOSE AND FREEDOM TO BE”
————–
Stella. You are obviously just a trouble maker and choose to be completely blind to the FACTS.
It is obvious by this statement of yours above that you’re just being antagonistic, and frankly i have no more time for you and that type of “let’s have fun annoying people saying the exact opposite, “just because.”
I know YOU CANNOT be that ill informed because JUST ABOUT EVERYONE writing here has told you flat out that Quebec DOES NOT allow Freedom of speech and DOES NOT have FREEDOM OF LANGUAGE when it comes to the English language.
I know you finally GOT the FACT that Canada IS NOT a bilingual country because you have NOW started writing Canada is a country with two official languages, but that took us over 2 years to sink into your head.
I just don’t know if i have the patience to spend another two years helping you come to your senses and realize that (a part of Canada)
— QUEBEC — DOES NOT HAVE TRUE FREEDOM WHEN IT COMES TO LANGUAGES and therefore, since Quebec is inside Canada, this means that Canada does not have freedom when it comes to languages —
That’s as simple as i can put it in hopes that YOU WILL GET IT.
PS: adding comparisons like warn torn countries to examples in the type of language debate we are having just for impact is senseless and makes you seem VERY immature and lacking in intelligence.
YOU WOULDN’T WANT THAT WOULD YOU?
And on that note, i wish you a
“I give up wasting my time ON YOU and shall go back to ignoring you” kind of day eh 🙂
stellabystarlight wrote: NO ONE EVER SAID ANYTHING NOR DID THEY NOR DID ANYONE PUT HIM DOWN.
That obviously needed clarification hence the correction.
@yorlik……my correction was made immediately after I posted, I recognized the typo error…..just so you know.
Many have made corrections after reading their own post. Human errors happen.
stellabystarlight
September 1, 2013 at 9:44 pm
“BUT IN CANADA, WE HAVE MORE RIGHTS THEN MANY OTHER COUNTRIES. WE HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, FREEDOM OF RELIGION, FREEDOM TO VOTE, FREEDOM OF LANGUAGE, FREEDOM TO CHOOSE AND FREEDOM TO BE.”
As long as Quebec is part of Canada -freedom of speech (bill 101 and 14) and freedom of expression is limited .
True freedoms should not be limited in one province while all other provinces respect freedom of expression and speech.
The government has no right to tell a free people what language that is to come out of their mouths ,what language is to be on their business signs and what language their business is to operate in.
So freedoms in Quebec are limited by language legislation ;
CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS
GUARANTEE OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS
(1) The Canadian charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantee’s the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free democratic society.
FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS
(2) EVERYONE HAS THE FOLLOWING FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS :
(a)freedom of conscious and religion(b)freedom of thought ,belief,opinion and expression ,including freedom of the press and other media of communication (c)freedom of peaceful assembly;and (d)freedom of association.
With Quebec language laws restricting business signs,restricting freedom of communication in business(bill14) and Quebec’s charter of values and religious symbols.
Would this be justified as reasonable as the charter states :
“subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free democratic society.”
So by limiting a language which by the way only exists in one province in this vast country can it be said a that this is justified in a free democratic country?
By these conditions I do not consider Canada a “free democratic country” as this violates the charter of rights and there is an unreasonable limit prescribed in a” free democratic country” with regards to language laws.
We have in Canada what has been termed by international media a” LANGUAGE APARTHEID”
Whereby reasonable limits are readily abused and null and voids democratic principles as well as our charter of rights and freedoms.
The charter is not worth the paper it’s written on if it cannot be enforced.
stella asked “AS FOR LANGUAGES ON SIGNS……NONSENSE. WHAT DOES LANGUAGE ON A SIGN CHANGE? Unless it affects you personally….don’t sweat the small stuff.”
What does a language on a sign change ?
Well ask the OQLF (Tongue Troopers) in Quebec what does it matter if French and English are equal in size ,or PASTA is written on the menu ,the enforcement of the tongue troopers on legal business and the restriction of a language violates the charter.
Unless it effects you ? Quebec remains part of Canada and these laws effects Canadian rights and I DO NOT CONSIDER VIOLATING ONES RIGHTS AND THE CHARTER “SMALL STUFF”.
ONCE AGAIN THE CHARTER GETS VIOLATED MORE THEN A CHEAP HOOKER AND VERY FEW ARE IN DEFENSE OF OUR CHARTER.
stellabystarlight September 1, 2013 at 9:44 pm
“NO WHERE ELSE IN THE FREE WORLD ARE PEOPLE FORBIDDEN TO USE THEIR OWN LANGUAGE ON THEIR SIGNS.”
Stella, no one is forbidden to have English on a sign. As long as the French is is predominate. Quebec are not the only ones to have Language criteria on signs.
National Post: Sarah Boesveld | 11/10/31 (excerpt)
|
“As of Sept. 8, New Brunswick city’s bylaw officers have been cracking down on businesses erecting billboards and signs that don’t contain their messages in both French and English, with French listed first and English second, handing out about 80 tickets of around $100 each in the span of two months.”
Stella wrote: “If I or any other person wants to speak in their mother tongue, that is our right to do so. IT IS CALLED FREE SPEECH.”
Highlander wrote: “Sure you can stella anywhere in Canada you can speak French Highlander September 1, 2013 at 9:35 pm”
It’s weird how double standards are used in order to build a one sided argument. Another poster disagrees he tell me that using my Right to express myself in French in Canada;
“IS COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY RUDE AND DISRESPECTFUL TO THIS GROUP AND to the nice people who share thoughts and ideas here. Edudyorlik September 1, 2013 at 3:51 pm”
ANY WHERE IN CANADA BUT NOT HERE would be more reflective of the truth. Because “typing to, or speaking to that underling in French in order to speak disrespectfully of those nearby. Edudyorlik September 1, 2013 at 3:51 pm”
One last thing Stella, you have again on more time been misinformed with inaccurate information.
Highlander wrote: “IT MUST BE FRENCH THANK YOU BILL 14.
Highlander September 1, 2013 at 9:35 pm”
Bill 14 has been confirmed by Marois, will probably die on the order table.
CBC News Posted: Aug 30, 2013 (excerpt)
“Yesterday, Premier Pauline Marois said her government will likely end up scrapping Bill 14, their proposed ammendments to the French Language Charter.”
These are my thoughts and Ideas that I wanted to share with the very nice people here.
Hungry for the Truth….
September 1, 2013 at 4:51 pm
I know of several parents who are English who sent their children to french only school ,it remains their choice and Ontario does not restrict them entry because they have no french heritage or if their parents were educated in french schools .
Quebec does not allow those same conditions and severely restricts those that are guaranteed under the charter to have English education if they choose.
“In Quebec—contrary to elsewhere in the country—the immigrant population contributed to the increase in bilingualism, as immigrants in that province had higher rates of English–French bilingualism (51%) than the Canadian-born (42%). (Stats Canada)”
This is interesting as this indicates that the immigrant population has already a grasp of the English language ……but remember thousands of those same immigrants leave the province of Quebec every year because of the archaic language laws .
Oh the great whitewash of Canadian society:
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/2305997643001#.UiPiBooNI8M.email
Quebec’s demise will be of their own actions by their restrictive archaic language laws .
http://www.montrealgazette.com/life/Henry+Aubin+Securities+marginalizes+Quebec/8844364/story.html
Do you see this good people.
Now we are expected to take the word of someone. HE knows parents. The rules of Ontario are meaningless and have no value.
We should not take them seriously. The requirements are the same.
Ottawa Catholic School Board.
Documents required for registration
The Application for Direction of School Support (school taxes/proof of residence)
A copy of the child’s proof of age (e.g., birth certificate)
A copy of the child’s immunization record
A copy of the child’s baptismal certificate (or a parent’s, if the child is not baptized) from the Catholic Church or another denomination recognized by the Holy See
Proof of Canadian citizenship, landed immigrant status, or other valid legal status, as applicable.
A proof of The CECCE registration form the child’s right to receive instruction in a French-language school,
i.e., a document showing that the father, mother or guardian meets one of the linguistic criteria above or the other criteria in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms,
e.g., a report card for the father, mother or guardian from French-language educational institution
Other documents: court order/ruling regarding custody.
ONTARIO:
They require proof that one of the two parents have been educated in French
QUEBEC:
They require proof that one of the two parents or guardian or sibling, have been educated in English in Quebec or any province in Canada.
Highlander September 2, 2013 at 10:11 am
“I know of several parents who are English who sent their children to french only school , it remains their choice and Ontario does not restrict them entry because they have no french
heritage or if their parents were educated in french schools.”
I will leave it up to the readers to decide. Take your WORD. Or rely on the written rules that governs Minority Language Rights to education in their mother tongues in all 10
Provinces and Territories of Canada.
Highlander September 2, 2013 at 10:11 am
“This is interesting as this indicates that the immigrant population has already a grasp of the English language ……but remember thousands of those same immigrants leave the province of Quebec every year because of the archaic language laws .”
Stats Canada seems to disagree with your OPINION, that they are leaving Quebec.
Statistic Canada Study:
The evolution of English-French bilingualism in Canada from 1961 to 2011
In 2011, 42.6% of Quebec residents, or 3.3 million people, reported that they were able to conduct a conversation in English and in French. This compared with 40.8% in 2001, or 2.9 million people.
And it is interesting indeed.
Maybe Quebec are better bilingual Ambassadors and Advocate Bilingualism as a Positive than the ROC.
Again I’ll let the readers ponder this one and determine if your Opinion trumps
Statistic Canada’s findings.
Hungry for the Truth….
September 2, 2013 at 10:10 am
“One last thing Stella, you have again on more time been misinformed with inaccurate information.
Highlander wrote: “IT MUST BE FRENCH THANK YOU BILL 14.
Highlander September 1, 2013 at 9:35 pm”
Bill 14 has been confirmed by Marois, will probably die on the order table.”
Hungry AKA (LFL) this is a proposed bill and therefore if it were passed these conditions would be implemented .
Are we to wait till after it being passed to complain of an the unjust proposals or wait after the fact after they are implemented .
Should a provincial government decide to pass legislation that is racially or indiscriminately biased(oh wait that’s right Quebec is doing so with Quebec’s charter of values ) we should wait after the fact to object to it?
Quebec’s charter of values …..what a joke ….how about charter of discrimination values that would better suite it!
Should we wait for after the fact to object the violation of freedom of religion ?
Highlander September 2, 2013 at 11:13 am
“Hungry this is a proposed bill and therefore if it were passed these conditions would be implemented .”
As you say it’s a PROPOSED Bill. Which will probably die on the order table.
CBC News Posted: Aug 30, 2013 (excerpt)
“Yesterday, Premier Pauline Marois said her government will likely end up scrapping Bill 14, their proposed ammendments to the French Language Charter.”
Why assert it as if it was FACTUAL LAW?
“IT MUST BE FRENCH THANK YOU BILL 14.
Highlander September 1, 2013 at 9:35 pm”
Should it not read: It will have to be French if proposed Bill 14 is adopted and enacted as Law.
“Are we to wait till after it being passed to complain of an the unjust proposals or wait after the fact after they are implemented .”
COMPLAINING. Sure. Building an argument and using it as a FACT is not OK. It’s false inaccurate and misleading. The references that you make to Bill 14. assert that it’s an enacted legislation. This is not the first time. Search and seizure ring a bell?
I’ll leave the readers decide and conclude. They are pretty intelligent.
Hungry for the Truth….
September 2, 2013 at 10:58 am
“Now we are expected to take the word of someone. HE knows parents. The rules of Ontario are meaningless and have no value.
We should not take them seriously. The requirements are the same.”
Well folks here is the reality I have been informed by several parents that they enrolled their children locally in french school and they are anglophones.
Now he is implying that: The rules of Ontario are meaningless and have no value.
We should not take them seriously.
Did I say anything that says this NO , hungry -AKA-but lives for lies is definitely living by that moniker .
Gotta love his misinformation -its right there to see!
“Again I’ll let the readers ponder this one and determine if your Opinion trumps
Statistic Canada’s findings.”
I guess this time the numbers suite you as you have said many a times you do not believe in the validity of stats Canada as these numbers are skewed depending on the questions.
“Maybe Quebec are better bilingual Ambassadors and Advocate Bilingualism as a Positive than the ROC.”
WHAT! QUEBEC legislation in fact states it does not want institutionalized bilingualism !
I have not heard this in any other province in their policies statements.
People become bilingual not out of choice ,but necessity as the state is unilingual ,but remember as the masses leave that province they are bilingual and this allows opportunity to work and live outside of Quebec where English is the predominant language with exception of the 65+ bilingual government workforce.
Not to worry there (LFL) your credibility has already been tanked.
But keep trying to rebuild it ,but then again you will change your moniker name once again and post under that new name.
Highlander September 2, 2013 at 1:30 pm
“Well folks here is the reality I have been informed by several parents that they enrolled their children locally in french school and they are anglophones”
Well good people here is the reality I have heard from several parents that theyhave enrolled their children in English schools in Quebec and they are Francophones.
How does this make it any more true. IT’S YOUR word AGAINST THE WRITTEN RULES that seem to contradict what you are asserting to be the rules.
“WHAT! QUEBEC legislation in fact states it does not want institutionalized bilingualism ! I have not heard this in any other province in their policies statements.”
I will give you time to either retract that inaccurate statement or correct it before I prove you wrong again.
“Not to worry there (LFL) your credibility has already been tanked”
I think Highlander (KOI) that the readers that do not post have already established your inaccurate claim to your(S) credibility. Depends which of your moniker you post under.
“But keep trying to rebuild it ,but then again you will change your moniker name once again and post under that new name.”
I always leave that to the more experienced that have much experience at posting with many monikers. Ring a bell there sean. I on the other hand I have never posted anonymously leading readers to believe I was someone else. They knew because disclosed it for all to see. I did not insult their intelligence.
The one time that I used another moniker for 6 hours, everyone knew who I was, I did not take the readers for fools.
“WHAT! QUEBEC legislation in fact states it does not want institutionalized bilingualism !”
HFFT, neither do the majority of Canadians; so why fight for it here in Ontario instead of helping fight off these strange hiring practices?
Nothing ruder then people “talking” in French, when it’s well known many are English only on this forum.
RUDE!!!!
@Stella
English nurses do not have the right to work at Cornwall Community Hospital. ..
But, that’s ok…They can keep importing more Franchophones from Quebec
Yup, Canada, land off the free if your French…
English, back of the bus!!!
It’s weird how double standards are used in order to build a one sided argument. Another poster disagrees he tell me that using my Right to express myself in French in Canada;
“IS COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY RUDE AND DISRESPECTFUL TO THIS GROUP AND to the nice people who share thoughts and ideas here. Edudyorlik September 1, 2013 at 3:51 pm”
GET IT STRAIGHT Hungry for lies. What i was making light of was the idea of
— talking negatively (which you both were) and bad about others right in front of them while using another language was the part that was rude. —
NOT JUST SPEAKING French which, if you wish to do so is fine but, i would point out, would not be as readily acceptable if you you were to try speaking/typing English in a French forum.
I DARE you to try that one without being nicy nicy just to prove the point.
Try attacking a bunch of French people in a French forum in English and see what kind of treatment you get there.
admin September 2, 2013 at 2:36 pm
“WHAT! QUEBEC legislation in fact states it does not want institutionalized bilingualism !”
I do not agree with the accuracy of this statement. There are many things that are and have been legislated BILINGUAL in Quebec and has become institutionalized.
Despite my claim that the above statement is inaccurate Bilingualism is alive and well in Quebec.
Statistic Canada Study:
The evolution of English-French bilingualism in Canada from 1961 to 2011
In 2011, 42.6% of Quebec residents, or 3.3 million people, reported that they were able to conduct a conversation in English and in French. This compared with 40.8% in 2001, or 2.9 million people.
In a period of 10 years, 400,000 more residents in Quebec can speak English and French.
@stella
Do you agree with KOI. ?
“English nurses do not have the right to work at Cornwall Community Hospital”
It could change in a heart beat. If only some in this forum wouldn’t constantly attack everyone as adversaries. Try to collectively work at a solution instead of posting about LAWS and RULES in another PROVINCE. Focus on a constructive debate that could lead to a reversal of these Practices.
“They can keep importing more Franchophones from Quebec.”
Are we to believe that these Francophone Nurses do not speak English. I can only think that they would have to be tested for their English just like English are tested for their French. Or are they up to old tricks at CCH.
Now their giving the jobs to QUEBEC FRANCOPHONES.
I thought the faulty POLICY required 100% bilingualism from all staff?
Make sense to me. But I’ll let the readers conclude. Their pretty smart.
KOI wrote: English Lassie,
“Nothing ruder then people “talking” in French, when it’s well known many are English only on this forum. RUDE!!!!”
An equal and just as valid comment;
Nothing is ruder then people talking English when they well know that most are French only in the Province of QUEBEC. RUDE!!!!!
edudyorlik September 2, 2013 at 2:48 pm
“talking negatively”
Edudyorlik (KOR)…..There was nothing negative in what was written.
We posted “accurately” not negatively.
Hungry for the Truth….
September 2, 2013 at 3:26 pm
““Nothing ruder then people “talking” in French, when it’s well known many are English only on this forum. RUDE!!!!”
An equal and just as valid comment;
Nothing is ruder then people talking English when they well know that most are French only in the Province of QUEBEC. RUDE!!!!!”
I disagree with this statement on many levels.
1. EL was talking about an online newspaper, while you are talking about an entire province. (this is apples and oranges)
2. Being the guilty party in the accusation I can see where you would have to deflect and lay blame elsewhere. (Funny games you pay.)
3. Can you not keep one thought in your head when belittling people? You say how accommodating your Quebec is, how any English speaking tourist would have no problems visiting and navigating the cities, and now to bolster your opinions you say it’s all French and how dare we ask for special favours that you expect elsewhere.
Let’s talk rude shall we?
Let it be known that the only reason English parents enrol their kids in French Immersion or French school is so that they’ll have a chance at one of those government jobs.
This is the plain and simple truth. It has nothing to do with any technicolour idea of some sort of desire to have a bilingual kid growing up and to raise them knowing both languages for the fun of it.
For me, it was done as an idea that my mother wanted me to know her, “mother tongue”.
And there it is again! That constant, ever-there, obsession to ensure that this language is passed down to children!
Do I care whether I know un deuxieme langue? Hell, no!
It was only a means to a better job that has turned into a major disappointment for me and thousands of others!
Much like my wasted, overpaid, useless university education.
highlander wrote: Are we to wait till after it being passed to complain of an the unjust proposals or wait after the fact after they are implemented .
Hmmm!!! Who do you think you are to be able to tell the Quebec gov what laws can and can not be passed. Are you an elected official representing your constituents? If not, you have no power to dictate what is acceptable and what isn’t for the people of this country.
Let it be known that smart English parents will enrol their kids in French immersion or French schools, they know that learning BOTH OFFICIAL LANGUAGES of this country will benefit the child and will open doors to a better future. Three languages is even better.
Credentials and high education are not a guarantee that one will be hired. Many other elements are at play also.
Highlander was right when he wrote:
Because one has some form of education doesn’t mean they are smart……he proved that many times when posting.
CANADA THE LAND OF THE FREE
LET’S KEEP IT THAT WAY!!!!!.
bella September 2, 2013 at 4:56 pm
“I disagree with this statement on many levels.”
The joys and freedoms of living in Canada.
You have the right to disagree. Use it. .
I equally disagree with you statements.
“Can you not keep one thought in your head when belittling people”
For you bella since you are always filled with positivity and so
accommodating every time you reply, I will try and keep on thought in my head. If I could ask a favour, could you hold back a bit on all the compliments that you give me because after a while they become to much. There’s just so many I can’t sleep.
About the issue of Hiring policies did you have something constructive to contribute?
stellabystarlight
September 2, 2013 at 5:56 pm
“Who do you think you are to be able to tell the Quebec gov what laws can and can not be passed. Are you an elected official representing your constituents? If not, you have no power to dictate what is acceptable and what isn’t for the people of this country.”
We are citizens of the country we have every right as citizens to tell our ELECTED OFFICIAL’S what is exceptable welcome to democracy -or at least in this case of Canada pseudo democracy .
Cory Cameron September 2, 2013 at 4:57 pm
Cory,
Take it easy my friend.
Looks like your having a bad day.
Things always gets better. When you get home relax.
Tomorrow’s another day.
Education is never wasted.
As expected, no apology from the instigaters on this thread.
Not surprised & it never ceases to amaze me how “they” spin it so now WE the English are the rude ones…
Anyhow, have yourselves,” a f*** you,I’m always right & your wrong kinda day” 🙂
stellabystarlight
September 2, 2013 at 6:17 pm
“Let it be known that smart English parents will enrol their kids in French immersion or French schools,”
SO IS THAT TO SAY THAT PARENTS ARE NOT SMART BY NOT ENROLLING THEIR CHILDREN IN FRENCH IMMERSION OR FRENCH SCHOOLS ?
SO LET ME GET THIS RIGHT PARENTS WHO HAVE NO CULTURAL LINK TO FRENCH SHOULD HAVE THEIR CHILDREN GO TO FRENCH SCHOOLS ?
FOLKS CAN YOU NOT SEE THIS AS ASSIMILATION TO FRENCH ,THAT SAME ASSIMILATION THAT FRANCOPHONE AND QUEBECERS UTILIZED BILL 101 AND BILL 14 AGAINST ENGLISH ASSIMILATION?
SOMETHING STRANGE HERE!
NOT ALRIGHT TO ASSIMILATE FRENCH
BUT ITS ALRIGHT TO ASSIMILATE ENGLISH….
OUR COUNTRY IS FU**ED UP
bella
September 2, 2013 at 4:56 pm
Well said bella .
Yes rude but as well he is frequently wrong,oh that poor credibility thing ,time to change the moniker name yet again.
Besides after that RANT blaming all the french woes on the English:
Hungry for the Truth….
August 30, 2013 at 2:24 pm
You have lost all credibility !
sean had advised you well on Quebec’s history that wasn’t tainted by your separatist brethren propaganda .
It was very evident that sean knew more history of your promised land (Quebec ) then you had ,and you were proven wrong YET AGAIN!