Kapitän Rotbart

The French are in France and the English are in England. Canadians are in Canada, with the exception of some Canadians, Englishmen and Frenchmen living abroad. Apparently the bilingual policies have some sort of meaning to you, otherwise they wouldn't phase you. I was talking about Federal Bilingual Policies and propaganda, not provincial. Regardless of people of a given language in Québec and the rest of Canada, the feds are developing bilingual policies which does have a meaning to all Canadians. Official Multiculturalism is a joke of a slogan that Canada, followed by Sweden and Australia decided to put on, meaning they accept ethnic segregation, but do not force it. The government would not be any different had they not declared Canada officially multicultural. Yeah, but there's no reason for Canadians to lose the language of the first colonizing European nation... if Switzerland is big enough for four official languages, I'm sure Canada is big enough for two.

The feds used this term as a nonsense slogan to try to please everybody. It does not mean anything, unlike bilingual policies, which do mean something. No, but about 17% of Canadians are already bilingual, and the rest split for the most part between the two domestic languages. You can increase bilingualism, though. The best way is by changing the education system, requiring that all public schools be bilingual, but that is not likely to happen because the provinces would never agree to it. Otherwise, the government can make huge incentives to become bilingual, like offering higher income and more jobs to those who are. I was curious as to how you'd go about it in make Canada bilingual, Leafless, but you don't seem to make for as fun a discussion as I was hoping. There is no benefit to the private sector in demanding bilingualism "just because". They demand it because they figure that if they can sell to locals in the locals' prefered domestic language, they'll increase revenue. They do it for the money, meaning that there is a natural demand. Should businesses ask you if they should prefer bilingual candidates? They're in it for the money, not to please tax payers, especially considering they do not get public funding (that's why they're the private sector). How is the Québec charter of rights so terrible? I haven't read it, all I know is that one of their rights is that they are to not be discriminated based on their first language. Please quote their charter of rights if you think it is so terrible. Cool! Specific example! Ok, firstly did you tell your son-in-law to never learn French? I hope so, because you would hate a God-fearing English speaking Canadian to gain a linguistic skill in a language other than their own... particularly in the French language (because they ought to rather do other things). Ok, this is a specific case of people within the institution, also I am assuming that there is huge bias here. Let's assume that it is true as is for the sake of this discussion... this does not mean that all French speaking supervisors in Canada's public sector's priority would be to run out the anglophones. There may be individual cases of discrimination, but the policy itself does not discriminate against any people of any background. Man, you sure sleep in. Plus official multiculturalism means nothing. It's a nonsense slogan for Canadian propaganda. It doesn't affect anyone other than cost us at most $0.01 in tax money per person once and that's it. Much more money has been wasted on other things, so paying a bit into a silly slogan is not changing anything. Isn't English Canada in North America? Superfluous redundancy! French has great importance outside of France and Africa, considering the French have colonies just about everywhere, and most EU offices are in Belgium and mostly use French in these EU offices. Regardless of "international languages", let's get back to within Canada's borders. Canada has two official languages, so putting stop signs in either language is fine. Because Canada is a very socialist country. The Liberals are popular just about everywhere outside Alberta. They have big popularity in Manitoba and SK, and a big chunk of BC. No, if it were about intellect, you'd know to get out of your seat and start influencing politicians. They're aware that they're a province. They are quite aware that they have nto yet seperated. There are bilingual stop signs in Ottawa, which are pretty cool. Yeah, but as you said, the American government will not allow trends of the day to change their laws, unlike Canada. They had a majority favoring English as the only official language, yet it still didn't pass. Truly awsome! There's also no wrong in a company choosing to use its own language regardless of majority/official languages, if they can still make good money doing so. Canada's different, though. We've been evolving since day one, Canada's a younger country and we decided to take a different route, which cannot be stopped now. Ask the politicians to make a referendum. Not asking them will not make them any more likely to make one.

You don't even vote? Then you shouldn't even be listened to! Canada could be more democratic, but times are getting better. When the liberals were in federal budget was being flushed with frequent elections, but it's slowly getting better. When people like you don't vote, other people's intentions are being carried out. No guessing is needed, the signs' meaning is pretty obvious. Latin America does not always comply with the "international language" for stop signs (not only that, there is not even a standard throughout Latin America... I've seen wordless signs, some saying "Alto", some saying "Para", etc. At least Québec's stop signs all look the same). The other nine provinces have almost as much freedom as Québec... they just have fewer communists.

You are someone living in a place that you consider to be terrible, we are people who don't think it's all that bad. Almost 50% of Québécois have seperatist values, often limited to sovereignty-association (not full seperation, rather running their own show, like the natives do, so it would be like a nation within a nation). To say that all residents of Québec having seperatist values are crazy commies/ticking time-bombs is incredibly narrow-minded. Oh, and you think you're more democratic? You want to shove your ideals down the government's throat, regardless of the fact that language policies are being passed in our democratic system. The US government is awsome. They never had a federal official language and despite the fact that the majority were in favor of establishing one, it didn't pass. However, this only supports the plurality of domestic languages, because individual states could decide whether or not they would cater to its minorities (and clever Texas doesn't have an official state language either). Funny how neither of these countries would limit themselves to the English language. The US was formed by patriots, the loyalists fled to Canada (who spoke like Americans by then according to a Canadian documentary on Canadian English). Québec itself was an English colony yet Québec and Louisiana use the Napolean law system, which is obsolete in France. Either way, regardless of our law system, it does not mean we should be bound to the language spoken by those who conceived that system. The easy way out is not always the best solution. We know you despise of official bilingualism, but anyone wanting to make a difference should get involved and step into parliament. A referendum would only stir up anxiety. I am well aware of this. I think I'll agree with many young Australians I've met that we should leave the commonwealth and become a republic. We should have done like the Americans and kicked the English out of our country way back when the loyalists came in, or join the United States when Maine did. There are signs that say "Arrêt" in Ontariario. I find them interesting. Seriously though, I've seen stop signs in Spanish in Latin America, but putting them up in English will not make the panamerican any safer. Most stop signs I've seen so far in Europe have no words on them, just using international symbols (there are still some American-style stop signs though, but not nearly as many as the wordless ones). My only complaint about Québec's "Arrêt" signs is that they are not properly translated. It's a noun and not the imperative form, whereas Yield has been translated to "Cédez" (imperative form). In other words the stop sign is informing the people that it is a stop, yet not ordering people to stop. This is just a technicality, and anyone with a North American or international driver's licence should be able to recognize an eight-sided red sign.

Why not have bilingualism? We have two official languages, so we might as well harmonize them. Québec decided to do like Texas and have their own charter of rights. It's actually kind of cool. Assuming you are conservative, you probably like Mr. Bush and the United States, especially Texas. In fact, I've been to Texas and loved everything about it. It makes for another interesting place on the map, and if you don't like it, no one is forcing you to live there. Bilingualism is present where a significant portion of residents speak the minority official language of their locale (English in Québec and French elsewhere), some of the time. Bilingual assistants are not available within some distance from all the significant francophone communities out West because Western provinces will not subsidize French language schools beyond a certain grade for the most part, so bilingualism has not yet complied with its natural demand. An artificial demand is not all that bad, though. If the Canadian government requires bilingualism for 100% of its jobs, then more people are more motivated in being bilingual, then the private sector will start prefering bilingual candidates because it means they're hiring the more motivated candidates in general, meaning the Canadian economy will most likely increase because the private sector's efficiency would increase (because they would be hiring more motivated and most likely more intelligent candidates, who would not only be qualified but also fluent in two languages). Eventually, (virtually) all well paying jobs would require bilingualism just because they could and a much higher proportion of Canadians would be bilingual. This is indeed your nightmare, but it's in a strange way a utopia. Canadians are probably already the world's biggest bookworms, I'm certain Canadians could easily become bilingual for the msot part. If most Canadians are bilingual, hate between Canadians of different prefered domestic languages will be nearly eliminated, which to me is worth whatever amount Canadians are paying in taxes to make Canada more bilingual. In reality though, the demand is already existing thanks to the Canadian people, but if the government does establish an artificial demand for bilingualism, it wouldn't be all bad. There are no English taxpayers nor French services in Canada... there are Canadian taxpayers and Canadian services in Canada. If you are refering to anglophone taxpayers, they're paying into Canadian services offered in both languages, and just like the francophones, have the right to choose in which language they wish to be served by their government. In the case of Ontario, where either no one or almost no one speaks French, they do not require bilingualism. Going by your terms, you are then paying less into something you would not benefit from, so we all win. Bilingualism is determined by the people. As mentioned earlier, we have bilingualism because of Canadian voters who insist on being served in their prefered domestic language, and the private sector's this for bilingualism can only be conceived by a natural demand. I wouldn't say bilingualism's chance to succeed has been completely spoiled. They're doing all they can do. Actually, Leafless, I'll ask you to think hypothetically of how you would make Canada a bilingual country had your life depended on it. I'm kinda curious as to how you'd go about it. Secondly, like guyser said, we could spend much more tax money asking all Canadians if they want bilingualism. Thirdly, Bill 101 is not racist! BC has a similar language policy. Not to the same extent as Québec's crazy language police, but they require all signs to be written in English, even for retaurants (because American tourists complained they couldn't read the signs in Chinese in Canada). If Bill 101 is racist, then so is BC's language law. I think language laws limit freedom, usually out of arbitrary selfishness, but they still don't fall under racism. Fourthly, The feds are not trying to persue the provinces in becoming bilingual at this time. Sure Ontarian and Federal liberals may be good friends, but I am unaware of any bribes the federal government would be giving Ontario towards bilingual policies (I think the feds have become pretty transparent since the scandal). Even if Québec were to join Canada like all other provinces, they would still only have one official language in their province, so it wouldn't change much. I will add that a friend of mine, who happens to be an anglophone from Québec, noticed he was asked his first language for the purpose of receiving a paycheck in Québec, which goes against even Québec's charter of rights, so apparently they don't even run their own show very well. I don't live in Québec, so I cannot complain about their provincial policies other than their extreme socialism, being the biggest reason why I don't move there (because Montréal would be a much funner city than Ottawa, but I'm not going to leave Ottawa just to live in a more socialist place). Fifthly, check this out: Found at http://www.canadianheritage.gc.ca/pc-ch/pu...2/no_01/1_e.cfm. Canada being an officially multicultural country is a self-declaration and to me seems like an arbitrary term used by policitians to promote good things like abolishing racism and increasing tolerance towards bilingualism. Just because Canada declares itself an officially multicultural country to me makes it no different than if it did not declare anything about its culture within its borders. Sure this declaration may have been undemocratic, but asking all Canadians whether they liked the way it sounded everytime they were to declare anything would drive us into bankruptcy. The private sector is reflecting the natural demand bilingualism. If it were purely an artificial demand, it would never pass.

If it's so lousy, nothing's forcing you to stay. Ontario's bilingual policy is by quotas. Ontario does not have French as an official language, yet they still serve Ontarians in French where the demand exists. This has nothing to do with the supposive "artificial demand" established by the federal government. I'm not worried, by the way (where do you get these ideas about how I might feel?), though I appreciate the concern. I already know both domestic languages, so if Ontario becomes officially bilingual, I could only gain. Either way, I'm not complaining about the current situation, so I need not to worry. Either way is fine for me. Don't be an ass! Ontario has for a long time has a bilingual policy to provide certain services to Francophone's 'where numbers warrant' UNLIKE in entitled QUEBEC that has NO BILINGUAL POLICY ANYWHERE. Man, you would almost think stuffed Quebec won the battle on the 'Plains of Abraham'. I only know a single language and in my mind NO OTHER language other than majority English matters and that's the only language I will ever fight for, the language of the victors who won Canada and as well is the language the U.S. uses and is the language many countries use that dominates the commercial world, unlike French whereas it is popular among a handful of African countries. Canada is a lousy place to live because of Quebec, but since I was born here I will never allow a minority to run me out of my own country. I will always remember what the FLQ did and don't think for a moment if push ever comes to shove, the English are as equally as capable of pursuing national goals. See you around Kapitan. Why should Québec and Ontario have the same bilingual policies? Out of ten provinces, one is French-only, one is officially bilingual, one is unofficially bilingual and the rest are English-only. Besides, due to the large English-speaking communities in Québec who don't speak French (or refuse to speak it), the provincial government of Québec is forced to supply provincial services in English, despite not having a bilingual policy. On paper, they have no such policy, yet in practice, Québec is a province of both Canadian languages, about as bilingual as Ontario. Wow, to think that only your language matters is a little self-centered. I'd say that English may be the most important language in most cases, but not the only important language. For instance, when the Queen of England and the president of France meet, they always speak to eachother in French. The English language is now the "international language" thanks to the United States, having nothing to do with language policies within Canadian borders. I'd say other than English, other major languages are more "purpose-orientated", for instance German is the second most important language in International Business in the United States and Europe (and also very important in philosophy and to some extent research), French is still a very diplomatic language (in high demand for diplomatic purposes in the United States aswell), is very useful in International Development, is the only language other than English spoken officially in five continents, is an official working language for plenty of international organizations, plus the French are surprisingly still big developers in science and technology. Spanish is spoken by a really large number of people and Latin American countries have very low rates of residents fluent in English, so anyone interested in anything regarding Latin America or even the United States' hispanic community would be much better off knowing Spanish. Japanese is the official language to the world's second most powerful economy, Mandarin has the highest count on this planet of residents speaking it as a first language... there are plenty of very important languages. Knowing at least two give people an incredible advantage over their monolingual peers. No minority would be able to run you out of your own country, but complaining about the current situation will not change anything. You always have the freedom to leave, even to move to antoher province, which not everyone on this planet has (not everyone can leave their country so easily as Canadians). You don't have to leave, just as you wouldn't be forced to leave any country unless you were to commit a serious crime or to disobey customs policies in a country other than your own. Canada has room for everyone (in fact the world's population could fit comfortably in the state of Texas... the whole place would look like New York City, but it could be done!), so no one has to leave. Canada certainly has room for more. The FLQ? Ok, I'll agree that English are just as capable as francophones of reading Marx's stories, losing their mind and going on a communist rampage. By the way, the English are in England, so this is irrelevant. If you're talking about English-speaking Canadians, I am not convinced that they all share your national goals. Not all anglophones in Canada are upset about the bilingual policies and many will agree that there's room in Canada for two languages. Canada is the only country in the world with stop signs in French, so losing that would be losing a Canadian distinction, making us a little less special.

But if you want a Francophone, then you will require bilingualism, even though bilingualism is neither necessary or even helpful to the job. Since when? It wouldn't stop bilingual anglophones from getting the job. Besides, why would I prefer a candidate of a given first language over another purely based on that reason? Either way, a majority of employers are anglophones, so even if francophones prefer to employ francophones, this would affect such a small margin of employment requiring both languages, whether public or private sector. If it's so lousy, nothing's forcing you to stay. Ontario's bilingual policy is by quotas. Ontario does not have French as an official language, yet they still serve Ontarians in French where the demand exists. This has nothing to do with the supposive "artificial demand" established by the federal government. I'm not worried, by the way (where do you get these ideas about how I might feel?), though I appreciate the concern. I already know both domestic languages, so if Ontario becomes officially bilingual, I could only gain. Either way, I'm not complaining about the current situation, so I need not to worry. Either way is fine for me.

Actually, if we are to discuss linguistics, it's probably easier to pick up a working ability in the English language than the French language, but for fluency, I'd say French would come quicker. French may have more rules, but English has more exceptions. Many anglophones do not properly speak nor write in their first language, likewise for francophones. It would be time consuming for an adult to learn any new language from scratch, however time well spent if it means a career advancement. This is a practical advantage, however just because English is more accessible in this continent does not make it easier to learn. Music is played in the English language worldwide, yet so many people from non-English speaking countries could not carry out a conversation in English, despite their American CD collection. The Internet is available in all languages... I'll admit that there is much more information available in English online, but going by Wikipedia's article count, though French does not have the highest count, the count is still pretty high, meaning one could probably still do all their web surfing whithout needing English. Anglophones in Québec are the most bilingual group of Canadians? Can you quote a source? Last I heard there are approx. million anglophones in Québec, and approx. million francophones in Ontario. I'd figure that there would be a higher rate of bilingual franco-Ontarians than anglo-québécois. I could be wrong, but it would be neat if you could find a source to back that statement. I'm for effeciency through privatization. This thread is one big debate about bilingualism. I could rant about all the things that matter to me, but they would be irrelevant to this thread. Actually, I have more skills than fluency in both domestic languages. I'd send you my résumé but that would make me no longer anonymous. I can work efficiently in three office suites and I'm pretty good in HTML for instance. I do consider myself skilled, but based on many, not all being language-related. Ok, if Swedish was actually needed for the job, I'd understand. Swedish is a random example, whereas French has a gradual growing importance in Canadian workplaces. However Swedish comes out of no where. Anyone losing their job because it suddenly requires bilingualism will sure become spiteful, but it's not like they wouldn't see it coming. Normally one can predict such a change, having enough time to learn French before it's actually required. Government jobs that do not make use of language skills should be outsourced. Those representing the government themselves should be bilingual. Whichever companies they pay to do work for them can have their own language policies. If I may add, if that scenario were my case, I'd hopefully see it coming and learn Swedish before it would be required for the job. It's likely to be the easiest Germanic language, so if I needed it, I'd give it a try. Sure you could argue "Oh, not everyone is like you and willing to learn a foreign language just to keep their job", but it's a matter of opportunity cost, whether the job is worth the effort of learning a new language. I wouldn't learn a language to keep a job at a fast food joint, but if it were a job I enjoyed and it offered all the perks I really wanted to keep, I'd learn the newly required language. Plus all Canadians with few exceptions are required to learn both domestic langauges in school, so it would not exactly be starting from scratch for most cases, but rather building on however much they already know. Sure, but such jobs should be outsourced. If the government believes that a certain position is worthy of being staffed by a government employee and not outsourced, they should feel free to require language skills. If the private sector insists candidates be bilingual, it's because they see a profitable advantage. Last I heard it was more like 9 million, but regardless... Politicians are trying to please as many voters as possible, so they'll obviously be interested in keeping the language policies. Also, regardless of the voters, there are enough francophones in parliament who would not change the language policy.

This is an outright LIE. You must be an idiot. There is no demand for bilingualism in Canada outside of the artificial discriminatory federal one. Quebec has no use for English or developing a bilingualism policy. Your just pissed off because the French language in Canada could NEVER create a demand for its language without FORCED discriminatory federal government intervention. I'll have to agree with Guyser's response for the most part. Ok, someone is shooting insults into the interweb... real smart. That is not a lie, it is the reality. If I am an employer and require certain skills for a job, I don't care if the applicant is black, white, hispanic, asian, francophone, anglophone or whoever, provided the applicant has the skills for the job. If I require language skills, I will consider black, white, hispanic, asian, anglophone, francophone, etc. applicants who have those language skills. I do not see why you do not grasp this. People of any background can know both domestic languages. If you disagree to that, you are being racist for believing that some people should/could not be bilingual. No currently monolingual provincial government has any use for developing a bilingual policy. New Brunswick may be interested in develeping their bilingual policy, and Ontario is "considering" becoming officially bilingual (or that would be not properly worded according to you... so "officially of two languages" if that suits you better), but we have yet to see if that gets anywhere. I don't actually care about Ontarian bilingual policies, I think it's fine the way they manage unofficial language quotas. I suppose it would be cool if Canada's most populated province officially had both languages, but there's no hurry for that to happen. Lastly in responding to your first post since I last posted, I'm not pissed off... if anything you are, because you seem to be losing it (wow, this forum is consuming your emotions, I do feel sorry for you, and I appologize if this discussion causes you to lose any of the hairs on your head, provided you still have hair). People also create the demand for the French language (not just the government)... because if only the government wanted this, it would never pass because Canada is a democratic country. I have worked in many places in Ottawa and I have often heard people agreeing to speak to eachother in French in the workplace. People who speak French as a first language, even outside of Québec (and yes there are many... Ottawa has tonnes of them) often prefer to consume in French, meaning shops can increase their earnings if their staff are bilingual, that is why the private sector thirsts for bilingual candidates... because there exists a natural demand. If you mean that the language policy is discriminatory because it means there is an extra skill employers are using to determine which candidates are qualified, then I will agree. If I am to hire a truck driver, I will quickly refuse blind candidates. If I want to hire a police man in Ottawa, I will much prefer a bilingual one, because Canadians including you have the right to do their legal processes in their prefered domestic language, so just as much as you have language rights in Canada, so do the criminals, and I would prefer a cop who could deal with the criminal in whichever domestic language the criminal speaks. Ok, maybe not all jobs requiring bilingualism actually make use of the language skills of those working those jobs, however it's still nice that people representing Canada can communicate with all Canadians. It would be disappointing if you were to make a call that was connected to a federal government building in Québec where the federal government employee could not serve you in English. In my opinion, there should be as few government employees as possible, that they all be bilingual and that all the rest of the work be outsourced to companies having their own language policies, requiring bilingualism according to the natural demand (which by the way exists). That way no efficiency is lossed and everyone representing the federal government would be fluent in both domestic languages. This is completely feasible. Anyway, to point out your absurdity, you agreed that the private sector has increased its thirst for bilingual candidates, which in your opinion is a loss in jobs for the anglophones (which can only reflect the natural demand because unlike the government, the private sector's priority is to make money and they will only prefer bilingual candidates if it means they can increase revenue. This means it's a reflection of a natural demand for bilingualism) yet you say that outside the federal government language policy, there would be no natural demand for the French language. Plus you dare call me an idiot. Wow, I am indeed astonished. Also, I will comment on your most recent post: I gather you think francophones are of one culture and that anglophones are of many cultures. This makes no sense at all. There are people of various backgrounds using either language in Canada. I don't even know why this is even mentioned in the first place, because I never said Canada only had two cultures. Seriously, for instance Switzerland has a significant Portuguese speaking community, but they won't make Portuguese an official language. I believe there are more people who speak Portuguese in Switzerland than Romansh, their fourth official language, yet they do not change their official languages nor do they abolish them. Canada recognizes all its cultures, and agreed to use two languages. You would not know French as a commercial language in Canada because you would never write a company in French. If a Canadian decides to write a company in French, they will most likely receive an answer in French, meaning a customer service relationship would be handled in French and therefore French would be used for commerce. Such service is not nearly as common for foreign languages (normally only within minority communities). Sure English is the dominant language, meaning you will not see much being done in French unless you actually speak French or you look for it. Pretty much all sectors in Ottawa are requiring bilingualism to a certain extent other than IT, so it is still used commercially, especially if a company's headquarters are in Montréal or Québec City. As mentioned earlier, the importance of the French language in Canada is not nearly as artificial as you are puting it out to be. How are official languages discriminatory in a multicultural country? Germany is multicultural, but if they don't have an official language, the Turk population could easily run their own public schools in their own language, so could the Russians and so forth and so on. Official languages make it easier for people to agree on up to a few languages, and being able to do everything everywhere in their own country provided they speak all official languages (covering all regions within their borders). I would be for having no official languages, had Canada never had official languages. Since we've made it an issue, it won't so easily go away.

Ok, firstly about the definition of race... I did look it up, and according to your findings, item #8 says some common feature, including color, meaning the European founders of Canada were of the same race. Anyway, here are my findings from the WordWebPro Interactive English Language Dictionary, released by Princeton University. Item #2 is "People who are believed to belong to the same genetic stock", item #5 "(biology) a taxonomic group that is a division of a species; usually arises as a consequence of geographical isolation within a species". I guess only item #2 from my findings is relevant to this discussion, but I don't have any bigger English language dictionary around me. People of different languages do not form different races. This is completely irrelevant, because Canadians of both languages have equal chances at obtaining a job requiring bilingualism provided that they both be bilingual, therefore there is no discrimination whatsoever. You've first mentionned this: In other words, you say Canada called itself a "multicultural country" because this label sounded more pleasing to the Westerners than a "bicultural country". Should Canada then adopt more official languages and require them in the workplace? No other language has ever been official to Canada than the current ones, so it would be pointless to advocate their use in the workplace in Canada. Actually, I have met many anglophones who may not speak fluent French but still think it is neat that we have two official languages, so you are very quick to determine the "collective will of Canadians"... not all monolingual anglophones are upset by the bilingual policies. I'll agree that Canada should not discriminate on the basis of language, but employers can discriminate based on the candidates' skills. In fact, Canadians should not even be identified by their first language, so people should be treated according to the same justice regardless of their first language, however it is fine that an employer requires language skills.

Since when must multiculturalism be officially recognised? Can a country be unofficially multicultural? English is already the only commercial language in Canada... companies in Québec are doing their accountancy in English, even if no one other than the accountant in the given company knows English. Yeah, the absence of official languages would have worked had Britain never given Québec an official language other than French. Since then the francophones of Québec have been advocating their language rights. Also, there would be no such outcry... there is no longer a significant proportion of the Canadian population who have been here for several generations speaking an unofficial language and the sizeable communities in Canada speaking foreign languages at home have most likely known immigration within the last three generations, where the family knew that they were moving to a country having other official languages than their own, therefore they would not advocate official recognition of their language. Since day one? On day one Québec was one of the first provinces to join Canada, and the first people to consider themselves Canadian. Seperation is a fairly young issue, even proportionally speaking of Canadian history. Again, one third of Canadians whose first language is French live outside of Québec. By your stupid logic, Francophone=Québecois=Seperatist. That's like saying 100%*(2/3)*49%=100%, which actually comes out to a little less than 33%. I don't even see why seperatists would advocate bilingualism within the Federal Government, because they actually want to be their own nation, not caring about policies affecting other provinces. Culture and race are not components of eachother. Race and culture have a Many to Many relation. A culture may be celebrated by people of many races, and a race may celebrate many cultures. Language is a skill, and is usually spoken by people of a common culture/nationality. Also, French and English speaking Canadians, for the most part, both originate from the same continent, Europe... both groups being predominantly cuacasian... the same race. Official bilingualism does not divide anyone. It means people of any background knowing both official languages can apply for government jobs. You seem to hold anger towards people of a given location - Québec - and that is racism. No initiative in learning a second language? I beg to differ! Actually, I am for mandatory language training in primary schools, whether domestic or foreign languages. Those knowing more than one language before attaining puberty become faster learners and more skillful in mathematics than their monolingual collegues. Because English and French are official in Canada, we might as well teach the official languages before moving onto other languages. Kids learning both languages at a young age will find that they learn things faster and will then have more time for other things later on, so it's a win-win situation. The private sector wants to make money (unlike the gov't who just enjoys stealing it through taxation), and if offering services in both languages in Ottawa increases their income, they'll do it. Maybe monolingual anglophone Ottawans will see the profitability in learning the French language. Besides, the private sector is not costing you your precious tax dollars. Also, Ottawa offers the anglophone everything they need to immerse in the French language right in their own city, making it incredibly convenient to achieve bilingualism.

Injustices? I think it's just to expect federal government employees to be bilingual... the "Official Languages of Canada" law is silly. The federal government should be free to require whichever language skills they wish, provided they provide language training in public schools (which they do). Without the 'Official Languages Act, their would be no 'official bilingualism within the federal government and Francophone's would be dealt with in English or federal offices from within Quebec. You know as well as I concerning bilingual positions in the federal government, do not simply provide services to Francophone's, but providing a functional Francophone working class society within the confines of the federal public service. Where else in society would you get this discriminatory, racist, linguistic handling of a minority language outside of the federal government? http://www.ocol-clo.gc.ca/faq.asp?Lang=English#q1 Firstly, I said the language act was silly and in my opinion should be revised, so that they could require bilingualism without their own act being an issue. Providing a functional Francophone working class society within the confines of the federal public service? You seem to insist that one's language is part of one's identity. These are Canadians working within the Federal Government, and I don't care what their first language is, provided that they know both. As long as there are more francophones than anglophones willing to learn a second language, there will be skewed demographics. Seriously though, this is not racism. Anyone can learn a second language, and by suggesting that just because English is the dominant language in Canada and that you should not have to know both yet have access to the same opportunities as those who know both languages discusts me... Learning a second language has not hurt anyone! Outside the federal government, the private sector has developped a certain thirst for bilingual candidates. Not to the same extent as the feds, but bilingual candidates have more opportunities even in the Canadian private sector. I don't see Canada's unemployment rate increasing because of this, so there is no apparent problem. Monolingual Canadians are still able to find employment. Anyway, if the municipal government in Ottawa requires bilingualism for more municipal jobs, that is fine as it is a bilingual municipality.

Injustices? I think it's just to expect federal government employees to be bilingual... the "Official Languages of Canada" law is silly. The federal government should be free to require whichever language skills they wish, provided they provide language training in public schools (which they do). Refusing someone a job because they did not have the requested skills (including language skills) for the job is not discrimination. Anyone is capable of gaining a language, just like everyone is capable of learning to use software or operating a machine, however language requires too much time to be considered a skill that one could easily pick up "on the job", so it makes sense that they require it for the hiring process. Racism? No! Anyone of any race, culture or background can learn the necessary skills to find employment in the field and location they wish, making everyone equal. The "unfairness", for instance, is that people born lucky, like me, do not have to work as hard to gain such skills, just like kids raised by mathematicians will have more ease in mathematics because they have more access to assistance in that field. Again, I'm against fairness because that results in communism and eliminates diversity when everyone is considered equal regardless of skills (which also eliminates the desire to learn).

Hydraboss, That's actually unfortunate. If I were raising a kid studying a compulsory foreign language (other than English or French) I'd still care about the child's language training regardless. Just because French is almost inexistant in Alberta doesn't mean that one should go carelessly about education. That's a very bad lesson to one's child! Parenting's a whole other topic, so back to official languages. Whether Québec seperates from Canada or not will have little or no effect on Alberta in terms of language policies. Alberta already has only English as an official language provincially, so the only real advantage of being fluent in French is for those who think they may end up moving East, working for the feds or for certain companies who make use of that skill. However, learning French in school is still a better investment of one's time than learning a foreign language in school, even in Alberta, considering French is not a difficult language to learn compared to many other languages spoken by a large proportion of the world's population (not necessarily as a first language) and is the only language used in a very sizeable part of Canada. Even Albertans get free language training in school, meaning those who chose to not learn it should not complain about the oportunities that are taken from them. I'm actually against provincial language laws, such as Law 101 in Québec and a similar law in BC where all signs and banners must be readible in English. I don't really see the need. If a Chinese restaurant can make enough money in Vong Kong/Vong Kouver with signs and menus only in Chinese, let them. If you are for provincial language laws, you are just as bad as Québec's provincial government. Ontario's unofficial bilingualism is probably as good as it gets in Canada... however I wish it were easier for communities to open their own schools anywhere in Canada in their prefered language, whether domestic or foreign. Also, I personally don't like Québec nor the fact that they get a big portion of federal funding... not because of the language issue but because they're communists! Argus, I'm for justice yet against fairness. If the manager does not have the required management skills nor the capacity of learning them, they should not be a manager. Just because I am prefered on the job market for skills I have worked towards (yes, I had to study English and French in school, meaning I had to learn my grammar) does not mean I'm trying to squelch efficiency. Also, you seem to be pointing the finger as if I were "one of them". I'm just as English-speaking as you are (I'm fluent in English as of age two... I happen to be fluent in French as of the same age, but that does not make me any less of an anglophone). Adding a language does not subtract from another. If you cannot comprehend that one can be raised in two languages equally, you're worse than the feds. Not quite. Using your example, I'd have the pool outsource the lifeguard service to a private company who would have their own policies. I'm saying those representing the gov't should be bilingual, but not necessarily those working indirectly for the government (through the private sector). It seems that you are convinced that bilingual people have no skills beyond languages. According to our current system, no political party is interested in abolishing language policies... the conservatives may not add to them, but no sizeable party is suggesting we abolish them. Also, we could remove the government, but under the monarchy, we'd have to ask the Queen to do that, who would not likely remove the Canadian government over a language policy. Canada still has ridiculously low unemployment (7%)... if it rises above 30% the Queen just might intervene. Other than crying to the Queen, Canadians cannot easily overthrow the government because Canadians do not have the right to bear arms (gun control is mind control!). I'm not so sure about that one... a lot of them are bilingual though. Leafless, Not really, they just provided service beyond the quotas. I myself am surprised that they had an employee fluent in French in Calgary. Either way, there's no harm in making the service available in French, in this case there was an employee who could serve in both languages as well as do the job... this is not compermising efficiency. You make a good point. They kind of did violate their law, which is a terrible law that should be revised (like many others).

No, I'm trying to respond to what you say one segment at a time... I do not do this in a way to obfuscate your replies. Also, this is a forum... we're here to discuss the topic, not grade how well eachother is discussing it. As much as I believe that you're wrong about this matter and that your arguments are flawed, I would keep this to myself and I think it's unfortunate that you have to comment on the quality of my arguments on a forum. Remember, arguing over the Internet is pointless because even if you win, you still won't get a prize (http://youareretarded.ytmnd.com/), so let's just stick to the topic. Anyway, if you still feel the issue of biculturalism is worth discussing, please elaborate. I don't really get the context, because Canada has more than two cultures. Kids have been required to take French language classes in English language schools, yet I don't hear anyone complaining about that issue. It's also undemocratic, yet it doesn't seem to bother anyone. I think I explained this one already. There are mostly francophone applicants for federal jobs because there are too few bilingual anglophones applying. If there's a skewed candidate pool, there will be a skewed result. If you learn French and apply for a job in the federal government you can increase the anglophone population within those jobs. As long as there are more francophone applicants, there will be more francophone civil servants. Fair share?! Now you're sounding communist. The doors are open to all those having the required skills. Anyone can achieve these skills, therefore no one is forbidden from working for the feds. Actually, you failed to prove your own argument. By the way, I did follow both links. The quote says languages can communicate culture. 1. The quote does not say "language can communicate the content of its culture" 2. Nor does the quote say "language cannot communicate the content of other cultures". Seems to me that all languages can communicate the content of all cultures according to that quote. However, if you must link culture and language, I'd say it's a "many to many" relationship. A language can be spoken by people of more than one culture and people of one culture can speak many languages... even as a majority (by many I mean in this case more than one, but I use the word "many" because we're talking about relationships). Again, culture is knowledge and is independant of race. Children adopted to parents of a different racial background is the most obvious example (because they are raised in the culture of their adoptive parents). There may be tendancies, but one is not the component of another. Language is a skill whether in demand or not. For instance, any foreign language I could speak is a skill, even if I do not need it for work. Also, I ride a unicycle (alas I cannot juggle though)... that's not useful for any job in the federal government, yet I do believe it is a skill. Cooking is also a skill, despite the fact that most government employees do not use their cooking skills on the job (possibly none do, because that work can easily be outsourced).

That's why I said "I think". Forums are for sharing opinions! I don't exactly grasp what you mean by "bicultural"... Canada has multiple cultures, and if you mean "two fully intertwined distict cultures", I'd see that as one new culture, so please explain! Most capitalist countries have only one official language, and even if they have more than one official language, it's not a big issue. It wouldn't be an issue in Canada if Canada were a national republic, allowing the feds to run everything nation-wide and leave no freedom to the provincial gov't. But I'm sure we can agree that being a national republic would not be favorable. No, because in this case both languages are domestic. Firstly, language is a skill. Secondly, culture and race have their correlations, but one is not the component of another. Races can be distiguished by ethnic, hereditary traits. Culture is knowledge! Culture must be learned... people do not automatically celebrate a certain culture just because they are of a certain race. In other words, you're telling me that forcing knowledge upon others (that would otherwise only be shared between a smaller portion of the population) is racist. I will first point out that I am for education and its availability, but I am against requiring children to go to school beyond the sixth grade (they're already literate by then and those not willing to learn are waisting tax money), so I kind of agree with your logic that it is terrible to force people to study. I also know that one cannot be forced to learn (for instance parents and teachers often have to motivate students in order to reach their interest). However, requiring a certain skill from everybody in my opinion makes sense (as opposed to only requiring a given skill from people of a certain race... now that would be racism!). Also, as I mentionned earlier, most anglophones do not need to integrate into a new culture, only learn a new language in order to optimize potential success within Canada. Francophones for the most part actually have to integrate into the dominant culture within their own country, aswell as learning a new language in order to meet the same potential. What confusion? I think most Canadians are now aware of the skills needed to work for the federal government. Man, did you have a bad experience? Seriously, linguistic abuse makes me think of a grammar lecture. You cannot be abused by a skill. I'll admit there's a humongous hole in the federal government system in terms of their language policies though (I'll admit I'm not completely for their policies as a whole, but I am for a bilingual federal government). I hate how the government identifies people by their first language. In fact, I think it's the liberals who started this, but it's pretty much affected everyone. If people would not identify themselves by their first language, Canada would be a much better place. Whenever I'm asked my first language and I say both it drives them nuts!!! They want to test me in my second domestic language, which they cannot identify because I have two domestic mother tongues. Also, I've heard rumors (from biased anglophones but I would easily believe it if I had more evidence) that the feds are tougher when testing anglophones with French as a second language than when they test francophones in their English language skills. It's possible considering the already high number of francophones in the federal government who help eachother out, but this to me is just rumors. If it's true though, I will agree that there is racism within the federal government. This, however, is not the racism you were talking about in my understanding. The main reason why there are more francophones in the federal government than anglophones is because anglophones are less willing to learn the other domestic language. However, Canadians' unwillingness to learn a second language just because it's "of another culture other than their own" disgusts me. Also, speaking of racism... there is still skin color/nationality-based racism in Canada in the private sector... probably to a greater than language-based discrimination in the private sector. Give a WASP two applicants, one being a WASP, the other being a Frenchman/Indian/African/etc. Both applicants have the same skills, bilingualism is not required for the job, not a CRTC-licenced employer and therefore no minority quotas... the WASP will hire the WASP due to familiarity and justify it by saying the WASP applicant was better dressed for the interview or any subjective excuse for choosing one over the other, when the two applicants presented themselves equally. This is a reality that will most likely always exist. Is it racism? It's familiarity. I can't say I agree with this... I'd rather the employer choose over the flip of a coin in the case of two equally skilled applicants. There is the reality that there are now more francophones in the federal government than anglophones, and the only way this can truly be changed is if more anglophones become bilingual and compete for those jobs. Otherwise, as you said, the federal government will be run by a bunch of francophones. If the feds ever become 100% francophone, then it may become very difficult for anglophones to ever find employment within the federal government. It's not by writing letters that this will change, it's by becoming bilingual, penetrating the government and making a difference. I wouldn't be too concerned about separatists, though, they're still a minority amongst francophones. Here's for a silly (but relevant) comparison... Why is there a high correlation between blonde women and dental hygiensists? (For the purpose of the comparison, assume this is true.) Do you think they turn down brunettes or redheads over blondes? I doubt it, they just get more qualified blonde applicants. If only francophones apply for federal jobs, only francophones will be hired. Get the skills you need, get in there and make a difference!

Ok, I'll agree to call Canada a country of two languages as opposed to a bilingual country, but I still find that subjective (bilingual means of two languages, which happens to be the case for Canada). I was referring to people being able to be served by the feds nation-wide in their preferred domestic language... I am leaving provincial policies out of this because I know that the provinces would never comply to create the utopian "bilingual Canada". Racism? Since when am I attacking a people of a given race? I have not done so yet. If you choose to work in a certain country's government, fluency in official languages is naturally required. Canada's been a little slow at requiring this. Nazism was about authoritarianism and "racial purity", which is just downright evil. Requiring a certain skill for a job is not about racial purity, and people of a given ethnicity in Canada will not disappear. "Degrading the English language"? They're not lowering the importance of the English language, they're just increasing the importance of the French language. There's no subtraction, only addition. This does not make any less of the English language in Canada, it only adds to national unity... doing the only thing the feds can do without forcing the provinces into becoming bilingual. Who are these francophones? Again, assuming there are no francophones outside Québec. Only two thirds of Canada's francophones reside in Québec. I know some, and I've been told of others. They're quite the minority, but separation is more of a provincial issue than a national issue... This post is about bilingual jobs in Ottawa, and I would rather save provincial politics for another thread. My point was that there are separatists in Québec, of both languages, and that there may be a high correlation between francophones and québécois, and there's a correlation between québécois and separatists, but when you try to correlate francophones and separatists, it's suddenly not nearly as high a correlation (less than a third of Canada's francophones are separatists, making them a real minority). 1. Check your spelling. 2. I was speaking hypothetically. 3. Though the second part of the statement is likely to be true, I don't actually care (in other words, I'm not angry). I'm just glad that the federal government is requiring both languages for many jobs. Each man / woman is responsible in becoming qualified for any job they consider applying. 4. I actually have no language preference, I think it's cool to meet people of different backgrounds, regardless of the languages they bring. Again, I was speaking hypothetically. Has learning a second language hurt anyone? It makes for a more educated society. I think requiring bilingualism will make for a "smarter Canada". It's not discriminatory! Anyone who was not "born lucky" to a parent who knows both English and French that is now bilingual has had to learn a second language the hard way. Regardless of one's first language, one can achieve bilingualism. If you are saying that another group of people may find it easier to achieve bilingualism than your group of people means you are the one being racist, suggesting that your group of people is less capable than those of the other group. If you want to complain about those "born lucky" (raised in both languages), you're referring to a small minority. Undemocratic? You never chose your first language. Also, those averaging highest income in Canada are from highest to lowest: bilingual anglophones; bilingual francophones; monolingual anglophones; then monolingual francophones. The anglophones average higher income than francophones initially, and those knowing both official languages average even higher income. If anything, anglophones still have the upper hand, because it's easier for them to rise to the top due to being of the dominant culture. Francophones who were only raised in the French language have to learn the language and culture of their anglophone neighbors to meet the same success the anglophones achieve simply by learning the French language. I'm not complaining because I was born lucky, but I see the struggles on both sides and I think the anglophones have to put less effort in the end towards achieving success because their culture is already dominant in Canada's private sector. However, because English is a more widespread language, there is a higher rate of bilingual francophones than bilingual anglophones. There's nothing stopping you from increasing the bilingual anglophone population. Not according to a Canadian documentary about the Canada's English language. When loyalists came up to Canada, they sounded just like Americans. English will always be required by the feds. It will always be a suitable language for federal public service. Increasing French does not decrease English!

Illegal? Under what law? Under all federal documents, America's 51st state (the one with the maple leaf) has two official languages. Alas it wouldn't happen, but it's the liberals' dream. I don't see the need in pressuring the western provinces into becoming bilingual, but they have little importance to me in the big picture compared to Ontario and Québec in terms of federal politics. (Most Westerners are liberal, except for Alberta and a third of BC are really conservative, so it always balances out.) Not true! Do you know any Canadian history? Until America had independance day, there were hardly anyone speaking any language other than French and aboriginal languages in the 51st state. Then the loyalists moved North, then when England clued in that they had all this land in North America even after losing the United States, they sent a bunch of Brits, Scots and Irishmen, quite often to teach the loyalists how to speak European English because the loyalists by then were talking like Americans! Time went by, then there was an agreement that the Francophones could explore and settle, but could not bring their language with them outside lower Canada. They explored several parts of the Western Canada and United States, and settled. That's the main reason why French is the only language spoken in certain small towns out west. Basically, French was the language of choice until the loyalists came in. Now, people want to speak English because either that is what is spoken at home or because America exports it's dollar, language and culture to the world. It's effortless for Canadians to celebrate the English language with the American mass media, yet anything available in French is on a smaller scale or quite often European, which is of a very different culture. That's why French speaking Canadians feel alone with their combination of language and culture, and do everything they can to hold on to it. Of course with Globalization, less spoken languages disappear and a select few grow in importance, but as long as French remains part of the big four, and a third of Canadians speak French (while a quarter of Canadians speak it as a first language) and feel strongly about conserving their culture and language, it won't disappear. They were here first. Just because the loyalists came in from other states does not mean we cannot share Canada. Also, it seems that the monolingual Anglophones who are against bilingual policies want to treat the francophones the same way the early Canadians treated the aboriginals. Just because one of the two people are more numerous and speak a more important language internationally does not mean that they should choose their language over all others. I'll agree to a certain extent. Bilingualism has not yet fully succeeded, and therefore is still a fail... but I see it more as a work in progress and it can still happen. The easiest way is if all provinces comply and become bilingual, but that will not likely/easily happen. Wow, that's a whole lot of spite! An English speaking federal civil servant who learns a new skill for the job is doing him/herself a favor. Sure if more do it, it's easier to expect the skill out of candidates, but that's a good thing. Don't you wish fed servants were more skilled? It's not going to hurt anyone. It's firstly a bad thing to assume that francophones are seperatists. There are several anglophone seperatists in Québec aswell. Also, just because outside of Québec, Canada is predominantly English-speaking doesn't mean anything. Just like the English did, we could invite tonnes of French-speaking immigrants to populate "English Canada". The feds often employ bilingual people, regardless of where they're from. Tonnes of them are from Ontario. Also, if more anglophones become bilingual and take these jobs, you can be sure that there will be fewer seperatists in parliament, so encouraging anglophones to become bilingual might be the best thing for national unity. In Canada you have the right to consume in your prefered domestic language, and for that to be possible, we need people who can serve in all Canadians' prefered domestic language, whether English or French. By making Canada more bilingual, you'll be able to consume government services with greater ease in your prefered domestic language accross the nation. I do not see how requiring bilingualism for federal jobs could be a bad thing. Besides, no one is forcing you to work for the government, nor to live in Ottawa, nor to even live in Canada. I don't think the current system is perfect either, but to change it, you have to play the game. Make sure you are bilingual, then get in the government, then advocate against bilingualism from within. You could even become a lobbyist. If you can convince a liberal francophone in parliament that the federal government's bilingual policies are draconian, then you're off to a good start. Good luck buddy

Speaking of people willing to work for low pay, I think Canada should have an immigration tax. This may not be completely relevant, but I think that the Canadian government should pay for immigrant professionals' national certification so that they can practice their profession in Canada within a couple years of immigrating. This education would be paid by a fund generated by an immigration tax. Once certified, these professional immigrants would pay into such tax until their professional training is paid off. About higher minimum wage, I don't really see the point. The Canadian dollar has a relatively low inflation rate, yet the minimum wage seems to be climbing faster than inflation. I think minimum wage should be reduced. Even without minimum wage, employees would not be willing to accept work under a certain rate (I don't think even high school students would be willing to work for a couple bucks an hour unless it were the funnest job in the world, something they could do effortlessly at home or extremely temporary), so it would come to a good balance.

I do not really see this as an issue. Most of our public servants are from the Ottawa area and live in Orléans. Also, I am for privatization. The federal government should outsource most of its work to companies who do not require bilingualism to all its workforce. Not because of the language issue but rather because I value efficiency, which is something no government has proven itself capable of delivering. For now, the government is still making exceptions by hiring monolingual Canadian residents where the required skills other than language are in short supply. It may not be a commercial language for the most part, but that does not mean the government should favor English over French. Both languages are equally official in the federal government. Many countries in the European Union have English as a commercial language, despite the fact that English is not an official language for the majority of these countries. Just because English is an official language in Canada does not mean that it should be "more official" than the other official language, being French. If political-cultural issues are to be discussed, I must mention that the liberals, ever since Trudeau, have been trying to make Canada more and more bilingual nation-wide. It's the conservatives (for instance Stephen Harper) who are trying to let Québec become more and more distict. One possible solution is to let Québec have sovereignty-association like South-Tyrol has in Italy. However, I am still not sure if that is truly in the interest of most Canadians. In fact, because there are so many bilingual francophones in the Canadian government already, even if Québec has sovereignty-association, the Canadian government outside of Québec will probably conserve bilingualism just to spite you! MDR... Pretty much anywhere within 300 kilometers (180 miles) from Québec's provincial boarders in Ontario and New Brunswick and a bunch of other communities will conserve the importance of bilingualism, even if Québec does become sovereign. Ontario is unofficially bilingual. The province ensures that services are available in both languages where there is a significant francophone population (I think the cut-off line is at 8%... so if at least 8% of residents in a given part of Ontario speak French, French-language services are available). Québec, however, is not bilingual provincially (as you all know by now). For Gatineau to be a bilingual municipality in a monolingual province is like having a bilingual municipality in a monolingual country. I don't hear the Gatineau residents pressuring their town hall into becoming a bilingual municipality, so I don't even see the issue. Just because the federal government has offices in Gatineau does not mean Gatineau should be bilingual. Federal government offices already offer service in both languages on both sides of the Ottawa river. Everyone who does their Kindergarten to high school completion has had to take language courses for both official languages, therefore for the little time an Ontarian spends in Gatineau, one should be able to manage at ease. I guess for the purpose of tourism it might be cool for Gatineau to be bilingual, but in my opinion it would be even cooler in Ottawa becomes a city-state. For the purpose of tourism, there are plenty of cool things Canada could do... like require all visible signs nation-wide to be bilingual. Would be cool for tourism. People of other countries have told me how cool they think it is that Canada is the only country to have stop signs in a language other than English. Just wanted to say that if the federal government declares Canada an officially bilingual country, they should live up to it. They're on the right track for requiring both languages. I think it's time people realize the importance of bilingualism and make sure they have all required skills for any career they plan on getting into, including their second Canadian language. It takes a few years to learn another language without immersion, yet immersion is available in Ottawa, so someone can whip up a skill allowing them a much larger proportion of the job market at tax payers' expense. I don't understand why not everyone is rushing to sign-up lists for classes to become bilingual. Considering the skill being available at tax payers' expense, it only makes sense that bilingualism be required for government jobs because that means they wouldn't be hiring people not willing to learn a free skill.

I've got some comments for y'all... Draconian? Who are you to say it's so terrible that bilingualism is evil? Why is Canada predominantly English-speaking? Thank Uncle Sam for that... the English language was shoved down your throat. Ottawa should be a "city-state" in my opinion and not be part of the province of Ontario, like Washington DC, Mexico City and Berlin, to name a few examples. Why would this not work? Because if Ottawa becomes a city State, Gatineau joins and would no longer be part of the People's Republic of Québec, meaning seperatists from the communist province would be a strong majority in Québec and surely they would seperate. Honnestly, the people in Québec are friendlier, I would rather live in Montréal than Ottawa if it weren't for the fact that Québec is extremely socialist (and the blasphemy... but that's another issue). I estimate 5% of Ottawans only speak French. However, easily over third speak it as their first Canadian language (most of this proportion speaks it as a first language, however many speak a language that is neither English nor French as a first, yet learned French before learning English, that is if they did learn English). Just because most Ottawans can speak English doesn't mean they should be expected to use English over French in their day-to-day life. If these francophones wish to be served in their prefered domestic language, that makes as much sense as a bilingual anglophone prefering service in English. I'm for justice yet against fairness. As I mentioned, the best solution in my opinion would be for Ottawa to become a city-state, but alas because of the seperatists that is not preferable, so we live in a compermise. Gatineau is in Québec, a French-language province. Ottawa is in Ontario, officially English-speaking and unoficially bilingual, going by quotas. Why should the municipality of Gatineau be expected to go beyond provincial expectations? Ottawa is complying with Ontarian expectations, and likewise Gatineau is complying with Québec's expectations. There's no need for fairness, because some people will always be more fortunate than others, and that's how we stay away from communism and enjoy what life has to offer. Also, one has the choice as to which side of the river they live, so fairness is not an issue. People are (still) Canadian citizens on both sides, and can freely move within the entire dominion of Canada. Ok, this is an incredibly ignorant question (I hope it was rhetorical). Let's pool Mandarin and Cantonese speakers, even if it's not their first language. Let's assume that there is roughly the same number of Canadian residents who are of Chinese origin as those who speak a Chinese language. There are currently just over a million Chinese-Canadians (3.5% of Canadian population). How many people speak French as a first language?! Last count I saw was at 24+% or over nine million. Even if these stats are not perfectly accurate, those who speak French outnumber those who speak a Chinese language (tremendously), so please read your numbers before stating!!!!! I've got just a little more to say... I speak the big four (English, French, Spanish and German) and I do not identify myself by any language. Ethinically, I'm more Germanic than anything else combined. If the government wants to require language skills for employment, then those considering working for the government should make sure they are bilingual. It's like any job, make sure you have the right skills. One wouldn't start working in medicine or law without having studied it, for instance. Also, requiring bilingualism for a job is a good idea, because people who are fluent in at least two langauges before puberty have more ease in using a higher brain-capacity. Sure one who speaks a foreign language and a Canadian language would have that advantage in terms of faster thinking and quicker learning yet there are enough candidates who do know both Canadian languages to fill these positions and make use of their skills which are more relevant to the job. I honestly don't know why so many people are so unwilling to learn a second domestic language. I may still be working on my fourth language, but it is incredibly rewarding. Whenever I think of Ottawans who only speak one language, I wish them luck in persuing a profession that would not require bilingualism (medicine, law...) or they're welcome to serve me a cold beer when I hit the bar. I honestly don't think these Canadian kids should be working the best jobs without being bilingual... it was taught to them in school, yet they chose not to learn (therefore they're either lazy or terrible learners). Also, I highly encourage English-speaking immigrants to learn French because then they can "steal the Canadians' jobs"... mdr, well I never! It's so easy... learn another language (requires two to five years for fluency while living in Ottawa with reasonnable effort), suddenly one is more skilled than the vast majority! It's that simple! In fact, it's a skill available to Canadians at taxpayers' expense. It's about time the government starts tying ends. Seriously, if "job distribution" is mentioned, only the skilled should work. If the government is hiring, they pick the required skills. Pardon me but I don't think it's possible to get a job in most governments if one does not know the official language(s). Also, suggesting that the government would be hiring less qualified people because they would single-out monolingual applicants is called discrimination. In fact, when the government cannot find qualified bilingual applicants, they fill certain positions with monolingual applicants. Plus without the French language, Canadians are not really different from Minnesotans (for those who see language as a big part of their identity). Bilingualism is just, but alas it isn't fair. It's not fair that you were born in Canada and someone else was born in Haiti. It's not fair that there are people who were given more languages at home than me. Life isn't fair, let's keep it that way. Those who attempt fairness only find communism, which isn't fair after all.