Does the Death of the BLOC mean the end of Sovereignty?

[g_bambino]

I'm not saying they don't have a distinct culture. That is not my point at all. I am saying they do not claim to have a different opinion about the current system. In the mindset of all provinces, the system is just fine as is and it doesn't affect their cultures.

While in Québec, it's the other way around. Because our culture is more different from the others, than the others are from one another. The other provinces always agreed with how the federal is run. Québec never agreed.

Confederation does as much to threaten Quebec's dominant culture as it does to Newfoundland's, or Nunavut's, or even Manitoba's smaller Metis culture; i.e. nothing. This idea that Quebec's culture is "more different than the others" - by which you mean Quebec is "most different" - is purely subjective and, frankly, illogical; Nunavut's distinctive culture doesn't have any of the European roots the cultures of both Quebec and Newfoundland, for example, share. I mean, I understand you want to portray Quebec as being the perennial victim, ever since the conquest in 1759; it's the same re-hashed souverainetiste propaganda: Quebec is a unique and fragile jewel that could shatter at any moment in the vice grip the imperialist Anglos have had on it for the last 250 years, yadda, yadda. But, under scrutiny, the complaints just don't hold up. Your claim that Quebec never agreed to be in Confederation or to how it is ordered and run, for instance, is demonstrably false. The fact that you need to rely on revisionism and irrationalities says a lot about the motives driving your cause.

[cybercoma]

Blah blah blah. Get to the point.

How much will it cost?

The point is that it doesn't cost as much money, except for the absolute basic services: mail, military, currency, and first nations. Quebec no longer receives transfer payments from the federal government for healthcare, education, and social services (welfare, CPP, EI, etc.); however, it also means that Quebec gets to oversee immigration to Quebec, language legislation, and revenue genearation within its borders for instance. I would also humour Quebec no longer being able to vote in federal elections, due to the reduced involvement of the federal government and increased autonomy, while having a Governor-like relationship or liason with the federal government. While Quebec will still be a part of Canada, they would be required to honour medicare from other provinces and pensions (and other social services) must be fully transferable. People and businesses too must be free to move between Quebec and the other provinces as they are today.

If that's what Quebeckers want, I think they should have it. So long as they remain Canadian citizens and Quebec remains the territory of Canada and the Queen. Personally, I think it's a terrible idea for Quebec. I believe Trudeau was right when he said it would push French Canadians into a ghetto of sorts because I don't believe, if Quebec were given more autonomy, that the federal government ought to be bilingual in other parts of the country. Of course, it would only make sense to offer services in French in French communities in other parts of Canada (like NB for instance, the only bilingual province). In other words, it would lead to the rest of Canada being less tolerant and less educated in French because Quebec would be seen as being mostly independent from the ROC.

[Dave_ON]

What are you trying to say?

So what about the english Quebecers in Québec? What's your point?

Québec is the only one with a huge french majority while the 9 others have a clear english majority.

What is it you don't understand with that simple fact?

And NB is the only province that is officially bilingual and has a relatively small English Majority. It's in the vicinity of 65/35. That's a fairly large minority. My further point is, that Acadians are by far and in large regarded as "less French" then their Quebec friends.

I suppose my question to you is this. What reforms do you wish to see? Would said reforms apply solely to Quebec? Should Quebec be treated differently than the rest of the provinces in confederation and if so why?

[Dave_ON]

Why do you think that's true?

No other province brought us the stampede? I travel quite a bit for my work and I can generally spot which province someone is from. Calgary is always a dead give away. No one in Toronto wears a cowboy hat unless they're attempting to be ironic... or heading to a pride event I suppose.

The regions are vastly different from one another on a cultural level. Different attitudes, different priorities and different outlooks on life. Each region really is distinct, I'm from NB originally and it was quite the culture shock when I moved here. Everyone was always in a such a hurry to do everything, everyone was curt or rude, and I found the hospitality to be somewhat lacking. This of course was by Maritime standards, which is comparatively much more laid back, friendly and very accommodating.

[ninjandrew]

No other province brought us the stampede? I travel quite a bit for my work and I can generally spot which province someone is from. Calgary is always a dead give away. No one in Toronto wears a cowboy hat unless they're attempting to be ironic... or heading to a pride event I suppose.

The regions are vastly different from one another on a cultural level. Different attitudes, different priorities and different outlooks on life. Each region really is distinct, I'm from NB originally and it was quite the culture shock when I moved here. Everyone was always in a such a hurry to do everything, everyone was curt or rude, and I found the hospitality to be somewhat lacking. This of course was by Maritime standards, which is comparatively much more laid back, friendly and very accommodating.

That reminds me of something else that differentiates Quebec from other provinces: They seem to think that they are the only ones different from everyone else, and that it warrants sovereignty.

[g_bambino]

That reminds me of something else that differentiates Quebec from other provinces: They seem to think that they are the only ones different from everyone else, and that it warrants sovereignty.

It's not everyone in Quebec that thinks the above; let's not generalise while criticising others for generalising. But it is what Benz and his sovereigntist friends believe.

[WIP]

So honestly I'm looking to get feedback from Quebec specifically, but anyone is free to answer. I think it's definitely premature to say that sovereignty is dead in Quebec, though I'm certainly glad to see the BLOC go. Have Federalist parties in every corner of the country will only benefit us all.

It's my hope that one of the first items in the new budget is the removal of the vote subsidy. This would eliminate the BLOC entirely, not that they were due very much money this time around anyway. However, it would also ensure that never again could a regional party get it's funding from federal coffers.

I'm especially interested to hear August's take on this whole affair.

Well, I'm going to give you my take anyway! Removing the vote subsidy...which Harper will almost certainly do, will leave Canada with a two party duopoly, like the U.S., and most countries that have kept first-past-the-post systems. Canada has been an anomaly for decades, having three national parties competing for votes.

The Bloc is not the only party endangered by the removal of the vote subsidy; every other minor party - including the Greens, and the Liberals, will not have the resources to mount credible election campaigns. While the Conservatives have the big money! Money they freely have thrown around with continual out of season campaign ads against Liberal leaders - Dion and Ignatieff. No other party can compete with a 365 day Conservative campaign now...and this was Harper's no.1 goal from the start. Canada's future is a corporate-funded Conservative Party, vs. a union (what's left of it) funded NDP.

As for Quebec Separatism - I would say it is a greater likelihood now that the Conservatives have become the natural governing party without needing any representation in Quebec. Harper, being a political strategist above all else, will likely see more political points available to score with by appealing to anti-Quebec voters that are already close to the Conservative base, then paying political capital to court Quebec votes.

[RNG]

Are not both corporations and unions forbidden to make political donations in Canada?

[fellowtraveller]

The point is that it doesn't cost as much money, except for the absolute basic services: mail, military, currency, and first nations. Quebec no longer receives transfer payments from the federal government for healthcare, education, and social services (welfare, CPP, EI, etc.); however, it also means that Quebec gets to oversee immigration to Quebec, language legislation, and revenue genearation within its borders for instance. I would also humour Quebec no longer being able to vote in federal elections, due to the reduced involvement of the federal government and increased autonomy, while having a Governor-like relationship or liason with the federal government. While Quebec will still be a part of Canada, they would be required to honour medicare from other provinces and pensions (and other social services) must be fully transferable. People and businesses too must be free to move between Quebec and the other provinces as they are today.

If that's what Quebeckers want, I think they should have it. So long as they remain Canadian citizens and Quebec remains the territory of Canada and the Queen. Personally, I think it's a terrible idea for Quebec. I believe Trudeau was right when he said it would push French Canadians into a ghetto of sorts because I don't believe, if Quebec were given more autonomy, that the federal government ought to be bilingual in other parts of the country. Of course, it would only make sense to offer services in French in French communities in other parts of Canada (like NB for instance, the only bilingual province). In other words, it would lead to the rest of Canada being less tolerant and less educated in French because Quebec would be seen as being mostly independent from the ROC.

You are on crack if you think that either Quebec or the ROC would buy that scenario.

If they are part of the political union, they get the same rights and they have the same responsibilitiesas other participants in the union. If that is utterly abhorrent to their cultural sensibilities, I think it is quite reasonable for them to wish to negotiate a civil departure if that is how they see their destiny. But they don't have any right to determine the destiny of the place they choose to leave. They don't get to choose to remain citizens on their terms. We don't get the right to insist their territory is still ours if they choose to leave. And they don't get to determine the future of First Nations, it ain't their call much as they wish it were.

[noahbody]

No other province brought us the stampede? I travel quite a bit for my work and I can generally spot which province someone is from. Calgary is always a dead give away. No one in Toronto wears a cowboy hat unless they're attempting to be ironic... or heading to a pride event I suppose.

The way a city dresses for a 10-day festival doesn't exactly qualify as culture to most sober people... of course you probably just spilled beer on your Lederhosen as per Ontario culture.

[August1991]

So honestly I'm looking to get feedback from Quebec specifically, but anyone is free to answer. I think it's definitely premature to say that sovereignty is dead in Quebec, though I'm certainly glad to see the BLOC go. Have Federalist parties in every corner of the country will only benefit us all.

...

I'm especially interested to hear August's take on this whole affair.

At present, about 30% of people in Quebecers are separatists. Ils veulent un pays. Another 20% or 30% of people in Quebec (allophones, anglophones, colonized francophones) are convinced Ottawa Canadians. Between these two groups, there are millions of people who are not decided.

It's my hope that one of the first items in the new budget is the removal of the vote subsidy. This would eliminate the BLOC entirely, not that they were due very much money this time around anyway. However, it would also ensure that never again could a regional party get it's funding from federal coffers.

I favour the vote subsidy, or a tax return check off. I would prefer extending this idea of a democratic vote.

If you like a political party, vote for it - and because of your vote, give some of your tax money to the party too. Dave, we all pay taxes. Whatever party you favour, how can you object to giving some of your tax money to a specific party?

IMV, the vote subsidy makes a vote valuable. And is that a bad thing?

Edited May 6, 2011 by August1991

[Benz]

And NB is the only province that is officially bilingual and has a relatively small English Majority. It's in the vicinity of 65/35. That's a fairly large minority. My further point is, that Acadians are by far and in large regarded as "less French" then their Quebec friends.

Less french? They had a micro context different from the french in Québec. In percent, they have a better situation than any other french elsewhere but still, they are in minority. Which is very different frrom the french in Québec. They are not less french, they have less control over their destiny though.

I suppose my question to you is this. What reforms do you wish to see? Would said reforms apply solely to Quebec?

Only to Québec? Just the nation written into the constitution plus a constitutional veto. That means, a veto only on future modifications of the constitution. That's it. Every other changes concern every one else. We want that a region can choose its senators and we want that a province/state can retire from a federal program and get full compensation. We are not asking much. We are not asking more money.

Should Quebec be treated differently than the rest of the provinces in confederation and if so why?

Only when the time comes to decide the supreme rules. The constitution. Because english and french canadians have different values, even if we are more alike than different. Those differences are very important for us. The two cultures must be seen as equal. However, once the rules are set by both cultures, every individuals are equal under those rules. One cannot claim to have something more than another just because he is french or english. The rules set by both cultures are the same to every one.

This is what the Québec federalists tried to work out with you for decades.

Edited May 6, 2011 by Benz

[Bryan]

Are not both corporations and unions forbidden to make political donations in Canada?

Yes they are. It's part of the Federal Accountability Act, enacted by the Conservatives in 2006. They cut themselves off from that advantage their opponents have perceived them to have. Likewise with the removal of per-vote subsidies, they're the ones with the most to lose from their own legislation.

[Bonam]

At present, about 30% of people in Quebecers are separatists. Ils veulent un pays. Another 20% or 30% of people in Quebec (allophones, anglophones, colonized francophones) are convinced Ottawa Canadians. Between these two groups, there are millions of people who are not decided.

I favour the vote subsidy, or a tax return check off. I would prefer extending this idea of a democratic vote.

If you like a political party, vote for it - and because of your vote, give some of your tax money to the party too. Dave, we all pay taxes. Whatever party you favour, how can you object to giving some of your tax money to a specific party?

IMV, the vote subsidy makes a vote valuable. And is that a bad thing?

Maybe someone doesn't favor any of the parties? Maybe someone prefers an independent candidate in their riding? Maybe someone is opposed to the whole idea of political parties and resents their tax money being funneled to them?

Personally, I'd very much prefer if no tax money at all was spent on political parties. They should raise money through fundraising from their supporters. Or, they can cut costs. You can get your message out very cheaply these days.

[Vancouverite]

I read a columnist who said that the Bloc will now go to the PQ, who will then become more radicalized. Maybe. In the cut-throat world of politics, no one will listen to a bunch of losers, and, while the PQ may welcome the newly-unemployed Bloc members as PQ members, along with the new membership fees, the PQ will not listen to a bunch who have just been thrown out by the voters.

As for the sovereignty issue, I don't think that will go away, and the NDP got elected at least partly on its soft nationalist platform.

[TimG]

IMV, the vote subsidy makes a vote valuable. And is that a bad thing?

What's the problem with expecting people to take $5 out of their pocket and giving it to the party they choose? I am not a fan of policies that reward laziness.

[g_bambino]

Because english and french canadians have different values

Cite, please.

[Dave_ON]

The way a city dresses for a 10-day festival doesn't exactly qualify as culture to most sober people... of course you probably just spilled beer on your Lederhosen as per Ontario culture.

I was just kidding and really meant no offense, good call on Oktoberfest, being from NB I never really quite understood all the excitement surrounding it. It's not like it's St. Patty's day. Though many Albertans wear cowboy hats year round it seems. or at least they do while they're in the Pearson Airport in TO. I still maintain that there are distinct regional cultural differences, I haven't lived West of Ontario, but even moving from the Maritimes to Ontario it was a huge culture shock. I've traveled extensively in MB and SK, less so in AB and BC, but it's definitely a different feel. There are even distinct differences Between, NB NS and PEI, something a non-maritimer wouldn't pick up on.

I guess do you feel that there isn't cultural distinctions? Are those from Ontario the same as westerners? Maybe it's just me, but I can speak from experience that Maritimers are vastly different from Central Canadians. Given the different ethnic groups that settled the various regions I'd say that's nigh on impossible. For instance, as you pointed out there are indeed a lot of German decent individuals in Ontario, but in the North there is heavy French influence, NB has a huge Irish influence as well as Scottish. There's also massive French influence in NB. NS has a similar makeup but ask anyone from Cape Breton where they're from and you won't hear NS, they'll tell you Cape Breton. MB, and the prairies have heavy Ukrainian influence. All these different cultures influenced how their present day cultures took place, all we really have in common is a language. I reject Benz assertion that language is what determines culture, it's a part of it, but it's certainly far from the be all and end all of it. The fact that Quebec is French is not what makes them distinct, it certainly has shaped them, but it is not the only factor. There is far more to culture than language, and it irks me that Fracophones in Quebec are so quick to cry that we don't understand their culture, when they are so quick to lump all anglophones into the same amorphous group.

Edited May 6, 2011 by Dave_ON

[Dave_ON]

Less french? They had a micro context different from the french in Québec. In percent, they have a better situation than any other french elsewhere but still, they are in minority. Which is very different frrom the french in Québec. They are not less french, they have less control over their destiny though.

A minority that has guaranteed rights and language protections. There are many French immersion schools and all signs and documentation are in English and French. In many ways NB is the only truly Canadian province in Confederation as both languages are treated equally. Many of my Acadian friends feel that Quebecois are condecending towards Acadians, as if they are somehow traitors to French culture. Your answers lead one to believe that Quebec, speaks for all the French in Canada, this is not the case, Quebec speaks for the Quebecois who also happen to be french, nothing more. No other province in confederation would be so arrogant as to claim they speak for all the English. English is not a culture, it's the language that many of us in confederation share, but our cultures are as distinct as the landscape in each of our provinces.

Only to Québec? Just the nation written into the constitution plus a constitutional veto. That means, a veto only on future modifications of the constitution modifications. That's it. Every other changes concern every one else. We want that a region can choose its senators and we want that a province/state can retire from a federal program and get full compensation. If you don't want the other provinces. We are not asking much. We are not asking more money.

Not asking muche?!? A constitutional veto is asking a heck of a lot, why should Quebec hold the reins on the veto? Absolutely not, either every province has a veto or none do. You're not looking to be equal in confederation you're looking to be superior.

Only when the time comes to decide the supreme rules. The constitution. Because english and french canadians have different values, even if we are more alike than different. Those differences are very important for us. The two cultures must be seen as equal. However, once the rules are set by both cultures, every individuals are equal under those rules. One cannot claim to have something more than another just because he is french or english. The rules set by both cultures are the same to every one.

This is what the Québec federalists tried to work out with you for decades.

There you go again, you cannot speak for all French Canadians, nor can you lump all of us English speaking Canadians into one group. We do not have shared values that are distinctly English, Albertans have different values than Ontarians, which are different from Maritimers. You speak only for Quebec, let's be honest and up front about that. You do not speak for the Acadians in the Maritimes, nor do you speak for the French in N Ontario.

Further how can the Quebec be considered equal yet have special rights, ie. a constitutional veto? That makes them by definition not Equal to the other members, it subjects the other members to the whims of one.

[Benz]

Cite, please.

Hey kid, I answered that several times and even directly to you. If you are an adult, act like one. If not, become one.

[g_bambino]

I answered that several times and even directly to you.

Link to it, please.

[Benz]

A minority that has guaranteed rights and language protections.

Yeah tell me about it. They are constatnly fighting in supreme court. Now that Harper killed the federal program to help minorities to fight for their rights, it becomes harder than ever.

There are many French immersion schools and all signs and documentation are in English and French.

the french want french schools. Not once in a while immersion french schools. However, I know what you wanted to say. It is true indeed that NB is now giving more importance to help the english kids to learn french. NB figured that Québec and several Europeans are an important market and if they want to be ahead on their neighbors in the Maritimes and New England, a better ability to speak french is a non-neglectible asset. NB was able to get investments that would have gone to Québec otherwise.

In many ways NB is the only truly Canadian province in Confederation as both languages are treated equally.

Moreless. It's not bad, but the english people of Québec are in a better situation than the french of NB. Despite their percentage is much lower. Compared to other provinces, NB is a respectable example though. I give you that.

Many of my Acadian friends feel that Quebecois are condecending towards Acadians, as if they are somehow traitors to French culture.

None of the Acadians I know see that in me. However I heard indeed that some Acadians feel that way. It's strange.

Your answers lead one to believe that Quebec, speaks for all the French in Canada, this is not the case, Quebec speaks for the Quebecois who also happen to be french, nothing more.

Not true. Although the french outside Québec do not live into the same reality, the Québécois can speak for all the french. I'd go further than that, I don't see how we can do otherwise. I said earlier in this thread that the only other way would be to give a veto to the french based on the sum of all individuals speaking french. To do that, we need to seperate all the canadians into two status. A dual citizenship based on the languag eyou speak. IMO, this is very complicated and leads to several problems. What do we do with someone perfectly bilingual having parents on both side of the fence. Also, I don't like the idea that individuals have different status. I think the management of such system is too complex. Beside giving a veto to Québec, I don't see how else we can give the french a veto. If you have a better idea, share it with me.

No other province in confederation would be so arrogant as to claim they speak for all the English.

Come on. Don't say stupid things like that. They don't do that because they are not the only english majority in the whole country. Just stick to the reality and the canadian context.

English is not a culture, it's the language that many of us in confederation share, but our cultures are as distinct as the landscape in each of our provinces.

Wrong. whether it is english, french, russia or swahili, the language is not just a synthax to interprete command lines into a computer system. It's more than that. You fail to understand it because you lack in knowledge of other cultures.

Not asking muche?!? A constitutional veto is asking a heck of a lot, why should Quebec hold the reins on the veto? Absolutely not, either every province has a veto or none do.

ok ok... so give a veto to everyone then so you can stop whinning that Québec gets soooooo much.

You're not looking to be equal in confederation you're looking to be superior.

How the heck the french can be superior than the english just because of a veto in future constitutional modifications? Please, describ me that superiority phenomenon. Can't wait to see that.

You do not speak for the Acadians in the Maritimes, nor do you speak for the French in N Ontario.

Do you have an idea on how we can make them join the group? Even if you manage to create a structure so the french outside Québec can voice among the french of Québec. Does that mean we also have to exclude the english speaking people of Québec? How can we do the perfect system?

Further how can the Quebec be considered equal yet have special rights, ie. a constitutional veto? That makes them by definition not Equal to the other members, it subjects the other members to the whims of one.

No it does not. A special power would be that Québec can get something from the federal that the others can't. It is not the case at all. It only gives a fair balance in the decision of the supreme rules between the french and the english. Nothing else. Once those 2 nations set the rules, the rules are the very same to everyone. No exceptions.

[cybercoma]

You're missing a very important point about what Kelly Lamrock introduced in New Brunswick with regards to French in schools. English children are no longer allowed to attend French immersion. They quite simply do not have the choice. French and English instruction both are thrown at the English kids in grade schools, so now they have to tackle going back and forth between the two languages. I think if parents want their English children in French immersion, that option should be available.

The problem is that NB is trying to turn out more bilingual children that are natively anglophones. You can't work in this province without being bilingual and the French have a decided advantage, considering the abundance of English media all around them, especially the internet. There are many times more bilingual natively francophone people than vice versa here.

In any case, I have a problem with English parents not being allowed to send their child to French immersion.

[Dave_ON]

the french want french schools. Not once in a while immersion french schools. However, I know what you wanted to say. It is true indeed that NB is now giving more importance to help the english kids to learn french. NB figured that Québec and several Europeans are an important market and if they want to be ahead on their neighbors in the Maritimes and New England, a better ability to speak french is a non-neglectible asset. NB was able to get investments that would have gone to Québec otherwise.

Actually, NB has had French schools and French immersion since I was in grade school over 25 years ago. Also in English school French is a mandatory course you must take up until grade 10 and is a requirement to graduate. It had nothing to do with NB playing on Quebec and European markets and everything to do with the fact that we were an officially bilingual province, the only one in fact in all of Canada. It also had a lot to do with the fact that a large portion of province speaks French.

{quote]

Moreless. It's not bad, but the english people of Québec are in a better situation than the french of NB. Despite their percentage is much lower. Compared to other provinces, NB is a respectable example though. I give you that.

None of the Acadians I know see that in me. However I heard indeed that some Acadians feel that way. It's strange.

I don't think the English people in Quebec, which is officially French are in a better way then the French in NB which is both English and French. The French in New Brunswick have street, signs and all official documentation in their mother tongue. Do the English in Quebec have this? No I've driven through Quebec many times, all signs are in French and French only.

Not true. Although the french outside Québec do not live into the same reality, the Québécois can speak for all the french. I'd go further than that, I don't see how we can do otherwise. I said earlier in this thread that the only other way would be to give a veto to the french based on the sum of all individuals speaking french. To do that, we need to seperate all the canadians into two status. A dual citizenship based on the languag eyou speak. IMO, this is very complicated and leads to several problems. What do we do with someone perfectly bilingual having parents on both side of the fence. Also, I don't like the idea that individuals have different status. I think the management of such system is too complex. Beside giving a veto to Québec, I don't see how else we can give the french a veto. If you have a better idea, share it with me.

Come on. Don't say stupid things like that. They don't do that because they are not the only english majority in the whole country. Just stick to the reality and the canadian context.

One simple question and please answer it honestly. Are all Anglophones the same? Is there no difference that separates individuals from the various English provinces. Because they are English they are all the same?

Wrong. whether it is english, french, russia or swahili, the language is not just a synthax to interprete command lines into a computer system. It's more than that. You fail to understand it because you lack in knowledge of other cultures.

No you are wrong, by your assertion that would mean the Canada, US, UK, South Africa, Australlia, New Zealand, Turks and Caicos, and any myriad of other Common Wealth Nations or former Empire colonies are all one culture because we all speak English. Culture is not defined by language, it is but one factor in the great context.

ok ok... so give a veto to everyone then so you can stop whinning that Québec gets soooooo much.

How the heck the french can be superior than the english just because of a veto in future constitutional modifications? Please, describ me that superiority phenomenon. Can't wait to see that.

Giving Quebec a veto that no other province has, gives them far more power over the rest of the country. They could veto absolutely anything the felt like, even if had absolutely nothing to do with Quebec. That is the danger of what you seek. This change doesn't affect Quebec but it also doesn't help Quebec VETO! That's not right, no one province should have that much power over the other provinces. That's not a partnership.

Do you have an idea on how we can make them join the group? Even if you manage to create a structure so the french outside Québec can voice among the french of Québec. Does that mean we also have to exclude the english speaking people of Québec? How can we do the perfect system?

No it does not. A special power would be that Québec can get something from the federal that the others can't. It is not the case at all. It only gives a fair balance in the decision of the supreme rules between the french and the english. Nothing else. Once those 2 nations set the rules, the rules are the very same to everyone. No exceptions.

That's my point, you can no more claim to speak for all the French people in Canada, than I can claim to speak for ToadBrother in BC, Hydraboss in AB, or Bloodyminded in NB. I can speak, for myself only, and Ontario, can speak for Ontario only, which includes Franco-Ontarians.

[Dave_ON]

You're missing a very important point about what Kelly Lamrock introduced in New Brunswick with regards to French in schools. English children are no longer allowed to attend French immersion. They quite simply do not have the choice. French and English instruction both are thrown at the English kids in grade schools, so now they have to tackle going back and forth between the two languages. I think if parents want their English children in French immersion, that option should be available.

The problem is that NB is trying to turn out more bilingual children that are natively anglophones. You can't work in this province without being bilingual and the French have a decided advantage, considering the abundance of English media all around them, especially the internet. There are many times more bilingual natively francophone people than vice versa here.

In any case, I have a problem with English parents not being allowed to send their child to French immersion.

Oh wow really? I hadn't heard that was the case, I haven't lived in NB since 2001, so I guess that has changed just recently. I know a lot of kids were in immersion simply because of the reasons you listed above, it's a huge advantage to be bilingual. The same holds true with government jobs in Ontario as well.

When did that happen? I still can't believe they took away french immersion as an option for anglophones.