Ignatieff calls bilingualism the essence of Canada

Machjo · May 30, 2009

Because they have zero weight, politically. Any reasonably sized town in the rest of Canada has more voters.
If federal funding were cut off, all three would be depopulated in weeks.

Yukon. for example, has less than 32,000 people and four levls of govt., which is obviously the largest 'industry' by far. All of them are ultimately paid for by federal taxpayers.

Now I could certainly see the argumen for cutting government spending to the territories, and provinces too for that matter. However, the fact that the govrnment is curently spending too much money there doesn't in and of itself eliminate their right to be heard like any other Canadian.

If you talk taxes, I'm all for cutting government spending, but it would seem that libertarians and conservatives support government tax reductions on different grounds. For the Libertarian, it's just a matter of fiscal responsbility, nothing personal against anbody and no ill will intended. For the conservatives, it seems to be a way to 'get back at Quebec' or 'to show those indjuns'. It's the attitude of many conservatives that turns me off. I could vote Libertarian, but they're not likely to win an election. Next up would be the Green Party, the most economically conservative without having that 'we'll show those damned Frenchies and indjun's' attitude.

The Conservative Party of Canada, on the other hand, is quite repulsive overall. Yes, I pften find mself agreeing with some of spending cuts, but then it just ruins it by shifting spending to the military, even worse, or cutting taxes without cutting spending. Again, even worse than not cutting taxes.

Personally, I'd rather see a government cut spending first, followed by taxes. That's truly conservative in my book. The CPC goes about it backwards, and in the meanest of spirits. Cut spending, yet. But start off with spending cuts that won't hurt the poor first, and then cut that spending last. The conservatives do exactly the opposite.

Sure, I'm all for reducing government spending in the territories, but not because of some attitude that the territories don't matter. Such an attitude is revolting.

CANADIEN · May 30, 2009

There is no law against it.

No... But it is highly entertaining to wtach you promote what you denounce when it's done by others. Especially when you are so cluesless about it that your stance is never even really hypocritical.

Machjo · May 30, 2009

Leafless, if you're so concerned about your imaginary white culture, why don't you just join this organization:

http://www.resist.com/

I'm sure you'll blend right in.

Leafless · May 30, 2009

We are, through respect for the rights of the individual. Sorry it clashes with your delusion.

And those undemocratic discriminatory, oppressive rights were created unilaterally by the legislative authority of a dysfunctional government or governments totally ignoring the citizens of Canada.

The fact that Quenecers should get health care in Quebec aside, let's get to the real point, shall we? The fact that any excuse will do for you to treat French-speaking Ontarians like if they were not Ontarian?

French speaking Ontarians are Ontarians and they even have their OWN DIFFERENT Ontario flag to prove it. Of course Franco-Ontarians are entitled to health care but that was not the question you ask me, was it.

The funniest past is that you actually believe what you write.

I don't particularly enjoy to watch my culture and my country being destroyed by Utopian idealist.

Edited May 30, 2009 by Leafless

CANADIEN · May 30, 2009

And those undemocratic discriminatory, oppressive rights were created unilaterally by the legislative authority of a dysfunctional government or governments totally ignoring the citizens of Canada.

You forgot to add that this took place in La-la Land, not in the REAL Canada.

Of course Franco-Ontarians are entitled to health care

As long as it is in English, right?

I don't particularly enjoy to watch my culture and my country being destroyed by Utopian idealist.

I wouldn't either. If it were happening.

Leafless · May 30, 2009

No... But it is highly entertaining to wtach you promote what you denounce when it's done by others.

I never denounced protest.

There are usually well founded reasons to protest.

Ask the Tamils.

Leafless · May 30, 2009

I wouldn't either. If it were happening.

Ha-ha-ha-ha.

Trudeau would be proud of you.

Machjo · May 30, 2009

To some degree, I think Quebec has a good balance. On the one hand, it has but one official language. On the other, civil servants who can function in English or any other language are certainly not prohibited from doing so.

Thogh again, I think Bill 101 goes way too far in its invovlement in the private sector. But as far as the official language of government policy goes, I think that's a fine balance. To get a job in the Quebec government, you must know the official language, and any other language is a nice asset to have. You have a duty as a Quebec public servant to be able to serve people in French. But if the person doesn't know it, you're still allowed to switch to their language if you can speak it.

Beyond that, however, the Quebec government doesn't waste its money in teaching any other language to its public servants. You're sexpected to meet the sandards before you get the job, and then the government satisfies itself with that. Efficient, in my opinion, and saves much money in pointless language courses for civil servants.

I woud suport this in any organization. I just don't see how Leafless can straightfacedly support this kind of policy ofr Ontario and then criticize Quebec for the same.

CANADIEN · May 30, 2009

I never denounced protest.

Was referring to the way you denounce Quebec language laws then turn around and advocate something similar.

You reallly really don't get a clue.

Machjo · May 30, 2009

I never denounced protest.
There are usually well founded reasons to protest.

Ask the Tamils.

But there are different kinds of protest, Leafless:

1. You write a courteous letter to your MP, MPP, city councillor, etc. recommending a policy change, and presenting rational arguments for it.

2. You come on foaming at the mouth suggesting your race and ethnicity is somehow morally superior to all others.

Machjo · May 30, 2009

Was referring to the way you denounce Quebec language laws then turn around and advocate something similar.
You reallly really don't get a clue.

I may disagree with you on a few points, Canadien, but at least you're consistent and well-intentioned in your support for official bilingualism, and I respect that.

This is a perfect example of my siding with someone I disagree with because I at lest trust his intentions, while standing opposed to someone I agree with on some points because of his questionable motives.

This is something Leafless needs to learn. His attitude alienates even potential supporters.

Edited May 30, 2009 by Machjo

Leafless · May 30, 2009

Was referring to the way you denounce Quebec language laws then turn around and advocate something similar.

Oh. okay, you are back on that.

Yes of course and I do advocate the same right to choose a provincial official language which is the right of any province in Canada.

I never did understand how the federal government would allow a single volatile, separatist province to establish it's own French official language and language charter while obviously denying other provinces in Canada the SAME privledge.

I indeed find it strange after all these years not a single Canadian province has publicly stated it has intentions to make English the official language of their province.

This proves that Canada is a totalitarian state and controlled by Utopian idealist.

CANADIEN · May 30, 2009

Oh. okay, you are back on that.

Yes. You don't imagine you can spend your time saying how bad Quebec-language laws are when you want even worse in Ontario, with nobody pointing the double-speak, do you?

I never did understand how the federal government would allow a single volatile, separatist province to establish it's own French official language and language charter while obviously denying other provinces in Canada the SAME privledge.
I indeed find it strange after all these years not a single Canadian province has publicly stated it has intentions to make English the official language of their province.

Could it be because most provincial politicians know they cannot with sa straight face "bad bad Quebec, let's do the same".

I find it interesting that you have ALWAYS refused to define exactly what kind of language laws an official unilingual Ontario should have. Beyond no government services in French that is. Nothing about education. Basically nothing about the language of business and commercial signs. Virtually nothing beyond, "English will be the official language", which can mean anything under the sun.

Scared of showing how far you'd go to trample on individual rights, or you just don't have a clue what you're talking about?

Edited May 30, 2009 by CANADIEN

Leafless · May 30, 2009

This is something Leafless needs to learn. His attitude alienates even potential supporters.

Well, at least you got something right and are using the more acurate word 'attitude' rather than the tenth definition word 'tone' to describe my right to my opinions that you or anyone else might not agree with.

Have a nice day, Machjo!

Jerry J. Fortin · May 30, 2009

I believe that Bill 101 in Quebec is a violation of the laws of the land in Canada. Nobody has had the balls to do anything about it.

Smallc · May 30, 2009

If federal funding were cut off, all three would be depopulated in weeks.

Since the Northwest Territories has the largest economy per capita in the world, they would do fine if they were allowed to keep any of their own money.

Smallc · May 30, 2009

I believe that Bill 101 in Quebec is a violation of the laws of the land in Canada.

How so?

Machjo · May 30, 2009

Oh. okay, you are back on that.
Yes of course and I do advocate the same right to choose a provincial official language which is the right of any province in Canada.

I never did understand how the federal government would allow a single volatile, separatist province to establish it's own French official language and language charter while obviously denying other provinces in Canada the SAME privledge.

I indeed find it strange after all these years not a single Canadian province has publicly stated it has intentions to make English the official language of their province.

I would fully agree with Ontario adopting one official language of government administration. I would oppose its imposing this language on the private sector though.

This proves that Canada is a totalitarian state and controlled by Utopian idealist.

Th rhetoric isn't helping your cause here. You're free to promote whatever idea you want, but please try to argue your case rationally.

Edited May 30, 2009 by Machjo

Machjo · May 30, 2009

Another point I should make is that while official unilingualism is logically the most efficient organizational administrative language policy, it can differ from organization to organization.

For example, I'd have no issue with the provincial government of Ontario adopting English as its official language of internal administration (i.e. all provincial governmentstaff must know English and be capable of communicating in English upon request), while at the same time the local government somewhere in the province should choose to adopt French as its sole official language of internal administration. And even below that, for a local hospital in a city the official language of internal administration fo which is English adopt French as its sole language of internal administration.

The main issue is that any organization funded by the taxpayer should aim to have but one official language of internal administrationwhatever language that might be, as a means of saving money on translation costs. Translation is expensive, and all the more so when on a national scale.

Machjo · May 30, 2009

I believe that Bill 101 in Quebec is a violation of the laws of the land in Canada. Nobody has had the balls to do anything about it.

I believe the UNCHR had criticized Quebec on that point too if I'm not mistaken, but I'd have to confirm that to be sure. I do know that it's criticized Ontario's preference for Catholic over other religious schools twice already, and Canada is a signatory to the UN Human Rights Charter. Quite embarrassing really.

Smallc · May 30, 2009

This country is probably near the top when it comes to human rights. We have very little to be embarrassed about.

Machjo · May 30, 2009

Since the Northwest Territories has the largest economy per capita in the world, they would do fine if they were allowed to keep any of their own money.

Interesting. Thugh I don't agree with the government giving so much money to the NWT, I can also see the point Smallc is making here. Reduce government spending, pay off the federal debt, and then start either reducing taxes or, at the very least, make more of our tax money charity-deductible so that we can decide where it goes. Preferably reduce our taxes. Failing that, then at least let us give it to the charity fo our choice.

Machjo · May 30, 2009

This country is probably near the top when it comes to human rights. We have very little to be embarrassed about.

You're right. I guess, just as I expect more of myself than I do of others, I likewise expect more of my country than I do of other countries. If China goes from being a totalitarian regime with no human rights to one with some minimal human rights, I'll aplaud China for its progress.

But if Canada goes from being among the best defenders of human rights in the world with only a few minor spots on its record to the same ten years later, with those same spots present, then while China is progressing and catching up, Canada is just stagnating.

I don't applaud blind pride in what we have, no matter how good it is. I applaud progress, from no matter how low it starts.

Smallc · May 30, 2009

I agree, we should always strive to make things better, but I don't really consider many of the failings that we have to be embarrassing.

Machjo · May 30, 2009

This country is probably near the top when it comes to human rights. We have very little to be embarrassed about.

To take another example:

Should I pride myself in being but a petty thief just because my neighbour is a mass murderer. How Canada compares with other countries is irelevent. What is relevent is how Canada now compares to itself 10 years ago.

By the way, I hold all countries to this same standard. And if we look at it that way, China has made much more progress in its human rights over the last 10 years than Canada has. Sure we can take pride in that our human rights ten years ago were supeior to China's today. But it doesn't change the fact that while their society is progressing, ours is stagnating, basking in the pride of its past successes.