USA vs Canada

[mcqueen625]

What did lawyers do for the English in Quebec or what did the U.N. do for the English in Quebec or what did the Liberals do for the English in Quebec.

This is just sad, while I agree that the language laws in Quebec were ludicrous the fact of the matter is they don't contravene the charter. Your problem is with the federal government for not cracking down on Quebec on this matter, but wait doesn’t you want a decentralization of power? It’s all so confusing when you’re trying to keep track of a 10 year olds belief system.

What did lawyers or the Liberals do concerning the linguistic crippling of English workers applying for federal jobs in Ontario an English province?

There is nothing wrong with wanting BI LINGUIAL workers for government jobs, French only speaking Canadians have no advantage over English only speaking Canadians. Either way the requirement of semi bilingualism (since the vast majority of government employees have poor French skills at best in my experience) is hardly significantly onerous.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You need to come to the only Officially Bilingual province in Canada, NB where oftentimes when an English speaking person calls a government office the sometimes have to ask to have someone who can speak English put on the phone. These froncophones got their jobs because they were supposedly "Fluently Bilingual," but that is often not the case.

Even though these supposed bilingual people got their jobs because of their ability to speak French fluently, it now seems to be the case that fluency in English is not part of the language requirement. NOw the Acadian Society is demanding that these French speaking civil servants be afforded the right to work exclusively in the French language. The President of the Acadian Society stated that these employees are forced to work in English because some of their fellow employees speak English and so do most of the clients, who require service.

[Yaro]

No, Yaro, the only province that is officially bilingual is New Brunswick. Ontario is not and will not be so long as Quebec outlaws the English language.

Where is the statute that declares English as Ontario's official language, because in absence of that the charter applies. In fact there are some opinions that suggest that regardless s. 16 could reasonably be interpreted as to apply.

[Guest eureka]

The Charter does not apply and Ontario is not officially bilingual. There is no requirement for Ontario to do anything in any language. The language of Ontario is whatever its government says it is.

Only federal services are required to be bilingual.

That is the difference in that Quebec makes the same claim (and the Courts have upheld the claim). But it is not so since the history of Quebec is one of two languages side by side: and of a province that was once declared to be officially English.

[Yaro]

The Charter does not apply and Ontario is not officially bilingual. There is no requirement for Ontario to do anything in any language. The language of Ontario is whatever its government says it is.

Only federal services are required to be bilingual.

A provincial statute can override the charter in the matter, but yes in absence of such a statute the Charter does apply. This is why Manitoba tried to introduce English as its official language (but failed the test of Manitoba's own charter). The language in Ontario is what the provincial government says it is, it just hasn't said what it is and so it defaults. There is also some debate about whether the term “the government of Canada” only covers the federal government.

That is the difference in that Quebec makes the same claim (and the Courts have upheld the claim). But it is not so since the history of Quebec is one of two languages side by side: and of a province that was once declared to be officially English.

No, its not the same at all, the Canadian charter does not cover Quebec, the Quebec charter covers Quebec. It is the Quebec Charter which was tested by bill 101 not the Canadian charter and that is why it passed the test.

[River_God]

Suppose someone violates your "constitutional rights" in Canada, who do you call ?

Lawyer, same as in the US. There's very little difference in the process really.

What if you can't afford a lawyer?

Should the court system also deal with Health Care?

Theoretically, sick people will pay big money to pay for private health care because they can be sued for not being duly diligent to prevent spreading contagious diseases.

Theoretically Children, who can't afford health care, won't become a burden on society (for not growing up healthy) if we eliminate all public welfare and social programs.

I think public heath care is a great idea. Nobody really has the heart to let their fellow citizens suffer with medical treatment. At the same time, most people don't have the time to do health related charity work themselves. Empowering the government to take care of health care is probably the best solution.

[Guest eureka]

A Provincial statute can override the Charter with respect to issues of Rights. However, language is held not to be such an issue. Manitoba was ordered to translate its Provincial statutes and do some other things (bilingual traffic tickets) because it is obligated to do so by the Constitution not the Charter.

The Canadian Charter covers all provinces and overrides Provincial Charters if there is a conflict. The Charter was part of the agreement with the Provinces that allowed the Constitution to be patriated.

It was the Canadian Charter that was tested through challenges to Bill 101 not the Quebec Charter; and it is the Canadian Charter that failed the test of protection. In the few areas that it did fault the Provincial Act, the Notwithstanding Clause has been used to permit the continuance of the abrogation of citizen's rights.

Many have said it was a mistake and that the Quebec Charter should have been used in the challenges since there would be no Notwithstanding Clause to defy the Courts.

The challenge that I was involved with (that never came to trial) was based on Constitutional and legal issues not the Charter. Had it not been prevented from continuing, there would likely be no Bill 101 today. But the political pressure to not upset Quebec was too great - from all the governments of Canada.

[Murray B.]

Suppose someone violates your "constitutional rights" in Canada, who do you call ?

The Canadian constitution is a two pager and there is not much there. If the violation involves property then there is no such right at all. It was eliminated when they did the 'new' constitution.

If the right is enumerated in the constitution then the identity of the "someone" becomes important. If the violation is by any level of government then forget it unless you are part of some sort of group that can finance a long court case. Canadian law was designed to prevent colonists from getting uppity. The fact that the country is now a colony of Ottawa instead of Britain changes nothing as far as individual citizens are concerned.

Other than that, you can call a lawyer and pay thousands of dollars to right the wrong. If you win then you get the money back and then some. If you lose however you will get to pay all the court costs.

In real tersm rights in Canada are only for the upper class.

[Guest eureka]

Nothing was eliminated when the "new" Constitution (there isn't one) was done. Property Rights are protectd by the Consitution.

How would you phrase any so-called protection of property rights? And do you have any idea of what harm to other Rights could be caused by any actual words in the Charter?

[Murray B.]

Nothing was eliminated when the "new" Constitution (there isn't one) was done. Property Rights are protectd by the Consitution.

Thank goodness, then the whole P.E.T. patriation thing was just a bad dream? The B.N.A. act must still be in force. That is good.

How about metrication? I dreamed this too. Are we still using the King's measure or did we go to some wacko system based on ten fingers?

How about the Union Jack, the Queen appointing the Governor General, support for the armed forces, etcetera? Are all this traditions still in place?

Thank goodness, you don't want to know what I was dreaming.

God save the Queen!

[Black Dog]

How about metrication? I dreamed this too. Are we still using the King's measure or did we go to some wacko system based on ten fingers?

You had me right up to this bit. "My car gets forty rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes it!"

Geez. I haven't heard an anti-metric rant since I was in short pants.

How about the Union Jack, the Queen appointing the Governor General, support for the armed forces, etcetera? Are all this traditions still in place?

Well, the adoption of the Maple Leaf preceded patriation by a good 20 years. And the Queen still appoints the GG based on the PM's advice, as it has always been.

[Black Dog]

Well, let the new era of Canada/U.S. harmony begin.

Errr...not so much.

David Wilkins, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, said his government opposes Harper's proposed plan to deploy military icebreakers in the Arctic to detect interlopers and assert Canadian sovereignty over those waters.

"There's no reason to create a problem that doesn't exist," Wilkins said as he took part in a forum at the University of Western Ontario in London.

"We don't recognize Canada's claims to those waters... Most other countries do not recognize their claim."

[tml12]

Well, let the new era of Canada/U.S. harmony begin.

Errr...not so much.

David Wilkins, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, said his government opposes Harper's proposed plan to deploy military icebreakers in the Arctic to detect interlopers and assert Canadian sovereignty over those waters.

"There's no reason to create a problem that doesn't exist," Wilkins said as he took part in a forum at the University of Western Ontario in London.

"We don't recognize Canada's claims to those waters... Most other countries do not recognize their claim."

Typical of the left, you seem to think Harper would take the same path the openly anti-American Liberal Party did and tell the Americans to screw off. Instead, I am sure he will foster an open debate.

[BubberMiley]

How come only Liberals are anti-American when they stand up to the U.S.? Or is Harper anti-American now too?

[tml12]

How come only Liberals are anti-American when they stand up to the U.S.? Or is Harper anti-American now too?

Harper will foster debate while his MPs respect the trading partnership.

The Liberal rely on rhetoric and a war of words.

[YankAbroad]

I know this is a touchy subject, but how exactly would Canada enforce an effort to dominate the Arctic?

The Russians and Danes both militarily outmuscle the Canadian army, meaning Canada would require US help regardless. And it's unlikely the US will assist Canada against those countries without some form of concession on this issue.

[BubberMiley]

Ah, Harper is "fostering debate" while the Libs are engaging in a "war of words." It's clear to me now.

Maybe that's how we need to defend the Arctic: a war of words. I think that's the only way we'll ever outgun them.

[tml12]

Ah, Harper is "fostering debate" while the Libs are engaging in a "war of words." It's clear to me now.

Maybe that's how we need to defend the Arctic: a war of words. I think that's the only way we'll ever outgun them.

Harper said he would protect Canadian sovereignty...what was he going to do...say, "Mr. Wilkins, I am your humble servant baby?"

Martin dithered and rambled and Carolyn Parrish stepped on dolls and called the Americans bastards...Chretien cursed at the Americans and told them off, etc...

I mean, if Harper said: "I am protecting Canadian sovereignty, f**k off Wilkins, then I'd be a bit disappointed now."

[BubberMiley]

Martin dithered and rambled and Carolyn Parrish stepped on dolls and called the Americans bastards...Chretien cursed at the Americans and told them off, etc...

Carolyn Parrish was kicked out of the party. When did Chretien curse and tell them off?

[tml12]

Martin dithered and rambled and Carolyn Parrish stepped on dolls and called the Americans bastards...Chretien cursed at the Americans and told them off, etc...

Carolyn Parrish was kicked out of the party. When did Chretien curse and tell them off?

Oh give me a break Bubber,

Chretien was one of the most anti-American PM there ever was. He used to brag about how he would "stand up" to the Americans...his chief of staff used to make anti-American comments all the time...and in general he was not very pro-American.

Parrish should have been kicked out LONG before she was.

[BubberMiley]

He used to brag about how he would "stand up" to the Americans

As opposed to Harper today who was...uh, bragging how he would "stand up" to the Americans.

Again, it's not being anti-American to make your differences known. Parrish was fired after the doll incident. Granted, she should have resigned or been fired after the "bloody Americans" comment, but ultimately it was just an off-the-record comment made at the spur of the moment. I don't think conservatives making such a big deal out of it were worried they were hurting our two countries' relationship when they made sure everybody from here to FoxNews headquarters was aware of what she said.

[tml12]

He used to brag about how he would "stand up" to the Americans

As opposed to Harper today who was...uh, bragging how he would "stand up" to the Americans.

Again, it's not being anti-American to make your differences known. Parrish was fired after the doll incident. Granted, she should have resigned or been fired after the "bloody Americans" comment, but ultimately it was just an off-the-record comment made at the spur of the moment. I don't think conservatives making such a big deal out of it were worried they were hurting our two countries' relationship when they made sure everybody from here to FoxNews headquarters was aware of what she said.

Ah Harper said he would stand up for Canadian sovereignty.

Can you honestly compare that to this: http://www.canadafreepress.com/2003/weinreb041403.htm

Or better yet, this: http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9707/09/nato.chretien/

Buying votes? Thank God Chretien was such a clean, guilt and scandal-free PM...