Canadians for Language Fairness
P.O. Box 40111
Bank & Hunt Club Postal Outlet
2515 Bank Street.
Ottawa, ON, K1V 0W8
What do you know about the Official Languages Act?
The Official Languages Act (OLA), passed in 1969, is a Federal law which is enforced at the federal level and one other province i.e. New Brunswick. The province of Quebec has passed several anti-English laws (Bills 22, 178 & 101) that effectively make French their only official language. The provinces of Nova Scotia passed the French Language Services Act (2004) as did the province of Ontario (1986), and the province of Prince Edward Island (2013). Limited service in French is offered in each municipality in each of these provinces in varying degrees.
What's wrong with that?
Elevating a minority language to equal status with the majority language is creating an over-emphasis on the minority language, especially when that minority language is concentrated only in the Eastern provinces of Canada, namely, QC & NB. Further using that minority language as the criteria for employment at the federal level and increasingly at the provincial level is creating a work-force which over-represents the French-speakers. French-speakers are the ones most likely to be bilingual as they grow up speaking the language. Non-French speakers do not grow up speaking French and learning it at school does not make them fluent, especially as the educated French is very different from the colloquial French.
The 2011 Census showed that "self-assessed" bilingual Canadians make up 17.5% of Canada's population, the figure of those who can pass the language test is only about 12%. The Treasury Board (2014) showed that 31.9 % of the total Federal Public Service are Francophones in a country that is made up of only 21.3% mother-tongue French-speakers (2011 census). This over-representation of French-speakers in our public service concerns us greatly.
The limited supply of bilingual Canadians & the over-emphasis on a minority language as a criteria for employment has resulted in a lowering of academic & professional standards in our governments. Many high-level positions are filled by people with just secondary school certificates or equivalent.
As French is spoken widely only in Eastern Canada, this has led to Western Canadians being left out of the picture. The division and disunity brought about will eventually destroy Canada.
This is why you should be concerned.
25 July 2017
The Canadian Government has a long history of human rights violations since the British colonies became the Dominion of Canada in 1867. The Indian Act, The Chinese Immigration Act, and the internment of Japanese Canadians. Not one Japanese Canadian was charged with an act of disloyalty during the Second World War. The internment was unwarranted but racism took precedence. The Government of Canada has formally apologized for these violations and needs to apologize for two more, The Official Languages Act (OLA) and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (The Charter).
The Liberal Cabinet of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau abused its power in 1969 when it introduced the OLA. Its purpose was to make Canada a bilingual country, not by freedom of choice but by force of legislation. How could such a bad law as the OLA be passed by a responsible government? French-speaking Canadians do not like it and have used the notwithstanding clause to protect themselves from it. English-speaking Canadians do not like it and ignore it as much as possible. The OLA has only served to bring a resurgence of ethnic conflict between these two linguistic groups.
The rise of a near-permanent class of professional politicians in Canada has produced an arrogant and autocratic federal government. It has become an increasingly dictatorial one that follows a language policy that can only be described as a political irritation for the majority of Canadians. The OLA could not have been passed by parliament if the federal government had honoured the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Declaration) adopted by Canada in 1948.
So where is the Declaration today? It belongs to the people and they have a right to know where it is and why equal protection of all languages, as provided in the Declaration, was not put into their constitution. In seeking answers we have to look back in history to the year 1948 in order to understand what are human rights, how did we obtain them and who do they belong to?
World War II was caused by political and military leaders who did not possess a culture of human rights. The need for the protection of people from their own government, while not originally the purpose of the United Nations, was obvious. Born out of the atrocities and enormous loss of human life during that war many countries now believed the United Nations should embrace the protection of human rights as part of its mission. The United Nations’ Human Rights Commission was formed and now captured the attention of the world.
We should be proud that a Canadian, John Peters Humphrey,  was appointed Director of Human Rights for the United Nations Secretariat in 1946. As director, and with the assistance of many other human rights advocates from around the world, he authored the first draft of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It was never easy work. There were clashes of personality and philosophy along with the complications of international politics as the Cold War took shape. All citizens shared, for the most part, a common ideology and goal. But to create a document that clearly defined the inalienable rights of global citizens, one that transcended political, societal, economic, ideological, and religious beliefs, was a monumental task. The Declaration, which took two years to complete, is considered one of the world's greatest accomplishments and often referred to as ‘The Magna Carta for the People’.
The Declaration was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 10 December, 1948. It was the first time that countries agreed on a comprehensive statement of human rights belonging to people, not governments. These rights are inalienable fundamental rights "to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being” These rights were to be protected by enshrining them within a nation’s constitution and used as a guide for governments to consider before the enactment of any laws. The Declaration identified 30 separate rights which belong to each and every Canadian citizen.
The Parliamentary Houses of Canada formed a joint committee to study the newly created Declaration before approving it. They thoroughly understood the contents and the requirements for compliance. They agreed the Declaration should be adopted by Canada. The Liberal Cabinet of Prime Minister Louis St. Laurent disagreed. The Canadian delegation to the UN received a personal letter from St. Laurent expressing his concerns. Canada abstained from the vote on the adoption of the Declaration in the Third Committee of the UN, blemishing an honourable record in international human rights.
William A. Schabas,  is a Canadian academic in the field of International Criminal and Human Rights law, and is considered ‘the world expert’ on the law of Genocide and International Law. Using archival documents now available, he did extensive research to find the real reason behind the Liberal Government's hesitation.
The abstention by Canada astounded the UN members, especially our closest allies, Great Britain and the United States. Canada now found itself amongst undesirable company, those who were not in favour of their citizens having these rights. Canada’s reputation was at stake and senior bureaucrats quickly realized that they were playing with a hornet’s nest. Lester B. Pearson was now aware of the dangers of abstaining and at his insistence, the Canadian policy was quickly readjusted.
When the Declaration came before the plenary Assembly three days later, Canada had joined the near consensus and voted in favour. Canadian hesitation was principally due to discomfort in the Federal Cabinet with substantive norms enshrined in the Declaration, including Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Association. The evidence suggests that provincial jurisdiction was a pretext for federal politicians who wanted to avoid national and international rights commitments. In doing so, the Canadian Government deliberately misled both international and public opinion by concealing its opposition to the Declaration behind procedural arguments.
Schabas’s findings point towards Quebec’s Padlock Law. It denied both the Presumption of Innocence and Freedom of Speech to individuals. St. Laurent could have used the federal power of disallowance to nullify the Padlock Law, one of the most draconian laws ever passed in Canada but he chose not to intervene. He did not want to alienate rural voters in Quebec who continued to support the Liberals federally even as they supported the Union Nationale provincially. Faced with a dilemma, St. Laurent chose to protect the Liberal Party and his position rather than adopt the Declaration. He put his own self interest ahead of his duty as Prime Minister of Canada.
When Quebec threatened to separate from Canada, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau faced a similar dilemma as Louis St. Laurent. Without Quebec, the liberal party would be decimated and he would no longer be the prime minister. Quebec was making outrageous demands, they wanted a new constitution that would expand Quebec’s area of legislative jurisdiction and establish a bilingual and bicultural Canada.
Trudeau had a clear responsibility to say "NO" to this form of black mail; instead, he capitulated and gave Quebec’s nationalist party far more power than they were entitled. This coup d’etat of an existing regime by a group of French politicians was approved by parliament. With the passage of the OLA, language rights that formally belonged to the people now came under the control of the federal government. Did Trudeau put his own self interest ahead of his duty as Prime Minister of Canada?
Pierre Trudeau, as a professor of law, knew that the OLA would face a legal challenge if the Declaration was entrenched in the Constitution. Article 2 was a major obstacle in his plan to promote the use of the French language throughout Canada.
Article 2 - The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: - Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
“Without distinction “ means the separation of people according to their race, religion, language, etc. The Declaration was designed to prevent governments from giving special status, privileges or protection to one group at the expense of others. Its purpose was to prevent hostility and tension between groups that could lead to violence and civil wars within a nation.
Trudeau changed Article 2 of the Declaration by removing the words “without distinction” and the word “language” before placing his version in the Canadian Charter of Human Rights. In doing so he knowingly and deliberately violated Article 30 of the Declaration.
Article 30 - The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: - Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
This means that no country, group or individual can violate any article set forth in the Declaration by using another article or document to justify such action. The Canadian government made a commitment to the people that it would hold the Declaration in trust until it could be enshrined in the Constitution. Did Trudeau commit a breach of trust when he altered the Declaration? The Canadian Criminal Code, Section 122, makes it an offence for an official to commit a breach of trust in connection with the duties of his office.
When something is taken from the owners without their consent, it is theft and justice requires restitution. This can only be done by revisiting the Constitution, removing the corrupt version of human rights and replacing it with the original, unaltered Declaration. This would be extremely difficult, but not impossible. Until this is done the Rest of Canada is heavily burdened with a French constitution.
Canada has a well educated population with each generation better educated than the previous. Are human rights important to Canadians or are they content to leave things as they are? The following facts may help reach a better understanding.
A common language is the most unifying force known throughout history and is determined by the people and the territory they occupy. The common language in Quebec is the French language while the common language in the ‘Rest of Canada’ is the English language. No single language is better than another, they are only different. Language is more powerful than race, ethnicity, more powerful than common experience or even religion. What unifies a people is their common language.
Official bilingualism, forced upon a nation without their consent, is an anomaly not compatible within a democracy.  It is no different than forcing an unwanted religion upon them. The French argument for official bilingualism is based on the claim that Quebec is a founding nation. This is remarkable since Quebec was not a nation before Confederation and it is not a nation today. This myth needs to be put to rest.
The decline of the French language as a percentage of the Canadian population occurred through the process of immigration and language shift where people move from speaking one language to a more dominant language. Should the French language be treated differently? NO! Enshrining the Declaration in the constitution would have provided protection for all languages, not just the French language. As for being a distinct society, we have many distinct societies in Canada.
According to census information there are over 50 distinct languages and many more native dialects spoken throughout Canada. The Dominion Lands Act (1872) encouraged English, Irish, Scots, Norwegians, Swedish, Germans, Ukrainians and many others to settle in the three prairie provinces. Farmers, store keepers, ranchers and businessmen all came. Within 42 years, 1.2 million immigrants brought with them their different cultures, languages and religions. In 1914, they did not hesitate to join their fellow Canadians from across Canada when it came time to put on a uniform and fight for their country. This mixture of different races and different cultures came together as Canadians and died by the thousands in the mud of Flanders, they captured Vimy Ridge, broke the Hindenburg line, and led the advance into Germany. The battles they fought and the valour they displayed made Canada a nation in the eyes of the world.
The words “official” and “minority” languages impliy that one language or one culture is better than another. The United States, our nearest neighbour, does not have an official language and does not identify languages as being either official or minority because it bears the stigma of racism. Great Britain does not have an official language for much the same reason and did not give Canada an official language. The only mention of language in the British North American Act (BNA) is Section 133. This section simply made it possible to use the two most common languages, English and French, in the federal Parliament, the Legislature of Quebec, the courts in the province of Quebec, and the federal courts. The BNA committed neither the federal government nor the public service under its jurisdiction to official bilingualism. The idea that a normal society is a unilingual one or even a bilingual one is simply a myth. Canada, like the vast majority of the world’s countries, is a multilingual, multicultural society.
Are language rights in the Charter legal rights only, justiciable in court but without deeper moral foundation? Canada’s largest language group, those who speak the English language, have not asked for special attention. Why should the French language enjoy a special status not given to any other language group in Canada?
How can we make sense of a constitution where built-in limitations to the French language such as significant demand (Section 20) or restrictions of application of the French language to areas where numbers warrant?
Do these mean proportional representation or unlimited representation? Nor does it make sense that a bilingual civil service only serves to disenfranchise the majority of Canadian citizens from seeking a meaningful career in the federal civil service or our military. Why should they be forced to learn a language that has limited use outside the province of Quebec?
Unless language rights can be shown to be grounded in moral considerations, then the equality which the Charter accords them is illusionary, a consequence of politics rather than principle. 
Would independence provide two normal states free from deep linguistic tensions? It is wildly unrealistic to think that Quebec would ever agree to equal protection of all languages. A powerful argument in favour of the ‘Rest of Canada’ separating itself from Quebec is that the Constitution cannot guarantee equal treatment for all linguistic groups and the possibilities for genuine reform are negligible. If language protection in the Constitution satisfied the demands for justice, that would weaken the case for separation.
Canada needs a Constitution that is not racist, a Constitution that centres around the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, not a corrupted version placed there by politicians.
Canada’s political parties have always been interventionist ones that believe they can shape society according to their own political beliefs. They fail to accept the fact that they are elected representatives, not the rulers of a nation. An autocratic government can be removed quickly and efficiently with our first-past-the-post electoral system.
 John Peters Humphrey: The father of Human Rights; lawyer, diplomat, scholar and human rights advocate.
 William A. Schabas: Canada and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1998) 43 McGill Law Journal 403
 Dominique Schnapper: Linguistic Pluralism as a serious challenge to democratic life: Eccles des Hautes
Etudes en Sciences Sociales;
 Leslie Green: “Are Language Rights Fundamental?” Osgoode Hall Law Journal 25.4 (1987) : 639-669
“Where, after all, do universal rights begin?
In small places, close to home.
Unless these rights, have meaning there,
they have little meaning anywhere.”
24 July 2017
We received a heads-up from a reader who gave us the link to a private member's bill in the Senate:
Throughout the nearly 50 years that the Official Languages Act has been in force, changes have been made to strengthen the hand of French-speakers in Canada's government. Every change has made it easier for French-speakers to get into senior positions & made all Canadian parents think that the knowledge of French is imperative for employment & the demand for French Immersion has risen all across Canada. Years of French Immersion education in N.B. has proven that F.I has not produced more bilingual graduates, able to pass the stringent governmental language tests. Yes, they have learnt enough French to absorb the historical revisionism of Canadian history that French is a founding nation (even though every Canadian knows the lost the war).
Despite all the efforts made by the Francophones & Francophiles in power, the French are still not satisfied. They have found that, despite bringing in immigrants from French-speaking countries & deliberately keepimg out immgrants from Britain, the French-speaking population has not increased substantially enough. The Ontario government gave in to the demands of the powerful Language Commissioner to consider all people who can speak French as Francophones, thus increasing their proportion in the population & the necessity to provide service in French. So, if you're bilngual (in English & French), you're now a Francophone. The same tactic is being employed by the Senator who championed this bill.
We acknowledge that the CPC under PM Harper's terms in office tried to stop the expansion of the OLA but his government was not successful. We know that the courts stood in the way of every attempt but in the eyes of many English-speakers, the CPC has to wear that failure. It could also partly explain their failure at the last election as many English-speakers have felt betrayed.
We consider Bill S-209 to be another blatant attempt to Frenchify Canada, an effort that has already cost billions of taxpayer dollars that could be used to improve the lives of ALL Canadians, not just a select linguistic group; jobs & promotions have been denied to well-qualified Canadians because they are not linguists & more French is not going to improve the economic or poltical position of Canada as a country. French power in the world has been on the decline for years; the US will not consider us more valuable because our government officials can speak French & let me assure you there are mor Chinese learning Enaglish than there are learning French.
Our appeal to the CPC under the leadership of Andrew Scheer was sent three (3) days ago. We hope to get a reply in the near future. Losing votes because more English=speakers are now aware of the growing problem may be a reason to pay attention to this complaint but only if enough Canadians will take action & voice their concerns. Ignore it as an irrelevant issue & don't be surprised if the issue is also ignored by all politicians. Please contact your own MP - ask them to pay attention to this issue.
Letter to CPC Leader, Andrew Scheer
July 20, 2017
House of Commons
Attention: Mr. Andrew Scheer
Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada
Subject: Bill S-209: An Act to amend the Official Languages Act
Dear Mr. Scheer,
As you likely are aware, Bill S-209: An Act to amend the Official Languages Act (communications with and services to the public) is currently proceeding through parliament.
Our understanding of Bill S-209 is basically that it would expand the federal government’s delivery of bilingual communications and services to the public by revising the method used to justify the need for the delivery of bilingual services.
We read with interest the web page of The Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer regarding the cost estimate for Bill S-209 (http://www.pbo-dpb.gc.ca/en/blog/news/Bill_S-209) as well as their report at the link given on that page.
After reading their report, we addressed several questions to The Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, and have received a reply from Mr. Peter Weltman, Sr. Director, Costing and Program Analysis. (for copy of his reply, see below)
Unfortunately, Mr. Weltman’s replies raise other issues/questions as follows:
1. The proposed change to the method for determining the need for bilingual service delivery is fundamentally flawed
In his email, Mr. Weltman states: “The Official Languages Act requires that bilingual services be made available where demand warrants. Demand is determined using a methodology for estimating First Official Language Spoken in a census area, which considers knowledge, mother tongue, and language spoken at home. S-209 proposes enlarging that demand calculation to include those who indicate on the census that they have knowledge of the minority official language of their census area, regardless of whether or not they speak it at home, or whether or not it is their mother tongue. For example, if a person speaks English normally but has knowledge of French, they would be included in the calculation under S-209, but not under the existing law.”
We believe that the new inclusion of “knowledge of the minority language of their census area” in the demand calculation is a completely unreasonable, unnecessary and expensive expansion.
We believe that any reasonable person knows that Canadians will request services in their mother tongue or language spoken at home, not in the minority language of which they may have some limited knowledge. I have some knowledge of French but would never ask for services in French as this could lead to misunderstandings either on my part or on that of the government employee.
Would you agree?
2. The Cost Estimate is incomplete and misleading to the public
The Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s report provides a cost estimate of $147 million for implementation costs (one-time) and $9 million ongoing costs (annually), all of which is related to implementation for language training and the ongoing bilingual bonus and second language maintenance training.
But, this cost estimate is for only 535 newly bilingual offices, not for all of the 1,664 newly bilingual offices!
In his email, Mr. Weltman states: “The biggest impact/costs would be incurred by Canada Post, but we are not allowed to publish those details because they were provided to us in confidence. The total number of newly bilingual offices (1,664) less those belonging to Canada Post, (1,129) leaves 535 offices.”.
If the report’s cost estimate excludes “the biggest impact/costs” regardless of the reason, then it is grossly incomplete and misleading to the public. This cost estimate completely lacks transparency and voids the current government’s election promise of more open and transparent government.
Simply factoring the costs for the 535 newly bilingual offices to cover all of the 1,664 newly bilingual offices would mean that the total costs could be $457 million for implementation costs (one-time) and $28 million ongoing costs (annually). This is a huge and unnecessary amount especially when the current government is already running $30 billion annual deficits and projects a debt reaching $1.5 trillion before achieving a balanced budget.
Would you agree?
3. The Potential Social Costs
We believe that there may be significant social costs related to Bill S-209 that may not have been considered (or are being hidden), especially as they relate to Canada Post which according to Mr. Weltman has “The biggest impact/costs”.
The stated purpose of the bill is to increase primarily front line bilingual services. In the case of Canada Post, this likely means the clerks that serve the public at Canada Post outlets.
Many (probably most) postal outlets are now located in various shops and stores (grocery stores, drug stores, corner stores etc.) across the country, and the employees are hired by the stores, not Canada Post. What happens now to a unilingual French employee at one of these outlets in a drug store in Quebec when the "office" is now designated bilingual - is he/she fired? And, the same for unilingual English speakers elsewhere in Canada. Is Canada Post going to pay for language training for these employees - we suspect not. Are some small family-owned corner stores going to lose their postal outlet (and the income from it) because no one in the family is bilingual, or will they be forced to hire a bilingual person that they cannot afford.
This entire issue is being completely hidden under the guise of confidentiality.
Would you agree?
Mr. Scheer, as you can see from the forgoing, we have some very serious concerns about Bill S-209, both financial and social, especially when this bill is completely unnecessary and yet another example of wasteful spending by the current government.
We believe that these concerns need to be fully addressed for all Canadians in an open and transparent manner by all government entities including Canada Post.
We look forward to your taking up this challenge on the behalf of all Canadians, and await your response.
Our email to the Office to the Parliamentary Budget Officer:
July 13, 2017
Subject: Request for Information re Cost Estimate for Bill S-209: An Act to amend the Official Languages Act (communications with and services to the public)
Dear Sir or Madam,
I have read with interest your report entitled "Cost Estimate for Bill S-209: An Act to amend the Official Languages Act (communications with and services to the public)" dated 17 August 2016, and I have a few questions:
I look forward to your response,
Reply from Peter Weltman, Sr. Director, Costing & Program Analysis
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: July 18, 2017 9:38 AM
Subject: RE: *Request* Bill S-209
Happy to help in any way that I can.
First off, we are not subject to the Access to Information and Privacy law because we are considered a parliamentary organization (Parliament is exempt from this Act). However, as a matter of course, we always provide information to anybody that asks, unless that information has been provided to us in confidence. And there is no charge, but you don’t get a nice letter on letterhead- just an email from me.
The Official Languages Act requires that bilingual services be made available where demand warrants. Demand is determined using a methodology for estimating First Official Language Spoken in a census area, which considers knowledge, mother tongue, and language spoken at home. S-209 proposes enlarging that demand calculation to include those who indicate on the census that they have knowledge of the minority official language of their census area, regardless of whether or not they speak it at home, or whether or not it is their mother tongue. For example, if a person speaks English normally but has knowledge of French, they would be included in the calculation under S-209, but not under the existing law.
This would take the number of Canadians qualifying for bilingual service from 2 million to almost 6 million. The geographic distribution of this population would determine where and how many extra points of service would be required. If half of those people lived in metropolitan Montreal, for example, it is unlikely that departments would need to add new offices- they would likely simply need more bilingual staff.
The Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) has a model that is used to determine required bilingual points of presence. Individual departments calculate their own costs of complying with this determination. The biggest impact/costs would be incurred by Canada Post, but we are not allowed to publish those details because they were provided to us in confidence. The total number of newly bilingual offices (1,664) less those belonging to Canada Post, (1,129) leaves 535 offices.
I hope this helps. Please do not hesitate to ask if you have any further questions on this or any of our work at the PBO.
Best regards - Peter
Sr. Director, Costing and Program Analysis | Dir. Principale, analyses des coûts et des programmes
Bureau du directeur parlementaire du budget | Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
Bibliothèque du Parlement | Library of Parliament
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A9
From Beth Trudeau, Spokesperson from CLF:
Dear Mr. Scheer,
Further to Mrs. McConnell's letter, I have attached a commentary that also pertains to this subject that you should be aware of.
Hi Jason, member of the media:
Thank you for the opportunity to state our concerns on behalf of Anglophones across Canada. Based on the Analysis of Complaints section of the 2014/2015 report from the Office of Official Languages, there were only 550 complaints total for the year.
According to Stats Canada, in 2016 there are 164 staff total working in the six (6) Official Languages Offices with salaries and benefits totaling over $18 MILLION annually. Based on 550 complaints, that means each staff handles 3.35 cases PER YEAR!!!
And now they want to set up another source to do what they are receiving over 18 MILLION dollars to do already to handle a whole 550 complaints? The government would be much wiser and LESS DISCRIMINATORY if they used that same 18 MILLION dollars to instead invest in automatic translators, such as the following;
At a cost of $200 per device, the government could hand out 90,000 translation devices to government workers and the need to hire based on language instead of merit, would disappear forever. The ability for any person of any language to assist another person of a different language would be possible. We DO have the technology.
There would also be less government workers on stress leave as many suffer such ailments because of the language testing and the continual threat of losing their jobs, and that will result in more savings for taxpayers. We know this because Canadians for Language Fairness DO listen to Anglophone complaints, unlike the Commissioner of Official Languages, Graham Fraser who refuses to hear complaints from the majority.
The savings to taxpayers by going the technology route instead of the same old discriminatory, unaccountable route are huge in a time when so many are having to choose between heating, eating and paying their hydro bill.
Canadians for Language Fairness
05 August 2017
Every now & then, the Ottawa Citizen runs an article on the language debate & this one is very exciting because it tells us that the French-language social-engineering agenda is NOT working!! We've always known that it is not working & the 100's of billions of taxpayer dollars have not succeeded in making French more widespread or accepted - that is such a relief!! The article has attracted more views supporting our stance than ever before & if you want to enjoy reading all those comments, please link to the article. The comments don't always appear so if you cannot get the page to open up, contact me as I've captured as much as I could & I'll be so happy to share.
This fight for the rights of English-speakers should concern more Canadians as it affects the majority - even though there is an increase in the number of other languages as we bring in more immigrants from around the world, English is still the most spoken language in Canada. We have NO quarrel with other languages as long as they don't try to become "official" & force their use in government. We've heard that even Gaelic is a language that still attracts attention & we've got a lady who wants to tell us about that language that used to be the most spoken language in Canada. That's a bit of Canada's history that I didn't know!! Lynn will tell us that interesting story when we gather at the Farewell party for Jurgen Vollrath. Beth has a very interesting day planned for those who live in the Bearbrook area (east of Ottawa) & she says that people are travelling long distances to attend. Please contact Beth Trudeau for details. We are mainly conservative-minded people so politics will be on the agenda. Special awards will be given to Jurgen Vollrath, Howard Galganov & Jean Serge Brisson.
Jurgen's show on July 28th can still be heard: http://www.dunet.ca/atg.html You can call in today between 3:00 - 4:00 pm (4:00 - 5:00 in NB) & Jurgen will be happy to hear from you.
Next week (August 11th), at the same time, Kris Austin will be talking to Jurgen so please tune in next Friday & listen.
We have an idea which I would like you to consider. Read the message below the article by Joanne Laucius & add your comments.
Ottawa is the most bilingual it has ever been, but growth rates have barely budged
Published on: August 2, 2017 | Last Updated: August 2, 2017 7:19 PM EDT
Bilingual sign on Parliament Hill. Chris Roussakis / Postmedia
Canada and Ottawa both have more bilingual residents than ever before, according to Statistics Canada figures released Wednesday.
Good news for Canada 150, right? Not really, say experts, who find the numbers underwhelming and say the rate of bilingualism in the capital has basically flatlined for the past 15 years.
“It’s the highest proportion ever. But it’s still not that much,” says John Trent, a senior fellow at the Centre on Governance at the University of Ottawa.
What growth there has been in Canadian bilingualism is coming from Quebec.
In that province, there were 3.6 million bilingual people in 2016 — almost 300,000 more since 2011, according to the new census data.
English-French bilingualism reached 18 per cent across Canada, meanwhile, up from 17.5 per cent in 2011.
The increase across Canada represents more than 455,000 more English-French bilingual people in the past five years.
The needle on Ottawa’s bilingualism rate has barely moved since 2001, says Jack Jedwab, a Montreal-based academic who spends a lot of time in Ottawa. The latest data show that 38.5 per cent of residents are bilingual, up from 38.3 per cent in 2011.
Across Ontario, bilingualism rates increased from 11 per cent to 11.2 per cent between 2011 and 2016. In most other provinces, gains have been either zero or negligible.
Quebec City, which was once behind Ottawa in terms of bilingualism, has surpassed Ottawa, says Jedwab, president of the Association for Canadian Studies and the Canadian Institute for Identities and Migration.
“There’s more practical opportunity to speak to people who speak English, such as tourists, in Quebec City, than it is to speak to people in French in Ottawa,” says Jedwab. He says he has been in meetings with five francophones and two anglophones, and the conversation just switches to English.
In Ottawa, bilingualism rates increased from 37.6 per cent in 2001 to 38.3 per cent in 2006. They didn’t rise at all in 2011, and only nudged up slightly to 38.5 per cent in 2016, says Jedwab. Meanwhile in Quebec City, bilingualism rates have increased more significantly, from 32.6 per cent in 2001 to 33 per cent in 2006, 36.1 per cent in 2011 to 39.5 per cent in the last census.
“Quebec City seems to understand that there’s a great deal of importance in acquiring English as a second language,” says Jedwab. “Francophones hear English in the workplace. There’s incentive to learn it.”
Francophones appear to have a better attitude toward learning English. In January, a report for the federal heritage department from Montreal-based Ad hoc Research found that about 84 per cent of francophone respondents said having two languages is culturally enriching, compared with only 60 per cent of anglophones. They were also more open to language-exchange programs in schools and more likely to think knowing both official languages improves the chances of finding a job — 94 per cent of francophones compared with 76 per cent of anglophones.
“Wake up, folks. The reality is that Quebec is much more bilingual, and the rest of Canada is stagnating,” says Jedwab. “We need to push it to the next level. But a lot of people won’t like it. It needs messaging from senior civil servants. If you have taken a training course, speak French to maintain and improve what you have learned. Come to Quebec. There’s a lot of opportunity to practise, and it’s a nice place to visit.”
There’s a lot of opportunity to learn French at school. But there’s not the same opportunity in the workplace, says Jedwab. “In Ottawa and the rest of Canada, what we’re still seeing is people who acquire French, but don’t retain it.”
For people with English as a mother tongue, bilingualism often doesn’t stick. Outside Quebec, anglophones who develop the ability to conduct a conversation in French usually learn it in school, between the ages of five and 19, notes Statistics Canada.
“Bilingualism rates then gradually decline from one age group to the next. Between 2011 and 2016, the bilingualism rate rose in each age category for the school-age population with English as a mother tongue. The bilingualism rate has risen among five-to-nine and 10-to-14 age groups with English as a mother tongue since at least 2001, but has declined in each census for people aged 15 to 19 years.”
People who may once have felt comfortable carrying on a conversation in French lose that ability over time, says Trent. “I find it difficult to explain. One would think with all the effort put into immersion, that number would be higher. It seems counter-intuitive.”
Universities also have a role to play in helping students maintain their French, says Trent. The University of Ottawa has a linguistic support program, but for the most part, universities have never made it a policy priority, he said.
Last year Bilingual Ottawa, a group of francophone organizations and individuals urged the city to embrace official bilingualism as a symbolic gesture for Canada’s 150th celebrations. Mayor Jim Watson declined, saying the city already has “pragmatic bilingualism.”
Trent says if official bilingualism becomes the culture of the city, more people would be motivated to learn French. “It all depends on will. The clear message is that bilingualism competence depends on people’s will.”
Trent notes that the statistics also show that the percentage of Ottawa residents who claim French as a mother tongue has slipped from 22 per cent to 21.3 per cent in the last census. Those who said French was spoken at home slipped from 23.8 per cent to 23.3 per cent.
“This is the reason why we want to push for official bilingualism in Ottawa,” says Trent. “This statistic shows that French needs support.”
The Rebel says that the censorship on the internet is stifling free speech (SunTV has already been killed) & YouTube has been cutting off people like Prof. Peterson.
To be totally free from censorship, the Rebel wants to be able to control their own access to social media on the internet. CLF will donate $250.00 to that effort as we will be given recognition & a mention on their website. If you want to add any amount to our $250 to make CLF a bigger supporter, would you contact me? This will get more people to know that we exist because many people are not even aware of the French agenda & the battle for English-speakers' rights. It will be chalked up as an advertising cost & your assistance will make our efforts more effective.
Please consider this seriously & send your cheque, made out to "CLF" & mail to our address at the top.
03 August 2017
This is an interesting article that focuses on the minorities in Quebec. Not just the English-speaking minorities but the racial minorities, the latter given more focus, naturally, as racism is a far bigger social crime in the modern Western civilization that has allowed the UN to promote the Cult of the Minority. Modern social thoughts on Democracy has identified that the rights of minorities far outweigh the rights of majorities; after all, the majority can always use their voting strength in the ballot box to look after their own interests.
This works only if the majority is informed enough to know that the funding given to minorities give them the advantage of being able to organize & be heard. This advantage is denied to the majority (about any issue) & so they have to resort to go begging for funding from the public. As we know, the general public is tapped out from the large number of charities begging for help so that when organizations that want to fight for the majorities ask for support, the well is dry!!
As an organization, Canadians for Language Fairness is concerned about the English-speaking majority having a voice We hear from many public servants who contact us, begging not to let their story go public because of the fear of harassment & retribution from their Francophone bosses. We feel for them because we know what they're going through & we know that there are 100's of thousands of English-speaking public servants who have to keep their heads down & pretend that everything is OK. After all, a job with the public service pays far more than the private sector (at least 15% more for the same kind of work) so keeping quiet seems the most intelligent thing to do. No point challenging this in the courts because we know where their sympathy lie - definitely not with the majority!!
So, what about appealing to the politicians for help? Again, this is a door shut in our faces because the 1982 Constitution with its built-in Socialist agenda has made it well-nigh impossible for any politician of any stripe to dare to speak for the Silent Majority unless they want to commit political suicide.
However, we still carry on, regardless of how difficult it is to be heard. We have attracted the attention of outspoken commentators like Howard Galganov, Jurgen Vollrath, Jean-Serge Brisson & hopefully, some fledging political parties which feel that it is time that the beleaguered English-speaking majority is heard. Jurgen Vollrath's show on Friday, July 27th, was fabulous. His special guests were Beth Trudeau, our very special Spokes-person; Joan Seeley from N.B.; Claire Dykeman from the Citizen’s Action Team in NB (C.A.T. for short) & Sharon Buchanan, President - Anglophones Rights Association of NB.
Jurgen's show on July 24th can be heard at this link: http://www.dunet.ca/atg.html
The knowledge imparted by Jurgen, Beth, Joan, Claire & Sharon was so interesting that he's planning to have another one featuring Kris Austin, Leader of the People's Alliance of New Brunswick (PANB).
p.s. don't forget the farewell party for Jurgen Vollrath on August 19th. Awards will be given for people who have fought the good fight!!
Don Macpherson: Who's afraid of hearings on discrimination in Quebec?
Published on: July 28, 2017 | Last Updated: July 28, 2017 2:45 PM EDT
Kathleen Weil, Quebec Immigration, Diversity and Inclusiveness minister, right, speaks to reporters as Tamara Thermitus, president of the Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse, looks on , July 20, 2017 in Montreal. Ryan Remiorz / THE CANADIAN PRESS
Been hearing lately about “systemic discrimination?” Wondering what that is?
Here’s one example:
In April, the Conference Board of Canada think tank published a report suggesting that Quebec was second only to New Brunswick among the provinces in quality of life. In a few areas, however, this province ranked at or near the bottom. One of them was the racial wage gap.
That’s what the report defined as “the percentage difference in full-year, full-time median wages and salaries between university-educated Canadian-born visible minorities and Caucasians.”
This excludes a lack of recognized qualifications or language skills on the part of immigrants as factors, and ensures that the individuals whose wages are compared have attained similar levels of education.
In Quebec, the racial wage gap was 19.7 per cent.
That’s a discriminatory outcome, whether or not it results from any intent to discriminate. And that’s systemic discrimination.
The Ontario Human Rights Commission says systemic discrimination can result not only from individual behaviour but also from “the unintended and often unconscious consequences of a discriminatory system.”
It’s “patterns of behaviour, policies or practices that are part of the structure of an organization, and which create or perpetuate disadvantage for racialized persons.”
Educating the public about unintentional discrimination is one reason why a public inquiry, such as the one on systemic discrimination and racism jointly announced last week by the Couillard government and the Quebec human rights commission, can be useful.
There are legitimate concerns about the consultation. Information on participation in the hearings to be held in the fall is available in French only. The human rights commission and the government have ignored the need for information in English, even though English-speaking visible minorities may face particular discrimination because of language.
The Parti Québécois has criticized the government for holding the consultation instead of acting, and has proposed 20 measures to combat discrimination in employment, housing and other areas.
And some people fear that the hearings, to be conducted by regional organizations with no experience in such matters, could get out of hand. They fear a divisive repetition of the hearings of the Bouchard-Taylor commission on religious accommodations.
The PQ has accused the Liberal government of staging the hearings on discrimination, to be followed by an “action plan” next spring, for partisan purposes before the general election due by October 2018.
Yet the PQ itself, competing with the Coalition Avenir Québec party for nationalist support, has politicized the consultation by exploiting it as an opportunity to practise more identity politics.
Saying the consultation amounts to “putting Quebecers on trial”— as if the victims of discrimination are not Quebecers themselves — the PQ again posed as the defender of the majority against minorities.
And it’s hard to see how the Liberals might gain any partisan advantage from the consultation.
Since the Liberals have held power for all but 19 months in the last 14 years, they risk being blamed for inaction against discrimination reported in the consultation.
And if the Liberal action plan includes measures the PQ has already proposed, the latter can take credit for proposing them first, before the consultation.
Some people, sensitive to accusations that Quebecers are especially xenophobic or racist, fear that the consultation will provide ammunition for “Quebec bashing” by outsiders, i.e., people who are not French-speaking Quebecers.
Yet, only six years ago, Quebecers had the courage to pressure a previous Liberal government into holding the Charbonneau inquiry to expose corruption in the province’s construction industry. And this was after their province had already been branded in English Canada in a Maclean’s magazine cover story as “the most corrupt province in Canada.”
Like corruption in construction, discrimination exists everywhere, not only in Quebec. In holding a consultation on discrimination, this province is merely following the lead of Ontario.
Quebec is the better for having gone through the Charbonneau inquiry. It will survive this one.
The problems of uncontrolled immigration into host countries by immigrants who do not share the culture of the host countries is a problem facing many developed countries (mainly in Western civilization). Here is Douglas Murray from UK who is concerned with this problem.
27 May 2017
Ken Gray runs an Ottawa-based blog called "The Bulldog":
Read Ken's blog that thinks that the City of Ottawa should be made "officially bilingual" as it is merely a "symbolic" gesture that has no purpose other than to make the 15% French-speakers "feel good". He thinks that they feel very strongly about this issue & have the right to make as much noise as they can in the attempt to persuade Mayor Watson & the 12 councillors who have said, "NO". These councillors represent the majority English-speakers who will bear the brunt of the extra taxes if Official Bilingualism is allowed to creep in should the "NO" councillors cave in to the pressure. Ken is using the threat of "Quebec Separation" as an intimidation tactic but forgets to mention that Official Bilingualism benefits mainly the French-speakers as many of our jobs at the City level are already occupied by Quebecers. He also doesn't mention that the French activists are very well funded to the tune of billions of Federal & Provincial tax dollars since the inception of the Official Languages Act.
Comments from the blog
Bob H's excellent comment was posted. Please read & add your comments:
It never ceases to amaze me that people like you want to be accommodating without any research or investigation of the potential costs, both financial and social.
First, let me inform you that Canada is NOT a bilingual country, not now and never can be. We have an officially bilingual federal government, an officially unilingual French Quebec and an officially bilingual New Brunswick. The rest of the provinces and territories are de facto English even if they do provide services to some extent in French. The primary reason that Canada is not now and never can be a bilingual country is that by law since 1974, Quebec is officially unilingual French – check the language legislation.
In fact, Quebec’s language laws have been cited by the UN as contravening the International Charter of Human Rights of which Canada is a signatory.
As for Gatineau/Alymer etc. ever becoming officially bilingual, this is simply impossible under Quebec’s language laws. Municipalities in Quebec are prohibited from communicating with their tax payers in English unless the English population exceeds 50% so how can you expect any of them in Western Quebec to ever become officially bilingual.
As far as costs go, the city of Ottawa’s Language Services budget is currently about $3 million per year. Using the percent of budget the federal government spends on official bilingualism language services (and this is only what they clearly show), I calculate that the city’s spending on language services under official bilingualism could jump to about $24 million per year and this doesn’t include the set up costs which could dwarf this number.
Have a close look at what is going on in New Brunswick, our only officially bilingual province. Provincial government jobs being filled by imported Quebecers (even their current language czar), complaints against English speaking provincial workers for not speaking French even though a French speaker is available (as an example, it cost a commissioner who served in the Canadian military his job – even a francophone made a big deal of this as being unfair), school buses running half empty because the French do not want their children tainted by English, even retail jobs including fast food servers needing to be bilingual etc. etc. This has caused more problems and divisiveness than any other provincial legislation. So, in a province that is about 60/40 English/French, this policy of inclusiveness has backfired, and now the tail is wagging the dog
I applaud Mayor Watson and the councilors who are against making Ottawa officially bilingual and I truly hope that they stick to their positions. Come next election, if they do, they get my vote.
In response to Ken Gray's article: http://bulldogottawa.com/who-does-official-bilingualism-hurt
Anyone who has taken the time to watch the steady advancement of the use of the French language in the Federal Public Service regardless of the number of francophones it represents, will understand why non-francophones have become very wary of more laws enforcing the use of French. After Pierre Elliott Trudeau's recommendation for official bilingualism "where numbers warrant", the "where numbers warrant" has been totally ignored by the francophone proponents who have worked to make official bilingualism legislated everywhere & for everyone. Once put into law, whether federal, provincial or municipal, it is strongly enforced to promote French with no leniency for English or other languages. Canada is a democracy & promotes multiculturalsim EXCEPT in the acceptance of languages. No other country in the world legislates language. However a certain number of radical francophones are determined to make French the primary language & every job's first requirement be the capability to speak French even when the job does not require the use of French. This has played out in the Federal Public Service over the past few years to the point that the majority of Federal Public servants in the Ottawa area are francophone. As a member of the Federal Pubic Service, I experienced the open discrimination against non-francophones in hiring practices & job linguistic requirements, in the determination to hire francophones for as many jobs as possible whether they had a sufficient knowledge of English or not, & then be paid language bonuses besides their regular salary.
First, the government said that francophones must be hired so that the public could speak to the people in government positions in the language of their choice. Nothing was said about the fact that few Federal Government employees speak directly to the public Then also, the province of Quebec, where most francophones live (including those who work for the Federal Public Service in Ottawa), has its own Quebec pension plan instead of the Canada Pension Plan that serves the rest of Canada. Pensions is one of the areas where most dialogue happens between the public & the government. Revenue Canada, another big area of dialogue, directs all our income tax forms & finances to the province of Quebec.
Then effectively, the federal government, under the direction of a prime minister from Quebec, said that all these francophones who have been hired, must be able to speak to their bosses in the language of their choice, which made it necessary for all bosses to be bilingual, & therefore a large percentage of those promoted to these positions were francophones becasue it is necessary for them to learn English unless they choose to live & stay in Quebec only. It was a logical & important step then for the requirement that bosses be able to speak to their bosses in the language of their choice, and so, on & on, up the ladder of administration to the top.
There is no importance given to the language used for the work done, which is most often English since the large majority of Canadians are English-speaking. Especially in the area of computers in which I worked for a number of years, English is the primary language of programs, especially since many are created by U.S. companies. Even there, positions were unnecessarily made bilingual imperative so that unless you could speak French, and even though the work being done did not require it, a well-educated, success-proven capable non-francophone could not even apply for the jobs because the primary requirement was bilingualism regardless of all other qualifications.
Watson is very wise to not allow official bilingualism & its dedicated francophone promoters, to rule all the jobs & everything else in Ottawa. At first glance, it would seem decent to allow more use of the French language to satisfy the francophones here. However, when we examine what has taken place in the Ottawa area during the past number of years, & how official bilingualism has played out in the Federal Public Service, we realize this is not just a gesture to recognize the francophones who live in Ottawa area. Official bilingualism is the key to francophones to dominate every situation & demand that every job, every position be filled only by people who speak French. What happens to all the non-francophones who have lived here all their lives but have not learned to speak French because they do not live in the province of Quebec where French is the only official language, & realistically the percentage of the population of Ottawa who are francophones does not warrant it? In the Federal Public Service, the persons holding the positions are warned to look for other positions that do not demand bilingualism (fewer & fewer positions all the time) because their position is being made officially bilingual (for no logical reason). Before I retired, so many francophones held manager positions that at each meeting a request was made that the meeting should be held in French since whoever was not francophone there, had taken a course to learn French; this even though the work we were doing was all in English because we were in the government of Canada, & English was the language of the majority. This was a very obvious determination to make French the working language, & language of the majority, using any means possible.
Try calling the Federal Public Service. Most often you will be answered in French first. When you go to visit Parliament Hill, listen to which language is being spoken by the workers going out for lunch or leaving work for the day. You will find the majority will be speaking French because they are francophones, whether their jobs honestly require bilingualism or not. Now with another francophone Prime Minister, francophones are being given even more preferential treatment.
For those who have a soft heart for official bilingualism for the city of Ottawa, what do you intend to tell all the young non-francophones who live in the Ottawa area, who are intelligent, well-educated, well-suited to jobs in this city, but who may not have an ease at learning other languages when they realize that they cannot apply for a job without satisfying the first priority of all jobs, to speak French? Especially when someone who speaks French but does not have as many qualifications as they do, actually gets the job instead of them even when the job does not require the use of French? So they must move away from home to get a job because they didn't pass the tests for official bilingualism even though the job itself doesn't require it?
What about the people who currently hold jobs in Ottawa if the Official Bilingualism becomes law? Will they be able to keep their jobs with a "grandfather clause" or will they handily be told to look for work elsewhere?
These are not idle threats! They actually happened in the Federal Public Service when Official Bilingualism was put into power. More than that, in this determination to make French predominant by making most positions "bilingual imperative", it was widely recognized through conversations with people taking the bilingualism tests, that the tests for French were much more difficult than the tests for English. Even some of the francophones admitted that they would find it difficult to pass the French tests. Too much time & energy is wasted by Federal Public Servants who wish to be upwardly mobile, trying to learn French instead of learning how to do their job more efficiently & effectively. The necessity to know French is also eliminating many prospective Federal Public Servants with great qualifications who would otherwise do a very successful job, from even being eligible to apply for these jobs. This does not make sense & is very destructive! We definitely don't need this happening to all the jobs in the city of Ottawa!
N Schroeder says:
No government should be legislating language.
If decisions were made by numbers, Chinese (Mandarin) and other Asian countries would be chosen. Being of aboriginal descent, should they also be represented. Languages evolve, due to the desire of people to keep their language, and if one wants to communicate with someone of that language, they will learn it. Quebec offers English to its population if there are 50 per cent requiring it, maybe the same should apply here.
Immersion classes haven’t worked, and now people from Quebec are coming to Ottawa to take bilingual jobs, but the reciprocation is not there.
Gord Miller says:
Official bilingualism enables activists and renders the majority to second class status. Just look at the federal government. And there is no earthly reason that all programs should be provided throughout the city in French. You’re in an English province. Bilingual services should be limited to essential services. If you want everything in French, move to Quebec.
There are other very good comments, especially from Robert Roberts. He has worked outside the country & writes that the policy alienates the West & divides the country. It is so good to know that there are well-informed Canadians out there. Read his comments - I sent a message thanking him but Ken Gray didn't post it. I know it is his blog & he can do what he likes but what we need in Canada are more people concerned about this policy even though it may not be the most urgent problem facing the country. There are other issues that need your attention but as an organization fighting for the rights of the majority English-speakers, this issue will always be our priority.
As a courtesy to an urgent request re: Bill C-16, here is a petition for you to sign:
Letters of Complaint re: Madeleine Meilleur
From: Claire Dykeman [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: May 23, 2017 9:13 PM
Subject: LANGUAGE COMMISSIONER APPOINTMENT
Dear Mr. Prime Minister,
I am deeply distressed at the appointment of Madeleine Meilleur as the new Commissioner of Official Languages. My understanding is that opposition parties do NOT approve of this appointment, which is on record as being a requirement!
The fact that her command of the English language (the MAJORITY language in Canada, I might add) is less than adequate for this very powerful position should have ruled her out of contention yet, somehow that is okay with you?? This does not speak well for your own standards or integrity I fear.
This rash appointment has wide ramifications across the country – where the English continue to be the majority voters. This appointment is an insult to all of them! A purely political appointment of a fellow Liberal from the provincial level removes her objectivity and puts her decisions in serious question.
I do hope that you will remember the promise you gave when elected, that there will be NO INTERFERENCE in strictly municipal jurisdictions. For instance, trying to make Ottawa ‘officially bilingual’ when they themselves consider it financially threatening to their future well-being. IF you are a man of integrity and can be relied on to keep your word, the new Commissioner will be replaced, and her replacement will be advised of your election promise! Thus, Ottawa will be allowed to make the decision that is best for them – without Federal interference.
Living in New Brunswick myself, with the harsh reality of forced bilingualism here, I know of what I speak. We live in a financial abyss for the English –with lost jobs, out-migration of the young, and soaring taxes to pay for the outrageous costs of duality and bilingualism. By allowing or encouraging forced bilingualism throughout Canada you are effectively alienating the majority of Canadian voters. There WILL no doubt be a breaking point!
I have noticed that you have broken many promises since being elected, Prime Minister Trudeau, but appointing a Language Commissioner who cannot even meet the basic standards of English is beneath the Liberal Party, let alone its Leader.
What is really offensive is the conservative columnists and media like Lilley and the Ottawa Sun only had a problem with Meilleur's lack of English and partisanship, and not because of her total lack of regard for the language rights of non-Francophones, where she dishonestly increased the Francophone population by putting anyone who understands French as a Francophone, hence more jobs requiring bilingualism.
Likewise, these so-called responsible fiscal conservatives never mentioned abolishing the expensive Official Languages Commission that goes and harasses businesses in English Canada with secret shoppers.
Anybody who treated the French in Quebec like Meilleur treated the English in Ontario, would be condemned by the liberal media as an Francophobe without any concern about any "backlash", and would never be appointed.
Sadly, far less sensible English people, specifically English Conservative politicians who continue to ignore the frustration of their Anglophone support who just want them to show the same concern for their rights as they do for French language rights because they are afraid of being called anti-French by such French Supremacist Madeleine Meilleur types and won't fight back in saying there is nothing anti-French in treating the English the same as the French.
SM in Ontario
The French activists will be rallying on May 31st - getting the school children out to wave the Franco banner & scream about how important French is & how the City of Ottawa must be made "Officially Bilingual" to celebrate the 150 years of Confederation.
I have done what I can to alert all the Ottawans on my list - we don't have the resources to mount a counter-rally. What we can do is write to the City Councillors & remind them NOT to allow the noisy French activists to intimidate them. We will be paying close attention if this topic is ever brought up for debate & we will make sure that their votes for or against the motion will be recorded & publicized.
Hard to believe - this just came to my attention - amazingly enough, a poll on The Bulldog blog (which I didn't know about) came up with the amazing result:
77% said "NO" to OB for Ottawa
23% said "YES"
The NAYS have it!!!
02 December 2016
We would like to express our gratitude to all the councillors & Mayor Watson for continuing to resist the call for the City of Ottawa to be made "Officially Bilingual" & to surrender Council's prerogative to decide what the city can afford in providing services in both languages (English & French).
We are very fortunate to have a very active supporter who is an excellent researcher who knows how to access the French media. It gives us the ability to keep an eye on what the small group of activist Francophones are doing & we get a lot of very useful information that we don't have the resources to obtain otherwise. In the following link:
Councilors were contacted by #ONfr to rule on the question: "We would like your answer" yes "or" no "to the question: Would you support official bilingualism in the City of Ottawa if the approach does not impose additional costs and does not cause job losses? "The elected were free to respond by email or by phone.
That question refers to the greatest threat to increased bilingualism, additional costs, especially if the policy is entrenched in law & can be enforced by the courts. The cost of bilingualization will obviously increase as everything is duplicated so common sense will tell you why it is being resisted by councillors who are worried about the cost of ALL services to be provided by the city. The following will show you how the cost of bilingual service has doubled since the passing of by-law 2001-170:
1. Cost of FLS in 2005 was $1.75 M (for copy of message from Andre-Cadieux, please contact Kim at firstname.lastname@example.org)
2. Cost of FLS climbed to $ 2.6 million in 2014 http://www.ottawasun.com/2015/06/23/119-complaints-in-2014-about-citys-french-language-services
2. Cost of FLS in 2016 was $3,064 M (for page from adopted budget 2016, please contact Kim at email@example.com) )
The next important point is that, no matter what they say, it will cause job losses to the majority unilingual English-speakers as more positions will be required to be bilingual. Surely, none of you would be so naive as to believe the lie that OB will not cost jobs to English speakers? We already know that many city employees come from Quebec to take jobs from residents who live on this side of the river & pay taxes to the city. Do those Quebecers help pay for the upkeep of the city?
We wish to thank the councillors who said a firm, "NO" but also the ones who are "undecided but favourable to the status quo" & the two councillors who are did not like the question. These are all councillors who have not been intimidated by the powerful French lobby. We will keep your names on our list of councillors to promote in the next municipal election.
BTW, an item just forwarded by a reader says that several recreational French/bilingual programs, paid for & set up by the City at the insistence of the French pressure groups, will be cancelled. Reason? Insufficient response!!!
The article is available in French here:
OTTAWA - Half of French activities offered by the City of Ottawa must be canceled due to insufficient enrollment.
Finally, we wish to express our best wishes to the Councillors for the upcoming festive season with a hearty:
"Where numbers warrant" will be met by boosting the numbers artificially. You'll note that the English-speakers in Quebec will still have to live under the French-language zealots who want the French language dominant in Quebec.
Folks, Bill S-205 died on order table when Harper govt fell. It was tabled again as Bill S-209 in December 2015 when Trudeau came to power. It aims to amend Part IV (Service to the Public) of the OLA, changing the definition of "francophone" a la Ontario FLSA.
Issues related to implementing the Official Languages Act
Commissioner lends his support to Bill S-205
In April 2015, the Commissioner of Official Languages presented his position in support of Bill S-205, which aimed to update Part IV of the Official Languages Act. In his briefFootnote 11 to the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages, the Commissioner gave three reasons why Part IV needs to be updated.
First, he noted that the criteria set out in section 32(2) of the Act to assess potential demand for services in the minority language are not inclusive, because they do not take into account all of the people who use the minority language in the public or private sphere. For example, the current criteria as they are applied exclude people whose first official language spoken is not the language of the minority but who:
speak the minority language at home (as can be the case for francophiles, anglophiles and newcomers);
speak the minority language in the workplace; or
receive their education in the minority language.
Second, he pointed out that significant demand is defined in relation to the proportion of the minority population (i.e., the 5% rule). However, the chief factor to be considered in determining significant demand in a region served by federal offices should be the presence of an official language community that shows signs of vitality. (It means presence of even one French school, according to their previous discussions - E.B.).
Third, he stressed that Bill S-205 is important because it codifies the principle of substantive equality by explicitly imposing on federal institutions the duty to provide service of equal quality in both official languages and to consult with the English and French linguistic minority population concerning the quality of those communications and services.
The Bill died on the order table after the federal election was called in August 2015 and was tabled again in December 2015 as Bill S-209. The Commissioner reiterated that this bill makes an undoubtedly significant contribution to fulfilling the purpose of Part IV of the Act and helps official language communities to strengthen their identity, to develop and to thrive.
Analysis needed of the impact of the Official Languages Regulations on the vitality of official language communities
In 2013, the Société franco-manitobaine made public a complaint that had been filed with the Office of the Commissioner concerning the Official Languages (Communications with and Services to the Public) Regulations.Footnote 12 The complaint alleged that the method used to determine the first official language spoken in order to establish what constitutes significant demand does not take into account large segments of the population that speak the minority language and would want or be likely to use it in federal offices.
The objective of the investigation was to determine the nature of the obligations incumbent upon the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat under Part VII of the Act in the context of the Official Languages Regulations Re-Application Exercise. The exercise seeks to review and update federal institutions’ language obligations every 10 years using census data: in this case, data from the 2011 Census.
In the spring of 2015, the Commissioner released his final investigation report to the parties involved. The Commissioner concluded that the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat had to identify the impact of the results of the re-application exercise on the vitality of official language communities that would no longer be receiving bilingual services because of changes in the linguistic designation of some federal offices. The Commissioner also concluded that the institution should present options to the President of the Treasury Board to mitigate the negative impact of these results.
Because the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat had stated that it did not intend to conduct an analysis on the impact of the results, the Commissioner concluded that it had not met its obligations under Part VII of the Act and that the complaint was founded.
The Commissioner therefore recommended that the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat undertake a thorough review of the impact of the Official Languages Regulations on the development and vitality of the official language communities affected by the results of the re-application exercise. He also recommended that the findings of the analysis be shared with the President of the Treasury Board, along with opinions and advice on solutions to be considered in order to mitigate any potential negative impact of the Regulations.
A follow-up is under way to determine whether the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat will be taking the appropriate steps to implement the Commissioner’s recommendations.
Société franco-manitobaine takes case to court
In February 2015, the Société franco-manitobaine applied for a court remedy in Federal Court under Part X of the Act. The Société petitioned the Federal Court to find that parts of the Official Languages (Communications with and Services to the Public) Regulations are inconsistent with section 20 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (and with several provisions of the Act) and to order the government to amend the Regulations. The Société maintained that:
the Regulations contain an unduly restrictive definition of the word “Francophone,” i.e., they do not make allowances for the recent expansion of the Francophone space to include mixed families, newcomers, people who are bilingual and people who are able to converse in French;
the use of formal numerical thresholds is inconsistent with the objectives of the Act; and
the Regulations were adopted without consulting the French-speaking minority, and they have not undergone any significant review or consultation since they came into force in 1992.
The objective of Senator Maria Chaput’s Bill S-209 was to correct the very shortcomings cited by the Société franco-manitobaine in its court remedy. The Commissioner strongly urges the government to update Part IV of the Act and to review the criteria for defining significant demand.
The Commissioner of Official Languages recommends:
that Parliament make Bill S-209 a priority so that the parliamentary committees examining it are able to conduct a diligent review; and
that, by March 31, 2017, the Treasury Board undertake an evaluation, in consultation with official language communities, of the effectiveness and efficiency of its policies and directives for implementing Part IV of the Official Languages Act.
More than 40 years ago, the Government of Ontario recognized the need to provide French-language services to the province's Francophone community. The right to French-language services contained in the French Language Services Act came into effect on November 19, 1989. It gives all citizens who request French-language services the right to be served in French:
* in any head office of a provincial government ministry or agency;
* in most provincial ministry and agency offices that serve or are located in the 25 designated regions.
Today, about 80% of Ontario's Francophone population has access to these services.
The following is a chronology which highlights some of the major advances in French language services in Ontario. You can sort the achievements by year and by sector for easier reference.
Adoption of a Regulation on the provision of French language services by third parties on behalf of government agencies.
32 new public service agencies were designated under the FLSA since 2003, which brings the total number of designated agencies to 222. These agencies provide health services and support services for children, youth and women who are victims of violence.
The total funding for French-language boards for the 2010-11 school year was $1.24 billion, the largest investment in French Language education in the history of the province.
Ontario puts in place a French language policy framework for postsecondary education and training. The goal is to help provide Ontarians with more opportunities to study and train in French.
Substantial additional investments in infrastructure in the primary, secondary and postsecondary francophone educational sectors:
$248.9 million worth of construction was undertaken under the French Capital Transitional Funding component of the Grant for New Pupil Places in the primary and secondary school systems.
$84.8 million was invested in the postsecondary sector as well as in training for Francophones.
Adoption of the Franco-Ontarian Day Act. The Province of Ontario officially recognizes September 25th of each year as Franco-Ontarian Day as well as the contribution of the Francophone community of Ontario to the social, economic and political life of the Province and the communitys importance in Ontarios society.
Adoption of a new directive for Communications in French by the Ontario Government. Ministries and classified agencies are required to consider and incorporate the Franco-Ontarian communitys specific needs when developing and implementing communications strategies and tactics.
Creation of 266 new child-care spaces in French language schools.
Official launch of TFO in Manitoba.
The Ministry of Tourism and Culture launches two three-year pilot programs to address the needs of Francophone visual artists, arts organizations and collectives in Ontario.
Adoption of the Francophone Community Engagement Regulation under the Local Health Integration Networks Act. Establishment of 6 French language health planning entities (1 in Northern Ontario, 1 in Eastern Ontario and 4 in Southern Ontario) in order to provide advice and input on French language health services in their communities.
Inauguration of the new Montfort hospital.
SERVICES FOR WOMEN WHO ARE VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE
Announcement of a $5.2 M investment for the construction of Torontos first Francophone womens shelter.
Opening of a 10-bed womens Francophone Shelter in Timmins.
Adoption of a new more inclusive definition of Francophone (DIF): 50,000 more Francophones identified, bringing the total Franco-Ontarian population to over 580,000.
Addition of a Youth Francophonie Award as part of the Ontario Francophonie Awards.
Release by the OFA on its website of a new General Statistical Profile of Ontarios Francophone Community in December 2009.
NewAmnagement LinguistiquePolicy whose goal is to help the provinces French language educational institutions and settings optimize the transmission of the French language and culture among young people, to help them reach their full potential in school and society, and to breathe new life into the francophone community.
As part of the provinces Accent on Youth Strategy, launch of a new initiative developed by the OFA in partnership with theAssociation franaise desmunicipalits de lOntario(AFMO) which aims to encourage young Francophones to learn more about municipal affairs.
The firsttats gnraux de la francophonie de Sudburywere held in November 2008. Bringing all sectors of the Sudbury community together in a planning exercise, this event made it possible to lay a foundation for setting priorities for the regions economic, cultural, community, social, and artistic development.
Each of these milestones has enabled Francophones to face the future with optimism and to focus their efforts on training the next generation of Francophone leaders. With its community partners and with private companies that have roots in the community, OFA launched itsAccent on Youth Strategyin 2008 to encourage young Francophones to socialize, work, and live in French.
TFO becomes an independent and self-governing organization with its own budgets, its own board of directors and its own offices.
Another milestone in the recognition of the French fact in Ontario was reached in 2008, with the introduction of French license plates for personal vehicles.
Creation of the Office of French Language Services Commissioner. Reporting to the Minister Responsible for Francophone Affairs, but independent of the OFA, the Commissioner is responsible for handling complaints relating to the FLSA, conducting investigations to ensure compliance with the FLSA and submitting special reports as well as an annual report to the Minister that is tabled in the Legislative Assembly.
Development of a French services accountability framework to be integrated in the annual planning process of each ministry.
Investments in the education sector are now making it possible to expand York University,Universit de Hearst, andLa Cit collgiale, and to expand French-language postsecondary program offerings in Ontario.
The year 2006 marked the 20th anniversary of theFrench Language Services Act. To celebrate this milestone in the history of French Ontario, the Government of Ontario created the Ontario Francophonie Awards as a way to honour Francophones and Francophiles who have made a valuable contribution to the vitality and well-being of Ontarios Francophone community. The OFA also created a travelling exhibition on the history of French Ontario, entitledLa francophonie ontarienne : dhier aujourdhui.
Francophones in eastern Ontario rallied around the project to create monuments to Ontarios Francophonie. On September 25, 2006, the 31st anniversary of the Franco-Ontarian flag, the first of six monuments in Ottawa was unveiled. It is a giant Franco-Ontarian flag symbolizing the history and contribution of the regions Franco-Ontarian community. This initiative has since spread to other Ontario communities, including Casselman, Rockland, and Sudbury.
Designation of Kingston under theFrench Language Services Act.
Signing of the Ontario-Quebec Cooperation Protocol on Francophone Affairs.
The growing number of French-language schools gives rights holders increased access to French-language education across the province.
Launch of thePolitique damnagement linguistique de lOntario, a language planning policy to promote the French language and culture, improve student achievement, and help keep young Franco-Ontarians in French-language schools.
Creation of an advisory committee on French-language postsecondary education.
Establishment of a permanent Elementary and Secondary French-Language Education Task-Force.
Establishment of an improvement program for French-language, rural, Northern, and First Nations libraries.
Implementation of the first phase of theStrategic Plan for the Development of French Language Services in Ontarios Justice Sector, in partnershipwith the francophone stakeholders, which aimsto improve, modernize and expand access toFrench Language Services in the justice sector.
COMMUNITY AND SOCIAL SERVICES
Support for French-language school boards to plan for the provision of child care services under the Best Start Plan.
Unprecedented commitment of $125 million to expand Montfort Hospital co-funded with the federal government.
Establishment of a Francophone working group on health care reform, headed by the CEO of Montfort Hospital.
Inclusion in the preamble of Bill 36 on local health system integration of recognition that the requirements of theFrench Language Services Actmust be respected. The Bill also requires that the Francophone community be consulted both in the development of a provincial health system plan through the establishment of a French-language health services advisory council, and at the regional level by local health integration networks.
Creation of a website,Centre darchives des rglements municipaux, whichprovides the English and French versions of municipal by-laws.
Signing of the Canada-Ontario Agreement on French-Language Services providing $1.4 million per year over four years to increase the capability of the Government of Ontario to deliver French-language services and support the development and vitality of the Francophone community of Ontario.
Designation of five new agencies under theFrench Language Services Act. Since 1988, 201 agencies have been designated to provide services in French.
Commitment of $140 million to contribute to the development of French-language schools.
Signing of the Provincial-Federal Funding Agreement for French-Language Education and French-as-a-Second-Language Instruction, providing $301 million over four years for minority and second-language instruction at the elementary, secondary and post-secondary levels, as well as an additional $30 million to recognize that Ontario has the largest minority French-language community in the country.
Establishment of a permanent Elementary and Secondary French-Language Education Task Force to advise the Minister of Education on unique Francophone matters such as promoting French culture, reducing assimilation and helping to retain Francophone students.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRADE
Distribution of a Resource Guide for immigrant entrepreneurs to all the Canadian Embassies and high commissions abroad.
Adoption of anAct to amend the City of Ottawa Act, 1999, recognizing the bilingual character of the City of Ottawa. The amendment requires the City of Ottawa to adopt a policy respecting the use of the English and French languages in all or specified parts of the administration of the city and in the citys provision of all or specific municipal services.
Provision of $700,000 over four years to translate municipal by-laws and other key documents into French, cost-shared with the federal government.
Commitment of targeted funding to promote access to postsecondary education for Francophones as part of the $6.2 billion to be invested in response to the Rae Report.
Creation of an advisory committee on French-language postsecondary education charged with advising the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities on improving access to French-language postsecondary programs.
SERVICES FOR WOMEN WHO ARE VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE
Creation of a help line for Francophone women who are victims of violence: 1 877 FEMAIDE (1 877 336-2433). Francophone women across the province can access this dedicated toll-free line anytime.
Creation of a Provincial Advisory Committee on Francophone Affairs. The committees mandate is to advise the Minister Responsible for Francophone Affairs on how to best meet the needs of the Francophone community.
Participation of Ontario at the Xth Summit of the Francophonie in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Designation of the City of Brampton and the municipality of Callander under theFrench Language Services Act. After an implementation period of two years, provincial government offices located in Brampton will offer their services in French. Because there are no offices of the provincial government located in the municipality of Callander, French-language services will be available at government offices in the City of North Bay.
Funding of $30 M allocated to the provinces 12 French-language district school boards as a first step in the implementation of the French-Language Education Strategy.
To help strengthen French-language education in Ontario, the Government launches thePolitique damnagement linguistique 2004. This plan is designed to help promote French language and culture, improve student achievement and self-esteem and help keep young Franco-Ontarians in French-language schools.
SERVICES FOR WOMEN WHO ARE VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE
The Government adopts a Domestic Violence Action Plan. One of the objectives of this Plan is to improve access to French-language violence prevention programs and services in accordance with theFrench Language Services Act.
The Centre Victoria pour femmes and the Timmins and Area Women in Crisis announce the creation of a new Francophone Sexual Assault Centre.
Holding of tats gnraux sur le dveloppement des services en franais en matire de violence contre les femmes (conference on the development of French-language services in the area of violence against women). The purpose of the conference was to discuss issues related to French-language violence prevention programs and services, to discuss best practices and explore models for improved service delivery.
Investment of $1.9 million to support sexual assault centres across the province offering French-language services or serving Francophone communities.
Creation of a French Language Institute for Professional Development through which professionals in the justice system can increase their French-language abilities.
Creation of a Francophone Advisory Committee by the Seniors Secretariat in order to develop, implement and evaluate a series of information tours for Francophone senior citizens across Ontario.
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
A federal-provincial-community committee is set up to discuss Francophone immigration.
HEALTH AND LONG TERM CARE
Announcement of a $7.4 M increase to the base funding of Montfort Hospital and a grant of $20.8 M for 2003-2004.
Citizens can request licence plates with the design of the Franco-Ontarian flag.
Eleven new transfer payment agencies are designated under theFrench Language Services Actas providers of French-language services. Since 1988, 196 agencies have been designated as providers of services in French. Of these, 66 have been designated since 1995.
Official groundbreaking ceremony atLcole secondaire de formation professionnelle et techniquein Ottawa.
Official opening ofCollge Boralcampus in Toronto, in the Fall 2002.
Signature of a memorandum of understanding between Legal Aid Ontario and theCentre mdico-social communautaire de Torontofor the 2003 opening of the first Francophone Legal Aid Clinic in Toronto.
Five-year memorandum of understanding between the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and the French-Language Health Services Network of Eastern Ontario.
SERVICES TO WOMEN VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE
Announcement of funding for Francophone pilot projects in the area of violence prevention.
Games of La Francophonie 2001, Ottawa-Hull: the Ontario Government participates in the planning of the Games and hosts a pavilion that welcomes many visitors. Some 3,000 athletes and artists from 52 countries compete in these games, 85 of these competitors being from Ontario. In all, Ontario wins 3 medals in the Cultural competitions and 16 medals in the Sports division (8 of which are gold).
The Franco-Ontarian flag becomes an official emblem of the province.
Additional financing to improve legal aid services in French in Ontario.
TheCourts of Justice Actis amended to improve access to justice and simplify the administrative procedures to request a bilingual trial.
The Government of Ontario launches the Early Years Challenge Fund. In order to meet the needs of Francophone families, a special envelope 5% of the total Fund is set aside for projects within the Francophone community. Following consultations with Francophone stakeholders, a separate process is put in place to evaluate and recommend projects by Francophone groups.
Organization of the 4th Games of La Francophonie to be held in Ottawa-Hull in 2001.
128 long-term care beds allocated to Montfort Hospital, as part of the governments commitment to create 20,000 new long-term care beds in the province by 2004.
$4 million to train specialists to identify young Francophones who need special education services.
Five year agreement with the Federal government for the funding of French-language colleges, including some funding for theCollge dAlfred.
Funding toLa Cit collgialefor the development of a bilingual training centre for call services in the high technology industry.
Funding toLe Collge Boralfor the Centre for Excellence in Forestry of Northern Ontario.
The Ontario Tourism Marketing Partnership (OTMP) develops a tourism marketing strategy specifically for the Francophone community of Ontario and provides tourism information in French to Francophone consumers.
The Ontario Government attends the 8th Francophone Summit in Moncton where the Ontario Pavilion showcases Ontario products and services.
The Ontario Legal Aid, established under theLegal Aid Services Act, must provide services in French.
Renewal of theCanada-Ontario Agreement on the Promotion of Official Languages.
Five year Federal/Provincial Agreement for the financing of French-language school boards.
TheProvincial Offences Acttransfers responsibilities for the administration and prosecution of offences to the municipal level. The Act is accompanied by a memorandum of understanding whereby municipalities in designated areas agree to maintain the provision of services in French.
After 3 years of implementation, Francophones in the City of London officially have the right to receive provincial government services in French as stipulated under theFrench Language Services Act.
Creation of 12 French-language school boards (4 public and 8 separate) with funding equivalent to that of English-language school boards.
SERVICES TO WOMEN VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE
The OFA, together with the Ministry of the Solicitor General and Correctional Services and the Ontario Womens Directorate, implement an action plan to increase services to help Francophone women victims of violence.
Opening of two French-language colleges:Collge BoralandCollge des Grands Lacs, and a permanent campus site forLa Cit collgiale.
Multi-use school facilities are established in Kingston and Brampton.
Designation of a new area under theFrench Language Services Act. The City of London becomes the 23rd designated area to provide provincial government services in French. These services come into effect on July 1,1997.
Under the Act, another eight agencies are designated to provide some or all of their services to the public in French, bringing the total number of designated agencies to 130.
Provincial Francophone organizations now number 76 in comparison with 31 in 1986.
Amendments to theCredit Unions and Caisses Populaires Actenables the caisses populaires to offer a wider array of financial services and support to their Francophone clients. They can offer preferred shares to members, an important source of revenue to help them expand.
Financing to set up caisses populaires in under-serviced areas.
Amendments to theCooperatives Corporations Actprovides cooperatives with:
easier self-financing and ability to structure themselves as groups of partners rather than members; and improved access to support programs for small businesses.
First multi-use school facility set up in Longlac. (Fall 1994)
Capital funding for the construction of eight new French-language schools.
Dissolution of theConseil scolaire de langue franaise dOttawa-Carletonand creation of two autonomous French-language boards as of July 1, 1994: theConseil des coles publiques dOttawa-Carletonand theConseil des coles catholiques de langue franaise de la rgion dOttawa-Carleton.
Establishment of an annual Trillium Award to recognize Francophone authors and French-language literature.
A new community radio station for the Cornwall-Alexandria area goes on air.
COMMUNITY AND SOCIAL SERVICES
There are now 52 Francophone daycare centres. In 1986, there were 3.
Establishment of a Francophone medical social services centre in Hamilton-Wentworth.
Designation of 24 agencies under theFrench Language Services Act(July 1993). (New total: 122)
Renewal of the Canada-Ontario Agreement on the Promotion of Official Languages.
Announcement of the creation of two new French-language colleges, one in Northern Ontario (Collge Boral) and one in Central/Southwestern Ontario (Collge des Grands Lacs).
Creation of a fund for Francophone cultural centres with the help of the Office of Francophone Affairs and the Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Recreation.
The firstSalon du livre de Toronto, a French-language book fair, financed to a large extent by the government, is held in October 1993. It is the first event of that nature in Ontario.
The community radio station for Kapuskasing goes on air with the financial assistance of the Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Recreation.
TheUnion des cultivateurs franco-ontariensis recognized as the official union to represent the provinces Francophone farmers.
TheCoalition franco-ontarienne pour le logementis recognized as the official representative for Francophones on housing issues.
Designation of the first two legal clinics under theFrench Language Services Act; one in Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry, the other in Prescott-Russell.
PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
Establishment of theAssociation des personnes sourdes franco-ontariennes.
Designation of 12 agencies under theFrench Language Services Act(Summer 1992). (New total: 98)
Creation of a French-language school board in Prescott-Russell (January 1992).
CULTURE AND COMMUNICATIONS
Establishment of the Ministers Advisory Committee on a Cultural Policy for Francophones of Ontario as a result of recommendations contained in the report, RSVP!: Cls en mains/RSVP!: Keys to the Future, by the Working Group for a Cultural Policy for Francophones of Ontario. The interministerial committee (Culture and Communications, Office of Francophone Affairs) submits its final report in November 1992.
Establishment of two French-language community health centres, one in Sudbury and the other in Cornwall-Alexandria. A bilingual community health centre is also underway in Longlac.
Designation of 15 agencies under theFrench Language Services Act(Fall 1991). (New total: 86)
CULTURE AND COMMUNICATIONS
Creation of a grants program for the development of French-language community radio.
SERVICES TO WOMEN VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE
The Office of Francophone Affairs receives an allocation in order to develop a strategic plan for the provision of violence prevention services in French. Emphasis is placed on public education initiatives and on the development of direct services for Francophone women victims of sexual assault.
The Revised Statutes of Ontario are published in French.
HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES
Creation of a program for victims of sexual assault to improve French-language services for Francophone women.
Partir dun bon pas pour un avenir meilleur/Better Beginnings, Better Futures: a provincial project on services for children in difficulty includes a French-language pilot project in Cornwall-Alexandria.
Re-establishment of the Council on Franco-Ontarian Education (CEFO) to advise the Minister of Colleges and Universities and the Minister of Education on all subjects concerning French-language education programs at the elementary, secondary and postsecondary levels.
Creation of the Advisory Committee on Francophone Affairs (ACFA) to advise the Minister of Colleges and Universities on the issue of French-language postsecondary studies (July 1991).
Provisional report of the Select Committee in Ontario on Confederation, which recommends the maintenance of French-language services.
Designation of 24 agencies under theFrench Language Services Act(December 1990). (New total:71)
Setting up of the French-Language Education Governance Advisory Group (Cousineau Commission) responsible for recommending criteria for the governance of French-language education in Ontario.
Opening of Ontarios first French-language college of applied arts and technology,La Cit collgiale(Ottawa, September 1990).
Bourdeau Commissions report recommending the establishment of French-language colleges in Northern and Central/Southern Ontario.
Beginning of the installation of bilingual signage on provincial highways.
Amendments to article 136 of the Courts of Justice Act provide for other forms of hearings such as pre-trial and pre-motion conferences, as well as the filing of documents in French in certain regions.
On November 19, 1989, theFrench Language Services Actcomes into effect.
HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES
Creation of the firstCentre mdico-social communautaire(Toronto) that brings health and social services under one roof.
Designation of the first 47 agencies under theFrench Language Services Act. The first designated agency is the Hospital Notre-Dame in Hearst.
Canada-Ontario Agreement on the Promotion of Official Languages: Cooperation Agreement between the two governments to improve access to French-language services in provincial ministries.
Setting up of first French-language school boards in Toronto and Ottawa.
Creation of French-language community literacy centres.
HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES
Creation of the French-language daycare network,Rseau francophone de services de garde.
Dissolution of the Council on Franco-Ontarian Affairs and creation of the Ontario French-Language Services Commission.
Development and presentation of each ministrys implementation plans for French-language services for review by the Ontario French-Language Services Commission and the Office of Francophone Affairs.
Establishment of a linguistic evaluation centre by the Human Resources Secretariat.
Establishment and enhancement of the offices of the French-language services coordinators in ministries and certain crown corporations.
CULTURE AND COMMUNICATIONS
TVOntariosLa Chanebegins broadcasting. (January 1987)
Adoption of theFrench Language Services Act. This Act consolidates existing policies and recognizes the right of Francophones to receive government services in French in the 23 designated areas of the province.
Establishment of a simultaneous interpretation service in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.
Enactment of legislation on school governance giving Francophones full and exclusive governance of their French-language schools and instructional units.
The Office of the Government Coordinator of French-Language Services becomes the Office of Francophone Affairs.
|397||Canada rewards Omar Khadr - why?||2017-07-10|
|396||Hurray!! Madeleine Meilleur bows out!!||2017-06-16|
|395||D-Day - A Victory To Remember||2017-06-07|
|394||Opposition to Madeleine Meilleur as Language Commissoner||2017-06-04|
|391||Madelene Meullier - Poor Choice||2017-05-22|
|390||Fallacy of French Under-Representation||2017-05-16|
|389||French Extravagance in NB||2017-05-02|
|388||CBC - The Story of Us||2017-04-23|
|387||April 20 planned rally for OB Ottawa||2017-03-27|
|386||M-103 + Ottawa's Mayor being intimidated||2017-03-25|
|385||Two Important Reminders||2017-03-21|
|384||Several Items Of Concern||2017-03-21|
|383||St. Pat's Day Lunch + John Trent||2017-02-26|
|382||The Holy Grail||2017-02-24|
|381||Court Challenge Program reinstated + Bill M-103||2017-02-12|
|380||Dialogue Canada Pushing||2017-02-03|
|379||Kim & Howard's Smorgasbord||2017-01-31|
|378||Prof. Robson Joins The Battle||2017-01-30|
|377||Justin's Faux Pas||2017-01-27|
|376||Now Is The TIme||2017-01-20|
|375||A Local French Paper Closed Its Doors||2017-01-18|
|374||English Schools being hollowed by French Immersion||2017-01-14|
|373||Canada's public servants stressed by language tests||2017-01-02|
|372||PM Trudeau says NO to French activists||2016-12-27|
The various opinions expressed on this website are not necessarily shared by everyone whose photo is displayed.
This website has been visited 151405 times.