The spoiled child Quebec

[dmckay]

Really? This thread is still going? I know it annoys me to get directions that are all in French and the Olympics were a little frustrating with French being the first language, but I don't lose sleep over it! Someone has some attention issues, me thinks?

[glen d.]

Still quacking ....

Serge Joyal's speech in 1982. . . “Everything we undertake and everything we are doing to make Canada a French State is part of a venture I shared for many years with a number of people! The idea, the challenge of making Canada a French Country both inside and outside Quebec- an idea that some people consider a little bit crazy,-this is something beyond ordinary imagination”!

Now it looks to me as these are well connected governing individuals who have stated pretty much what the agenda was going forward .... ?

[S.A.S]

Originally Posted by glen d.

Still quacking ....

Serge Joyal's speech in 1982. . . “Everything we undertake and everything we are doing to make Canada a French State is part of a venture I shared for many years with a number of people! The idea, the challenge of making Canada a French Country both inside and outside Quebec- an idea that some people consider a little bit crazy,-this is something beyond ordinary imagination”!

Now it looks to me as these are well connected governing individuals who have stated pretty much what the agenda was going forward .... ?

I am not questioning the legitimacy of your posts but I would like to ask where you are getting your information from.

[glen d.]

Serge Joyal, PC, OC, OQ (born February 1, 1945) is a Canadian Senator. A lawyer by profession, Joyal served as vice-president of the Quebec wing of the Liberal Party of Canada. He was first elected to the Canadian House of Commons in the 1974 general election and remained a Liberal Member of Parliament for ten years.

In 1978, Joyal, along with a group of concerned Montreal citizens that included Nick Auf der Maur and Robert Keaton, co-founded the Municipal Action Group ("MAG"). Joyal was particularly well known at the time for having supported L’Asociation des gens de l’air, a group which was criticizing the lack of spoken French by airport controllers.
I think he may have been the Sec. of State also.


This came from Wikipedia.
Canadians against bilingualism.
Canadian Language Fairness
Howard Galganov

[glen d.]

There is some books that JV Andrew wrote on the bilingualism also.

[howlin]

http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/...666/story.html another story to fan the flames

[glen d.]

An open letter to the Prime Minister, M.P's and newspapers. March26,2010



In a matter of seconds shocking news travels around the world to inform people of drastic events like the tragic death of Robert Dziekanski, the Polish fellow who came to Canada to visit his Mother and was tasered to death by four attending Mounties at the Vancouver Airport before he was able to see his Mother.



Or the tragic story that sent shock waves around the world about the horrific attack on a wheelchair victim from Canada who went to Australia to visit his girlfriend. He was brutally attacked by two teenaged boys in an elevator.



But where are the shock waves to tell the world that, Gilles Caron, a French Canadian, was issued a traffic ticket in English only in the 98% English speaking province of Alberta and two years later was awarded $91,046.29 plus G.S.T for damages by the Court Of Appeal of Alberta because his rights were violated.



This may not be as shocking an event as the taser death of a Polish man who could not communicate with the Mounties but the truth behind this situation is really shocking and should hit the news media of the world.



For the past 40 years the English language has been degraded and insulted by Quebec's racists Laws, Bills 22, 178 & 101 with the blessing of our past and present Governments. English is becoming a second class language with the French minority gaining more control of the top administrative jobs in Ottawa and other government job across the nation and the English speaking Canadians have been under attack, losing jobs and seniority because of the Federal Official Languages Act 1969, insisting that all Canadians become bilingual. The government keeps telling the world that we are a bilingual country but ignores the fact that Quebec remains French only.



The horrendous cost of $18 billion a year is never questioned and no one dares to complain. Quebec has lost over 1 million English speaking people and 600 head offices of major companies have relocated to other parts of Canada for peace and language freedom. Unbelievable ? Yes, that is the truth.



Quebec racist Bill 101 restricts the use of English in some work places and all outdoor signs must show French lettering, larger and brighter than the English lettering. The United Nations agreed Bill 101 was unconstitutional but the governing Liberal Federal Government did nothing about it. The current Conservative Party is following suit, held hostage by the hope of getting into majority territory if they could just persuade the Quebecers to abandon the Bloc Quebecois and vote for the Conservatives. In the meantime, the Wildrose Alliance is starting to rock the provincial conservative party’s boat in Alberta and chances of them replacing the governing party are growing everyday.



Canada is the only place in the world that persecutes the English language and many of us are seeing shades of Germany in the 30's. When we complain we are called racists and silenced in many subtle ways.



Where are the shock waves for this serious crime against the English language in civilized Canada?

You have my permission to forward this letter to anyone.



A disappointed Canadian,

Dot Davies-Fuhrman

[Alberta Separatist]

excellant point glen d !

[glen d.]

This a letter from Alberta's attorney general stating facts of why we don't need more forced bilinqualism in this province/country.




Alberta challenges bill requiring top court judges to be bilingual

Canadians' trust in the Supreme Court is at risk, justice minister says

Alison Redford, Freelance

A bill currently before Canada's Senate represents a serious risk to the interests of western Canadians, to the proper function of the Supreme Court, and to the integrity of the justice system.

Recently, I wrote the federal minister of justice about Bill C-232, An Act to Amend the Supreme Court Act. Introduced as a private member's bill by an NDP MP from New Brunswick, Bill C-232 would require all Supreme Court justices in Canada to be bilingual.

I wrote the federal minister in the hope that there is still time to revisit the bill's wisdom before it leaves the Senate and is proclaimed into law.

As a country with two official languages, French and English, it makes sense that Canada's central institutions be able to function in both languages. This is a policy that Alberta respects. However, Bill C-232 introduces a new concept of bilingualism in Canada and our courts.

Historically, bilingualism has meant that Canadians have the right, in designated areas, to receive services from federal institutions in either English or French.

But there's a world of difference to move from requiring institutions to provide services in both languages to requiring that all members of the institution be fluently bilingual.

I appreciate the symbolic importance of the Supreme Court. Having fluently bilingual justices on the court is an important reflection of Canada's linguistic reality and is an objective that Alberta supports.

But in addition to being an important symbolic institution, the Supreme Court is first and foremost the highest appeal court in the country.

That means the overriding considerations in the selection of judges should be legal competence and individual merit. Legal competence, not proficiency in both languages, should be the determining factor. Barring unilingual Canadians from becoming Supreme Court justices is wrong.

Our particular concern in Western Canada is the risk that establishing an inflexible linguistic requirement will, for all practical purposes, prevent the vast majority of the current legal bar in the West from being considered for selection to serve on the Supreme Court. In that respect, it's worth noting that while the requirement of three justices drawn from the Quebec bar is a statutory requirement, the geographic allocation of the rest of the court -- two seats for Western Canada, three for Ontario and one for Atlantic Canada -- is a constitutional convention.

By excluding from consideration for the court most of the best legal minds in Western Canada, pursuing this kind of linguistic perfection poses the serious risk of entrenching a permanent geographic imbalance on the Court.

Alberta is currently examining whether Bill C-232's linguistic requirements would actually even be constitutional. Under the Constitution of Canada, changes to the composition of the Supreme Court require the approval of both Parliament and the provinces.

In the end, perhaps the most serious risk Bill C-232 poses is to the confidence Canadians can place in their justice system.

Part of the Supreme Court's legitimacy comes from its ability to be representative of all regions of the country. Anything that threatens its representative nature threatens the trust Canadians can place in their Supreme Court, and their justice system.

Canadians need to know their Court reflects their interests, concerns, and their diversity. Bill C-232 threatens that fundamental premise.

Changes as profound as those Bill C-232 proposes should only be done with the support of a genuine consensus of Canadians. I think it's clear that such a consensus doesn't exist today.

I'll be writing separately to the federal opposition party leaders to express Alberta's position regarding this legislation.

I encourage all Albertans to write or contact their MP and Senators to express their concern over this serious risk to Canada's justice system.

Alison Redford, Q.C., is Alberta minister of justice and attorney general ILLUS: Photo: Journal Stock /

Originally Posted by fluxcore

In Alberta were very fortunate to have most of the oil and gas under us, That being said were part of the BIG picture that makes up Canada and our wealth should be shared with the other provinces. Its to bad Quebec wanted to seperate in that case let them have it but for the rest of the provinces like BC, Newfoundland, Ontario ect.I think alberta does and should help them get through tough times besides they make up allot of Albertas work force.

I lived in Montreal for 4 years and a town of 5000 just outside Quebec City for 2,, I was the only english only speaking person in the town. I never did learn how to speak french, kinda understood it, could kinda read it. Here's the thing, the same sentiment is expressed in quebec as Alberta and the common thread is those people have never ventured out of both their prefered belle province. When we watch our own English govt prov/fed we are quite fed up, it's the same in Quebec, we just speak differently. The most common complaint is the news natl/local, they keep the non-war afoot. Seperatists and Sovereignists are as sick of Quebec govt political posturing as the rest of Canada. I could go on and on.

In the town outside of Quebec City, I was restoring a very old house, the word of mouth spread around and I was turning down work at $40 per/hr,, some potential contracts brought translators to try to talk me into taking contracts. One job I did take was helping a plumber repair 20 above ground swimming pools,, he could only speak a very old weird french and me only english,, every morning he'd pick me up for work and say "Halloweeeeeen" and I reply "OOOoooooooh scary". After a month a neighbour says to me,, what are you teaching Ben? when we ask him how he's doing in french he answers by saying "OOooooooh scary",,,, I then found out that every morning he was trying to say "Howareyoudoing". It should be noted that this town is where the Bloc Quebecoise started their party, I was always devoutly a federalist and never had a scratch threatened my way,,

On the contrary -and similar to the knee jerk attitude we get when we here a quebec minister whine back east- someone at a party did start tossing some verbal my way, Alberta this Alberta redneck that, uncultured greedy, bla-bla-bla, he was ejected from the party, by a seperatist nonetheless.

One last story,,, if you've made it this far,,, for the moose hunters. So I'm approached to figure out the best drainage in a pristine, extremely remote area with a high water table, marshes, wetlands, lake, dense forest for a septic system. the cabin was built deep on forestry land purchased by lease for next to nothing,, the guy who built it is seriously the hunters hunter,, for 5 years, piece by piece he brought a cabin that he built in his spare time, took it apart, got the lease and reassembled it deeeeeeeeeep in the woods, at the end of a lake, piece by piece with a 12 foot aluminum put-put. So on this particular job, he, me and 8 of his friends from La Tuque head out on a very long journey to the cabin,, holy fudge!!!! It looked like he helicoptered it in. He speaks broken english, I speak pepe lapew french and his friends speak rural french. Long to short, I decided to be an english pro-seperatist just this one time,,,,, later in the evening, the host asks why I'm doing this? Because I don't want to get into a scrap in the middle of nowhere with 50 guns around. He then tells me that they're all federalists and very anti-seperatist. Thing is, La Tuque was a thriving bi-lingual township, then a seperation referendum, then the owners of the industry got spooked, left town and everybody lived off U.I or E.I (whatever the correct softer name of it is), then Welfare, then realised their wonderful govt wasn't interested in bringing in reinvestment and the town literally crumbled. It was ironed out nicely, we drank, talked fishing and hunting and built a special drainage system.

We all suffer a backward political system across canada that works for the most part and fails the real voice more often than not. same boat, different language.

Stompin Tom Connors said Quebec should seperate and the rest of us Canadians should move there and be done with Ottawa.

If any Moose Hunters would like to enjoy that cabin, I know he'd be more than gracious to let you use it. Drop me a line and I'll ring him if you're serious about very trophy moose.

[glen d.]

Once upon a time...



Even Canada had a Prime Minister with guts........103 years ago.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------



Wilfrid Laurier ideas on Immigrants and being an Canadian in 1907.

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes a Canadian and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet a Canadian, and nothing but a Canadian...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is a Canadian, but something else also, isn't a Canadian at all. We have room for but one flag, the Canadian flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language.. And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the Canadian people.'
Wilfrid Laurier 1907

[JBG]

Originally Posted by glen d.

Once upon a time...



Even Canada had a Prime Minister with guts........103 years ago.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------



Wilfrid Laurier ideas on Immigrants and being an Canadian in 1907.

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes a Canadian and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet a Canadian, and nothing but a Canadian...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is a Canadian, but something else also, isn't a Canadian at all. We have room for but one flag, the Canadian flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language.. And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the Canadian people.'
Wilfrid Laurier 1907

I believe the story quoted in the Opening Post is apocryphal, but it should be true. It sounds like a speech Teddy Roosvelt gave that itself has been altered by Internet coverage. The "alteration" was regarding the circumstances under which he uttered those words:

http://urbanlegends.about.com/librar...immigrants.htm


http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/troosevelt.asp


http://msgboard.snopes.com/politics/...troosevelt.pdf

[glen d.]

What is the agenda ....

Montreal Gazette : June 12, 2010

Grade 10 exam smells like propaganda
Two hours and one topic: Quebec as a nation. Discuss. God help the students who don't agree with the premise
By JIM WILSON, Freelance
Parents would be appalled if they thought the government were using the education system to indoctrinate children into accepting a partisan political belief. We are all too keenly aware that such things do happen in other countries, but surely not here!

But the first of this year's two Grade 10 history exams produces some concerns along these lines.

The results of provincial examinations in this compulsory program are a major consideration for CÉGEP admission. This year, the first two-hour exam, yes, the entire exam, was focused on just one topic: Quebec being a nation.

The exam booklet consisted of 12 "documents" and four "tasks." Any advertising executive or propagandist knows the value of repetition to imprint an idea. The phrase "Quebec as a nation" appears within the text no fewer than 13 times. No doubt the issue will linger in the students' minds.

The exam has the objective, supposedly, of evaluating two competencies. The first is to "examine a social phenomenon from a historical perspective," and the second is "the exercise of citizenship through the study of history." (That this would be Canadian citizenship is not mentioned.)

The exam has four questions to be answered, two for each competency.

The first question requires a paragraph of 50-100 words to "make an observation about some vision as Quebec as a nation." The second asks the student to "formulate three questions about some vision of Quebec as a nation."

The third question has a diagram that is to be completed by listing four examples of a) "What makes Quebec distinct?" and b) "How can Quebec protect its distinct status?"

The exam's final issue is "justify your opinion on protecting Quebec's distinct society," and requires the student to produce a two-page essay on: "Will the recognition of Quebec as a nation help protect Quebec's distinct society?"

The responses are to be gleaned from the "documents" presented in the "task" booklet. The term "document" is a little misleading. Many of these "documents" are little more than quotes from political figures and media or are advertising posters. For example, when asked to complete the diagram on Quebec's distinct status, students are referred to a document that explains the language rights provided by Bill 101. It is made to seem quite positive, with no mention of restrictions or contradictions of other human rights.

Although there are a number of comments questioning the notion of Quebec as a nation, the sheer number of references to Quebec as a nation could be providing the concept with legitimacy. Individuals can be convinced by repetition to accept an argument, especially if they are unaware of what is missing. The failure of the Charlottetown Accord is noted, but no mention is made of the provision that would have granted recognition of Quebec as a distinct society. Nor is there a hint that the majority of Quebecers rejected that deal in a referendum.

Also, Pierre Trudeau has disappeared from history. He receives not a word, despite his central role in the repatriation of the Constitution. The support of Quebec's MPs for repatriation is excluded. Instead, we have quotes from Gilles Duceppe, the Jean-Baptiste Society, and "the Youth Assembly for the French language." Some of the terminology, such as "ethno-linguistic group," "cultural-sociological," "ethnic nationalism," "national reconciliation," and "cultural heritage," demands a reading comprehension and political sophistication well beyond that of most students.

There are serious concerns with this exam, one of which is ethical, a consideration that applies equally to both French and English students. Are answers expected to be honest opinions, or given with an eye on the final mark? Does the exam assume that one must accept one or both of the concepts that Quebec is either a distinct society or a nation? Could students state that they do not accept either? That stance would make some questions impossible to answer. Would such students fail because they do not subscribe to a particular political view?

If you have misgivings with this type of exam, make your views known, and call your school board or school. Ask whether they approve of this exam and are they planning to take any action so it doesn't happen again.

Whether you have a child in French, English, private or public school, or even if you are just a concerned citizen, surely we should not accept a government exam that smacks of political propaganda disguised as a new system of student evaluation

Jim Wilson is a retired teacher, and former head of a teachers' union.
© Copyright (c) The Montreal Gazette

[Doug F]

This was the reply from my school board to Jim Wilson's letter
Should they not be able to discuss the issues intelligently rather than provide knee-jerk reactions?

Re: "Grade 10 exam smells like propaganda" (Opinion, June 12).

Your readers should know that the Grade 10 history exam cited in Jim Wilson's article was generated not by the Ministry of Education but by a committee of staff members of the English Montreal School Board, the Lester B. Pearson School Board, and the Sir Wilfrid Laurier School Board. The French version was validated by an educational consultant of the Eastern Townships School Board. All of the personnel involved are familiar with the program and with the Quebec Education Program on which it is based.

The exam is based on the Harper government's 2006 recognition of "the Quebecois as a nation within Canada," an issue with which students would have been familiar through discussion of nationalism that is part of the curriculum that has been discussed in class.

The documents to which Wilson refers are balanced and offer differing perspectives. For example, the first document read by students was from CBC News, reporting on the Conservative government recognition of "the Quebecois."

The education program encourages debate and the answer key encourages teachers to examine different perspectives, and not to penalize the student who does not agree.

Students are evaluated on two competencies: Competency 1 "examines a social phenomena from a social perspective," and Competency 3 "strengthens his/ her exercise of citizenship through the study of history." For the first competency, students were asked to read the documents provided and to (i) make observations (take notes) and (ii) generate questions on what they have read. These tasks encourage students to examine an issue in depth and not simply to gloss over it. Task 4, "Will the recognition of Quebec as a nation help protect Quebec's distinct society?" asks students to take a position based on the documents provided and on prior classroom discussion. The answer key allows for pro and con responses, contrary to what Wilson has implied.

There was no political agenda in this exam.

Michael Chechile Educational services

Lester B. Pearson School Board

Montreal

[glen d.]

What is the agenda?

National Post



(2010-07-03)



News
No French on labels costs grocer $20,000; Called unsellable
Graphic: Color Photo: /



Deb Reynolds stood in her shuttered grocery store, surrounded by boxes filled with cheeses, jam, pickles, beef and baked goods, watching in shock as her
staff loaded the crates from her west Vancouver shop into a truck two weeks ago. She was disposing of $20,000 worth of food, after a surprise visit from
two inspectors with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency on June 17 when she says they deemed a third of her store's stock unsellable because the labels
weren't printed with French translations or were missing nutrition tables.



Ms. Reynolds says the two inspectors removed 108 items from her shelves at Home Grow-In Grocer, a 14-month-old shop that carries only food grown or produced
in B.C., including by micro-farmers in Metro Vancouver, the Fraser Valley and the Okanagan/Similkameen Valley.



"They were there for six hours," she said. "They were picking up every jar, every bottle, every package, taking pictures of the labels, writing notes."




They handed her seven pages of infractions, she says, all relating to labels missing bilingual information or nutrition tables. The inspectors flagged 11
suppliers in the small shop, which Ms. Reynolds says sells 300 dozen eggs a week. One dairy supplier, for example, was pulled because their labels read
"feta" or "Monterey Jack" but not "cheese."



But Keith Campbell, supervisor of food investigations for the CFIA, says the inspectors seized only one product, worth $100 and not $20,000, a yogurt made
from a dairy supplier that consistently hasn't been complying with the rules.



"There were approximately 21 containers of yogurt with no net quantity, no best-before date," he said. "In addition to the yogurt, the inspectors who were
there noted some other products that were not in compliance, but they didn't detain them and didn't restrict the retailer from selling them." Some of the
other products included items without bilingual labels, he said, as well as bread being sold with no label at all.



Mr. Campbell acknowledged, however, that Ms. Reynolds' store was used as a way to get complaince from the dairy supplier. The inspectors were simply looking
for a place carrying food from that supplier, which he declined to name, and found her store on the Internet.



Rather than throw the noncompliant food away, Ms. Reynolds said she was able to return some of the food to her suppliers, but donated most of it to a local
transition house. "To me it was a waste of taxpayers' money and time to go through my individual little suppliers," she said. "I'm just somebody who is
trying to support the local B.C. economy."



The CFIA requires suppliers to label products in both English and French, save for a few exceptions including food produced locally. If less than 10% of
the residents in the area speak one of the official languages, that language doesn't need to be printed on food labels.



klaidlaw@nationalpost.com



Katherine Laidlaw

[glen d.]

They have their own secret police .... wounder what is the agenda?

Adrian MacNair: French — B.C.’s very unofficial official language
Adrian MacNair July 5, 2010 – 9:14 am
Deb Reynolds owns a grocery store in West Vancouver called Home Grow-In Grocer. She recently had her store shuttered and closed, and $20,000 of her wares confiscated by the government of Canada, when two inspectors with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency showed up unexpectedly. Her crime? She didn’t have French labels on her stock.
The inspectors spent six hours removing 108 items from her store, closely analyzing every jar, bottle and package, while taking pictures of the labels and making notes. She was then handed seven pages of government infractions all related to labels missing bilingual information or nutrition tables.
The irony in all of this? Ms.Reynolds’ store caters entirely to food grown only in British Columbia, including micro-farmers in Metro Vancouver, the Fraser Valley and the Okanagan/Similkameen Valley:

They handed her seven pages of infractions, she says, all relating to labels missing bilingual information or nutrition tables. The inspectors flagged 11 suppliers in the small shop, which Ms. Reynolds says sells 300 dozen eggs a week. One dairy supplier, for example, was pulled because their labels read “feta” or “Monterey Jack” but not “cheese.”
Rather than throw the noncompliant food away, Ms. Reynolds said she was able to return some of the food to her suppliers, but donated most of it to a local transition house. “To me it was a waste of taxpayers’ money and time to go through my individual little suppliers,” she said. “I’m just somebody who is trying to support the local B.C. economy.”

According to the CFIA rules, suppliers have to label products in both English and French, with a few exceptions if the food is produced locally — which appears to be the case here. And if less than 10% of the residents in the area speak one of the official languages, that language doesn’t need to be printed on food labels. According to Wikipedia, French is spoken by 1.4% of residents of British Columbia.
In fact, the city of Vancouver stated in 2004 that 50.6% of the city does not speak English as their first language. French penetrates 1.7% of the demographic in the city.
The mother tongue of 26.6% of residents of Vancouver is one of the Chinese dialects. Even more people speak Punjabi [2.7%] than French. Believe it or not, the “official language” even comes in fourth place in the province, behind German speakers who comprise 2.2% of the language share. Since this census was done in 2006, you can be certain that Tagalog [Filipino] and Korean have overtaken Français.
And if the government really wants to hassle small businesses, they could head out to Richmond, where 90% of the stores have signs in a foreign language and comb through their shelves. I can almost guarantee the products won’t have either French or English on them.
Adrian MacNair is a Vancouver writer and blogger.

[glen d.]

They want it all .... what is the agenda?


Letter to the editor,



Its called history for a reason, leave it alone.Show some respect to our forefathers, the founders, the builders of this country! It’s bad enough that Quebec has spent the 5 decades wiping out our real BNA, UEL history in Quebec but now the same thing is happening outside Quebec.This is just sickening.





Quebec = 5 decades wiping out the English language and culture with racist,anti-English language laws such as bill 22,178,101…Just a fact.Racism,bigotry,ethnic language cleansing and human rights violations alive and well in kebec.Kebec where the English,Scottish, Irish,United Empire Loyalists…built the province since 1763,where the Union Jack and Red Ensign flew until 1950.Again just the facts.This lie, this revisionist BS that Quebec is a French province and that Canada is bilingual is just that,an outright lie.1 million people have been forced out of the province of Kebec(original native spelling)due to this type of hatred/lie/spin.While all this is going on in Quebec they are forcing the French language outside kebec in every province.Everything and anything the French demand,they are getting across this entire country.Its called bilingualism (another lie never clearly defined on purpose).What’s really going on?”First Quebec, then we take over the rest of the country, one step at a time…through bilingualism…”PT. “How to take over a country through bilingualism…”SD.Nice, eh? The same thing is now going on outside Quebec.From the removal of our real flag in 1965...Let’s remove, revise, and lie about more of our real BNA, UEL history… See what’s going on here?





Enough is enough, wake up people.” Loyal She Began, Loyal She Remains."Go learn our proud,BNA and UEL history.These were the builders of our country since 1763,not this phony,revisionist lie,spin,nonsense,this bilingual,multicultural,2 founding nations, linguistic duality lie,spin that we’ve been living with since Trudeau and Kebec forced this upon the nation.We’ve been part of the British Empire since 1763 and officially an English speaking country for over 200 years,just a fact.Leave our real history alone.



Anthony Silvestro,



Ottawa, Ont.

[glen d.]

How to make money on backs of others hard labour.

Ottawa Sun : August 6, 2010 2:00am
Quebec feasts on equalization payments
By L. IAN MACDONALD, QMI Agency
We need new rules on equalization, and the proof of it is in the Quebec model.
Equalization is supposed to allow the six recipient provinces to provide “comparable services” to the four donor provinces.
But Quebec, which received $8.3 billion or 60% of all equalization transfers in the last fiscal year, provides services as a have-not province that are nowhere available among the haves.
There is no other province where publicly funded daycare is available for $7 a day, when its total cost is seven times that, $49 a day.
This is why Quebec, with only 20% of the daycare-age kids in the country, has about half the daycare spaces in the country. Thanks, Alberta.
There is no other province where university tuition fees are $1,800 a year for undergraduates, allowing Quebec residents to attend McGill, the country’s most renowned university, for about half what it would cost to attend the University of Alberta, the biggest donor province.
Quebec tuition fees have been frozen since 1995, which was in another century. Thanks, Alberta.
There is no other province where half the cost of private secondary schooling is subsidized by the provincial government, which is kind of Quebec’s little secret. The rest of Canada hasn’t heard of that one yet. But when my daughter attended Sacred Heart School for girls in Montreal for five years, the $7,000 annual tuition fees were matched by the government. This is why about 25% of Quebec secondary students attend private schools, as opposed to a national average around 10%. Thanks, Alberta.
And now, as of yesterday, there is no other province that provides free in vitro fertilization treatments as part of publicly funded health care.
The treatments can cost $7,000 and $15,000 per cycle, and a patient may undergo three cycles of IVF treatments. You do the math. Thanks, Alberta.
Already there is a long waiting list, as the Montreal Gazette reported yesterday: “With more than 3,000 women already signed up for treatments available for free, medical specialists say Quebec won’t be able to keep up with the demand.”
The program will cost Quebec $70 million a year, and is expected to provide about 3,500 IVF cycles in the next year, doubling by 2014.
But already there’s a shortage of family doctors and gynecologists in Quebec, to the point where the Gazette reported that, according to the provincial midwives’ association, about 1,500 Quebec women could not find a GP or gynecologist “to follow their pregnancies last year.”
One of the outcomes of IVF treatments is multiple births in 30% of successful cases, and one of the occasional consequences of multiple births is an incidence of autism in one of the children.
Quebec projects a deficit of $4.3 billion this year, a manageable 1% of provincial output, in line with stimulus spending to beat the recession.
But it wouldn’t be in a position to offer this new entitlement without the $8.3 billion a year in equalization.
Established in 1957 and entrenched in the Charter of Rights in 1982 at the insistence of New Brunswick’s Richard Hatfield, equalization’s purpose is to provide comparable services for recipient provinces, not unique services at the expense of donor provinces.
But until we have a national conversation on equalization, if you want IVF treatments and can’t afford them, move to Montreal.
This is Quebec’s new version of revenge of the cradle.
— MacDonald is editor 
of Policy Options magazine

[glen d.]

Can you believe this?

Editorial: Need for French is lost in translation
The Province August 5, 2010 Comments (3)



Language politics in Canada have never been pretty. But now they seem to have become downright petty.

The latest storm in a linguistic teacup revolves around the RCMP and criticism of the quality of the French in the news releases it puts out on its B.C. website.

The RCMP apparently has only one French translator for the entire province. And it used to take weeks to service those few people who sought an official French translation.

The RCMP decided to solve the problem quickly and inexpensively. It added Google Translate software to its site, so folks could view instant translations of its releases in multiple languages, including French.

Earlier this week, however, a story on French-language Radio-Canada slagged the translations for not being up to snuff. And the RCMP, sensing it was in violation of the Official Languages Act, decided to remove them.

The Mounties now say they plan to hire another full-time translator. But in the meantime, they're going to dispatch their releases to Public Works Canada for translation, at a reported cost of around $3,000 daily.

The reality is that more B.C. residents speak Punjabi, Cantonese, German or Mandarin as their native tongue than they do French. Did we say our country's language politics were petty? Costly and silly might be more appropriate words . . . in any language.

What do you think? Email a brief comment, including your name and town to: provletters@theprovince.com

© Copyright (c) The Province

[Okotokian]

I hear crickets.

[bruceba]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

I hear crickets.

J'entends des crickets

[glen d.]

Creeek .... creeek ....

The citizens of B.C. will be sorry if not more is done to stop the French language from taking over more of your daily lives. With 4.06% of Ontario made up of French speakers, they have been given so much language-related rights that they have become disproportionately powerful. They have a Commissioner of Languages whose main duty is to see that the French have their own clinics, community centres, schools and other institutions which are funded by the English-speaking taxpayers but to which they are not welcomed. Thus, English speakers cannot attend these clinics even in an emergency and even if their doctors are on duty at one of these clinics as happened to Shirley Ravary in Cornwall; French-only buses take French-speaking students to school and English-speaking children are not allowed to share these buses even if the schools are on the same route; hirings that are bilingual imperative have been proven to be an Affirmative Action plans for French-speakers and this has led to more than the proportionate representation of French-speakers in the public & private sector.



We have been working for the last 10 years in an effort to raise the public’s awareness of the excesses of the Official Languages Act. This Act was passed in good faith to provide service to language minorities across Canada “where numbers warrant” but it has been corrupted by its proponents into a policy that clearly discriminates against the English-speaking majority. After over 40 years of this policy, we see that the number of Canadians who can communicate in both languages (English & French) has not increased significantly but the premium placed on French as opposed to English has given the French-speakers a great advantage so that they are effectively the beneficiaries of this Affirmative Action plan.



http://www.psc-cfp.gc.ca/arp-rpa/200.../tbl16-eng.htm



In the web site above, I draw your attention to the one showing “Total Public Service”. In the classification for bilingual imperative positions, 64.8% are Francophones, showing very clearly our contention that bilingual positions favour the Francophones. In the provincial breakdowns, the NCR also shows a clear advantage for the Francophones (61.0%) where the French-speakers number in the 15% range; and in N.B. Francophones occupy 76.5% of the public service position in a province with approx. 30% French speakers.



After over 40 years of this policy and the financial hand-outs (in the billions) to the Francophone minorities all across Canada, French-interest pressure groups have been formed that helped them organize into a very powerful force that wields effective political weapons against the defenceless English-speakers who have no financial assistance of any sort.



British Columbians should wake up and be aware of this growing powerful group.



Kim McConnell

Ottawa, ON


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[glen d.]

This is what is happening in Ontario. This is what is going to happen in the West/Alberta as the throat jammers of bilinqualism are in place and will being coming forth in the future.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Which of you councillors are in support of SEGREGATION? This is what is happening in Ottawa on an increasingly larger scale but most of you councillors are keeping very silent about it. The French-only institutions are growing so fast that the 15% Francophones (Canada Census using the definition of “mother tongue) are wielding far more power than the English-speaking majority. Why is it that so few councillors are willing to put a stop to this? We cannot support SEGREGATION in the City of Ottawa – say NO to unilingual French institutions while forcing English-speaking ones to be bilingual.


1. While all the English-speaking institutions are being forced to become bilingual, we are funding French-only institutions. Isn’t this what is commonly called, “SEGREGATION”? This is similar to the situation in Canada where the Rest (Most) of Canada is forced to accept Official Bilingualism while allowing Quebec to become unilingual French. We must NOT allow this to happen in Ottawa where segregation is becoming too well established.

2. The number quoted of 28,000 Francophones cannot be verified in the census – where is Alex Cullen getting his numbers from? Is he also adopting the French subterfuge of classifying anyone who speaks French as a Francophone? So any English-speaking person who learns French because he’s forced to do so for the sake of his job is suddenly a Francophone?

3. Why is the City giving this group $2 M. in grants to buy the Grant school site that the City paid $4 M. to the School Board for? Has the City no other use for this valuable property which is located on prime land?

4. If the $50 M. is not forth-coming from the various levels of our cash-strapped government (at both the provincial & federal level), what will happen to the site? Which of our city councilors is looking out for the interests of the general tax-payers to ensure that this self-serving group does not walk away with a piece of property that belongs to everybody?

5. We have been told that this multi-centre is for the whole community but we know that it will be only for the French because NO English-speaker will be serviced here. We have seen this in the French-only health centres, senior community centres & schools which are examples of segregated institutions paid for by the majority English-speaking taxpayers but of benefit only to the French.

6. If segregation is what they want, why don’t we allow ALL English-speaking institutions to operate in English only and forget this fiasco known as Official Bilingualism?

Kim McConnell

[glen d.]

Danny Williams rip's into Quebec at a speech at the Canadian Club in Ottawa.

Danny Williams attacks Quebec over hydro rights

Paul Daly for National Post Thursday,
Sept. 9, 2010

Hypocritical, a bad neighbour, and guilty of “highway robbery”: Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams called Jean Charest’s Quebec government a few names in a St. John’s speech, escalating a feud over hydroelectric power rights that has simmered between the two provinces for decades.

In a luncheon address to the St. John’s Board of Trade on Wednesday, Mr. Williams denounced Quebec’s opposition to Newfoundland’s bid for federal funding to build a power transmission line from Labrador to Nova Scotia to potentially sell Labrador-generated power in the Maritimes and New England.

Calling Quebec’s opposition to funding the project “shameful” and “abhorrent,” Mr. Williams said Quebec “shafted us once” on the existing, 1960s-built hydro plant on the Churchill River and suggested it was trying to do so again with the proposed Lower Churchill project.

“[Quebec] wants it all, and that just doesn’t go down well with me … It needs to get out of the way of the progress of its neighbours,” he said.

He added: “The rest of the country and even Quebec itself is finally admitting that it has been getting away with highway robbery in Canada for decades.”

The Quebec government has eschewed the same kind of tough language so far. In a statement issued yesterday, Quebec Deputy Premier Nathalie Normandeau said the province does not oppose the construction of any undersea power transmission lines. What it opposes are federal subsidies for these on the grounds that they could distort the price and market for electricity. In a letter last month, Quebec asked Ottawa not to fund a joint Newfoundland-Nova Scotia hydro project on those grounds.

Mr. Williams characterized that move as “disgusting.” His elaboration on that position on Wednesday was in keeping with his tendency to take aggresive stances against other Canadian politicians.

“Newfoundland and Quebec have been at loggerheads for a few decades now. The difference is, Danny Williams brings a very strong personal component to it. He has demonstrated in relations with Ottawa and with other premiers that he [isn’t] hesitant to butt in,” said Nelson Wiseman, a University of Toronto political science professor, who noted public disagreements between premiers is rare.

That combative style plays well in Mr. Williams’s home province, where his popularity ratings tend to stay above 80%. “I guess his feeling is playing nice hasn’t gotten them anywhere,” said James Feehan, a professor of economics at Memorial University Newfoundland and the co-author, with Melvin Baker, of an article in the September issue of Policy Options magazine titled “The Churchill Falls contract and why Newfoundlanders can’t get over it.”

Driving Mr. Williams’s anger is a desire to capitalize on Labrador’s hydroelectric potential for the first time by piping power to the Maritimes, perhaps even finding a market for Labradorian electricty in New England.

The proposed Lower Churchill project could accomplish what the existing Churchill Falls project has failed to do for residents of Newfoundland and Labrador: namely, get hydro royalties flowing in the direction of St. John’s.

For Newfoundlanders, Quebec’s apparent blocking of attempts to develop the Lower Churchill project smacks of the Churchill Falls hydro deal signed in 1969, which has obliged their provincial power utility to sell electricity to Quebec for absurdly low prices. The deal angers Newfoundlanders still.

“There were events that took place that I think do not look all that clean in terms of business ethics. There were issues of conflict of interest, where Hydro-Québec had an interest in [the Churchill Falls Labrador Corporation] at the same time,” Mr. Feehan said.

Nalcor Energy, parent company of the Churchill Falls Labrador Corporation, launched a lawsuit against Hydro-Québec in January. Several past attempts by St. John’s to have the Churchill Falls deal changed or renegotiated have failed.

In the meantime, Mr. Williams reckons Newfoundland is selling Quebec more than $2-billion worth of electricity each year for around $50-million. The contract expires in 2041.

Running the power through Quebec has been considered an option for the separate and still undeveloped Lower Churchill project. However, a ruling this year by Quebec’s electricity regulation board put serious obstacles ahead of that possibility.

The Lower Churchill project could instead circumvent Quebec, if Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador can successfully partner on the project. The two Atlantic provinces are seeking $375-million in federal aid to build a power transmission line across the Cabot Strait.

Hydro power generated in Labrador could produce billions in revenues for the provincial government in St. John’s — but only, Mr. Feehan said, if billions in financing for the necessary infrastructure can be assembled, a sizeable enough market can be found for the energy in the Maritimes and New England, and engineering challenges surmounted.

For the most part, Quebec has responded to Mr. Williams’s recent tirades with sangfroid.

“We understand that Mr. Williams is raising again the topic and the choice of tone is his,” said Quebec Justice Minister Jean-Marc Fournier in an interview last month. “But we, for one, think we should be discussing this reasonably.”

Quebec says its position against federal funding for any potential Labrador-Nova Scotia power link is grounded in fairness. “It’s a question of equity,” Mr. Fournier said, as Quebec has always paid to build its own transmission lines.

“If Newfoundland and Labrador or another province were to receive a payment from the federal [government] for that — whereas Quebec paid for it [itself] — it would be unfair competition.”

- with files from Postmedia News and the St. John’s Telegram

amcdowell@nationalpost.com

[KegRiver]

Originally Posted by roadkill

I mean come on, you all secretly covet our women

Secretly!!

I'll shout it from my rooftop. French women rule!!!!!!

Just don't tell my wife I said that. We don't want to get her German panties in a knot.

But seriously folks. Why buy into the whining of a few media types looking to sell a story.

Quebec has legitimate grievances, so does Alberta, PEI, BC, Saskatchewan and all the others.
We can't build up our country by trying to tear it apart.

I am either part of the problem or part of the solution.
I prefer to be part of the solution.

[blackpheasant]

Originally Posted by KegRiver

Secretly!!

I'll shout it from my rooftop. French women rule!!!!!!

Just don't tell my wife I said that. We don't want to get her German panties in a knot.

But seriously folks. Why buy into the whining of a few media types looking to sell a story.

Quebec has legitimate grievances, so does Alberta, PEI, BC, Saskatchewan and all the others.
We can't build up our country by trying to tear it apart.

I am either part of the problem or part of the solution.
I prefer to be part of the solution.

And what is the solution ?

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by KegRiver

Secretly!!

I'll shout it from my rooftop. French women rule!!!!!!

Just don't tell my wife I said that. We don't want to get her German panties in a knot.

But seriously folks. Why buy into the whining of a few media types looking to sell a story.

Quebec has legitimate grievances, so does Alberta, PEI, BC, Saskatchewan and all the others.
We can't build up our country by trying to tear it apart.

I am either part of the problem or part of the solution.
I prefer to be part of the solution.

Shhhhhhhhhhh Haven't you caught on yet? Glen is the only one that posts here. The rest of us have moved on. Just leave him alone with his thread.

[KegRiver]

LOL I guess not. But then this is only the second day since I found this site.

I'll learn.

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by KegRiver

LOL I guess not. But then this is only the second day since I found this site.

I'll learn.

LOL