capricorn

Are they really of grade A merit if they can't read the job desription and only later on find out that they're missing the language skills? I beg to differ. Classifying a job as bilingual does not stop Anglophones from applying. If they have the language skills, they can benefit from bilingual positions. Normally, language requirements are identified in advertisements of positions to be filled. In cases where the position requires a knowledge of French, anglophones who are not bilingual or who do not wish to become bilingual simply do not apply. Then, why would they bother to access or read the job description? This does not reflect on their merit in terms of whether they are qualified to the job. In my previous posts, I never addressed the question of bilingual anglophones applying for bilingual jobs. It's a given that if the job interests them, they will apply. So I don't see how you can differ on something that I never raised.

If Al Gore truly believes in what he is preaching, i.e. the planet faces certain oblivion unless the entire globe takes drastic action now, why does he always look so happy? At least David Suzuki manages facial expressions that match his dire predictions. Anyone raking in the kind of money Gore does can afford to live in luxury. His new book will surely rake in millions. Perhaps this is the source of his happiness. Why change a winning strategy?

We don't have unlimited time nor do we have unlimited resources. Military expenditures to keep the mission going are rising substantially. Canadians may think the right thing to do is stay the course until Feb. 09. What Canadians may start to question is whether we should be pouring out all that money for an uncertain result.

The ADQ is not ready to form a government and Dumont knows this. Charest knows that Dumont knows this too. That's why in part Charest started this little gambit. When the election results came in and the ADQ was tied with the PLQ, Dumont looked positively panicked. He was some relieved when the PLQ pulled ahead. The ADQ was not ready then and is not ready now. Should the PLQ fall, I also do not think Dumont will be asked to form a government. I'm hoping an election can be avoided through some kind of compromise on the PLQ budget. This is the first challenge faced by the ADQ and the PQ.

Because there are those who will always want to tie Canada's actions to the U.S. in order for them to continue the facade of 'Harper = Bush' you know how it goes. I am phasing out using the term "Bush" in my comments. My references now read "Bush/the US". That is, until the new President is elected. Whoever that will be presents a complication. "Bush" is a one-syllable name, compact and sounds menacing when blurted out with disdain. Adding one or two syllables sorta softens the impact. Wait one minute while I remove my tongue which is firmly planted in my cheek. LOL

If I was a Quebecer, I would punish the parties that sent the province into an election so soon. I would also not want another minority government to repeat the process. Therefore, I see the PQ losing even more support. The question is will those votes be parked with the Liberals or the ADQ?

Yeah! Mussolini, Franco, Pol Pot, Ivan the Terrible ... they're the real heroes. If you mean that these infamous characters had the courage of their own convictions, then yes, I must agree they did not care about other people thought. Whose heroes might they be?

I'll be up front. Whatever happens regarding Afghanistan, I will still vote Conservative. The Liberals sent us there, not the Conservatives. Where we are at in Afghanistan cannot and should not be attributed entirely to Conservative policy. In my view, the mission should end in Feb. 09. That's our commitment and that's plenty for a nation of our size, population wise. Back to Harper. If a politician engages in actions that are likely to lead to defeat, why does the politician do it? I speak here of Harper's musings of extending the mission. Some say he is intent on cozying up to Bush/the US. What good will that do him if it leads to his defeat? This man is far from stupid, so I can't point to incompetence. Therein lies my inability to read Harper on the Afghanistan question.

Public Service Employment Act ( 2003) PSEA at DoJ Canada So merit actually includes language proficiency as established by the deputy head. Deputy Heads sub-delegate most of this authority to subordinate managers. So the question becomes: How objective (unbiased?) are managers in determining that a position should be bilingual and in setting the language proficiency of positions. When the 1969 Official Languages Act was revised in 1988, Section 91 was introduced to address this. “Section 91 emphasizes the need for objectivity in setting the language requirements of jobs in federal institutions for the purposes of a particular staffing action. In general terms, this provision states that no federal employer may arbitrarily set language requirements in applying the provisions relating to service to the public or language of work. These requirements must be genuinely necessary to perform the duties of the position to be filled. Complaints concerning failure to comply with the objectivity requirement in section 91 in connection with a specific staffing action may be filed with the Commissioner of Official Languages, and eventually with the Federal Court. Complaints relating to bilingual positions may concern the levels of skill required in the second language or the obligation, or lack thereof, to meet the requirements at the time of staffing.” http://www.ocol-clo.gc.ca/archives/op_ap/a...llo_annot_e.htm I must give credit to the Joint Standing Committee on Official Languages of the H of C in existence at that time. It is this Committee that developed Section 91 for inclusion into the revised Act of 1988. It was clearly intended to offer some protection for anglophones who disagreed with deputy head/managerial decisions.

Wow. That's about the last thing Steve's political history would make me think. His record is a litany of bashing virtually everything Canadian, in favor of virtually anything American. Harper knows that more and more Canadians are turning thumbs down on this war. He's not making himself any favour by talking about an open timetable (beyond Feb. 2009) for our involvement in Afghanistan. This is the kind of thing that keeps me wondering about his motives. He's in a minority situation and he does not appear to fear losing power over this war. You may be right that he is only playing into the hands of the US. At this point in time, I find it difficult to reach that conclusion.

Appointments to government jobs are supposed to be based on merit, meaning the most qualified person is selected. Section 30(1) of the Public Service Employment Act: "Appointments by the Commission to or from within the public service shall be made on the basis of merit and shall be free of political influence." http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/showdoc/cs/P-...-ga:l_2-gb:s_30 The "Commission" is the Public Service Commission, that delegates its staffing powers to deputy heads. Screening candidates in a selection process on the basis of language proficiency interferes with selecting and appointing on the basis of merit. That is, the most qualified employee is passed over for appointment or promotion. In many staffing actions, anglophones are the most qualified but are screened out of the process on the basis of language. The system is not flexible or fair enough to assess qualifications (merit) first and look at language as a second step. For example, if a unilingual anglophone is appointed on merit, managers should be able to adjust the work unit accordingly. Language training could then be offered on a voluntary basis. Anglophones who want a career in the public service constantly face this disadvantage. As a group, they are particularly affected in the national capital region since this is where the majority of bilingual jobs are found. Providing a systemic advantage to francophones and having too many jobs designated bilingual does not place both language groups on equal footing.

K.R, I don't see the bonus as such a successful financial motivator for employees to learn a second language. Look at the numbers. $800.00 per annum equates to $66.00 per month, deduct say $13.00 (20%) in income tax, leaving approx $53.00 clear monthly on the employee's paycheque. It is not an easy task for most adults to learn a second language. How many employees would actually put out that effort for a measly 50 bucks a month, especially if they have to pay their own way. The bonus was set at $800.00 over 30 years ago and was never increased by one penny. If the government believed the bonus would significantly contribute to an increase in its workforce's level of bilingualism, why wasn't it ever increased? In the 80s and 90s, unions pressured for an increase of the bonus in accordance with the inflation rate. The government steadfastly refused. Had the government agreed, today the bonus would be worth around $2,000.00 or more per annum. Government has never bothered or been able to place a monetary value on second language skills. Personally, I don't think a bonus should be paid nor should it be increased. The real motivators for employees to learn a second language should be to increase their personal qualifications, and to become more competitive for promotion and career advancement. I think that rather than receive a bilingualism bonus, anglophones would much prefer a level playing field.

I have been observing Harper's actions on this Afghan question for a while. It looks to me that Harper is staking his political future on whether Canadians will side with him on seeing the Afghanistan mission to completion. Either this guy is so convinced that this is Canada's calling and that we will succeed or he is suicidal. I think he sees something great in this Country and its citizens, in spite of our internal feuds. He knows what we are capable of, as proven by the tremendous accomplishments by Canada in previous wars. I am not convinced Canadians will dismiss him and elect another Liberal government over this matter. Ordinary Canadians have been hungry for some time to feel meaningful and relevant, at home and internationally. Pride in one's country is a formidable emotion. It sits just below the surface ready to erupt. It's as if he is daring us to be more than we think we can be. Canadians may not buy into his vision of Canada. So be it. Harper seems willing to take that gamble. If his government falls over the Afghanistan mission, the Conservatives will be looking for a new leader. Then, we'll have a new government to bash.

This morning, a CTV poll shows 88% (3051) say Harper's visit with the troops on the front lines is a good show of support. 12% (415) say it is too dangerous and Harper should not have gone. If the vast majority of Canadians do not think southern Afghanistan is dangerous, why do the majority of Canadians want us out of there? It amazes me that so many Canadians cannot understand the simple fact that it's a dangerous place. Is it any wonder a proper debate is not in the offing?

Quoting Leafless: "Since when does a minority control the political interest of the majority?" This situation arose because of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism of the early 60's (Pearson-Lib), the Official Languages Act of 1969 (Trudeau-Lib) and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms of 1985 (Trudeau-Lib). Successive PM's from Québec and years of Liberal rule have entrenched the powers of minorities throughout the bureaucracy. Being all things to all people has entered the psyche of the majority of Canadians. Although I am a francophone, I do not associate my identity in any way with Québec and I want that province to sever from Canada. Many francophones inside and outside that province see me and those like-minded as traitors. If Québec does separate, I don't think undue control of minority groups over the majority will go away. Liberals will continue to pander to the ethnic and minority vote. It's always worked for them, has it not? I worry that the Conservatives may use this tactic to stay in power. No wonder Conservative supporters are confused.

I've noticed there have not been many fights in any of the playoff games this year. There have been many solid checks though. Looks like the Ducks are wiping out the Red Wings tonight. They have a 3-0 lead going into the 3rd. The Ducks play a very physical game. Should be interesting to see how the Sens match them up. Hey, I'm not worried. Sens win cup in 6 games. GO SENS !

Maybe he's using his frequent flyer miles? Frankly, if he thinks this trip will change the mindset of Canadians, I don't think so.

Governments in Canada have been known to walk into a quagmire and not know how to get out of it. I predict that in October, Ontario voters will turn PR down big time. I will vote against it simply because I don't want parties to have the power of naming MPPs. Give them additional powers and there will be abuses. I also don't agree because it will result in a reduction in the number of ridings.

I wonder if anyone is paying attention. And some observers here have noted, not much is happening politically over the next week. The story is probably going to be buried in hockey play-offs. Harper went to Afghanistan to present a Senators sleeper pyjama to Karzai for his newborn. There's the hockey connection. I mean, Harper is writing a book on hockey, is he not?

What the Canadian English community is up against is the promotion of 'linguistic duality' by our dear friend, our federal government, with no input on what the Canadian tax payer has to day about all of this by way of referendum or whatever. Our government is obsolete and is in need of a major tune up, so that it will be able to perform its basic function, the administration or running of this country, rather than to be totally self absorbed with social engineering or statism. I think the Conservatives are trying to turn things around. Abolishing the Court Challenges Program is an excellent example. This program encouraged Canadians from minority groups to bring forward their complaints of unequal treatment, no matter how petty. As a result their will was imposed on the majority. To add insult to injury, each and every Canadian payed through to nose for this litigation only to get kicked in the butt by the resulting court decisions. I'm pleased and surprised the Conservatives had the guts to do this. They're still getting blasted by the opposition over this decision. I would add that not just English Canadians are worried or being affected by the imposition of rights for special interest and minority groups. French Canadians also do not digest or accept some of the rights conferred to special interest groups and ethnic minorities. Yes, French Canadians are a minority. Yet, we represent around 23% of Canada's population and we share many of the concerns of our English compatriots. Remember, most of us were born in Canada. The Conservative minority government is trying its best to govern while confined to a straight jacket. They need to achieve a majority to bring about real change and to undo the system of social engineering instilled by previous administrations. Now when you say our government is obsolete, if you mean the parliamentary system......then that is an entirely different discussion.

It is ironic that a Francophone whose obvious mother tongue is French is always tested in English and not French. This obviously means many Francophones who speak slang french, could very well be incompetent in in their own French language. The majority of the components of the official languages program operate in favour of francophones. No doubt, the framework for language testing is flawed. As soon as francophones declare that French was their first language learned it is recorded as their mother tongue. They are then tested in English. A public service wide review of the language designation of all positions should have been done a long time ago. This review raises 2 questions. Would the government be willing to spend the money to complete this review? (I can hear protests against this expenditure). Would the results be much different if managers were assigned to conduct this review? I think this review should be limited to the National Capital Region (includes Gatineau) where the majority of bilingual jobs are located. This is also where anglophones are being squeezed out of the hiring and promotion process in large numbers. Why? There are a lot more francophone employees than anglophones and too many jobs are designated "bilingual. Also, too many are designated "bilingual imperative", meaning you have to pass the language test before you get the job and there is no access to language training. In terms of the language proficiency of francophones in the French language, it's not so much the slang part. Obviously, slang has more to do with verbal communication which enables parties to converse. For many francophones, the problem arises in reading a French text and understanding it and answering written questions in proper French (grammar, vocabulary, etc). This is not surprising since many francophones outside Québec have worked primarily in English for a long time, i.e. manuals, files and other documents. If the City of Ottawa looks to the feds as a model, it will commit the same mistakes and fall into the same trap. Anglophone employees and the community have got to speak up to avoid the pitfalls.

Actually, a person occupying a bilingual position and who meets the language requirements receives an annual bonus of $800.00. This income counts toward the calculation of the retirement pension. Does it make any sense that the government pays for language training for unilingual employees then rewards them with a language bonus? Should plumbers or electricians receive a bonus because they are certified in their trades? What's to stop managers from designating positions bilingual simply to reward friends? Bilingual employees would not contest the language designation of their position as this would hit them in the pocketbook. The bonus system is open to abuse and should be discontinued. You can bet the unions would put up a huge fight. Other hidden costs to bilingualism in the public service are the various bodies set up to oversee this program. One example is the National Joint Council Official Languages Committee. This is a joint union-management committee that regularly discusses language policy changes and hears grievances related to the bilingualism bonus. There are others. A true accounting of these costs could only be properly done by the Auditor General. I think a lot of rot would be uncovered. I suggest calling it "bil-gate".

Bring on Detroit and be quick about it please. Don't want Canada's team too rested. SENS will clip the Wings off that pretend-goalie Hasek in 6 games to bring Stanley home. In Ottawa, it is now 1 am. As we speak, I hear the car horns honking from my condo which is about 5 minutes from Parliament Hill. How sweet it is.

The story is the one provided that starts this link. Justifying such childish behaviour that is supposed to govern us, shows how badly our government is failing the people of Canada. It's hard to believe that we pay for such behaviour in the house, committee and Senate. When are adults going to govern our country, and do it on the behalf of the people whom elected them. I have absolutely no use for the constant whining and defence used by the CPC that the LPC did it first. Infact, like many posters on this forum suggest, the CPC under Harper have managed to behave like Liberals in record time. The Conservatives had to learn from the Liberals before acting like them. It's a learning curve. Divide and conquer along the lines of special interest and ethnic groups. Time will tell if it worked.

I agree with the sentiment expressed here that Justin questions many things but is short on solutions. I find this true of many academics. I watched a couple of his addresses on YouTube. I was not impressed. Yet, I can see how young people would be mesmerized by this person. I think the fact he is PET's son has a lot to do with this idolization. Whether Dion will clip his wings will be interesting to watch.