3,500 City of Ottawa Jobs to be bilingual

[guyser]

Seriously, you need to realize that there are skilled Francophones.

Dont hold your breath. The obvious dislike for all things french is apparent.

[Argus]

My province is Ontario. I've never lived in Québec (so I don't really care about how residents of Québec or of any province other than Ontario are treated, regardless of first language.

Buddy, you might not live there, but you should. You sound like a dedicated French nationalist.

I insist that federal government employees have the language AND non-language skills mentioned in the job description. You seem to think that I want to staff the gov't with incompetent bilingual people, whereas I want to staff the gov't with competent bilingual people. To suggest that bilingual people have no skills beyond languages is discriminating.

I have already pointed out the reality of eliminating 95% of potential candidates based on an irrelevant language requirement. Your answer has been that you don't care. I have already pointed out the affect this has in staffing, in the difficulty of filling candidate pools, the difficulty of finding qualified people. Your answer has been to ignore this. You clearly care about nothing but advancing the cause of the French.

You would be counted as a Francophone. Guaranteed. There is no slightest part of you that is Anglophone.

I'm just as Anglophone as you are.

You are ashamed of being a Frenchman? Sorry, but that doesn't cut it. You are a Frenchman. The ability to speak English does not make you English.

. If we flip through the dictionary, I quote WordWeb

Anglophone: Someone who speaks English, esp. as their first language

That describes me, because I can speak English and I always could speak English.

And thus your tenuous hold on reality and logic comes out for all to see once again.

A language has nothing to do with political intentions and you're wrong for claiming me to not be something that I am.

You are a French ethnic nationalist. That is patently clear in everything you write.

Then what do the skilled Francophones require? Or do you not consider that to be a possibility?

Seriously, you need to realize that there are skilled Francophones. You should also know that I believe that the government cannot make use of candidates who have absolutely no skills beyond languages and who are terrible learners.

No one has said they do. I have said that making language the primary screening tool for a particular job means that you don't get the people who are best at that particular job. You get people who can speak French and can scrape by in that job. You get people who screw up often, but don't get fired because they're in the government. You get people who are agonizingly slow at doing their job, or people who take months and months to get the fundamentals of a complex job - thus costing us money in terms of delays and inefficiency. When you eliminate 95% of candidates based on a requirement which is not directly related to the actual job you are going to wind up with a far smaller pool of candidates, few of whom are actually going to have the necessary skills or knowledge to do the work with any kind of effectiveness. I can think of several fairly new French managers right now who are flailing away desperately trying to keep their heads above water because the only reason they got their jobs was their bilingualism - even though any number of much more experienced unilingual anglos could have gotten the jobs.

There's no point continuing this discussion with you if you suggest that Francophones have no skills beyond languages and if you claim that I am any less of an Anglophone than you are.

I know many Francophones who have been able to speak English since childhood. If I told them they were Anglophones they would laugh in my face. If you were here now I would laugh in your face.

[Leafless]

Seriously, you need to realize that there are skilled Francophones.

Dont hold your breath. The obvious dislike for all things french is apparent.

Only where it's forced, I would think, like the federal public service and majority English provinces and cities where federal intervention is responsible for for the requirement and use of French relating to federal style bilingualism.

Do you not think guyser, that there is no French hate directed towards English speaking Canadians simply because they form the dominant language, a language Quebecers could use if they wanted to. Quebecers want there unpopular french language to be on the same level as English, an impossible feat without the forces of government.

Along came the OLA, that little Nazi type language policy that forces French on the English populous.

Why should there not be a dislike for a government sponsored discriminatory French language attack on the majority English language while Quebec remains unaffected and culturally pristine with no federal government intervention forcing English on Quebecers.

In either case, the root problem is that government has no business dictating language policies inducing a hate filled linguistic environment.

Simple solution, keep French in Quebec where they want it.

http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pubs_pol/hrpubs/O...lpf-cplo1_e.asp

[guyser]

I will be happy to oblige leafless.

Dont hold your breath. The obvious dislike for all things french is apparent.

Only where it's forced, I would think, like the federal public service and majority English provinces and cities where federal intervention is responsible for for the requirement and use of French relating to federal style bilingualism.

Most of what I have read is about hating the french. The use of derogatory terms , comparing ONLY a Quebec firm with respect to subsidies, only to be shown that the O&G industry takes far more no matter how you slice it , says enough.

I dont like forced anything. Never have never will. I too am not pleased with Ontario, outside of Ottawa and the northern Ont french regions (tons of them) having to institutionalize French. I do agree with every Govt office front line worker being able to use both languages where needed outside of Quebec. Failing that, at least one in every office ,perhaps two for sick and holiday time.

Argus is vehemently anti-french from what I can gather. Thats fine, it is his opinion. He actually makes some good points, but it is all couched in such hate that it gets lost. Rotbart is very pro french, yet he has said numerous times that he is not a fan of forced French. His good points get roughshod just because they are pro-french. Our compadres in Alberta have long had reason to hate the east, and particularly Ontario Toronto Ottawa and Quebec, but because they are so far removed from Quebec, and in turn the rest of the places I listed, they are isolated from the benefits, culturally and socially that accrue.

I abhor the fact that English is ignored in Quebec. I have no problem going into Markham and seeing signs in Mandarin/Chinese only as they cater to the local market. Besides I like that it makes it all authentic , even though I can look out the window and damn well see I am on Steeles Ave. The fact that it is law in Quebec bothers me immensely. In an predominantly english suburb the idea that they cannot legally have english wording as a predominent feature drives me nuts.

Do you not think guyser, that there is no French hate directed towards English speaking Canadians simply because they form the dominant language, a language Quebecers could use if they wanted to. Quebecers want there unpopular french language to be on the same level as English, an impossible feat without the forces of government.

Of course there is. PLenty of it . But in an overall sense ..?...No I dont. I treat it the same way some ethnic communities show disdain for my colour as if I had anything to do with intolerance or rascism. It is out there, but IMHO overblown to the nth degree.

I happen to think that the french would have their language above and beyond what the laws have deemed. An irrational fear that French will be the new Latin (dead) is what the Lords deemed. So they made a law.

I dont think that most rational Quebecois feel that they want French on the same level , speaking wise, as English. There are plenty of brilliant people in Quebec, their Universities are top notch, industry and business in general is coming back. The english language will be de rigeur for any Quebec company wanting a market outside of any French speaking locale. Neither you nor I would set up shop in the most ardent French neighbourhood with only English speaking people, and that goes for setting up a shop in Markham On without most of my people speaking Mandarin/Chinese. The language of business is money. Quebecers want it , the ROC wants to make more of it too.

I love Quebec. I have never failed to have a great time every visit. Sure I meet some dickheads, but damn, I live in Toronto and I know we have more than a fair share here, so I do not let a little Quebecois snobbery get to me. Frankly I think that some Quebecers know how irritated the ROC gets vis a vis the subsidies, the language issue , the Canadiennes...uggh...but the french have always been that way and they enjoy a little rubbing in our faces.

Why should there not be a dislike for a government sponsored discriminatory French language attack on the majority English language while Quebec remains unaffected and culturally pristine with no federal government intervention forcing English on Quebecers.

Yes I agree with you here. Unfortunately people take it to the personal level and become bigoted, myopic and nasty as respects Quebecers. I do not share the culturally pristine angle . I dont think that has been changed from anything it was in the past. So I guess I am saying here is it is what it is, or always was for the most part. I could put on a dress and high heels, but I am still the same. An English shop with French signs is still an English speaking shop.

In either case, the root problem is that government has no business dictating language policies inducing a hate filled linguistic environment.

This particular thread has made me think about that a lot in the past week. So far what I have formulated is that the Govt should encourage the use of French, but mandating it , or rather keeping it mandated in the light of economic upturn might be a mistake and I also believe they know it. (the Que govt)

[Kapitän Rotbart]

Argus,

Buddy, you might not live there, but you should. You sound like a dedicated French nationalist.

In Soviet Russia, French Nationalist dedicates YOU!

I am not for the seperation of Québec and I would never live there because of two factors, the first being their socialism and the second being their atheism. There's also the fact that Québec is only interested in the French language, making it not bilingual enough for me. It's fine that people live there, it's just not my cup of tea.

I have already pointed out the reality of eliminating 95% of potential candidates based on an irrelevant language requirement. Your answer has been that you don't care. I have already pointed out the affect this has in staffing, in the difficulty of filling candidate pools, the difficulty of finding qualified people. Your answer has been to ignore this. You clearly care about nothing but advancing the cause of the French.

95% of candidates in what area? 40% of Ottawans are bilingual, nearly a quarter of Canadians are bilingual, I do not see why you would knock out 95% of an applicant sample due to a language requirement.

ou are ashamed of being a Frenchman? Sorry, but that doesn't cut it. You are a Frenchman. The ability to speak English does not make you English.

Frenchman: A person of French nationality

I don't have French citizenship. Unless you have English citizenship, you are not English either. You are not what you speak. I am not ashamed of the fact that I am both Anglophone and Francophone. I am simply content with being a Canadian and I prefer to not identify myself by language because people like you are too ignorant to understand the possibility of having two first languages. Yes, I speak both languages at home with my folks (one language to one parent, the other language to the other parent, and my parent to whom I speak English cannot speak French).

You are a French ethnic nationalist. That is patently clear in everything you write.

No, I have no interest in differentiating people by nationality nor ethnicity. I am for bilingualism and the plurality of cultures.

I know many Francophones who have been able to speak English since childhood. If I told them they were Anglophones they would laugh in my face. If you were here now I would laugh in your face.

We can laugh in eachothers' faces. I laugh at your ignorance, it amuses me. Each person has their own sense of belonging, and sadly clueless Canadians feel they have 'belong' to a language. If you determine their sense of belonging, they will laugh in your face. If you determine my sense of belonging, I will also laugh in your face. I do not feel that I belong to any language, but I speak both Canadian languages since I have been able to speak, so I am not more of one than the other.

[Leafless]

Argus is vehemently anti-french from what I can gather. Thats fine, it is his opinion. He actually makes some good points, but it is all couched in such hate that it gets lost. Rotbart is very pro french, yet he has said numerous times that he is not a fan of forced French. His good points get roughshod just because they are pro-french.

I share the same sense of an almost unbearable frustration as Argus does.

Everything that has to do with bilingualism is federal government implemented and is so undemocratic in nature that it forces one to almost throw up. To think the Charter was actually consented to by the provinces is next to unbelievable.

But to be fair the premiers at the time were probably absorbed with the notion of providing french services where required, and never really were that concerned to what has really happened to-day, being the transformation and take over of the major English language by a foreign minority language forcefully pursued by the government of the land and in Ontario's case the Liberal provincial government.

This part that makes it so un-nationalistic is that Quebec has its own definition of nationalism and the rest of the country has theirs basically concerning the British win of Canada and the monarchy.

For a federal government to try and stamp out the true origins of this country by promoting a minority who associates them self to France rather to Canada is the next thing to treason IMV.

Rotbart's view supporting bilingualism while denouncing Quebec does not make sense unless he is on one man campaign to land a plum federal job because of a thick French accent.

[Kapitän Rotbart]

Everything that has to do with bilingualism is federal government implemented and is so undemocratic in nature that it forces one to almost throw up. To think the Charter was actually consented to by the provinces is next to unbelievable.

No, there is a natural demand for bilingualism. Otherwise it would never pass. The Liberals have maintained a high popularity amongst monolingual Anglophones as well, so it was very democratic.

This part that makes it so un-nationalistic is that Quebec has its own definition of nationalism and the rest of the country has theirs basically concerning the British win of Canada and the monarchy.

I'll agree that it would be nice if Québec were to integrate itself a little more, but there's no reason for them to be any more accomodating than they already are to the Anglophones as long as the Maritimes and the Western provinces don't become more accomodating to the Francophones in their regions.

For a federal government to try and stamp out the true origins of this country by promoting a minority who associates them self to France rather to Canada is the next thing to treason IMV.

Canada never associates itself with France beyond History. I have met a few Francophile Canadians who think France is paradise and everything else is second to it, but I'd be glad to tell them myself to move to the French Republic. Canada does not import any culture from France nor anything else. Canada provides its own cultural resources in the French language, which is really impressive (it puts many Anglophone Canadians to shame, who limit themselves to American culture with the possible exception of the Canadian media content forced down their throats through the fascist CanCon law). Since the quiet revolution the Québécois have been developing a larger sense of belonging to their province than to their country, which I find unfortunate. The only solution for Québéc would be a cultural revival, going back to the mindset predating the silent revolution. I wouldn't mind seeing Québéc developing a larger thirst for capitalism, as long as it doesn't stop them from producing and exporting their own regional culture, which other provinces are failing to do.

Rotbart's view supporting bilingualism while denouncing Quebec does not make sense unless he is on one man campaign to land a plum federal job because of a thick French accent.

I don't know how you can come to an assumption that I have a French accent. I can speak French with a French accent, sure. I also speak English without a French accent (I've been speaking English as of day 1 with Anglophones). I don't know what leads you to believing that I have a French accent, but if you make false assumptions about me, I get to make false assumptions of you. I assume that you are a member of the KKK

The reasons I support bilingualism and not Québec are many:

I support bilingualism because it increases national unity, allows Canada to live up to its Charter signed by all provinces using the majority language and it improves its representation by having those representing an institution of two languages fluent in those two languages.

I do not support Québec because they have a high rate of seperatists (highest rate of seperatists in Canada), a very socialist system and because I've never lived there. They can run their province however they like, as an Ontarian I cannot tell them how to run their system, but I am not interested in moving there. To me, language does not have to be limited by borders.

[Leafless]

No, there is a natural demand for bilingualism.

Prove it.

The Liberals have maintained a high popularity amongst monolingual Anglophones as well, so it was very democratic.

Liberals buy votes but Harper is learning fast.

You wouldn't know what democracy is.

I'll agree that it would be nice if Québec were to integrate itself a little more, but there's no reason for them to be any more accomodating than they already are to the Anglophones as long as the Maritimes and the Western provinces don't become more accomodating to the Francophones in their regions.

Quebec is accommodating to themselves-NO ONE ELSE.

What regions are you talking about. Canada is comprised of provinces in a single country called Canada. Nobody is forced to accommodate Francophone's anymore than any other Canadian.

Canada never associates itself with France beyond History.

Canada doesn't but French nationalist Quebec does. Even the leader of the official opposition party is a citizen of France and Quebec is fully involved with selling cheap hydro to French companies to process aluminum also a cause for environmental concerns and caters to France's wine industry.

http://lavoieverte.qc.ec.gc.ca/dpe/Anglais...asp?air_quality

http://www.sea-us.org.au/gulliver/puk.html

[Leafless]

Canada does not import any culture from France nor anything else. Canada provides its own cultural resources in the French language, which is really impressive (it puts many Anglophone Canadians to shame, who limit themselves to American culture

Canadian English culture and the English U.S. culture was born from the same mother, a culture that gave us our constitution and English based laws explains why we enjoy English as being the most innovative language in the world and is the reason why this country as progressed so dramatically.

What part of the backwoods are you from to think otherwise?

I wouldn't mind seeing Québéc developing a larger thirst for capitalism, as long as it doesn't stop them from producing and exporting their own regional culture, which other provinces are failing to do.

Quebec's nationalistic socialistic tendencies concerning their language is what keeps Quebec alive extracting powers and financial aid from federal resources.

Why should they invite in evil anglophones to create industry in Quebec when they can blackmail the federal government with threats and violence like from the Quebec terrorist organization the FLQ and with constant threats of separation.

Quebec is not exporting their culture, they have the federal government to do it for them.

I don't know how you can come to an assumption that I have a French accent. I can speak French with a French accent, sure. I also speak English without a French accent (I've been speaking English as of day 1 with Anglophones). I don't know what leads you to believing that I have a French accent, but if you make false assumptions about me, I get to make false assumptions of you. I assume that you are a member of the KKK

Your phrasing gives you away.

Concerning my post and others you also ad lib direct English words and phrases from previous post and use them in your follow up post.

It seems you don't have the linguistic capabilities to devise your own sentences properly. Argus is right , you certainly sound like either a French nationalist or French sympathizer. To argue bilingualism just for the sake of bilingualism without the required foundation serves no purpose and is nonsensical

I support bilingualism because it increases national unity, allows Canada to live up to its Charter signed by all provinces using the majority language and it improves its representation by having those representing an institution of two languages fluent in those two languages.

Prove bilingualism increases national unity?

It seems you like to force other provinces to maintain their commitment to Charter obligations because they signed it (something I previously told you) but have no concern with the fact Quebec, the only province in Canada never signed the new amended constitution. This is strange indeed and shows your bias.

[Kapitän Rotbart]

Prove it.

Almost a quarter of Canada's population has French, one of Canada's official language, as their mother tongue.

The private sector has caught on to the national demand and is requiring it for many positions because they see the profitability in selecting bilingual candidates.

Liberals buy votes but Harper is learning fast.

You wouldn't know what democracy is.

I'll quote WordWeb:

Democracy:

1. The political orientation of those who favour government by the people or by their elected representatives;

2. A political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them;

3. The doctrine that the numerical majority of an organized group can make decisions binding on the whole group

Seems to me that the Liberals have been democratically elected. Most politicians find ways of defrauding the system one way or another, but that doesn't mean the government infrastructure is any less democratic.

Quebec is accommodating to themselves-NO ONE ELSE.

What regions are you talking about. Canada is comprised of provinces in a single country called Canada. Nobody is forced to accommodate Francophone's anymore than any other Canadian.

My point is that if one province is to become more accommodating to Canadians of the region's minority language (English in QC, French in TROC), then all provinces should become more accommodating to their minority language (by the way, English is a minority language in Québec, because I cannot assume that people speak English there).

Canada doesn't but French nationalist Quebec does. Even the leader of the official opposition party is a citizen of France and Quebec is fully involved with selling cheap hydro to French companies to process aluminum also a cause for environmental concerns and caters to France's wine industry.

WTF? Just because the leader of the Liberals is a French citizen does not mean he praises France, nor does it mean the Liberal Party praises France either. There have been several Canadian politicians having dual citizenship, so why should one of them having French citizenship change anything? This is an obvious proof of your racism. I quote His Satanic Majesty Stéphane Dion:

In a December 7, 2006 interview on CBC's The National, Dion pointed out that Prime Minister John Turner had dual citizenship and questioned why it would be an issue now if it was not an issue in the 1980s. However he promised that "f it's a problem for a significant number of Canadians and if it's a liability that may keep Mr. Harper in power and prevent us [from bringing] together more than any other country in the world: economic prosperity, social justice, environmental sustainability, then I will do this sad thing then, to renounce my French citizenship that I received from my mother."

He clearly values Canada more than France. Anyway, I don't really like him either, but claiming that the Liberals are praising France by appointing a leader with French citizenship is enough evidence of racism. Who wouldn't cater to France's wine industry? They're the kings of wine (it's one of the few things they do properly). Hydro-Québec can give whichever price they want to whoever they choose, and Hydro-Québec does not represent Québec's population. Sure a few people in Canada praise France, but that doesn't mean Canada nor any part of Canada praises France an entity.

Canadian English culture and the English U.S. culture was born from the same mother, a culture that gave us our constitution and English based laws explains why we enjoy English as being the most innovative language in the world and is the reason why this country as progressed so dramatically.

What part of the backwoods are you from to think otherwise?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_Canada

Sure many aspects of Canadian and American culture are shared, but English speaking Canadians still have their own distinct culture. English may be the most innovative language today, but that's thanks to the United States. Canada does not provide to the English language (with the exception of a handful of English language words only used in Canada), only the USA is innovating the English language. Canada is benefiting from many aspects of being neighbors with the United States of America and having few if not no cultural barriers. I just find it sad that most Anglophone Canadians are unaware of their distinct culture because they so quickly embrace American mass media.

Quebec's nationalistic socialistic tendencies concerning their language is what keeps Quebec alive extracting powers and financial aid from federal resources.

Why should they invite in evil anglophones to create industry in Quebec when they can blackmail the federal government with threats and violence like from the Quebec terrorist organization the FLQ and with constant threats of separation.

Quebec is not exporting their culture, they have the federal government to do it for them.

They need innovation in their province, regardless of who creates it. Unless you're talking about la fédération luxembourgeoise des quilleurs, the FLQ is history and is no longer an issue.

Québec exports its culture to the world, including to France and Germany (I have spoken to many folks from Europe who listen to music from Québec, and other Canadians have confirmed the same findings to me). The Québécois do not seem to have much interest in exporting their culture, most of their artists will only put on a show within their province (others who happen to like this culture just seem to catch on to it). Québec doesn't have the Feds exporting their culture... if that were the case, there would only be Québécois dishes and Québécois music seen and heard in Parliament.

Your phrasing gives you away.

Concerning my post and others you also ad lib direct English words and phrases from previous post and use them in your follow up post.

It seems you don't have the linguistic capabilities to devise your own sentences properly. Argus is right , you certainly sound like either a French nationalist or French sympathizer. To argue bilingualism just for the sake of bilingualism without the required foundation serves no purpose and is nonsensical

I refer to the terms you mention, because those are the ones you post on the forum. Should I try to find some wise way of rephrasing them or use synonyms? I don't see the point. I'm proficient enough in both my first languages, so I do not need your judgement towards my language skills.

Prove bilingualism increases national unity?

It seems you like to force other provinces to maintain their commitment to Charter obligations because they signed it (something I previously told you) but have no concern with the fact Quebec, the only province in Canada never signed the new amended constitution. This is strange indeed and shows your bias.

If Canada's population attains a higher rate, Canadians would be less divided by language.

Your observation is false. I would gladly force all provinces to be bilingual, but it's not gonna happen. Ontario is the only Canadian province in which I have lived, so I don't care too much about provincial policies that are foreign to Ontariario.

By the way, I don't believe that you are a true Anglophone. This is obvious because your command stated above telling me to prove that bilingualism increases national unity is ended with a question mark (you'd fail ESL).

[Leafless]

Almost a quarter of Canada's population has French, one of Canada's official language, as their mother tongue.

So what.

Are you telling me EVERYONE in Quebec exclusively speaks French?

I never saw any demand for bilingualism in Quebec.

You are an outright liar.

The private sector has caught on to the national demand and is requiring it for many positions because they see the profitability in selecting bilingual candidates.

One minute your talking exclusively and are only interested in federal bilingualism and now you assert the private sector has caught on to the natural demand for bilingualism.

The only city outside of Quebec where there is a demand for bilingualism is Ottawa.

And that demand is purely artificial, created by Ottawa's forced bilingual policies created by a bunch of left wing French sympathizers including the previous mayor Bob Chiralli an admitted federal Liberal supporter.

I'll quote WordWeb:

Democracy:

1. The political orientation of those who favour government by the people or by their elected representatives;

2. A political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them;

3. The doctrine that the numerical majority of an organized group can make decisions binding on the whole group

Seems to me that the Liberals have been democratically elected. Most politicians find ways of defrauding the system one way or another, but that doesn't mean the government infrastructure is any less democratic.

You can't even read your understand own quote. "1. The political orientation of those who favour government by the people or by their elected representatives".

In Canada our system allows 'government by our elected representatives'.----WHERE IS THE REPRESENTATION?

They tow the party line and DO NOT REPRESENT THEIR CONSTITUNENTS---You know like a communist country.

My point is that if one province is to become more accommodating to Canadians of the region's minority language (English in QC, French in TROC), then all provinces should become more accommodating to their minority language (by the way, English is a minority language in Québec, because I cannot assume that people speak English there).

Your point is not valid, simply because Quebec is a province in Canada part of the majority English provinces that form Canada.

If Quebec refuses to acknowledge the majority commercial English language, then they are totally wrong as Quebec is not some sort of exclusive reservation, but are in fact and benefit greatly from federalism and the other majority English provinces in Canada that support Quebec has a 'have not province'.

WTF? Just because the leader of the Liberals is a French citizen does not mean he praises France, nor does it mean the Liberal Party praises France either. There have been several Canadian politicians having dual citizenship, so why should one of them having French citizenship change anything? This is an obvious proof of your racism. I quote His Satanic Majesty Stéphane Dion:

Racism charges---- How can I be racist when Dion is White and I am White? (reported)

Is this a communist country?

I like many Canadians think that the leader of the opposition with prime ministerial capabilities, while retaining French citizenship, is an insult to Canada and shows a definite lack of respect for Canada and Canadians at large.

Sure many aspects of Canadian and American culture are shared, but English speaking Canadians still have their own distinct culture. English may be the most innovative language today, but that's thanks to the United States.

Even if the U.S. was not there you would have more British influence and English speaking influence than ever.

Remember it was not France who won the war on 'THe Plains of Abraham'.

the FLQ is history and is no longer an issue.

Tell us about the big wig jobs some of them have or had with the federal government after returning from exile in France where they were originally kicked out of the country to Cuba?

I refer to the terms you mention, because those are the ones you post on the forum. Should I try to find some wise way of rephrasing them or use synonyms? I don't see the point. Prove bilingualism increases national unity?

You don't even understand what I am talking about.

I would gladly force all provinces to be bilingual, but it's not gonna happen. Ontario is the only Canadian province in which I have lived, so I don't care too much about provincial policies that are foreign to Ontario.

Whatever that is suppose to mean.

By the way, I don't believe that you are a true Anglophone. This is obvious because your command stated above telling me to prove that bilingualism increases national unity is ended with a question mark (you'd fail ESL).

Asking you to 'prove' bilingualism increases national unity, is not a command, it is a simple question asking you for evidence.

[Kapitän Rotbart]

Asking you to 'prove' bilingualism increases national unity, is not a command, it is a simple question asking you for evidence.

Questions don't start with the word "proove". That's imperative.

You don't even understand what I am talking about.

Not when it doesn't make any sense.

Tell us about the big wig jobs some of them have or had with the federal government after returning from exile in France where they were originally kicked out of the country to Cuba?

This is your argument, I'll ask you to elaborate.

Again, another example of poor grammar. Start your questions with verbs in imperative form? Use the English language? Doesn't sound right to a native English speaker in your patois.

Even if the U.S. was not there you would have more British influence and English speaking influence than ever.

Remember it was not France who won the war on 'THe Plains of Abraham'.

If the USA weren't there, the first Anglophones to populate Canada, the loyalists, would have no where to come from. Regardless, Anglophone Canadians have a distinct culture, yet fail at celebrating it. Despite the government's attempts at forcing exposure to Canadian culture in either language with the gay CanCon law, Anglophone Canadians still have little interest in celebrating their own culture.

It doesn't matter who won the Plains of Abraham... Canada still has to cater to its current demographics according to its policies. Britain failed at assimilating all the Québécois into the English language while Québec itself was an English colony. Hasn't happened yet, and probably never will.

Racism charges---- How can I be racist when Dion is White and I am White? (reported)

Is this a communist country?

I like many Canadians think that the leader of the opposition with prime ministerial capabilities, while retaining French citizenship, is an insult to Canada and shows a definite lack of respect for Canada and Canadians at large.

Racist according to your definition, where race is not limited to skin color. I also do not believe that you're white, unless you're really a member of the KKK.

In Soviet Russia, Canada insults you!

There have been other Canadian politicians with dual citizenship. One could argue that it is an insult to Canada that an American citizen represent Canadian people in a costitutional monarchy. You seem to only hate one people, the French and those who speak their language, including those falling in this category of your own country.

Your point is not valid, simply because Quebec is a province in Canada part of the majority English provinces that form Canada.

If Quebec refuses to acknowledge the majority commercial English language, then they are totally wrong as Quebec is not some sort of exclusive reservation, but are in fact and benefit greatly from federalism and the other majority English provinces in Canada that support Quebec has a 'have not province'.

Your statement is erroneous. Québec is amongst other provinces, not part of other provinces.

Québec can use whichever domestic language it pleases. As long as they use a domestic language, it's fine.

You can't even read your understand own quote. "1. The political orientation of those who favour government by the people or by their elected representatives".

In Canada our system allows 'government by our elected representatives'.----WHERE IS THE REPRESENTATION?

They tow the party line and DO NOT REPRESENT THEIR CONSTITUNENTS---You know like a communist country.

Wow, you really can't read. Using item 1 which you gladly quote yourself, read over again and again "or by their elected representatives". Still fits the definition of democracy, buddy.

One minute your talking exclusively and are only interested in federal bilingualism and now you assert the private sector has caught on to the natural demand for bilingualism.

The only city outside of Quebec where there is a demand for bilingualism is Ottawa.

And that demand is purely artificial, created by Ottawa's forced bilingual policies created by a bunch of left wing French sympathizers including the previous mayor Bob Chiralli an admitted federal Liberal supporter.

I never said I was only interested in federal bilingualism. I think it would be nice for all provinces to be bilingual, but that's not feasible. Granted Ottawa is the only urban center outside Québec with a strong natural demand for bilingualism, yet there are pockets of nearly exclusively Francophones throughout Ontario (and in pretty much all other provinces aswell).

The demand is not artificial, otherwise the private sector in Ottawa would not care about bilingualism at all.

So what.

Are you telling me EVERYONE in Quebec exclusively speaks French?

I never saw any demand for bilingualism in Quebec.

You are an outright liar.

Are you telling me that you cannot understand English? A demand for bilingualism means there is a need to serve in two or more distinct languages. Canadians don't care for the most part if the government official assisting them speaks both domestic languages, they only care that they can be served in their own domestic language, resulting in the need for skilled workers who also are able to communicate in both official domestic languages.

In Soviet Canuckistan, demand for bilingualism sees you!

[geoffrey]

Bilingualism is a complete fraud in Canada. I illustrated on another thread how my knowledge of French in a suburban Calgary neighbourhood (all of which maybe 1 or 2 people can only speak French out of a few hundred thousand) got me preferential treatment at the passport office.... it actually applies everywhere the government has to provide me with French services despite no one actually demanding them.

Somehow I'm not sure if I'd received the same friendly service strolling into a passport office in Beauce demanding expedient service in English. Who knows.

If francophones in Quebec want their French services, sure. But if it's not cost justifiable, too bad. In my area of Canada, I think it's far more practical to mandate Chinese or Arabic as the bilingual language. I have never met anyone in Calgary that cannot speak English but speaks French.

Idealistically, Quebec would seperate and then they could preserve their culture on their own dime. They indeed are too distinct to be part of Canada, and force unreasonable realities upon the rest of us.

Quebec is French. The RoC is English. That's how it should be.

[Kapitän Rotbart]

Bilingualism is a complete fraud in Canada. I illustrated on another thread how my knowledge of French in a suburban Calgary neighbourhood (all of which maybe 1 or 2 people can only speak French out of a few hundred thousand) got me preferential treatment at the passport office.... it actually applies everywhere the government has to provide me with French services despite no one actually demanding them.

Somehow I'm not sure if I'd received the same friendly service strolling into a passport office in Beauce demanding expedient service in English. Who knows.

If francophones in Quebec want their French services, sure. But if it's not cost justifiable, too bad. In my area of Canada, I think it's far more practical to mandate Chinese or Arabic as the bilingual language. I have never met anyone in Calgary that cannot speak English but speaks French.

Idealistically, Quebec would seperate and then they could preserve their culture on their own dime. They indeed are too distinct to be part of Canada, and force unreasonable realities upon the rest of us.

Quebec is French. The RoC is English. That's how it should be.

I for one am surprised that a passport office in Alberta would have service in French.

Sure virtually all who speak French in Alberta also speak English. However, abilities and willingness are two seperate things. If the bilingual people in Alberta prefer to be served in French, then they are justifying the demand for service offered in both domestic languages.

In Ottawa when I went to the Ontario Health Insurance Plan office, I grabbed a ticket for each language, willing to be served in either language provided I get the shortest wait time. Service in English called my number first, so I gladly renewed my health card in English that day. There was a higher demand to supply ratio for service in French than for service in English. Not too surprising for Ottawa, but I'd imagine that there could be days in an Albertan passport office where no one requests service in French. On the other hand, the bilingual Service Canada employee in that office probably has other tasks to keep busy when not serving people in French, so it's not a huge expense to have a bilingual agent at such a location.

Culture and socialism are two seperate things. Québec is preserving their culture on their own dime. They celebrate their culture without government intervention, whereas the distinct English Canadian culture is hardly celebrated and probably wouldn't be celebrated at all had it not been for the Canadian government subsidies. Québec's socialism is costing the RoC. I'd be in favor of demanding that they stop publicly funding day care service and plenty of other things, but that has nothing to do with language.

[geoffrey]

I for one am surprised that a passport office in Alberta would have service in French.

They don't. It actually says so on the listing of offices (the one I went to). But you just have to get all upset and they'll have you at the front of the line, speaking to the only French person there in a jiffy.

Sure virtually all who speak French in Alberta also speak English. However, abilities and willingness are two seperate things. If the bilingual people in Alberta prefer to be served in French, then they are justifying the demand for service offered in both domestic languages.

There is only one domestic language in Alberta. There never has been French people here ever (there is a small Metis settlement by Edmonton). German, Ukrainian or more recently Chinese are far more accurate cultural and historical languages to have dual service in. If they can speak English, they can save us all the cost of having duplicate services. No need for French service in Alberta at all, ever.

On the other hand, the bilingual Service Canada employee in that office probably has other tasks to keep busy when not serving people in French, so it's not a huge expense to have a bilingual agent at such a location.

Unless a more qualified anglophone didn't get the job.

[Leafless]

Questions don't start with the word "proove". That's imperative.

I guess they don't.

Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-"proove", that's a good one.

The one your talking about, I made a 'typo'.

But to prove to you I know what I am talking about, go to post #208 and it will confirm "prove it" in fact, ends with a period.

Even if the USA weren't there, the first Anglophones to populate Canada, the loyalists, would have no where to come from.

Brilliant.

But aren't you forgetting about that little war 'On The Plains of Abraham', the English were here regardless. They would not be loyalist, just plain British.

Regardless, Anglophone Canadians have a distinct culture, yet fail at celebrating it.

We celebrate Victoria Day and Dominion Day.

But Dominion Day was taken away from us by the federal government in order to appease Quebec and multiculturalism in general and now call it Canada Day.

Anglophone Canadians still have little interest in celebrating their own culture.

That is because basically most of the federal funding to do this goes to Quebec to celebrate their St. Jean Baptiste Day. Talk about treachery.

[Charles Anthony]

Anglophone Canadians still have little interest in celebrating their own culture.

That is because basically most of the federal funding to do this goes to Quebec to celebrate their St. Jean Baptiste Day. Talk about treachery.

You need "federal funding" to celebrate your own culture.

[Kapitän Rotbart]

I for one am surprised that a passport office in Alberta would have service in French.

They don't. It actually says so on the listing of offices (the one I went to). But you just have to get all upset and they'll have you at the front of the line, speaking to the only French person there in a jiffy.

As I said I'm surprised that they had someone there who could serve you in French. If you can manage in French than you might as well take advantage of the shorter line.

Sure virtually all who speak French in Alberta also speak English. However, abilities and willingness are two seperate things. If the bilingual people in Alberta prefer to be served in French, then they are justifying the demand for service offered in both domestic languages.

There is only one domestic language in Alberta. There never has been French people here ever (there is a small Metis settlement by Edmonton). German, Ukrainian or more recently Chinese are far more accurate cultural and historical languages to have dual service in. If they can speak English, they can save us all the cost of having duplicate services. No need for French service in Alberta at all, ever.

Actually, there is a Franco-Albertan community, probably floating around 1% of Alberta's population (insignificant I'll admit, but still existing). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Albertan

The other minorities may be able to speak English, but it only saves Alberta from serving them in their language if they are willing to speak it. The federal gov't guarantees service in both languages, whereas the Albertan gov't does not guarantee service in any language beyond English. I'd suppose it wouldn't be a priority for the federal gov't to staff their offices in Alberta with bilingual employees, but it would be handy to have at least one or two on call just in case. Besides, people going to federal offices are not necessarily from the province where the office is located.

On the other hand, the bilingual Service Canada employee in that office probably has other tasks to keep busy when not serving people in French, so it's not a huge expense to have a bilingual agent at such a location.

Unless a more qualified anglophone didn't get the job.

You're suggesting that Anglophones are not bilingual. Also, people are not employed solely based on qualifications, they are hired based on how well they can convince the employer that they are the best candidate. If language skills are not required for the job, then they're graded as assets beyond the requirements for the job and do not contribute towards the required qualifications. I doubt hiring a bilingual person for such a position typically requiring say some computer skills and communication skills would be at the cost of not hiring a more qualified monolingual applicant.

[Kapitän Rotbart]

Anglophone Canadians still have little interest in celebrating their own culture.

That is because basically most of the federal funding to do this goes to Quebec to celebrate their St. Jean Baptiste Day. Talk about treachery.

You need "federal funding" to celebrate your own culture.

Even if Québec didn't celebrate St. Jean Batiste, English Canadians would not be celebrating their culture.

The Québécois and Americans are two great examples of people not needing government funding to celebrate their culture. They produce their own music, plays, cultural events and so forth and so on without government funding because they like to celebrate their own culture. It's understandable if the gov't funds certain holidays, but culture goes beyond a few days off work/school on the calendar.

[Leafless]

You need "federal funding" to celebrate your own culture.

If it is available and relating to on a national scale, why not, but it should be fair. Privately NO. And actually that is the way it should be. The federal government should altogether keep its nose out of providing funding for cultural celebrations period.

The official languages of Canada are English and French.

Language is a component of culture and officially speaking, federal funding is available to do just that relating to the two official languages.

In Quebec it St. Jean Baptiste Day and in the ROC it is Victoria Day and used to be Dominion Day as well. But Quebec unfairly receives the lions share of federal funding to promote these festivities, as compared to funding received by all other provinces in Canada.

English cultural history is being obliterated in a national sense by discriminatory federal intervention.

[Leafless]

It doesn't matter who won the Plains of Abraham... Canada still has to cater to its current demographics according to its policies.

What democratic policies are you talking about?

Britain failed at assimilating all the Québécois into the English language while Québec itself was an English colony. Hasn't happened yet, and probably never will.

I don't think anyone really cares whether or not Quebec assimilates or not, but never pull the 'el reverso' and try to force majority English Canada to assimilate into a 'minority French language', but which is ACTUALLY HAPPENING, believe it or not.

This belongs in 'Ripley's' as there are not to many countries that would tolerate this kind of federal intervention on behalf of an aggressive, arrogant minority, that is continually trying to force linguistic recognition from the majority English.

[Leafless]

Racist according to your definition, where race is not limited to skin color. I also do not believe that you're white, unless you're really a member of the KKK.

In Soviet Russia, Canada insults you!

Russians don't insult me at all.

What I am insulted by is Quebec, who never even signed our countries constitution and officially discriminates by way of policy against White, English speaking Canadians but yet receives more benefits from the tax payers of Canada, than any other province in Canada.

Wow, you really can't read. Using item 1 which you gladly quote yourself, read over again and again "or by their elected representatives". Still fits the definition of democracy, buddy.

Not quite, buddy.

The purpose of our elected representatives is: " Within the House of Commons Members of Parliament (or MPs) sit to debate federal legislation. Members are elected in individual riding's based on population to represent and make decisions on behalf of the people of that riding."

We do have 'buddy' a major democratic shortfall of proper representation of constituents throughout Canada.

http://www.thecanadapage.org/Government.htm

I never said I was only interested in federal bilingualism. I think it would be nice for all provinces to be bilingual, but that's not feasible.

Please read post #188.

Granted Ottawa is the only urban center outside Québec with a strong natural demand for bilingualism, yet there are pockets of nearly exclusively Francophone's throughout Ontario (and in pretty much all other provinces as well).

The demand is not artificial, otherwise the private sector in Ottawa would not care about bilingualism at all.

The demand is artificial the private sector in Ottawa is only catering Ottawa's 'forced' federal style bilingualism policy.

Are you telling me that you cannot understand English? A demand for bilingualism means there is a need to serve in two or more distinct languages.

What official policy are you making reference to.

If there is no official policy, then no one is obliged to cater anyone but simply use the majority language of the land---English.

You cannot demand someone speaks to you in your French language without some sort of official policy, nor anyone has to listen to you.

[Kapitän Rotbart]

Russians don't insult me at all.

What I am insulted by is Quebec, who never even signed our countries constitution and officially discriminates by way of policy against White, English speaking Canadians but yet receives more benefits from the tax payers of Canada, than any other province in Canada.

Haven't you heard of Soviet Russia jokes? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Russia_jokes).

Québec should have signed, but now that they got away with it, nothing's going to change this. I also don't think they should have dibs on so much federal funding per capita either. We're in agreement on this issue... still irrelevant to language policies.

Not quite, buddy.

The purpose of our elected representatives is: " Within the House of Commons Members of Parliament (or MPs) sit to debate federal legislation. Members are elected in individual riding's based on population to represent and make decisions on behalf of the people of that riding."

We do have 'buddy' a major democratic shortfall of proper representation of constituents throughout Canada.

http://www.thecanadapage.org/Government.htm

It may not be the best democratic infrastructure, but it's still democratic. Because Canadian democracy still complies with the definition of democracy, you cannot rightfully claim Canada to be otherwise.

I never said I was only interested in federal bilingualism. I think it would be nice for all provinces to be bilingual, but that's not feasible.

Please read post #188.

Yeah, that's my post... I wrote a lot in that one. Be more specific.

The demand is artificial the private sector in Ottawa is only catering Ottawa's 'forced' federal style bilingualism policy.

The private sector is not forced to cater to any policy. They cater to Francophones because of its profitability. Private sector's favorite language is money and no other.

Are you telling me that you cannot understand English? A demand for bilingualism means there is a need to serve in two or more distinct languages.

What official policy are you making reference to.

If there is no official policy, then no one is obliged to cater anyone but simply use the majority language of the land---English.

You cannot demand someone speaks to you in your French language without some sort of official policy, nor anyone has to listen to you.

Ok, I'll rephrase. In the case of the federal gov't, according to their language policies, Canadians have the right to be served in their prefered domestic language. In the case of the private sector, a demand for bilingualism means there is great profitability in serving in two or more distinct languages.

No one is obliged to use the majority language either. If someone can make profit using only a minority language, there's no point holding 'em back (they still have to file taxes in one of the two domestic languages).

You cannot demand someone speaks to you or will listen to you in any language. What's your point?

[Leafless]

Québec should have signed, but now that they got away with it, nothing's going to change this. I also don't think they should have dibs on so much federal funding per capita either. We're in agreement on this issue... still irrelevant to language policies.

It is relevant to language policies.

Quebec reneged with their contract to Canada by not signing it.

Their should be NO federal language policies of any kind or any other language policies accommodating Quebec across Canada.

The Liberal federal government failed to penalize Quebec for their traitorous actions but rather REWARDED them.

It may not be the best democratic infrastructure, but it's still democratic. Because Canadian democracy still complies with the definition of democracy, you cannot rightfully claim Canada to be otherwise.

Yes I can rightfully claim Canada to be otherwise.

But begin by describing it right.

A democracy is a system of government by the whole population, in our case, through elected representatives who are supposed to: "Within the House of Commons Members of Parliament (or MPs) sit to debate federal legislation. Members are elected in individual riding's based on population to represent and make decisions on behalf of the people of that riding."

http://www.thecanadapage.org/Government.htm

Canadians have been denied political justice by not being offered a plebiscite or national referendum to settle questions of national concern by their MP's or the PM in the case of a national referendum.

Personally I have no respect for a police state.

[Leafless]

The private sector is not forced to cater to any policy. They cater to Francophones because of its profitability. Private sector's favorite language is money and no other.

Many stores in Ottawa with NCC leases are FORCED by the federal government to supply bilingual services.

Ottawa has a French speaking population of 15% and supplies them with a federal style City of Ottawa bilingual policy. Merchants are encouraged to honour this bilingual policy.

I wish I could say the same thing for Gatineau, Quebec which has about the same percentage of English speaking Canadians but does not offer them a bilingual policy like Ottawa. In Gatineau the English population base must be 50% in order for Gatineau to offer its English speaking population a bilingual policy.

You cannot demand someone speaks to you or will listen to you in any language. What's your point?

You cannot demand private industry to supply bilingual services with provinces NOT DESIGNATED or accommodating 'official bilingualism', that is my point.

In Canada outside of Quebec, English is the language of business and this is the language the large majority of business utilize.

You must think French is a majority language rather than a small minority residential language, dream on.