English-Canada and French-Canada

[Leafless]

Rue

You wrote:

"Your above comment is a bit misleading. In the Province of Ontario, French is considered an official language in all provincial court proceedings and government services and in fact the provincial civil service and provincial courts must provide services in French if requested. So while most Ontarians are not bilingual, it does have a public policy that in effect guarantees equal services to Francophones."

No, my previous comment is not misleading and Ontario is NOT federally or provincially 'officially bilingual'.

Your comment is misleading.

What you are talking about is the 'French Languages Services Act' (FLSA), passed in 1986 regonizes in it's preamble that French is an honoured language and states the government of Ontario whishes to preserve it (voluntarily) for future generations.

The Act guarantees the right to receive provincial government services in French (where numbers warrant).

To date 201 organizations such as hospitals, children aid socities and nursing homes have been designated.

Designation of these organizations is VOLUNTARY.

I am in disagreement to this Act simply because it was imposed on Ontarians without a referendum and can lead (does lead) to the type of linguistic discrimination and minority control (4.8% French of all Ontario) found in the federal version of 'official bilingualism' in the cfederal public service and needless to say is extremely costly to maintain at the expense of ALL Ontario tax payers.

http://www.ofa.gov.on.ca/english/about-ann...ckgrounder.html

[newbie]

But Trudeau was wrong to say that Quebec is a province as any other. It isn't.

And this is where the problem lies. I live in Canada first; my Province comes next, not the other way around. I applaud Trudeau, and feel he was totally right with his not "giving in" to Quebec with concessions. Your language and culture is protected, you have your own civil code...from the Westerner point of view it is all a little too confusing and frustrating.

[geoffrey]

But Trudeau was wrong to say that Quebec is a province as any other. It isn't.

And this is where the problem lies. I live in Canada first; my Province comes next, not the other way around. I applaud Trudeau, and feel he was totally right with his not "giving in" to Quebec with concessions. Your language and culture is protected, you have your own civil code...from the Westerner point of view it is all a little too confusing and frustrating.

I disagree Newbie, I believe that here in Alberta we are the best people to understand Quebec's concerns other than Quebecois. I know I understand their concerns and support an idea exactly along the lines that August outlined, almost 'sovereign provinces' under a Canadian federation type concept. We too have a unique culture, I don't feel like the majority of Albertans, especially from my parts, share any bit of culture with Ontario, the Maritimes or otherwise. Albertans may have the common language, but we don't have the common culture. I'd say the Quebecois have a very similar culture to metro-Ontario, but a different language. Both result in provinces that are detached from confederation and the policies made in Ottawa.

Similar concepts, but I think it applies equally to both. I am sympathic to Quebec sovereigntists and I am slightly nationalistic in my views of Alberta as well on the same terms.

[Bakunin]

But Trudeau was wrong to say that Quebec is a province as any other. It isn't.

And this is where the problem lies. I live in Canada first; my Province comes next, not the other way around. I applaud Trudeau, and feel he was totally right with his not "giving in" to Quebec with concessions. Your language and culture is protected, you have your own civil code...from the Westerner point of view it is all a little too confusing and frustrating.

It must be hard to understand but their is a strong barrier, i beleive we know more about american culture than canadian culture. Im interested in canadian culture unlike most of quebeckers and the only canadian TV artist i know having a career in canada is Rick mercer and Don cherry... The only show i do listen once a year is this hour as 22 minutes. Other than that i know canadian air farce, the redgreen show,or something like that and the mercer report. Thats all i know about canadian culture, thats all i found wich i beleive is highly above average for a quebecker. The only other link is politics.

Are there anything else about canadian culture i should know ?

It is hard to beleive that two cultures ignorant of each others could form one day a stable central government. How could quebecker care or at least be loyal about something they don't know.

[geoffrey]

But Trudeau was wrong to say that Quebec is a province as any other. It isn't.

And this is where the problem lies. I live in Canada first; my Province comes next, not the other way around. I applaud Trudeau, and feel he was totally right with his not "giving in" to Quebec with concessions. Your language and culture is protected, you have your own civil code...from the Westerner point of view it is all a little too confusing and frustrating.

It must be hard to understand but their is a strong barrier, i beleive we know more about american culture than canadian culture. Im interested in canadian culture unlike most of quebeckers and the only canadian TV artist i know having a career in canada is Rick mercer and Don cherry... The only show i do listen once a year is this hour as 22 minutes. Other than that i know canadian air farce, the redgreen show,or something like that and the mercer report. Thats all i know about canadian culture, thats all i found wich i beleive is highly above average for a quebecker. The only other link is politics.

Are there anything else about canadian culture i should know ?

It is hard to beleive that two cultures ignorant of each others could form one day a stable central government.

My friend, Canada has so many more than 2 cultures, hence why in my opinion we can't all have the social programs and policies. Let the provinces run their own shows, let Canada be for the things that we can mutually benefit from sharing, like the military, embassies and things like that. Health care, education, social policy, stuff like that, should all be decided that the provincial levels.

[Leafless]

Bakunin

You wrote:

"It must be hard to understand but their is a strong barrier, i beleive we know more about american culture than canadian culture. Im interested in canadian culture unlike most of quebeckers and the only canadian TV artist i know having a career in canada is Rick mercer and Don cherry... The only show i do listen once a year is this hour as 22 minutes. Other than that i know canadian air farce, the redgreen show,or something like that and the mercer report. Thats all i know about canadian culture, thats all i found wich i beleive is highly above average for a quebecker. The only other link is politics.

Are there anything else about canadian culture i should know ?

It is hard to beleive that two cultures ignorant of each others could form one day a stable central government. How could quebecker care or at least be loyal about something they don't know."

There is very little difference in modern Canadian culture as in comparison to U.S. culture.

I really get a kick out of all this cultural B.S. stemming basically ( no one else really cares) from Quebec when the only real difference in Quebec culture compared to the ROC and the U.S. is the French languge.

And even at that I highly suspect the only reason for Quebec to pursue it's usage is to use the French language under the guise of culture as a political tool that is advantageous to Quebec politics to pursue power but at the huge expense of national unity and the main cause of a dysfunctional federal government.

I am sure Trudeau and his Liberals must have recognized this fact and therefore was all along part of the Quebec game political game plan.

This puts enormous political pressure on any other non-Liberal PM to adhere to this Liberal created constitutional effort or be seen as a direct threat to national unity if any non-Liberal PM whishes to undo Liberal created constitutional package.

In effect you can basically say the emphasis regarding this insincere Trudeau inspired cultural trickery has not possibly allowed Canada to progress in the fashion of a modern democratic country and instead reduced Canada in many areas with problems similar to that of a third world country.

[August1991]

But Trudeau was wrong to say that Quebec is a province as any other. It isn't.

And this is where the problem lies. I live in Canada first; my Province comes next, not the other way around. I applaud Trudeau, and feel he was totally right with his not "giving in" to Quebec with concessions. Your language and culture is protected, you have your own civil code...from the Westerner point of view it is all a little too confusing and frustrating.

IME, the only part of Canada where people do that is Ontario. It's prosaic but true to say: Canada is a country of regions and Canada works best when Canadians are not forced to choose between their region and Canada.

[August1991]

It is hard to beleive that two cultures ignorant of each others could form one day a stable central government.

My friend, Canada has so many more than 2 cultures, hence why in my opinion we can't all have the social programs and policies. Let the provinces run their own shows, let Canada be for the things that we can mutually benefit from sharing, like the military, embassies and things like that. Health care, education, social policy, stuff like that, should all be decided that the provincial levels.

Canada is a convenience to some and a heartfelt identifier to others. When speaking of Canada, a wise federal politician uses platitudes, sticks to areas within federal jurisdiction or follows a sharp mind about the logical consequence of any statement.

I wouldn't go so far as saying that the term "Canada" is kitsch (like the term "Europe", devoid of meaning). But it's also true that different Canadians interpret the word "Canada" differently.

Geoffrey, I know that Canada has more than 2 "cultures" but as a first approximation, the language divide is a doozy. So, I tend to agree with Bakunin's comment that it's hard to believe the 2 cultures could ever form a stable central government.

In the case of Canada, I think it works ultimately because of the profound attachment some Quebecers have to Canada. They just don't want to give up on the thing. This is fortunate for English-Canadians because it makes the country viable.

If I can make a comparison to North America, Americans should be thankful that they share a continent with such a country as Canada for a neighbour. We cause Americans no grief or trouble. The alternative could be far, far worse. In a similar sense, English-Canadians should be thankful to share a country with a minority such as French-Canadians.

----

With all of that said, I agree Geoffrey that Canada is a federal state because each province is different and it would be impossible (or insane) to have the same education curricula, for example, everywhere. Local issues should be decided locally. But that doesn't forbid letting Quebec have a "special status". Call it what you will - asymmetrical federalism or whatever. For better or worse, it exists now in the case of state pensions and immigration policy.

[Leafless]

August1991

You wrote:

"If I can make a comparison to North America, Americans should be thankful that they share a continent with such a country as Canada for a neighbour. We cause Americans no grief or trouble. The alternative could be far, far worse. In a similar sense, English-Canadians should be thankful to share a country with a minority such as French-Canadians."

I really don't know how you can make such a comparison between super power U.S. and constitutional boat rocker 'have not Quebec.'

For starters ANY country in the world in Canada's position would be on their hands and knees kissing the dirt to be America's neighbours, so don't give us the crappola we are something special because we don't cause the U.S. serious problems.

Do you really want to know why Canada has become so regionalized.

Simply because provinces have become so sick and tired of seeing the feds kiss Quebec's butt and being treated not in the same manner that now everyone wants a piece of the action and are demanding federal attention.

I don't especially want share my country with problamatic Quebec but unfortunately to date have no choice.

[newbie]

In a similar sense, English-Canadians should be thankful to share a country with a minority such as French-Canadians.

Finally something we can agree on. While I'm not crazy for hypenated Canadians I do share the sentiment. I am grateful for Quebec and its culture, but tend to get too hung up in the politics of it all.

[August1991]

I really don't know how you can make such a comparison between super power U.S. and constitutional boat rocker 'have not Quebec.'

For starters ANY country in the world in Canada's position would be on their hands and knees kissing the dirt to be America's neighbours, so don't give us the crappola we are something special because we don't cause the U.S. serious problems.

Leafless, instead of looking at it from your perspective, look at the relationship from the US perspective. Canada could be a northern Cuba. Then, Americans would have to worry about a long, long border and whacky shenanigans on the other side. That was (is) precisely the situation of Russia and China.

When I saw that crazy video interview with Anne Coulter talking about Canada, I thought the journalist should have just said Canadians make great neighbours. Because we do. And I see no harm in reminding Americans of that.

Do you really want to know why Canada has become so regionalized.

Simply because provinces have become so sick and tired of seeing the feds kiss Quebec's butt and being treated not in the same manner that now everyone wants a piece of the action and are demanding federal attention.

I don't especially want share my country with problamatic Quebec but unfortunately to date have no choice.

Look what's happening in Iraq right now. A minority of Sunnites (20% of the population, smaller than French in Canada) is making life hell for everyone else because they refuse to share power. Or how about Sri Lanka. Or Ireland. Or South Africa. It's very easy for a minority to make life hell for the majority.

Over time, French Canadians have accepted alot of nonsense from English Canadians and yet they have responded in a civil manner. From an English-Canadian perspective, you should be thankful. The alternative could far, far worse.

Leafless, you may view Quebec as "problematic" the same way Anne Coulter views Canada as "uncooperative". I'm saying both relationships could be far worse.

[geoffrey]

With all of that said, I agree Geoffrey that Canada is a federal state because each province is different and it would be impossible (or insane) to have the same education curricula, for example, everywhere. Local issues should be decided locally. But that doesn't forbid letting Quebec have a "special status". Call it what you will - asymmetrical federalism or whatever. For better or worse, it exists now in the case of state pensions and immigration policy.

I'm just asking for what Quebec gets for my province. I have no issue with Quebec having their own pensions, taxation, language laws, whatever. I support it completely, I would also support an independant Quebec if it so happened to come to that. But I want in on this deal too, Alberta should make it own pension plans, set their own taxation and social policies, such as same-sex marriage, which is extremely unpopular in this province.

I've travelled Canada coast-to-coast many times, and unlike the Tim Hortons commericals would tell you, I see more difference and disparity than commonality between provinces. I feel more at home in Texas or Colorado than I ever would in Quebec or heaven forbid Newfoundland.

[Leafless]

August1991

You wrote:

"Leafless, instead of looking at it from your perspective, look at the relationship from the US perspective. Canada could be a northern Cuba. Then, Americans would have to worry about a long, long border and whacky shenanigans on the other side. That was (is) precisely the situation of Russia and China."

The major difference is Canada and the U.S. originated from the same people.

There is very little difference between Canada and the U.S. up until recently with Canada's emphasis on foreign immigration created unsettling conditons concering anti Americanism.

I think it is very unwise to allow immigration into Canada from countries unfriendly or hostile towards the U.S. and if they are hostile or unfriendly towards the U.S. I can't imagine why they would want to immigrate to a country so close to the U.S. with mostly the same cultural and for the most part political ideolgies as the U.S.

Combine this with an anti-American Quebec and you have problems.

Do you actually believe any other country in the world in the place of Canada since the countries creation would actually give the U.S. any problems?

You also wrote:

"Look what's happening in Iraq right now. A minority of Sunnites (20% of the population, smaller than French in Canada) is making life hell for everyone else because they refuse to share power. Or how about Sri Lanka. Or Ireland. Or South Africa. It's very easy for a minority to make life hell for the majority."

Well depending of the issue's relating to that specific problem with minority uprising, that's life.

Don't forget August the minorities you speak of are also creating hell for themselves and are also in the positon to cool it if they wish. No one has to tolerate blackmail.

You also wrote:

"Over time, French Canadians have accepted alot of nonsense from English Canadians and yet they have responded in a civil manner. From an English-Canadian perspective, you should be thankful. The alternative could far, far worse."

Maybe you can address or explain that issue in a more detailed manner as I am not certain what your getting at.

[geoffrey]

Leafless, it seems how you see Quebec is how I see Ontario or the Maritimes, a big burden on our prosperity. That's why I think we need to just split this ship up a bit, operate together on mutual issues like a Canadian military or hockey/olympic teams and just stop pretending that the areas are similar enough for everyone to get along.

Everyone is stepping on everyone else's toes.

[Leafless]

geoffrey

You wrote:

"It seems how you see Quebec is how I see Ontario or the Maritimes, a big burden on our prosperity. That's why I think we need to just split this ship up a bit, operate together on mutual issues like a Canadian military or hockey/olympic teams and just stop pretending that the areas are similar enough for everyone to get along.

Everyone is stepping on everyone else's toes."

You can view the issue as you wish.

All I'm saying is Quebec is the root cause of constitutional dissention leading to the problems we have today and was never resolved because of weak federal leadership.

There is no way I want to see federalism diluted and think at the present time to many federal powers have already been given away in essence destroying federalism and is the main cause for provincial animosity.

Your view concerning burdens and prosperity is ludicrous and has nothing to do with the root problem.

All countries are faced pretty much the same problem with less productive parts than others but I have reservations that the country cannot afford the cadillac equalization system we now employ.

[geoffrey]

I agree, the equalisation system should be completely removed, forcing weaker provinces to actually institute some economically sound policy to feed their people instead of further running economies into the ground on Alberta and Ontario's money.

But how can you advocate removing equalisation, the tool of the federalist, and still want a strong federal system? Allocate more provincial powers to Ottawa? That won't fly out here, actually, it just won't happen.

August made a good point, that the right balance is when Canadians don't have to choose between their province and their country. And that can be done in a much less centralised state. It seems like Ontario folks fear decentralisation and their loss of control over the rest of us.

[Leafless]

geoffrey

You wrote:

"But how can you advocate removing equalisation, the tool of the federalist, and still want a strong federal system? Allocate more provincial powers to Ottawa? That won't fly out here, actually, it just won't happen."

I am not necessarily advocating the removal of equalization but the federal government should reserve the right as to direct or allocate into what areas these financial resources both equalization and transfer payments are to be spent.

Obviously a new formula should be created to reduce the total tax burden relating to the true cost of living of Canadians in different provinces that would reflect the total amount of dollars left available for both equalization and transfer payments.

You also wrote:

"August made a good point, that the right balance is when Canadians don't have to choose between their province and their country. And that can be done in a much less centralised state. "

I don't even know what that is suppose to mean.

This is like proposing eliminating Canada's ten provinces and creating ten new countries.