Dyan Adams wants leadership

[Leafless]

Article: Ottawa Citizen, Wednesday, May 10, 2006, Pg.A3.

Titled: Tories language policy a 'concern'.

Dyane Adams says Prime Minister Stephen Harper needs to start taking the country's bilingual nature seriously.

" What I want is leadership and this is a call for action for this government to say publicly where they stand" said Ms. Adam as she released the final annual report of her seven year stint.

She said the concept of bilingualism was nearly invisible in the governments throne speech and absent from it's first budget and even quoted Mr. Harper and Tory MP Scott Reid calling bilingualism " the god that failed".

She also had concern about Public Works, RCMP, still getting failing grades when it comes to offering a bilingual work enviroment and services to the public and suggested the government also move quickly on adapting legislation to protect the bilingual nature of Air Canada.

A spokesman for the prime minister said Ms. Adams concern about Tories are unfounded. The party supported a law toughening the 'Official Languages Act' that passed while the Conservatives were still in oppositon said spokesman Dimitris Soudas.

" We believe the linguistic duality is one of the foudations of Canadian society," he said. " We are committed to enforcing the "Official Languages Act."

I also think official bilingualism has failed and is discriminatory, racist and serves no purpose other than to give francophones federal jobs on the basis of being bilingual and to contribute further problems by trying to create an official bilingual workplace when either is justified since 85% of Canadians speak English.

I will ask you the question... Are you in favour of the Conservatives supporting 'Official Bilingualism' in government and propagating or supporting it in majority English provinces at public expense?

[shoop]

The Commissioner of Official Languages really said this?

Imagine the outrage if a Conservative MP had said it. Is Ms. Adams avaialable to speak about Madame Justice's exercise of power?

I also think official bilingualism has failed and is discriminatory, racist and serves no purpose other than to give francophones federal jobs on the basis of being bilingual and to contribute further problems by trying to create an official bilingual workplace when either is justified since 85% of Canadians speak English.

[Leafless]

shoop

You wrote- " The Commissioner of Offical Languages really said this."

What you quoted is my take not what she said.

I'am just in agreement with what Ms. Adams said Mr. Harper said that bilingualism is the "god that failed."

The question I asked was pertaining to the validity of retaining 'offical bilingualism' in the federal public service despite it's failure of creating what federal 'official bilingualism' was initially meant to accomplish rather than what has turned out to be a discriminatory imposed set of linguistic rules and regulations that question the democratic values most Canadians harbour concerning employment in their own federal government.

[shoop]

That's my mistake. It didn't seem like Adams would say something like that.

Official bilingualism is a fact of life. There are many, many people opposed to the policy. But no party can ever form Government with a policy of weakening or dumping the Official Languages Act.

Thus it is a law that will not go away.

I'm working on my French in the hopes it will prove beneficial to my career in the future. But that is really the only reason I am doing it, so it is tough to stay committed to studying the language. I don't use it ever in my daily life. But studying a language does have some benefits in keeping the mind sharp, so I view that as a reason to study when I'm not feeling like it. That even works sometimes.

The question I asked was pertaining to the validity of retaining 'offical bilingualism' in the federal public service despite it's failure of creating what federal 'official bilingualism' was initially meant to accomplish rather than what has turned out to be a discriminatory imposed set of linguistic rules and regulations that question the democratic values most Canadians harbour concerning employment in their own federal government.

[Leafless]

shoop

You wrote- " Official bilingualism is a fact of life."

Of course you must make clear when you say this you are talking about 'federal official bilingualism' and not official throughout Canada except as you know the province of New Brunswick which is an 'officially bilingual provincial province.'

You also wrote- " I'm working on my French in the hopes it will prove beneficial to my career in the future"

This could work for someone or work against someone depending on circumstances which in my opinion makes this policy such a failure and has nothing to do with the skills associated with the positon and only adds multiple levels of frustration with rigged competitons and pitting one linguistic group against another.

I know many previous English federal public servants who have left their jobs in complete disgust when confronted with the undesireable aspects of federal government bilngualism and others who were forced out one way or another to accomodate francophones and newly reorganized departments.

The 'Offical Languages Act' did nothing for the English language and basically is all about creating employment at any cost for francophones in a federal government that is suppose to represent 'all of Canada' and it's various minorities and not cater to the whims of any one province based soley on language.

[shoop]

I can't really see how working on my French would "work against" me. Of course there is the time, and expense, invovled. But other than that how would improving my French work against me?

I'm not arguing that the OLA is a good policy. What I am saying is that it is a fact of life that must be dealt with.

I am sure there are many many Federal public servants who have major issues with the OLA.

Politics is all about compromise. This is an issue francophone Canadians clearly won't compromise on and any attempts at appealing the OLA would help the separatist forces cause. Is that tradeoff worth it to you? It isn't to me.

You also wrote- " I'm working on my French in the hopes it will prove beneficial to my career in the future"

This could work for someone or work against someone depending on circumstances which in my opinion makes this policy such a failure and has nothing to do with the skills associated with the positon and only adds multiple levels of frustration with rigged competitons and pitting one linguistic group against another.

I know many previous English federal public servants who have left their jobs in complete disgust when confronted with the undesireable aspects of federal government bilngualism and others who were forced out one way or another to accomodate francophones and newly reorganized departments.

The 'Offical Languages Act' did nothing for the English language and basically is all about creating employment at any cost for francophones in a federal government that is suppose to represent 'all of Canada' and it's various minorities and not cater to the whims of any one province based soley on language.

[Leafless]

shoop

You wrote- " I can't really see how working on my French would work 'against me'."

Maybe I'm one step ahead of you and assumed you were lucky and became successful learning French and won some type of bilingual postion.

In a perfect world this would not be problamatic but unfortunately this is not the case.

Say your new position took you into an office where the majority is francophone and your mother tongue is English with an English last name.

If you think this senario would not produce a multitude of problems many unresolvable, I suggest you would be wise to think again.

This is the type of scenario that could work against you that would have a direct impact on your well being and possibly result with no federal employment period.

You also wrote- " Politics is all about compromise. This is an issue francophone Canadians clearly won't compromise on and any attemps of appealing the OLA won't help the separtist forces cause, Is that trade off worth it to you? It isn't to me."

You are right when you say this is an issue francophone Canadians clearly won't compromise on especially after Quebec, the only province in Canada to declare French the offical working language of Quebec.

It would also be fair to say the separatist cause has always been well supported in Quebec and in fact so much so the Bloc ( a separtist party) represents Quebec on a federal level.

This is not a question of trade off but one requiring strong leadership which I feel Canada has been 'sold down the drain' to a province that has no intention of ever having strong attachments to Canadian federalism nor Canadian nationalism.

The federal government has been taking advantage of English Canadians by abusing English the language of commerce of Canada by selling out English Canadians to incorporate the whims of an undeserving province and it's language to cover 'the lack of federal leadership' to properly correct this problem once and for all.

There is no way I would sell MY services to the federal government under existing conditions concerning the OLA.

[shoop]

I'm really not following your line of reasoning below. If you don't speak French, you can't get a bilingual position - period. So you are saying it is better to not get a bilingual position, than to get one and have to work in a majority Francophone office?

Maybe I'm one step ahead of you and assumed you were lucky and became successful learning French and won some type of bilingual postion.

In a perfect world this would not be problamatic but unfortunately this is not the case.

Say your new position took you into an office where the majority is francophone and your mother tongue is English with an English last name.

If you think this senario would not produce a multitude of problems many unresolvable, I suggest you would be wise to think again.

This is the type of scenario that could work against you that would have a direct impact on your well being and possibly result with no federal employment period.

Maybe Quebec will never have 'strong attachments to Canadian federalism or Canadian nationalism.' Seems like everybody knows that. I think we have to recognize that as a fact of life and try to acommodate Quebec with a new deal. Getting rid of the OLA could cause enough of a storm in Quebec to lead to the province's separation. I don't want Quebec to separate. Seems like you would be willing to accept that over the continuation of the OLA.

You also wrote- " Politics is all about compromise. This is an issue francophone Canadians clearly won't compromise on and any attemps of appealing the OLA won't help the separtist forces cause, Is that trade off worth it to you? It isn't to me."

You are right when you say this is an issue francophone Canadians clearly won't compromise on especially after Quebec, the only province in Canada to declare French the offical working language of Quebec.

It would also be fair to say the separatist cause has always been well supported in Quebec and in fact so much so the Bloc ( a separtist party) represents Quebec on a federal level.

This is not a question of trade off but one requiring strong leadership which I feel Canada has been 'sold down the drain' to a province that has no intention of ever having strong attachments to Canadian federalism nor Canadian nationalism.

The federal government has been taking advantage of English Canadians by abusing English the language of commerce of Canada by selling out English Canadians to incorporate the whims of an undeserving province and it's language to cover 'the lack of federal leadership' to properly correct this problem once and for all.

There is no way I would sell MY services to the federal government under existing conditions concerning the OLA.

[Leafless]

shoop

You wrote- " So your saying it is better not to get a bilingual positon, than to get one and have to work in a majority francophone office."

If you read the post I said if you were a bilingual anglophone, yes a multitude of problems could arise in a majority francophone office basically concerning your qualifications as being qualified in the French language and not being a true francophone. It sounds to me as if you never heard of any one experiencing these problems and are quite naive if you didn't.

My only suggestion to you is many English federal public servants have walked away from their federal jobs due to the intolerable working conditons concerning discrimination of this type which is very difficult to prove.

You also wrote- " I don't want Quebec to separate. Seems that you are willing to accept that over the continuation of the OLA"

Yes and so do millions of other Canadians.

It basically boils down to what you consider your Canadian citizenship to be worth and I consider it to be worth a lot more than to see my country over taken by a group not loyal to Canada with political interest of a foreign country that seen their better days on the Plains of Abraham.

[shoop]

So you really should have started a thread on why you want Quebec to leave Canada.

It basically boils down to what you consider your Canadian citizenship to be worth and I consider it to be worth a lot more than to see my country over taken by a group not loyal to Canada with political interest of a foreign country that seen their better days on the Plains of Abraham.

[Argus]

I am sure there are many many Federal public servants who have major issues with the OLA.

Politics is all about compromise. This is an issue francophone Canadians clearly won't compromise on and any attempts at appealing the OLA would help the separatist forces cause. Is that tradeoff worth it to you? It isn't to me.

So your idea of compromise is you'll bend over but the other guy has to pull your pants down, is that it?

[shoop]

Keeping Quebec in Canada is far more than just the OLA. Yes, the OLA helps Francophones. But you have to look at why. It helps Francophones because they are more likely to raise functionally bilingual kids. The only thing stopping more Anglophones from being bilingual is the, real or imagined, belief that it isn't worth the time or effort to learn French.

Is the OLA really that important to you? Why not put in the effort to learn French then?

So your idea of compromise is you'll bend over but the other guy has to pull your pants down, is that it?

[Argus]

Keeping Quebec in Canada is far more than just the OLA. Yes, the OLA helps Francophones. But you have to look at why. It helps Francophones because they are more likely to raise functionally bilingual kids. The only thing stopping more Anglophones from being bilingual is the, real or imagined, belief that it isn't worth the time or effort to learn French.

Is the OLA really that important to you? Why not put in the effort to learn French then?

So your idea of compromise is you'll bend over but the other guy has to pull your pants down, is that it?

The OLA means that within a decade or two 90% of all senior civil servants will be Quebecers. I don't consider that to be "compromise".

Maybe you have a different definition for that word.

[shoop]

Any actual support for that statistic?

What do you see as a fair concession to keep Quebec in Canada?

Why the big hangup about working in the civil service? If it was truly a desire of mine I would work harder at my French. It isn't, so no big deal.

What would you consider a *compromise* on the OLA?

The OLA means that within a decade or two 90% of all senior civil servants will be Quebecers. I don't consider that to be "compromise".

Maybe you have a different definition for that word.

[Argus]

Any actual support for that statistic?

I've posted it before

It is a matter of inference, but inference based on fact.

The number of positions designed "bilingual" which are staffed by Francophones is 71%, or was a few years ago, the last year I had statistics from Trasury Board.

Since that time several things have happened.

All senior public service jobs now require the highest level of fluency, not just bilingualism, but complete fluency.

The government has really tightened up on senior public servants who do not meet the bilingual requirements of the job.

The government has cut back on second language training, something which was disproportionately used by Anglophones (by about 10-1).

The government is cutting back and plans to eliminate the "bilingual non-imperative" designation, which allowed people to be hired on skill for a bilingual job, and then be trained to meet the language requirments.

Baby boomers are retiring in droves. They are disproprtionately anglophone. This clearly affects the senior ranks more, as most public servants have twenty years or more in by the time they become managers.

Even without any of these occurances, the mere fact that 71% of bilingual positions are staffed by Francophones would, as grandfather-protected boomers retire, make the senior manager class about 71% French within a short time. With these changes, I'm placing it at closer to 90%, especially when something else is taken into account - the number of Quebec Anglos who are bilingual. In my experience, just about

the only Anglos who can meet the highest levels of bilingualism are Quebecers.

So the senior ranks of the public service, where programs, are originated, policies are developed and interpreted, budgets and priorities are set, and advice is given to politicians, will be made up largely of Francophone Quebecers, Anglophone Quebecers, and a scattering of Francophones from The National Capital Region, Mannitoba and New Brunswick.

What do you see as a fair concession to keep Quebec in Canada?

Quebec seperatism is all about emotion, with no logic behind it. I personally would prefer a kind of sovereignty association. I think Quebecers are soft-hearted and soft-headed on most issues, both fiscally and economically, and I'd rather see us cut them adrift except for an economic association. As far as I can tell that's the only interest they have in being part of Canada anyway.

[Leafless]

schoop

You wrote- " So you really should have started a thread on why you want Quebec to leave Canada."

You are implying that not I or not in this thread anyways.

But you have made yourself clear that you support federal government involvement in maintaining the OLA and 'official bilingualism' in federal government despite it's total failure both in a democratic sense and a practical sense.

I don't share your sense of fear regarding Quebec separation and only hope someday proper federal leadership will recognize language is a provincial responsibility not federal like Quebec has proven over and over and dismantle the existing undemocratic and discriminating web of 'official bilingualism' that the previous Liberal government so wrongly imposed on Canadians.

[shoop]

I have not stated that I support the OLA. The bigger question is how do we proceed now that it is a fact of life?

I do believe that the *benefit* that would derive from dismantling/repealing the OLA would be far, far outweighed by the costs that would flow to Canada from the reaction in Quebec.

Why don't you share my fear regarding Quebec separation?

But you have made yourself clear that you support federal government involvement in maintaining the OLA and 'official bilingualism' in federal government despite it's total failure both in a democratic sense and a practical sense.

I don't share your sense of fear regarding Quebec separation and only hope someday proper federal leadership will recognize language is a provincial responsibility not federal like Quebec has proven over and over and dismantle the existing undemocratic and discriminating web of 'official bilingualism' that the previous Liberal government so wrongly imposed on Canadians.

[Leafless]

shoop

You wrote- " I have not stated that I support the OLA. The bigger question is how do we proceed that it is a fact of life."

You have voluntarily succumbed by your own definiton "it is a fact of life" which in doing so support the OLA and 'official bilingualism'.

Only a few Canadians have succumbed to OLA and federal 'official bilingualism' those being English speaking federal public servants who have sold out there language for employment and others in cities like Ottawa where private employer's following the federal lead and greed force their employees to be bilingual as part of their job qualifications.

How do we proceed concerning the wrongful application of OLA and 'federal bilingualism'?

That was answered a few posts back and is basically 'strong federal leadership' something that is sadly lacking from Canadian politics. A form of protest could be federal public service demonstrations and a backlash by angry City of Ottawa residents whose majority language is English and presently allow employers to demand bilingual qualifications for jobs in a majority English city.

It takes guts to get things done and I don't think many English speaking Canadians have what it takes to set the record straight and defend their Majority English Canadian citizenship and associated democratic RIGHTS.

You also wrote- " Why don't you share my fear regarding Quebec separation."

Simply because they are the instigators and I'm not about ready to hand my country over to Quebec.

Quebec has been playing constitutional blackmail for years and continue to do so.

They have laid off the separation threat again temporally as Quebec think tanks obviously are eagrily waiting for more federal gift offerings from Prime Mininister Stephen Harper.

Here is another instance how the 'Quebec wind blows.'

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/National

[shoop]

To lead you need to be in power.

By your definition Joe Clark showed strong leadership in 1979/80. He made some choices that were clearly in the best interest of the country, but lost power as a result. Would you like to see Harper try and repeal the OLA only to thrust another decade of Liberal government on us?

For 12 1/2 years the centre-right has won a lot of moral victories. Alas, that is all they can claim.

I read the article. Yes, it is a good thing that separatism is waning in Quebec. A repeal of the OLA would definitely move the province towards *moral assurance* of winning the referendum.

That was answered a few posts back and is basically 'strong federal leadership' something that is sadly lacking from Canadian politics. A form of protest could be federal public service demonstrations and a backlash by angry City of Ottawa residents whose majority language is English and presently allow employers to demand bilingual qualifications for jobs in a majority English city.

[Leafless]

shoop

You wrote- " Would you like see Harper try and repeal the OLA only to thrust another decade of Liberal government on us."

This ultimately proves federalism does not work in this country with Quebec continually playing the constitutional blackmail game.

What I would suggest is for Mr. Harper to allow Canadians to make the choice of allowing Quebec to continue to be part of confederation incorporating a national referendum to decide this.

This democratic approach would be in my opinion the only way to save the country.

Presently there is no way to satisfy the abnormal political appetite of Quebec without causing severe political animosity in the other nine provinces.

The Liberals have been successful in doing this by selling out rights and freedoms of English Canadians ( also incorporating a transfer of power to Quebec) under the guise of official bilingualism incorporating the divisive OLA.

I really don't call this nation building and have a name for this which I will not use for obvious reasons.

You also wrote- " I read the article. Yes, it is a good thing that separatism is waning in Quebec. A repeal of the OLA would definitely move the province towards *moral assurance* of winning the referendum."

This is the same old Quebec constitutional blackmail game they continue to play.

Quebec can't separate and they know it but still manage to acquire more and more previous only federal powers and federal money and programs, playing the game the feds refuse to stop playing resulting in a dysfunctional federalism and more than ever contributing to the breakup of Canada.

[rbacon]

This should be easy to understand...$700B scarce taxdollars spent on Official Bilingualism, a Provincial jurisdiction I might add.. Result one Unilingual racist, separatist Province... Wake up boys and girls.. Demand that the OLA be repealed and that Ottawa obey the BNA and get out of Provincial Jurisdiction..

[shoop]

I have no doubt the OLA is pricey. But $700 Billion? Come on. That seems insanely high. It fails the laugh test.

You are basically saying that if Official Bilingualism didn't exist Canada would have NO National Debt.

Any support at all for that figure?

This should be easy to understand...$700B scarce taxdollars spent on Official Bilingualism, a Provincial jurisdiction I might add.. Result one Unilingual racist, separatist Province... Wake up boys and girls.. Demand that the OLA be repealed and that Ottawa obey the BNA and get out of Provincial Jurisdiction..

[Leafless]

shoop

You wrote- " Any support for that fiqure."

Translating a SINGLE word from English to French cost taxpayers .22-.28 cents.

Can you supply 'official federal cost fiqures' concerning all actual cost and hidden cost including provincial cost relating to the OLA and 'official bilingualism since 1969?

THESE NUMBERS ARE NOT AVAILABLE and the ones that are are very questionable.

http://temagami.carleton.ca/jmc/cnews/20102000/c2.htm

The $700-billion estimate comes from a Toronto accountant.

These numbers can be found at:

http://languagefairness.ca

[Hicksey]

You know who needs to be reminded of our bilingualism just as much as the rest of Canada? Quebecers. I've been there as a truck driver many times and lots of people refuse to talk English to me even after I politely ask in my best Ontario High School French for them to speak in English because I don't understand enough French to carry on a conversation.

One guy was so much of an idiot it took me dumping a whole trailer full of limestone in their employee parking lot for him to finally start talking in English and even then I had to threaten to dump my other one there for him to finally tell me where to go to dump the other in English.

Now I just refuse to go there. I don't get paid enough to put up with that BS.

I thought for a while that Quebecers were getting a bad rap when I met my wife's family because they are Quebecers and pretty good people. That ended abruptly when I went there as a part of my job.

[August1991]

I don't know If I want to get involved in this thread. But I'll take issue with one point.

s Can you supply 'official federal cost fiqures' concerning all actual cost and hidden cost including provincial cost relating to the OLA and 'official bilingualism since 1969?

THESE NUMBERS ARE NOT AVAILABLE and the ones that are are very questionable.

The $700-billion estimate comes from a Toronto accountant.

The link you provide suggests a number closer to $50 billion. (If you're like me, $700 billion and $50 billion are both meaningless numbers.)

What is the cost of bilingualism? Well, what is the cost of government?

There seems to be this idea that if the government were unlingual, we'd save gazillions of dollars or something. Government doesn't work that way.

If we are going to have a functioning federation in Canada, the federal government must work in both English and French.