Conseil Scolaire du District Centre Sud Ouest

[Argus]

Going back to a debate that I thought ended a few decades ago, bilingualism merely means that French speaking people should receive federal government services in French. That's it.

Uhm, no, that is not it. That concept has very little to do with why every single executive level employee of the public service, few, if any of whom ever have contact with the public, must be completely fluent in both languages. It has nothing to do with why two thirds of all public service jobs in Ottawa require bilingualism, even though few ever have contact with the public.

It's about politics, not about giving good service to citizens.

[iamcanadian2]

French was always intended to be an optional language in Canada.

The "Where Numbers Warrant" was supposed to take care of these problems. If there is a community with 100% of the population being bilingual English / French then that community does NOT warrant any government services in French becauase English will do fine.

It is not the Governments Job or in Societies Interest to advance French over English as a language. The use of a language is a personal preference and not a right.

We are being had.

The only purposes that these systemic pervesions serve in to monopolise Government Jobs and Government Spending in favour of Quebec and French Canadians. IT HAS NO OTHER purpose that can be seen as legitimate.

[Leafless]

iamcanadian2

You wrote- " If there is a community with 100% of the population being bilingual English/French then that community does not warrant any government services in French because English will do fine."

I am not to certain about that as the criteria used to obtain those numbers works on the official language of the user and the users mother tongue and percentage of population.

This means that if 100% French speakers declared their official language as English but their mother tongue is French they would go down in the books as French is the way I understand it.

[August1991]

Going back to a debate that I thought ended a few decades ago, bilingualism merely means that French speaking people should receive federal government services in French. That's it.

Uhm, no, that is not it. That concept has very little to do with why every single executive level employee of the public service, few, if any of whom ever have contact with the public, must be completely fluent in both languages. It has nothing to do with why two thirds of all public service jobs in Ottawa require bilingualism, even though few ever have contact with the public.

It's about politics, not about giving good service to citizens.

Call it politics if you will but French-speaking people work in the federal civil service and deserve to be able to work in French too.

I'll repeat myself. If Canada is to remain a united federation, then the federal government must function more or less in both English and French. I happen to think that if the federal government concentrated on the things strictly in its jurisdiction, then this would be less of a problem.

[Leafless]

August

You wrote- " I'll repeat myself if Canada is to remain a united federation, then the federal government must function more or less in both English and French."

What makes you think Canada is a united federation?

We are not united in loyalites to Canada or united in political convictions.

Quebec has been playing the cultural blackmail game for 50 years and is still not satisfied.

You can repeat yoursef all you want as I think the government should get out of the language game (it never had any buisness in initially) entirely and leave it up to Canadians if they want to continue to be culturally blackmailed by a province who only feels at home if it is pulling the political strings to remain culturally aloof from the rest of Canada all at tax payers expense IN and OUT of Quebec.

[Riverwind]

I'll repeat myself. If Canada is to remain a united federation, then the federal government must function more or less in both English and French. I happen to think that if the federal government concentrated on the things strictly in its jurisdiction, then this would be less of a problem.

The problem with the french requirement in the civil service is they have set the standard unreasonably high - many people who speak French well enough to participate in a bilingual workspace are excluded by language tests designed to ensure only native French speakers can pass. Fix this problem and a lot of complaints regarding the bilingual requirement will also go away.

[Bakunin]

I have to agree with august, if the federal government would stop governing like a provincial government, then there would be alot less cultural trouble. I think Harper understood that.

Give me the name of one province fighting harder and with more vigor than Quebec to get rid of the federal centralisation ?

However, it is the ONLY blamed province for the problem caused by that centralisation !

Whatever we do, we are always the one blamed, i rarely see ppl on this forum trying to understand quebeckers, all i see is lots of prejudices and anger.

[Argus]

It's about politics, not about giving good service to citizens.

Call it politics if you will but French-speaking people work in the federal civil service and deserve to be able to work in French too.

No, actually, they do not.

Bilingualism is used as a screening tool for these jobs. It excludes 95% of Anglos from even applying. Now if the job actually functionally requires bilingualism, well, I have no problem with that. Most jobs don't. They are termed bilingual strictly for political reasons. That means that most of those Francophones who are in those jobs owe their employment almost ENTIRELY to the language requirement. Were it not for their bilingualism, most would never have made it through the door. So to get a job solely because of your language skills and then demand that nobody make you use them is utterly absurd. If I had a small business and hired someone specifically for their bilingualism and that person then tried to tell me he had a right to only be spoken with by me in French I'd give him the back of my hand and my boot up his arse on his way out the door. The gall of these people (no pun intended) is simply amazing sometimes. And I don't think you'd find the idea among Anglos. I don't see a bilingual Anglo being hired specifically for a bilingual job then turning around and demanding all his internal correspondance and orders be in the language of his choice.

Francophones, by the nature of our culture, have a far greater chance at such jobs. Bilingualism requirements give them a disproportionate opportunity. And now that all senior positions require the highest rate of bilingualism the numbers of Quebecers at the highest levels of the civil service are climbing rapidly. Within a decade - two at most, virtually every senior executive and manager in the public service will be a Quebecer, or a Francophone, or both.

I have a problem with that.

[Leafless]

Bakunin

You wrote- " Give me the name of one province fighting harder and with more vigor than Quebec to get rid of federal centralisation."

Yes and I wonder why?

[Argus]

I'll repeat myself. If Canada is to remain a united federation, then the federal government must function more or less in both English and French. I happen to think that if the federal government concentrated on the things strictly in its jurisdiction, then this would be less of a problem.

The problem with the french requirement in the civil service is they have set the standard unreasonably high - many people who speak French well enough to participate in a bilingual workspace are excluded by language tests designed to ensure only native French speakers can pass. Fix this problem and a lot of complaints regarding the bilingual requirement will also go away.

Not only are the number of positions which are termed bilingual increasing but the fluency demands are growing harder and harder. Your basic bilingualism used to be something along the lines of AAB, which meant you had to have some knowledge of the other language in reading and writing, and good conversational, ie, oral skills. I don't think there really are an "A" levels around any more. Basic bilingualism is now BBB (reading, writing and oral levels), and rising. More and more are now requiring at least one "C" level (very high fluency). I saw an admin assistant job the other day with a "P" rating (perfect bilingualism). All senior jobs are now C/C/C.

[Bakunin]

Bakunin

You wrote- " Give me the name of one province fighting harder and with more vigor than Quebec to get rid of federal centralisation."

Yes and I wonder why?

Then quit whinning all the time about quebeckers like a racist would do...

No other province have as much willing to get rid of that ineffective and disproportionate federal government. No other province fight with as much vigor against the trudeauist uthopia.

[geoffrey]

Alberta arguably fights harder for less centralisation, Quebec seems ok with centralisation if they get a massive share of the cash out of it. Though Alberta has the moola to not have to worry about it too much. Another NEP type program and there will be two unity crisises in this country.

[August1991]

Going back to a debate that I thought ended a few decades ago, bilingualism merely means that French speaking people should receive federal government services in French. That's it.

Uhm, no, that is not it. That concept has very little to do with why every single executive level employee of the public service, few, if any of whom ever have contact with the public, must be completely fluent in both languages. It has nothing to do with why two thirds of all public service jobs in Ottawa require bilingualism, even though few ever have contact with the public.

It's about politics, not about giving good service to citizens.

I'll pick this post Argus, although you have made the same point elsewhere, often in greater detail.

I gave some thought to this and I've come to the conclusion, Argus, that what really bothers you is the arbitrary nature of government bureaucracy. Government works in strange ways. What seems good on paper is often terrible in practice. The final result is rarely what was intended. Governments are constantly in the process of restructuring. Incompetents get promoted, good people get shafted. This is true in such unilingual bureaucracies as Washington, London or Tokyo. Argus, you are blaming francophones for something that is intrinsic to government bureaucracy. No doubt, some francophone civil servant is sitting at home in Hull right now, blaming anglophones for the rigged job competition.

Argus, picking on a minority to justify a broader grievance is hardly an original argument.

[August1991]

No other province have as much willing to get rid of that ineffective and disproportionate federal government. No other province fight with as much vigor against the trudeauist uthopia.

Bakunin, that would be easier to believe if Quebecers hadn't voted massively for Trudeau in every federal election in which he ran.

[Bakunin]

No other province have as much willing to get rid of that ineffective and disproportionate federal government. No other province fight with as much vigor against the trudeauist uthopia.

Bakunin, that would be easier to believe if Quebecers hadn't voted massively for Trudeau in every federal election in which he ran.

He won by default because the other party where unknown to quebeckers before the constitutional crisis and murloney's "beau risque" wich lead to one of the worst score ever for the liberal.

[Leafless]

Bakunin

You wrote- " Then quit whining all the time like a racist would do... No other province have has much willing to get rid of that ineffective and disproportionate federal government. No other province fight with much vigor against the trudeauist uthopia."

Well then, it looks like Quebec is again riding down the one way street all along supporting Trudeau utopia and now demanding more federal decentralization that could further set up the Quebec separatist reality, legally.

The two work hand in hand while destroying the concept of federalism.

Iam total against federal decentralization as this could lead to massive problems mainly the destruction of federalism and the potential of failed provincial policies which could further destabilize the country or bankrupt it, as well as padding the separation factor.

[iamcanadian2]

It excludes 95% of Anglos from even applying. Now if the job actually functionally requires bilingualism, well, I have no problem with that. Most jobs don't. They are termed bilingual strictly for political reasons. That means that most of those Francophones who are in those jobs owe their employment almost ENTIRELY to the language requirement. Were it not for their bilingualism, most would never have made it through the door. So to get a job solely because of your language skills and then demand that nobody make you use them is utterly absurd.

Now this 95% rule is responsible for the creation and maintaing of corrupt school systems like Conseilo Scolaire Du District Centre Sud Ouest.

The bureaucrats in charge of public spending when they receive complaints of this school board pilfering close to a Million Dollars from the Province of Ontario did not even bat an eye, did nothing about it, and in fact will cover everything up for their compatriates that speak French too, just like them.

It's like a freking French Speakers club when is comes to pilfering from the taxpayers money.

This is also responsible for Quebec getting away with things like excluding Ontario construction workers from responding to Public Works contracts in Quebec, but at the same time, Ontario Bureaucrats let Quebec companies participate in public tenders in Ontario.

This is all because the Civil Service generally in all Local, Provincial and Federal are disproportionately French speaking Canadians and they keep the public jobs and public money circulating among their kind.

There should be madatory Ratio thaat fixes all government jobs to be split so that NO MORE than 20% of the public jobs should go to French Speaking Canadians, bilingual or otherwise. This is the ration of French speakers and the rest who are Non-French Canadians.

We probably have 80% of the public jobs being carved up between 20% of the population. This is unfair. Everyone should have a RIGHT to the chance for public employment.

The RIGHT to a FAIR CHANCE for public employment for all Canadians is MORE IMPORTANT than the FRIVOLOUS right to CHOOSE to speak French instead of using the English they know as well.

[Leafless]

Bakunun

You wrote- " Then quit whining all the time about quebecers like a racist would do."

You have that one backwards!

It was not I who voted a Quebec separatist party into power to sit in parliament supporting RACIST Bill-101 or the French Charter among a host of other un-Canadian undemocratic endeavours.

Iam complaining as a loyal Canadian to this country and it's head of state.

[Greg]

Your wife may claim a French lingustic right squarely between her legs based on the only thing a French Linguist may be better at doing with their tounges than any other tounges used everywhre in Canada.

This statement takes the cake as one of the most offensive things I've read in these forums. Congrats Iamcanadian2, you're taking a one month holiday from these forums.

[seabee]

In Québec, the law that made French the official language was presented by then premier Robert Bourassa, leader of the Québec liberal party, in 1974, and is known as law 22.

It was flawed in that it contained many legal ambiguities.

A few years later, when the Parti Québécois was first elected, it clarified these ambiguities by law 101; if anything, it made it less strict and introduced several legal loopholes.

No language, including English, is or was banned in either law 22 and law 101.

In Québec, English is a mandatory course in all schools in the French school system, from grade 3 to 11.

[geoffrey]

There are very few French jobs in the civil service, less than English only jobs. If French people have to bother learning English, it seems that English civil servants are just complaining of some lack of interes in learning French. Which is fine, but state it like it is. It's not a problem with bilingualism in this case, it's a problem with people unwilling to diversify their skills to a sufficent level.

Are there jobs in English Canada that shouldn't require two languages? Probably.

Are there jobs in French Canada that shouldn't require two languages? Probably.

So it's tough for the anti-French-in-public-service side to make this argument without being hypocritical. Are you ok with having no English in Quebec, if you are so adament on having no French in the rest of Canada? Or is English to be regarded as the superior language?

Why does Westjet require all their booking agents to be bilingual? They are a private company, based in Calgary, that deals mostly with Western clients. They have no legislation saying they must hire Francophones. But they do, and pay them higher wages for their education, because there is enough demand for it. And if there is enough demand for French service in a Calgary based airline to make it actually a profitable decision to hire bilingualists, then absolutely there is enough demand for French service in government agencies.

[Leafless]

seabee

You wrote- " No language, including English' is or was banned in either law 22 and law 101."

The French Charter is full of draconian restrictions and conditions that emulate the oppresive tactics of Nazi Germany.

Just the fact Quebec 'officialized' it's French languaguage is laughable considering the 'de facto ' majority language of commerce in Canada is English.

I would suggest all majority English language provinces 'officalize' their English language like Quebec in non-official bilingual provinces excluding the only offical bilingual province in Canada New Brunswick.

This would be done in order to protect English jobs and the potential ruin or actual ruin of English careers by the onslaught of the French concerning official bilingual federal employment and non- official provincial bilingualism propagated primarily by the federal government and power hungry federal supporting Liberal provincial premiers and federal Liberal supporting municiple city mayors.

Democracy has been badly tarnished in Canada and has been replaced by corrupt politics.

[Argus]

I gave some thought to this and I've come to the conclusion, Argus, that what really bothers you is the arbitrary nature of government bureaucracy. Government works in strange ways. What seems good on paper is often terrible in practice. The final result is rarely what was intended. Governments are constantly in the process of restructuring. Incompetents get promoted, good people get shafted. This is true in such unilingual bureaucracies as Washington, London or Tokyo. Argus, you are blaming francophones for something that is intrinsic to government bureaucracy. No doubt, some francophone civil servant is sitting at home in Hull right now, blaming anglophones for the rigged job competition.

Argus, picking on a minority to justify a broader grievance is hardly an original argument.

Government incompetence is a given. In fact, incompetence in any large organization is a given, especially one which is unionized.

However, the people responsible for bilingualism, for creating it, expanding it and maintaining it, are all Francophones. It has long been known, and widely so, the rate of bilingualism among Francophones was far, far higher than among any other group. It was most certainly known at every step of the way that bringing in bilingual requirements and expanding them would inevitably lead to more Francophones being hired and promoted, and fewer Anglophones. I won't say this program was specifically designed for that purpose, but I will say that if the reverse were true this program would never have been implimented.

Now you can say that this leads to increasing incompetence in the senior ranks of the public service, for this is inevitable when you screen out 97% of the population from even being considered for a job. You can NOT say that increasing the numbers of Francophones is merely a consequence of incompetence. It was, I am quite sure, considered a benefit, at least by the Francophones, both political and bureacratic, who designed and implimented Official Bilingualism within the civil service.

And while it clearly doesn't bother you at all to have Quebecers running Canada, most of the rest of us have a different view.

[Argus]

There are very few French jobs in the civil service, less than English only jobs. If French people have to bother learning English, it seems that English civil servants are just complaining of some lack of interes in learning French. Which is fine, but state it like it is. It's not a problem with bilingualism in this case, it's a problem with people unwilling to diversify their skills to a sufficent level.

You have not established that being bilingual IS a job skill for these positions. I could as easily require that all job applicants have a working knowledge of Klingon and state that as a job requirement. If a job requires bilingualism because it actually needs it, that's one thing. In most jobs the bilingual requirement is an artificial demand which does not aid in doing the actual work.

Furthermore, the higher level of bilingualism among Francohones has NOTHING to do with wanting to diversify their skills, and everthing to do with growing up amid a largely English world and learning the majority language in order to access American and British TV shows, movies, magazines, internet web sites and music. Young Francophones just naturally pick up English for cultural reasons. Young Anglos have no reason to pick up French naturally. This is widely known and understood.

So it's tough for the anti-French-in-public-service side to make this argument without being hypocritical. Are you ok with having no English in Quebec, if you are so adament on having no French in the rest of Canada? Or is English to be regarded as the superior language?

No one has made the case there should be "NO" French within the federal public service. However, its interesting to compare the way the federal public service treats French and the Quebec public service treats French. There are very few bilingual positions within the Quebec public service, and while Francophones make up a higher proportion of the federal public service than their numbers in the general populatioin (some agencies, ie the public service commision, are well over 50% Francophone) there are very, very few Anglophones in the Quebec public service.

[Leafless]

geoffrey

You wrote- " Are you okay with having no English in Quebec, if you are so adamant in having no french in the rest of canada? Or is English to be regarded the superior language?"

Legally speaking there is no English in Quebec if the provincial and federal OFFICIAL Language is French.

Any English received by by an English speaker in Quebec by a French Quebecer is solely a voluntary effort with no legal obligation to do so. Again there are no bilingual policies in Quebec of course not saying that SOME English is not provided, but why shouldn't there be as Quebec is part of a majority English country also the majority language of the only country attached by a border the U.S. and is the universal language of the world.

I think it is well recognized that English is the offical language of commerce throughout Canada and if you want to put it that way is the superior language of the country. I find it strange though you would use the word superior rather than say dominant.