3,500 City of Ottawa Jobs to be bilingual

[jbg]

When Louisiana petitioned for admission to the United States, one of the conditions was that they adopt English as their official language. No one held a gun to Louisiana's head. They could have maintained territorial status, as Puerto Rico has (though now labeled "Commonwealth there is functionally no difference, except there is no customs barrier to US entry as there is with the US Virgin Islands).

But, considering the circumstance of the day, they considered that a small price. The condition for admission in no way required them to stop speaking French or give up thier civil laws or religion. The USA was not requiring 'assimilation'. It never has.

True, the Louiisana citizens were permitted to keep the civil system for non-criminal offenses and the US has always tolerated all religions. However, as a result of French not having "official" status Louisiana was not allowed to make French the "default" language for education, not were they allowed to require publicly displayed signage to be in French.

Do you mean that forcing me to talk in two languages at the same time is a good thing? Or is it better to turn a country into a Tower of Babel?

Thats the thing. No Canadian is required to speak in two languages. No one in Louisianna is required to speak English. The governments of both the USofA and Canada allow for translators when necessary. The difference being in Canada you may communicate with functionaries of the Federal government in either English or French. This, of necessity, requires the Federal government to hire those who speak the minority language of a given area in order to supply the service. The government, to achieve efficiency, prefers to hire one bilingual employee at the point of contact, rather than one English speaker and one French speaker.

But that "one bilingual employee" is most often a Francophone with broken English rather than vice versa. This is true for several reasons. First, many Francophones are in English immersion from birth, living in an English-speaking continent.Second, the political reality is that official bilingualism was enacted largely at the behest of and for the benefit of Francophone politicians and civil servants.

Why, if an immigrant from, say, Italy, settles in Montreal, should they have to educate their children in gibberish, or some obsolete second language, when they're on a generally English-speaking Continent? Why should people have to handicap their children in that manner?

French is neither Gibberish nor an obsolete second language. Should the state be required to fund the education of the children of the Italian immigrants in Italian? No. The default language of education in Quebec is French. Elsewhere in Canada its English. If the immigrants wish to have thier children learn English then they should fund such education themselves (home schooling is allowed - but of course French would be part of any curriculum) or immigrate to some other place other than Quebec.

Then why, prior to 1974, did families in many parts of Quebec have the option to have their children educated in either or both languages?

[Kapitän Rotbart]

I do not know what your talking about. Are you trying to tell me Quebecers live like citizens of France. If you are, for instance, I don't see very many Fiats or Citroen's being driven on Quebec streets nor do I see exclusive French films but rather dubbed or English Hollywood productions. I don't see many French fast food outlets but certainly see all the popular English Canadian and American chains. Technology wise is the same mostly all translated American technical manuals.

Any modern city in Quebec including the Outaouais, the French have been voluntarily assimilated to the English Canada-U.S. way of life (culture), including freely chosen bilingualism.

The only component of the French culture Francophone's chose not to be fully assimilated is the French language which they keep primarily as a political tool.

Nonsense. Jbg understood what I was talking about, and responded accordingly (although Louisiana doesn't quite work in this case because France sold it to the USA... Louisiana never 'chose' assimilation). FIATs are Italian. Using American technology is simply efficient (do you suppose they should opt for European sockets?! No one would do that in North America, no matter how different they considered themselves). French Canadians still have their own food, their own music... most remarkable aspects of culture. These people have not really been assimilated into mainstream culture for the most part.

They are not advancing it democratically.

They are forcing it on you when they have no right to do that.

The federal government of Canada must reflect views that democratically accommodates ALL Canadians and not just their BIASED view.

The main brunt of the Charter is to forcefully and unilaterally and undemocratically (federally speaking) give Quebec special status, when BOTH the 'Charlottetown Accord' and the 'Meach Lake Accord' FAILED to do exactly that.

Uh, they reserved the right to do that.

Most Canadians are not complaining about having two official languages. Bilingualism is accomodating to all Canadians... that way all Canadians can be served in their prefered domestic language.

A single point.

A ethnic refugee stepping of the boat has the same rights as a native Canadian?

You would have to be nuttier than I, to accept that.

Wow, this just shows how little you understand about the Charter. The Charter of rights guarantees rights for Canadians in Canada. It is a privilege to be a refugee, not a right. Canadian citizens have full rights in Canada, whereas refugees are on different terms. Of course they won't have the same rights as the Canadian citizens. The statement in the Charter was to guarantee all Canadians equal rights. That makes sense and is anti-discriminatory.

This can or could be interpreted in court to allow criminals to break the law, including terrorist or could be helpful to remove the full impact of charges against an alleged criminal.

Why? Because we don't have the death penalty?

I don't know how you interpret this, but when my country guarantees me the right to life, liberty and security, I see that as a good thing.

Don't make dumb assertions, Quebec never even signed our Constitution.

I know they didn't sign, but they still pretty much comply. They comply with their own Charter, and it seems that Québec is complying with the Canadian charter aswell (unless you can quote the Canadian Charter where Québec is doing otherwise).

Did the federal government send in the troops to stop Quebec from holding a referendum on separation????

Oh, I know. Nobody can stop Quebec from doing anything, but it would be unthinkable for a PM to implement a national referendum to boot troublesome, unity busting Quebec, out of confederation.

This is how many civil wars are started.

When the government does not do the right thing initially but rather buy time with 'official languages' and 'official multiculturalism' and the Charter (as is the case with Canada) and then sits back and wonder why all hell breaks loose.

Stop trolling. The seperation issue is at both ends. One end is Québec may want to seperate. The other end is Canada may want to lose Québec.

From the feds' end, no one would want to lose a part of one's country. Also, what could the feds do to stop the QC from having a referendum? None of this behavior is surprising, nor was the feds' reaction disappointing.

How would you know.

The federal government never offered that opportunity to Canadians in the way of a national referendum, to see how Canadians actually felt

If the majority of Canadians were to agree with you, I'm sure we would know. A revolution would be a possible outcome. At least there would be (violent) protests... at very least.

Being able to partially communicate in English does not make one proficient in English, unless you are PERFECTLY BILINGUAL, which few Francophone's are.

Who are you to judge? Why the hell do you type an apostrophe in "Francophone's" when it's plural and not possessive in this case? I'd score higher than you in English proficiency.

My hardcover Oxford dictionary says, pertaining to refugee: "a person taking refuge, esp. in a foreign country from war or persecution or natural disaster."

I guess your definition also fails to define the Québecers at the time of English colonization. They didn't take refuge in a foreign country (they stayed in their country because they were no longer French at this point), nor were they fleeing from war nor persecution nor natural disaster because none of such things were waiting for them anywhere. Nice try, but you failed to define Québecers as ever having been refugees.

[Peter F]

True, the Louiisana citizens were permitted to keep the civil system for non-criminal offenses and the US has always tolerated all religions. However, as a result of French not having "official" status Louisiana was not allowed to make French the "default" language for education, not were they allowed to require publicly displayed signage to be in French.

That is an interesting point. I have no knowledge of how the education system in Louisiana functioned in the past or present. I imagine that presently if you send your kid to public school in that state then that public school will be an english-language one. I imagine that at the time of the Louisiana purchase a public school (if there were any) would have been a french-language one. Probably the idea of public education occurred long after the purchase, by wich time English language instruction would have been the defacto 'default'.

But that is a matter of American History of wich I am ignorant.

Kapitan Roberts statement to Leafless wich we barged into was:

Find me an example of a people (a group speaking the majority language of the locale, for instance French in QC) voluntarily choosing assimilation. To my knowledge, assimilation has always been forced. Please try to prove me wrong.

You responded with the Louisiana episode as (I assume) an example of volountary assimilation. It turns out that the conditions of admittance to the union did in fact constitute inevitable assimilation. Wether those signing the agreement knew this and accepted it, or suspected it but were determined to avoid it, or sold it to the populace as a guarantee they wouldn't be assimilated is beyond my ken.

Perhaps, due to the mixing of Spanish, French and English, they didn't consider it a big deal. Wich is to say they were not concerned about assimilation at all.

But that "one bilingual employee" is most often a Francophone with broken English rather than vice versa. This is true for several reasons. First, many Francophones are in English immersion from birth, living in an English-speaking continent.Second, the political reality is that official bilingualism was enacted largely at the behest of and for the benefit of Francophone politicians and civil servants.

I am not sure that what you state is true at all. Many Quebecers are indeed immersed in English, in Montreal, the Ottawa Valley, and most of the south shore. But many Quebecers only hear English when surfing through the channels of thier TV's from SRC to TVA. In Quebec City, where I lived for 10 years, English is only heard on the tube or from tourists on the street. It has been my experience that while most French Quebecers know a smattering of English most are not bilingual. Those who are learned thier English from a close relative (immersion) or in school.

I do not buy the argument that most Quebecers are bilingual and therefore most Quebecers profit from a bilingual civil service. This, I think is false. If it were true then there would be more civil servant who learned English as a second language than civil servants who learned French as a second language. I have also heard the many stories of Englishmen contacting a federal govt agency only to have to deal with some Frenchman who could hardly speak English at all. The assumption is that the Frenchman only got the job because they are bilingual and/or French. The funny thing is we can never hear of the Englishman contacting the civil servant only to be met with and Englishman who speaks french terribly. I guess we never will. But it has probably occurred far more often.

I thoroughly disagree with the contention that official bilingualism was enacted in this country so that Francophone politicians and civil servants could benefit from it. That is Leafless's argument and in that regard I am firmly in agreement with Kapitan Robert.

Then why, prior to 1974, did families in many parts of Quebec have the option to have their children educated in either or both languages?

Because they always had that option. They still do, its just that the government is no longer going to pay for it unless one of the parents was educated in English. I have the option of going on the next Russian rocket up to the Space station. So do you and so does everyone else on this planet. What inhibits us is our lack of cash. Prior to 1974 Quebecers did have the option of sending thier kids to English school but few took that option for many reasons. Most didnt see any advantage to an English education. Many found that there were no English schools nearby. Some found those English schools already full.

I moved from Quebec to SW Ontario with 2 children in tow. The youngest hadn't yet started school and the other had spent 2 years in English grade school. When it came time to enroll them I found that it was going to be impossible to have them enrolled in French school. There were none available short of bussing them 3 hours each day. So English school it was.

When I moved to NW Ontario with the same 2 children in tow (now starting grades 3 and 5) I tried again to enroll them in French schools but sorry, in order to be enrolled in such a school they needed to have commenced in grade 1.

But I certainly can't deny that French education was an option.

In 1974 the option of English education for most Quebecers vanished. This was a blow to those who had access to English schools. But the Government, PQ and determined to put an end to English Supremacy, decided to not fund English education except in cases where they, more or less, had to. But they never withdrew the option to parents of an English education - only that the government was no longer going to finance it. Of course the curriculum at French schools includes English language instruction all the way through and vice versa for English schools. I find this to be perfectly reasonable.

[Leafless]

My hardcover Oxford dictionary says, pertaining to refugee: "a person taking refuge, esp. in a foreign country from war or persecution or natural disaster."

I guess your definition also fails to define the Québecers at the time of English colonization. They didn't take refuge in a foreign country (they stayed in their country because they were no longer French at this point), nor were they fleeing from war nor persecution nor natural disaster because none of such things were waiting for them anywhere. Nice try, but you failed to define Québecers as ever having been refugees.

They did not stay in their country, for the simple reason it was no longer their country.

What they were forced to stay in was a foreign land belonging to the English. Please understand that statement.

The embarrassing fact (now that you are making nonsensical statements) is they had no place to go, they were foreign French refugees, trapped in a foreign land.

They could not afford the voyage back to France like their elite leaders, who left them stranded and at the mercy of the British.

[Leafless]

I do not know what your talking about. Are you trying to tell me Quebecers live like citizens of France. If you are, for instance, I don't see very many Fiats or Citroen's being driven on Quebec streets nor do I see exclusive French films but rather dubbed or English Hollywood productions. I don't see many French fast food outlets but certainly see all the popular English Canadian and American chains. Technology wise is the same mostly all translated American technical manuals.

Any modern city in Quebec including the Outaouais, the French have been voluntarily assimilated to the English Canada-U.S. way of life (culture), including freely chosen bilingualism.

The only component of the French culture Francophone's chose not to be fully assimilated is the French language which they keep primarily as a political tool.

Nonsense. Jbg understood what I was talking about, and responded accordingly (although Louisiana doesn't quite work in this case because France sold it to the USA... Louisiana never 'chose' assimilation). FIATs are Italian. Using American technology is simply efficient (do you suppose they should opt for European sockets?! No one would do that in North America, no matter how different they considered themselves). French Canadians still have their own food, their own music... most remarkable aspects of culture. These people have not really been assimilated into mainstream culture for the most part.

Quebec has not shut itself out from the outside North American English market, but freely chose to be assimilated into the English culture.

But we all know what communist Quebec did to counter Quebec's population from voluntarily becoming overly English oriented with their 'officially French language' and the 'French Language Charter'.

So don't say they did not chose assimilation because, they did. They liked the English culture and ALL it has to offer.

To-day they copy cat English news productions, talk shows, game shows and even American movies and drive American made vehicles and boats and use and copycat American technology, eat American frozen meals and even dress like English Canadians and Americans and even have their own Canadian type socialist government, the Liberals and the Bloc.

Anytime I go to Quebec, I don't hear Quebec teens listening to French music as their radios are tuned to English rock stations or copy cat French stations that play English rock.

If Quebec and Quebecers were serious about there culture, yes, they would be using European (sockets) and driving Fiats and Italian car produced and driven in France along with Renault's and Peugeots and French music (no one listens to) and the wine and cheese they currently import from France.

Make no mistake, the French want everything the English enjoy, but only keep their language to whip down the English in giving them more, for free that is, (culture of entitlement) in order to feed their insatiable appetite for power and glory and continue the battle of the 'Plains of Abraham' where France left off.

[Kapitän Rotbart]

My hardcover Oxford dictionary says, pertaining to refugee: "a person taking refuge, esp. in a foreign country from war or persecution or natural disaster."

I guess your definition also fails to define the Québecers at the time of English colonization. They didn't take refuge in a foreign country (they stayed in their country because they were no longer French at this point), nor were they fleeing from war nor persecution nor natural disaster because none of such things were waiting for them anywhere. Nice try, but you failed to define Québecers as ever having been refugees.

They did not stay in their country, for the simple reason it was no longer their country.

What they were forced to stay in was a foreign land belonging to the English. Please understand that statement.

The embarrassing fact (now that you are making nonsensical statements) is they had no place to go, they were foreign French refugees, trapped in a foreign land.

They could not afford the voyage back to France like their elite leaders, who left them stranded and at the mercy of the British.

It was still their country. Going by your logic, would you also consider the French in German-occupied France to be refugees or even foreigners? That would be absurd.

The change of government did not have much of an effect on the Québecers at the time. They still ate the same food, wore the same clothes, practiced the same religion and most certainly spoke the same language, even after the English had colonized Québec. This doesn't seem anything like a group of refugees who couldn't afford to go home.

Quebec has not shut itself out from the outside North American English market, but freely chose to be assimilated into the English culture.

But we all know what communist Quebec did to counter Quebec's population from voluntarily becoming overly English oriented with their 'officially French language' and the 'French Language Charter'.

So don't say they did not chose assimilation because, they did. They liked the English culture and ALL it has to offer.

Nonsense. Don't make false statements, because Québec has not accepted assimilation. I quote a website:

Aspects of culture. Sociology of knowledge; Education; Language; Science; Technology; Art; Recreation

- www.renardus.org/cgi-bin/genDDCbrowseSQL.pl?node=AAHSZ&ID=212

With regards to technology, Québec uses it's own French Canadian keyboard. They have a different taste for cars (Pontiac Parisiennes and certain other cars are much more likely to have Québec plates in Canada). Anything else would be incredibly inconvenient (different sockets and voltage... etc.) and are not even really relevant to culture. By the way, Québec is one of few people who use American text books. Because certain things like accounting and law are nothing like in France, the Québecers can't use French academic resources, yet they manage to publish their own as opposed to using English language text books. That's something that many countries have not achieved (most countries use American textbooks in universities even in countries where no English is spoken; people do their studies in English because their language may not support it). The French language also keeps up with vocabulary for technology where most languages simply adopt the English words. French, even in Canada, is no where near being an obsolete language.

People listen to American music in all 192 countries in the world. Does that mean they've all been assimilated? According to Leafless, when it comes to Québec, it does. What about the tons of people no where near English-speaking countries who only listen to American music? I don't think a kid in Hungary nor Turkey who only listens to American music has been assimilated... same goes for a kid in the deep woods of Québec.

To-day they copy cat English news productions, talk shows, game shows and even American movies and drive American made vehicles and boats and use and copycat American technology, eat American frozen meals and even dress like English Canadians and Americans and even have their own Canadian type socialist government, the Liberals and the Bloc.

Do you honnestly think 'American' frozen food is any different from the frozen food in Europe? I haven't noticed any difference... it's all frozen food. Have you even ever left North America, at very least for vacation?! The whole world watches American films (well, maybe not Cuba or North Korea, but otherwise pretty much the entire world is pluged into American cinema). Of course they have Canadian-type socialist parties... they're Canadian.

Anytime I go to Quebec, I don't hear Quebec teens listening to French music as their radios are tuned to English rock stations or copy cat French stations that play English rock.

Facny that. Yet Québec musicians can live wealthy touring only in their province. There's an obvious demand for local music/culture. By the way, CKTF in Ottawa/Gatineau plays about 50-50... half in English and half in French. They also prefer to play the music in English which is most popular in Québec, which may differ from the charts in Ontariario/the RoC.

If Quebec and Quebecers were serious about there culture, yes, they would be using European (sockets) and driving Fiats and Italian car produced and driven in France along with Renault's and Peugeots and French music (no one listens to) and the wine and cheese they currently import from France.

Remember, Québecers are not French. The Québecers originate from Normandie for the most part, making them ethnically Scandinavian Viking, yet this goes far back that Québec doesn't really retain culture from Normandie. Québecers are neither ethnically French, nor culturally. They have their own culture meaning their own food, so it would be quite ignorant to assume that everyone of a given language likes the same type of cheese (think about the difference between American and English food). Using European sockets, currency, etc. would simply be inefficient. They're not aspects of culture anyway.

Make no mistake, the French want everything the English enjoy, but only keep their language to whip down the English in giving them more, for free that is, (culture of entitlement) in order to feed their insatiable appetite for power and glory and continue the battle of the 'Plains of Abraham' where France left off.

This suggests that you may be insane.

If you cannot see that Québec has its own distinct culture, there's no point going on about this.

[Leafless]

Wow, this just shows how little you understand about the Charter. The Charter of rights guarantees rights for Canadians in Canada. It is a privilege to be a refugee, not a right.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

I know they didn't sign, but they still pretty much comply. They comply with their own Charter, and it seems that Québec is complying with the Canadian charter aswell (unless you can quote the Canadian Charter where Québec is doing otherwise).

I don't agree with the Charter. I think it is a total sham and an insult to Canadians.

I consider the Charter relating to Quebec, totally corrupt and implemented by traitorous politicians.

I have said this many times throughout this thread. Don't make me repeat myself by bringing up the same Quebec BS.

Stop trolling. The seperation issue is at both ends. One end is Québec may want to seperate. The other end is Canada may want to lose Québec.

I have no idea what you are trying to say.

[Kapitän Rotbart]

Wow, this just shows how little you understand about the Charter. The Charter of rights guarantees rights for Canadians in Canada. It is a privilege to be a refugee, not a right.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Shows your slow comprehension capacities.

You were trolling about the Charter and I pointed out that equal rights affects only nationals, not foreigners/refugees. It's a good thing that Canadians, regardless of background are to be treated equally.

The ways you misinterpret the Charter are frightening.

I know they didn't sign, but they still pretty much comply. They comply with their own Charter, and it seems that Québec is complying with the Canadian charter aswell (unless you can quote the Canadian Charter where Québec is doing otherwise).

I don't agree with the Charter. I think it is a total sham and an insult to Canadians.

I consider the Charter relating to Quebec, totally corrupt and implemented by traitorous politicians.

I have said this many times throughout this thread. Don't make me repeat myself by bringing up the same Quebec BS.

It's good that you suggest that what you've been bringing up about Québec is BS. I will agree with you on that.

You're the only one who seems to be insulted by the Charter.

Please point out the corruption in Québec's Charter. Please quote them and point out whatever you find outrageous. I doubt you'll find any 'discriminatory' rights.

Stop trolling. The seperation issue is at both ends. One end is Québec may want to seperate. The other end is Canada may want to lose Québec.

I have no idea what you are trying to say.

Because of your poor comprehension skills.

See it as QC vs. Canada, the feds. (simple, isn't it?)

QC can hold a referendum on whether or not Québec is to leave Canada.

The feds can hold a referendum on whether QC should be booted out of Canada or not.

It makes sense that QC would have referenda. The Basks and several other minority groups in this world have tried to seperate from their country (the Portugal is an example of successful seperation).

It makes sense that the feds not have referenda on booting QC out because no country wants to renounce territory.

[Leafless]

It was still their country. Going by your logic, would you also consider the French in German-occupied France to be refugees or even foreigners? That would be absurd.

What country are you talking about?

The Germans occupied France and the French were under control by the German forces, unlike Quebec that was now an English colony with the left overs that did not flee back to France.

The change of government did not have much of an effect on the Québecers at the time. They still ate the same food, wore the same clothes, practiced the same religion and most certainly spoke the same language, even after the English had colonized Québec. This doesn't seem anything like a group of refugees who couldn't afford to go home.

They were refugees and political prisoners of the British and continued living their previous lifestyle as they were in no postion to do anything else, or fight to the death which they didn't do.

Nonsense. Don't make false statements, because Québec has not accepted assimilation.

Then why don't they have their own country?

Why have they accepted being FORCED to live with the English?

Do you honnestly think 'American' frozen food is any different from the frozen food in Europe? I haven't noticed any difference... it's all frozen food. Have you even ever left North America

I don't have to leave North America, we have it ALL right here.

If you cannot see that Québec has its own distinct culture, there's no point going on about this.

All provinces are part of Canada and all provinces possess cultural distinctiveness, which is no reason to claim special rights because of it.

All Quebec has to do is grow up and realize New France is gone forever.

[Kapitän Rotbart]

It was still their country. Going by your logic, would you also consider the French in German-occupied France to be refugees or even foreigners? That would be absurd.

hat country are you talking about?

The Germans occupied France and the French were under control by the German forces, unlike Quebec that was now an English colony with the left overs that did not flee back to France.

The change of government did not have much of an effect on the Québecers at the time. They still ate the same food, wore the same clothes, practiced the same religion and most certainly spoke the same language, even after the English had colonized Québec. This doesn't seem anything like a group of refugees who couldn't afford to go home.

They were refugees and political prisoners of the British and continued living their previous lifestyle as they were in no postion to do anything else, or fight to the death which they didn't do.

Yeah, some political prisoners... hahahahahaha. They could still work, go to school and to church and had all their rights in terms of practicality. Why would the "left overs" flee back to France? They were no longer French by this point. Had they fled to France, then they'd be refugees.

Nonsense. Don't make false statements, because Québec has not accepted assimilation.

Then why don't they have their own country?

Why have they accepted being FORCED to live with the English?

I don't think Québec 'accepted' being colonized by the English. They made compromises.

Do you honnestly think 'American' frozen food is any different from the frozen food in Europe? I haven't noticed any difference... it's all frozen food. Have you even ever left North America

I don't have to leave North America, we have it ALL right here.

The more you know, the more you are aware of how little you really know. The less you know, the more you think you know. You seem to be an example of the latter.

There's a whole world out there, so much happening outside our continent. You should at least go on vacation somewhere outside North Am, it just might broaden your horizons. One thing North Am doesn't have are the two most touristic cities in the world; Paris followed by Madrid. We also don't have pyramids (unless you include Mexico), we don't have the world's largest music store (which is in Germany) nor do we have all the world's historical monuments like Noah's Ark. Had you visited countries outside North Am, you'd probably see that Québec shares most of the same similarities and differences with the USA as any other nation would.

If you cannot see that Québec has its own distinct culture, there's no point going on about this.

All provinces are part of Canada and all provinces possess cultural distinctiveness, which is no reason to claim special rights because of it.

All Quebec has to do is grow up and realize New France is gone forever.

That wasn't the point. You were trolling about how Québec has been assimilated into North American culture, and I was pointing out that Québec really does offer plenty of distinct culture and then you state that all provinces have distinct culture. This is a red herring. Seems like you can't actually face my arguments.

[jbg]

In 1974 the option of English education for most Quebecers vanished. This was a blow to those who had access to English schools. But the Government, PQ and determined to put an end to English Supremacy, decided to not fund English education except in cases where they, more or less, had to. But they never withdrew the option to parents of an English education - only that the government was no longer going to finance it. Of course the curriculum at French schools includes English language instruction all the way through and vice versa for English schools. I find this to be perfectly reasonable.

Then why, with your logic, should English Canada pay through equalization and "cultural support programs" for the inefficiencies created by Quebec's manic policies?

[Leafless]

Yeah, some political prisoners... hahahahahaha. They could still work, go to school and to church and had all their rights in terms of practicality. Why would the "left overs" flee back to France? They were no longer French by this point. Had they fled to France, then they'd be refugees.

Like I said previously, The British did not know what to do with Quebec. Their language and religion were not compatible with the British and that is the reason for the 'Quebec Act', let them co-exist among themselves.

Why would they be considered refugees if they had fled back to France? The place was called New France prior to the British win on the 'Plains of Abraham'. The Quebec French elite that fled back to France were not considered refugees.

I don't think Québec 'accepted' being colonized by the English. They made compromises.

They were forced to make compromises and if they felt that way initially, why did they even think about joining confederation? Why did they not stand on their own two feet, if they felt they constituted the status of a country?

The more you know, the more you are aware of how little you really know. The less you know, the more you think you know. You seem to be an example of the latter.

I think you have perfectly described the political ideologies of Quebec, with Quebec being the latter.

you'd probably see that Québec shares most of the same similarities and differences with the USA as any other nation would.

You have that wrong.

What you mean is, Quebec shares the same similarities and differences with CANADA as any other province would for the simple reason Quebec would not exist without the good fortune of being a province in Canada.

That wasn't the point. You were trolling about how Québec has been assimilated into North American culture,

No I am not trolling, I am serious, Quebec has been assimilated, as a group of refugees, many who think Quebec still belongs to France (the same problem Britain had) but continue to be in an advanced state if illusionary denial by thinking they are a legitimate French country, competing culturally with Canada.

and I was pointing out that Québec really does offer plenty of distinct culture and then you state that all provinces have distinct culture. This is a red herring. Seems like you can't actually face my arguments.

All Canadian provinces do have a distinct culture.

But your right about not being able to face your arguments which to me, are actually fabricated arguments based on your false belief relating to Quebec importance, superiority and distinct culture, which in my mind do not exist.

Quebec is technically still a province of French refugees (classified Canadian) unwilling to accept their true nature, relating to their political dilemma, making life in Canada pure hell. I can fully understand the federal governments position as what actually to do with the province of Quebec, which could very well result with millions of refugees on Canada's doorstep making Canada a true third world country.

It is for this reason any form of debate with you cannot continue on my part, as you are not only mocking my thoughts and my factualities, but making a fool out of this entire forum and website as a biased Quebec propagandist.

[Peter F]

Then why, with your logic, should English Canada pay through equalization and "cultural support programs" for the inefficiencies created by Quebec's manic policies?

Political expidiency. Quebec has lots of votes. Any party seeking power isn't going to change it.

('it' being cultural support programs. Equalization being a different kettle of fish)

[Kapitän Rotbart]

Then why, with your logic, should English Canada pay through equalization and "cultural support programs" for the inefficiencies created by Quebec's manic policies?

Most provinces are supported through equalization. Canada's cultural programs are often reciprocal... many Francophones and Anglophones do cultural exchanges, usually an internship in either the QC or the RoC where they can work on their 2nd Canadian language. What Québec wants to do with their money is their business, but federal money spent on culture is invested in a reciprocal manner.

[Kapitän Rotbart]

Yeah, some political prisoners... hahahahahaha. They could still work, go to school and to church and had all their rights in terms of practicality. Why would the "left overs" flee back to France? They were no longer French by this point. Had they fled to France, then they'd be refugees.

Like I said previously, The British did not know what to do with Quebec. Their language and religion were not compatible with the British and that is the reason for the 'Quebec Act', let them co-exist among themselves.

Why would they be considered refugees if they had fled back to France? The place was called New France prior to the British win on the 'Plains of Abraham'. The Quebec French elite that fled back to France were not considered refugees.

The elite who returned to France were probably born in France. Those who stayed were already at least a few generations Canadian by then. If they were to go to to France, it would be a first for them and they would already have to adjust from living in another continent with another culture, etc.

I don't think Québec 'accepted' being colonized by the English. They made compromises.

They were forced to make compromises and if they felt that way initially, why did they even think about joining confederation? Why did they not stand on their own two feet, if they felt they constituted the status of a country?

Yes, they were forced to make compromises... my point exactly; they never chose assimilation! Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

By the way, the Québecers were the first to call themselves Canadians (http://www.agoracosmopolite.com/leadership_candidate.htm) and the idea of seperation came much later... at the time they were really keen on being part of the maple leaf.

The more you know, the more you are aware of how little you really know. The less you know, the more you think you know. You seem to be an example of the latter.

I think you have perfectly described the political ideologies of Quebec, with Quebec being the latter.

Québec is not making such nonsense statements as you are.

you'd probably see that Québec shares most of the same similarities and differences with the USA as any other nation would.

You have that wrong.

What you mean is, Quebec shares the same similarities and differences with CANADA as any other province would for the simple reason Quebec would not exist without the good fortune of being a province in Canada.

No, I mean the Québecers share many of the same similarities and differences with mainstream North American culture as many other countries do. Most of the RoC has no distinct culture; they're sell-outs to the mainstream culture for the most part.

That wasn't the point. You were trolling about how Québec has been assimilated into North American culture,

No I am not trolling, I am serious, Quebec has been assimilated, as a group of refugees, many who think Quebec still belongs to France (the same problem Britain had) but continue to be in an advanced state if illusionary denial by thinking they are a legitimate French country, competing culturally with Canada.

Nonsense, the Québecers don't like the French (their lack of support in both world wars is a good example of this). They don't have to compete culturally, most Canadian culture comes out of Québec. Québec probably has more distinct food and produces more music than the entire RoC combined.

and I was pointing out that Québec really does offer plenty of distinct culture and then you state that all provinces have distinct culture. This is a red herring. Seems like you can't actually face my arguments.

All Canadian provinces do have a distinct culture.

But your right about not being able to face your arguments which to me, are actually fabricated arguments based on your false belief relating to Quebec importance, superiority and distinct culture, which in my mind do not exist.

Yeah, all provinces have distinct culture, but can you provide examples of dances, music, cuisine or other cultural manifestations celebrated throughout and exclusively in a given Canadian province? Please give me examples of the RoC proveinces' distinct culture. I bet there is some, but I've been to most provinces and haven't seen a significant difference between provinces in the regional cultures of the RoC.

I am right that you can't face my arguments because you refuse to recognize Québec's culture. Importance and superiority? More nonsense; I never claimed Québec were more important nor superior to any of the RoC provinces. Québec is just like any other provinces politically, it's simply populated by a people sharing a very different culture from the RoC who agree on the minority official language. There's nothing wrong with that.

Quebec is technically still a province of French refugees (classified Canadian) unwilling to accept their true nature, relating to their political dilemma, making life in Canada pure hell. I can fully understand the federal governments position as what actually to do with the province of Quebec, which could very well result with millions of refugees on Canada's doorstep making Canada a true third world country.

It is for this reason any form of debate with you cannot continue on my part, as you are not only mocking my thoughts and my factualities, but making a fool out of this entire forum and website as a biased Quebec propagandist.

How could they be refugees classified nationals? That makes even less sense. The only case where Québecers "could" be refugees in Canada is if they actually do seperate and some cross the border into the RoC to stay, because if they do become their own country, then and only then would they be foreigners in the RoC. By the way, that's "government's" with an apostrophe because it's possessive, in correct English spelling.

I'm actually playing the devil's advocate because you write total nonsense about the QC. I don't actually care about Québec in perticular, to me they're just like any other province with nice landscape who respects human rights just as effectively as the RoC, but I couldn't help but defend Canada when I see your completely absurd comments. I was hoping to discuss bilingualism in Ottawa in this thread, but you keep relating it to Québec (despite Ottawa being in Ontariario, last I checked).

[jbg]

Yeah, all provinces have distinct culture, but can you provide examples of dances, music, cuisine or other cultural manifestations celebrated throughout and exclusively in a given Canadian province? Please give me examples of the RoC proveinces' distinct culture. I bet there is some, but I've been to most provinces and haven't seen a significant difference between provinces in the regional cultures of the RoC.

Nunavut, NWT and Yukon, considered as a unit, have lots of that. When the people aren't too drunk or besotted from gasoline sniffing to dance or sing that is.

[Kapitän Rotbart]

Yeah, all provinces have distinct culture, but can you provide examples of dances, music, cuisine or other cultural manifestations celebrated throughout and exclusively in a given Canadian province? Please give me examples of the RoC proveinces' distinct culture. I bet there is some, but I've been to most provinces and haven't seen a significant difference between provinces in the regional cultures of the RoC.

Nunavut, NWT and Yukon, considered as a unit, have lots of that. When the people aren't too drunk or besotted from gasoline sniffing to dance or sing that is.

I'll second that, but the territories are not provinces and Native Canadian culture is not a mainstream culture of any of the 10 provinces.

[Leafless]

Yeah, all provinces have distinct culture, but can you provide examples of dances, music, cuisine or other cultural manifestations celebrated throughout and exclusively in a given Canadian province? Please give me examples of the RoC proveinces' distinct culture. I bet there is some, but I've been to most provinces and haven't seen a significant difference between provinces in the regional cultures of the RoC.

Nunavut, NWT and Yukon, considered as a unit, have lots of that. When the people aren't too drunk or besotted from gasoline sniffing to dance or sing that is.

I'll second that, but the territories are not provinces and Native Canadian culture is not a mainstream culture of any of the 10 provinces.

Neither is French a mainstream culture of any of (nine out of ten) provinces.

In Canada our culture mimics the U.S. culture including Quebec, so back off with the BS and Quebec's language of 'New France' that has been obliterated since 1759.

The only reason French is still alive in Quebec is because of the efforts of corrupt federal French politicians.

Individual cultures pertaining to groups, are basically only relevant to those groups and that is providing they have the society that can support their culture, without the collective help of other cultures, (Canada at large) or the more precisely, the tax payers of Canada.

[Kapitän Rotbart]

Yeah, all provinces have distinct culture, but can you provide examples of dances, music, cuisine or other cultural manifestations celebrated throughout and exclusively in a given Canadian province? Please give me examples of the RoC proveinces' distinct culture. I bet there is some, but I've been to most provinces and haven't seen a significant difference between provinces in the regional cultures of the RoC.

Nunavut, NWT and Yukon, considered as a unit, have lots of that. When the people aren't too drunk or besotted from gasoline sniffing to dance or sing that is.

I'll second that, but the territories are not provinces and Native Canadian culture is not a mainstream culture of any of the 10 provinces.

Neither is French a mainstream culture of any of (nine out of ten) provinces.

In Canada our culture mimics the U.S. culture including Quebec, so back off with the BS and Quebec's language of 'New France' that has been obliterated since 1759.

The only reason French is still alive in Quebec is because of the efforts of corrupt federal French politicians.

Individual cultures pertaining to groups, are basically only relevant to those groups and that is providing they have the society that can support their culture, without the collective help of other cultures, (Canada at large) or the more precisely, the tax payers of Canada.

French Canadian culture is a mainstream culture in Québec, and they are celebrating their culture regardless of government intervention. The only reason French is still alive in Québec is because the English failed at assimilating the Québecers upon colonization. As I mentioned earlier, no people voluntarily choose assimilation; it's always forced.

What the taxpayers are paying for is federal bilingualism. It's not that big an expense considering the kind of money all governments waste on the most useless things (like redecorating the prime minister's house every time a new PM is elected). Plus we have something to show for this expense; we are a country of two languages. It's not gonna change any time soon.

[capricorn]

I am a 60 year old francophone, born and raised in Ottawa, and still a resident. In the early sixties, the going thing was to get a federal government job. The salary was no hell but job security was a given. You didn't have to have a university degree. Heck even a grade 9 education could get you in if you passed the required written exam.

I learned English as a youngster on the street, not in school. I can't remember not being able to speak English. This was the case for the majority of francophones in the area. I totally agree that English is easier to learn than French. This may explain why my anglo friends did not bother to learn the language.

I passed the entrance exam and joined the PS in 1964 and worked exclusively in English. Then came the original Official Languages Act in 1969. Managers were asked to designate positions as either "French Only", "English Only" and "Bilingual". This is where the problems started. Managers really did not know or understand what they were doing. Some vindictive managers actually used the process to blackball employees they did not like. But that's another story.

Then, I had to be tested to determine my level of "bilingualism". Of course, having worked strictly in English and speaking mainly in English in social circles, my knowledge of proper oral and written French communication was abominable. Since my mother tongue is French, I was tested for my knowledge of English. Lucky for me. If I had been tested for my knowledge of French, I'm certain I would have failed. This was the case for the majority of my francophone co-workers. So, as time went on, the language requirements of federal in Ottawa increasingly required knowledge of a second language. That is why francophones then found themselves more "promotable" than anglophones, all because of the language designation of positions. Is this right? No it is not. But such was the nature of the beast when bilingualism was born.

There is absolutely no need to import this type of bilingualism in Ottawa. We don't need it, we don't want it and we certainly don't want to pay for it. Making Ottawa a bilingual community is nothing more than a campaign by over-zealous (French) federal, provincial and municipal politicians to mimic the feds.

[jbg]

There is absolutely no need to import this type of bilingualism in Ottawa. We don't need it, we don't want it and we certainly don't want to pay for it. Making Ottawa a bilingual community is nothing more than a campaign by over-zealous (French) federal, provincial and municipal politicians to mimic the feds.

Great post.

I will admit that signs saying "Nord" and "Sud" would be very helpful to travellers on Alberta's Route 2. Certainly, there is no demand for bi-lingual signs on the road from the airport to downtown in Montreal.

[Leafless]

The only reason French is still alive in Québec is because the English failed at assimilating the Québecers upon colonization. As I mentioned earlier, no people voluntarily choose assimilation; it's always forced.

The English did not fail at assimilating French Quebec.

They did not want to be assimilated. After the fall of Quebec City in 1759 and under British rule, the 65,000 French-speaking inhabitants of Quebec had a single aim - to retain their traditions, language and culture.

You are totally wrong to assume, "no people voluntarily choose assimilation; it's always forced."

I would assert, English Canadians in general, have voluntarily choose to be U.S. assimilated, as many Quebecers also have chosen that route, outside of language which they retain for political reasons and pure spite, stemming from the fact relating to their outright hatred of anything English.

It would be an outright lie to suggest Quebecers have not been U.S. assimilated outside of their language.

What the taxpayers are paying for is federal bilingualism. It's not that big an expense considering the kind of money all governments waste on the most useless things (like redecorating the prime minister's house every time a new PM is elected).

Thirty-three years of bilingualism have cost Canadian tax payers $700-Billion dollars, which is more than our national debt.

http://www.languagefairness.com/Cost.php

Plus we have something to show for this expense; we are a country of two languages.

At the expense of running Canada like a 'banana republic' by corrupt French PM's, under the guise of emulating a democracy where the judiciary can also determine what can and cannot be legislated and then rubber stamped by our so called, self serving elected representatives.

[Pat Coghlan]

...we are a country of two languages. It's not gonna change any time soon.

...who, for the most part, live in predominantly English or French regions.

The problem is that the ROC is not following Quebec's example and establishing one language of work, while providing services in both languages.

The goal of using either language in the workplace hasn't succeeded - and never will.

[jbg]

...we are a country of two languages. It's not gonna change any time soon.

...who, for the most part, live in predominantly English or French regions.

The problem is that the ROC is not following Quebec's example and establishing one language of work, while providing services in both languages.

The goal of using either language in the workplace hasn't succeeded - and never will.

Quebec does not provide services in English. The Federal Government, operating in Quebec, does.

[seabee]

Québec does provide services in English.