Conference kaosws::canada

>    I heard on the CBC radio news this morning that the youth wing of the 
>    Parti Quebecois has adopted a policy over the weekend, whereby all 
>    immigrants to Quebec will be forced to take french language instruction.
 
	This seems very OTT to me.

	I grant that it can sometimes be difficult, or very difficult, not
	to speak the native tounge of a country in which you live, but
	mandatory instruction seems a very draconian measure. I don't know of
	any other country that does this.

	Is this an extreemist group?

	Heather

    OTT???  What does this mean?
    
    Yes, they are extreemist.  They also voted that at least one of their
    members sit on the party executive, and this wasn't accepted by the
    party either.  No need to wonder why, with policies like that one...
    
    Today, immigrants who want to take French courses are paid to
    do so.  An American friend of mine started the courses but quit because
    they were too difficult.
    
    Imagine, being paid to learn another language and quitting!  But I
    digress...
    
    Normand

    OTT means "Over The Top".
    
    Overkill, if you like.
    
    Wayne

	Yup, sorry, OTT is "over the top"
    
>    Today, immigrants who want to take French courses are paid to
>    do so.

	Do you mean paid, like an hourly rate, or the classes paid for?

	If it's an hourly rate, than I would have thought that this would
	be enough of a carrot.

	The ones that don't take this up volunterily may not learn much even if
	the teaching was compulsory.

	Heather

    They are paid a monthly rate.  It sits somewhere between UI and welfare
    and many immigrants take the courses to extend their benefits.  It's
    funded by the province.
    
    And so when people tell me they quit the courses because they were too
    difficult, I remind them of my German courses at McGill, which cost me a
    bundle... and weren't a picnic, either.
    
    Normand

    I heard that they wanted to include "Quebec Cultural" training with the 
    language training, and that refusal should be punished by criminal
    charges. (I have not read this myself, I was told this by a FRANCOPHONE
    though.) 
    
    As for this being an extreamist group, it is the youth wing of the
    party that is widely believed to win the next provincial election in
    Quebec. It would be like calling the Brown Shirts an extreamist group
    before the elections in Germany before WWII. Yes they are extream, but
    they will form the next government.
    
     Heaven help minorities in Quebec when these young "nationalists" grow
    up and assume the reigns of power.
    
    
    							Derek.

>   I heard that they wanted to include "Quebec Cultural" training with the 
>   language training, and that refusal should be punished by criminal
>   charges. (I have not read this myself, I was told this by a FRANCOPHONE
>   though.) 
 
And you believed him?   Derek, knowing your opinion about the Parti
Qu�becois, he was just pulling your leg.

>   As for this being an extreamist group, it is the youth wing of the
>   party that is widely believed to win the next provincial election in
>   Quebec. It would be like calling the Brown Shirts an extreamist group
>   before the elections in Germany before WWII. Yes they are extream, but
>   they will form the next government.
 
The youth wing has very little influence and virtually no power in the party.
They have no representatives on the party executive, as opposed to the
Liberal youth wing which has 4 representatives on the party exec.
   
>   Heaven help minorities in Quebec when these young "nationalists" grow
>   up and assume the reigns of power.
    
When these young nationalists grow up, they will mature and realize that
with power comes responsibility.

Normand

 >When these young nationalists grow up, they will mature and realize that
 >with power comes responsibility.

  Responsibility towards who?????

  Ben

  PS. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

    re .7 I think you may be right about my leg getting longer....
    
    BUT these people will grow up to be the next leaders (as they are
    already inside the power structures of Quebec) and I hope they do learn
    that just because you have power dosen't give you the right to do as
    you please.
    
    
    					Derek (who now walks with a limp)

The fact that these young nationalists have rather unorthodox views is
perfectly natural.  It's all part of growing up.

Last week a study in Qu�bec revealed that young police officers were
less flexible, more dogmatic, and more apt to applying the strict letter
of the law to criminals... law and order for everyone, strict
sentences, and "long live the prisons".

There was public outcry in our Qu�bec newspapers.  If these young
officers were like this today, how would they be as they aged?  Were
we headed for a police state?  Editorialists talked about "Totalitarianism".

My opinion is it's the exact opposite.  As these young officers grow up
they will learn from experiences, and realize that there is very little that
is "black and white" in this world... it's all shades of grey.

Ditto for the young "ind�pendantistes".

As for the comment about absolute power, I couldn't agree with you more.
And this comment was never more true than with our Conservative government
headed by Mulroney.  Absolute power in Ottawa has corrupted absolutely.

Normand

	It looks like a very generous off to fund this, however I don't like
	the idea of compulsion, if it stays the way it is, I think it's a good
	idea.

	Heather

    Yet another waste of your tax dollars.....
    
    If the Quebec provincial government can dictate that all immigrants go
    to a french speaking school...how is this any different. ?
    
    Brian V
    

    Well, one way it might be different is...
    
    People who are not students!  We're talking Mr/Ms Immigrant, working
    adults.
    
    Pieter
    

    That's right.  These are adult immigrants who want to learn French
    so that they can work in Qu�bec.
    
    How do adult immigrants learn English in the ROC?  Are courses given for
    free?
    
    How do you attract immigrants?
      
    Normand

    
>    How do you attract immigrants?
 

	This is very rare indeed, a place that wants to attract immigrants.

	Heather

    Canada (generally) provides a far better life to those that come as
    immigrants. A higher standard of living, political/religious freedom,
    and the opportunity to give your children a chance at a better life.
    These are strong reasons to come to Canada. Wether they coose to learn
    English is entirely up to them, as a person could live in Toronto and
    speak only Chineese for example. Maybe this explains why Quebec can
    only keep 1 in 3 immigrants who initially come there.
    
    
    
    						Derek

> Canada (generally) provides a far better life to those that come as
> immigrants. A higher standard of living, political/religious freedom,
> and the opportunity to give your children a chance at a better life.

That's for sure.

> These are strong reasons to come to Canada. Wether they coose to learn
> English is entirely up to them, as a person could live in Toronto and
> speak only Chinese for example.

Ditto for Qu�bec.  And, yes, you could speak only English here too!

But if a Chinese immigrant in Toronto wants to learn English, but can't
afford it, how does he/she get out of the catch-22?  Without English, he
is relegated to small Chinese industries.  If he/she has a family, they
may need two jobs to afford Toronto housing.  When do you have time to learn
English in this kind of setting?

If you don't give immigrants money to live while they are learning a new
    language, you encourage ghettos, and these immigrants will never
    integrate and take full advantage of what Canada has got to offer... equal
    opportunity.

> Maybe this explains why Quebec can only keep 1 in 3 immigrants who initially
> come there.
  
Qu�bec (and especially Montr�al) attracts more immigrants than most of the
other provinces because it is viewed as a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic,
cosmopolitan city.  The reason they don't stay here is because of "jobs,
jobs, jobs."
    
Normand

English language courses (free) are offered in Toronto ...  You don't have
to pay if you can show the need like a new immigrant.

Stuart

    Of course, if anyone moves to Quebec (Canadian or an immigrant) and
    wants to their children to be educated in English, they can't do that
    because of the fine language laws in Quebec...

    RE: .19
    
    Not quite true, Gary.  If either parent was educated in Quebec in
    English, OR (new policy as of 1991) if the child has had at least one
    full year of English education in another province, then that child has
    the choice of English-only education in Quebec.
    
    Otto.

> Of course, if anyone moves to Quebec (Canadian or an immigrant) and
> wants to their children to be educated in English, they can't do that
> because of the fine language laws in Quebec...
    
    Although we are completely off-topic here, I don't mind talking about
    education and choice of language in the public school system, if you want.
    
    Anyone moving to Qu�bec knows that French is the language spoken
    by the majority here and that, as in any other state in the world,
    primary and secondary public education is provided in the language of the 
    majority.
    
    In France, it's French.
    In Italy, it's Italian.
    In Germany, it's German.
    In England, it's English.
    In the rest of Canada, it's English.
    
    Makes perfect sense to me.
    
    Qu�bec education language laws are in tune with the rest of the
    civilized modern world.
    
    Furthermore, the advantage for those coming to Qu�bec is that they can
    switch at junior College and University levels to English, if they wish,
    and have a choice of universities, at that.
    
    In other words, Qu�bec's education system is peculiar NOT because
    of its mandatory education in French to immigrants, but because it
    offers a choice of language of instruction at college and university
    levels.
    
    How many other countries provide this?  And of those countries, how many
    provide this in their PUBLIC, government-subsidized educational system?
    
    What would you tell an Italian immigrant who moved to Ottawa and
    insisted that his children be educated in Italian, and that your tax
    dollar pay for it?
    
    2 questions...
    
    Question 1:  After having emigrated to Qu�bec, why wouldn't you want your
                 children to learn French?
    
    Question 2:  If you emigrated to Germany, would you insist on English
                 instruction there, too?
    
    Normand
    
    P.S. Please keep in mind that I am talking about the public school
    system throughout this note.  Anyone can send their child to an English
    private school if they want to pay for it.
                                                    

    In a country where there are 2 official languages, ideally, there should 
    be no restrictions on the use of either language anywhere in the
    country.  Practically speaking, this is ridiculous, but in areas where
    there is sufficient demand, services (and this includes education) 
    should be available in one of the two official languages.
    
    So, if I moved to a place with a very low or non-existant anglophone
    population, then it would be ridiculous for me to expect education in
    English.  On the other hand, in say Montreal or Hull, there is no
    reason an English based primary education shouldn't be available.
    
    The same thing goes in the rest of Canada ... Ottawa and area provide
    French language education ... both with a French Language school board
    (aimed at Francophones) and French Immersion schools, aimed at
    Anglophones.
    
    There are NO rules in Ontario, apart from availability to deny anyone
    an education in one of Canada's official languages, where Quebec does
    provide such rules.
    
    Stuart

    I agree with Stuart. The ROC will provide alternate language education
    if numbers justify it. I have seen on TV there is a small town in
    Alberta that no longer provides ENGLISH primary school service. The
    demand for FRENCH imersion has eliminated the need for ENGLISH schools.
    
    One would think this would be an indication of the desired harmony the
    English in Canada want to have with the French.
    
    
    							Derek 

    I agree with Stuart as well.  If you view the Anglo population in the
    Montreal area as a "community", this community is a city the size of
    Edmonton.  Can you imagine a community the size of Edmonton not having
    education in their desired official language?  
    
    [Of course, Bill Davis managed to play a highly successful shell game
    in Ontario by not dealing directly with the principle of "as numbers
    warrant".  He spent his time basically sending out the message that
    Franco-Ontarians could not have enshrined rights to education in french
    in all circumstances]
    
>>>    Qu�bec education language laws are in tune with the rest of the
>>>    civilized modern world.
    
    I think you'll find that the principle of "where numbers warrant" is
    allowing governments to be more flexible in serving their populations
    in whatever language is more appropriate.  This is important, because
    while it's nice to have a cultural / language policy, it is more
    important that young children be given a basic education.  Would you
    rather have thousands of spanish speaking kids in California drop out
    of an anglo system, and be burdens on the economy, or would you try to
    accomodate their language and give them a basic education,ensuring that
    English is high on the list?
       
>>>    Furthermore, the advantage for those coming to Qu�bec is that they can
>>>    switch at junior College and University levels to English, if they wish,
>>>    and have a choice of universities, at that.
    
    I think the CEGEP system is a great concept.  And you are right that
    the choice is there for attending Anglo or Francophone institutions.
    However, these are not mandatory parts of education.  The crucial parts
    of the system are those for elementary and secondary, which everyone
    must pass through.
    
>>>    In other words, Qu�bec's education system is peculiar NOT because
>>>    of its mandatory education in French to immigrants, but because it
>>>    offers a choice of language of instruction at college and university
>>>    levels.
    
    See above point.
    
    Pieter
    

    Let's see,
    
    Quebec has (or did have) a functioning English language school system,
    
    And then made it illegal for immigrants (all) to attend the English 
    language system,
    
    And now the English language system is facing hard times because of low
    enrollment,
    
    And the Quebec government recognizes that if they allowed immigrants to
    enroll in the English school system, most would, so they wouldn't
    become francophones and the French language scholl system would be
    harmed (the last two points were made in a radio show within the last
    couple of weeks).
    
    Now convince me that the Quebec government has not constructed a
    situation that can only end with the complete elimination of an English
    school system in Quebec.  Also convince me that if any province was to
    enact similar laws or deny it's francophone citizens a French
    educational system, that the citizens of Quebec would stand up and
    defend that province just as they defend the laws of Quebec.
    
    Garry, who is still planning to send his children to French immersion...
      

> In a country where there are 2 official languages, ideally, there should 
> be no restrictions on the use of either language anywhere in the
> country.  Practically speaking, this is ridiculous, but in areas where
> there is sufficient demand, services (and this includes education) 
> should be available in one of the two official languages.
  
As was stated earlier, anglophones in Montr�al and Canadians whose
children have attended just 1 year of English instruction elsewhere
in Canada, have the right to send their children to English schools,
though they may send their children to French schools.

Although it's expensive for Qu�bec taxpayers to support two educational
system in both official languages, it's an acquired right for English
Qu�becers and for Canadians.  

    
However, if I as a Canadian, send my children to 3 years in French
school in Montr�al, and then move to Victoria, this same acquired right
is denied... because of availability.  I understand this and support it.

Do immigrants have the same acquired rights as Canadians?  I don't think so.
When they move to Canada, it's because they chose to.  If they *don't* want
to live in a primarily French province, there are 9 other provinces to
choose from, who would be happy to welcome them.

I always find it interesting to see Anglophone parents
line up several days ahead of time to register their children in certain
French immersion schools.  They'd do anything to get their kids to
attend French immersion schools in English neighbourhoods.  Compare that
to some immigrants who would do anything to send their children to English
schools and demand it as a right.
    
> There are NO rules in Ontario, apart from availability, to deny anyone
> an education in one of Canada's official languages, where Quebec does
> provide such rules.

The rules only apply to immigrants.  I believe that the reason behind
the language laws is to curb abuse.  Otherwise, immigrants could easily
move to Qu�bec, take advantage of our public school system, educate their
children in English only, and then simply move to Toronto, Vancouver,
Halifax, or Calgary for their working (and tax-paying) lives.

Unemployment is high in Qu�bec.  The economic situation is worse here
than in many parts of the country.  Qu�bec has a right to protect its
fiscal interests.

> I agree with Stuart. The ROC will provide alternate language education
> if numbers justify it. I have seen on TV there is a small town in
> Alberta that no longer provides ENGLISH primary school service. The
> demand for FRENCH imersion has eliminated the need for ENGLISH schools.
    
> One would think this would be an indication of the desired harmony the
> English in Canada want to have with the French.

This is an isolated incident... as was the Qu�bec-flag stomping show 
we all saw last year on TV during the constitutional talks.

Normand

>    I agree with Stuart as well.  If you view the Anglo population in the
>    Montreal area as a "community", this community is a city the size of
>    Edmonton.  Can you imagine a community the size of Edmonton not having
>    education in their desired official language?  
 
    But Pieter, the anglophones in Montr�al (where numbers warrant) *DO*
    have access to English schools... from primary to university.
       
   Normand

    RE: .26
    
    I have to agree with Normand on this one.  It is a little unfair for
    Anglophones who don't actually live in Quebec to criticize a system
    they have no direct experience with.  My son attends an English school
    in Quebec, so I have first-hand knowledge of the system.  It is neither
    dead nor dying.  Compared to his first few years of schooling in
    Calgary, his educational development and activity roster inside school
    is much higher.  In fact, one of the reasons he is not in French school
    or French immersion is that he would have surely failed grade 3 (his
    first year here).  That is because he was exposed to NO French at all
    in Calgary, and would not have been until grade 6 (that's when I was
    first exposed in Quebec in the '60's!).  He cried every time he had
    French class in grade 3 because he was so far behind the other children
    and couldn't understand anything (he's doing quite well now, thank
    goodness).  As well, he was behind in Mathematics and writing skills,
    since in Calgary they didn't start handwriting (as opposed to printing
    words) until grade 3.  So again he was behind his peers.
    
    Each system has it's good and bad points.  But to *ASS*U*ME* how a
    system works without knowledge is what causes prejudice, IMHO.
    
    And the point is well taken that immigrants don't necessarily have to
    settle in Quebec.  If that is their own choice, then the point is moot. 
    They have chosen French education, French culture, and English as a
    second language in the province.
    
    Otto.

>The rules only apply to immigrants.  I believe that the reason behind
>the language laws is to curb abuse.  Otherwise, immigrants could easily
>move to Qu�bec, take advantage of our public school system, educate their
>children in English only, and then simply move to Toronto, Vancouver,
>Halifax, or Calgary for their working (and tax-paying) lives.
    
    This applies to all kinds of groups everywhere.  If we accept the fact
    that we are a single country (which I know many Quebecois do not but
    that's not the issue here) ... then there should be freedom of movement
    across the land.  For people who move out of Quebec, then there may
    be people who move to Quebec .. the system has away of balancing
    such things.  There are non-immigrants who have been educated in
    Quebec and then move out too.
    
    If people are leaving Quebec, then that is the issue that should be
    addressed.  Be it for reasons of employment, or education, or
    seeming prejudice ... these are what should be addressed so that
    people are less likely to land in Quebec and then take their benefits
    elsewhere.
    
    Stuart

    The popularity of French imersion reflects the reality of the
    advantages of being bilingual in Canada. How many politicians will
    never aspire to become PM because they lack the ability to communicate
    in both official languages? How many unilingual people are retarded in
    their career growth in both public and private sector work? I suggest
    that French Imersion is not an isolated incedent, and reflects the
    people in this country of non-french decent that want/need to
    accomodate the French fact in Canada. 
    
     Not too bad for a bunch of people who "Can't understand" the French
    culture because they are not French!! Maybe we can't understand it, but
    we sure try to support it!!! 
    							Derek.

>    I suggest
>    that French Imersion is not an isolated incedent, and reflects the
>    people in this country of non-french decent that want/need to
>    accomodate the French fact in Canada. 
    
    And I suggest that people who send their children to French immersion
    schools don't do it (in general) to accomodate Quebecers, but they do it
    because they are enlightened, intelligent individuals who have
    come to the conclusion that "two languages is better than one".
    
    Only my humble opinion.
    
    Normand

    I think the reason for sending children to French Immersion is much
    simpler and is the same reason that so many immigrants want to learn
    English - there are definite ECONOMIC benefits, particularly in
    Ottawa/Hull.
    
    To put it bluntly, I won't feel badly if my children never see a play 
    in French, but I will feel terribly responsible if their careers are
    limited because I failed to see the significance of "two languages are
    better than one".  
    
    Garry
    

Re:  *accomodate* the french culture by sending your children to French immersion.


Derek,

I'm afraid that I'm happy to support Norman's notion on this one that by doing
so, you are not *accomodating* the French culture but rather educating,
enlightning, and giving your children the opportunity to be more mobile when
they grow up, whether in Canada or anywhere else in the world.

If I was given the opportunity to learn Spanish, Italian, German, or whatever
for free during work hours, here in Digital Hull, I'd be the first one to sign
up, even though I don't *need* these languages to live happily in Canada.  As
far as I'm concerned the more languages you know the better off you are.

/Mario

>    I think the reason for sending children to French Immersion is much
>    simpler and is the same reason that so many immigrants want to learn
>    English - there are definite ECONOMIC benefits, particularly in
>    Ottawa/Hull.

>    Garry 

EXACTLY.  Anglophones learn French to get better jobs, to sell more products,
to communicate with French-speaking customers... in other words, anglophones
learn French for economic reasons... the almighty dollar.  They learn 
French to accomodate themselves.  This makes perfect sense to me.

But to suggest that French immersion is popular because of the goodwill of
anglophones to "accomodate" Qu�becers, as Derek suggests... GIVE ME A BREAK!
    
>   I have to agree with Normand on this one.  It is a little unfair for
>   Anglophones who don't actually live in Quebec to criticize a system
>   they have no direct experience with.  My son attends an English school
>   in Quebec, so I have first-hand knowledge of the system.  It is neither
>   dead nor dying.  Compared to his first few years of schooling in
>   Calgary, his educational development and activity roster inside school
>   is much higher. 

Good... someone who has first-hand experience.
    
>   And the point is well taken that immigrants don't necessarily have to
>   settle in Quebec.  If that is their own choice, then the point is moot. 
>   They have chosen French education, French culture, and English as a
>   second language in the province.
    
>   Otto.

Thanks for the support, Otto.

Normand

    To the last two noters... You are not English, so you cannot comment on
    what motivates English people.
    
    							Derek.

    and by the way, why don't French people look at learning English as an
    "enlightening" experience, rather that assimilation? Is English such a
    bad language that nothing could be gained by learning it?
    
    							Derek.

Re:

>    To the last two noters... You are not English, so you cannot comment on
>    what motivates English people.

Well, I did grade 6, all high-school, in an English school in Quebec.  Did 3
years of college in Ontario, worked 3 years in Sault Ste. Marie, and worked and
lived in Ottawa for 4 years.

I may not be English but I have been around them in their territory for a while.
I guess that puts me in a position such that my comments do have some integrity.

>    and by the way, why don't French people look at learning English as an
>    "enlightening" experience, rather that assimilation? Is English such a
>    bad language that nothing could be gained by learning it?

My parents are *Quebeqois de souches* (from the roots) and they made the
decision of sending me to English school in grade 6 to learn English for the
right reason, being that I would be more mobile for my whole life thanks to it.
They are now envious of me and all others who are fluent in English.  Call it
enlightening, assimilation, whatever you want.  No-one I know in Quebec thinks
English is a bad language not worth learning.  Quite the contrary, most
Quebeckers want to learn English so they can get out and see the world a bit.
Especially Florida...

/Mario

    SET MODERATOR
    
    Please be careful about making value judgements on whether people
    are in a position to make valid comments.  I'm not saying you can't
    do that ... but I am saying that there is a fine line over which
    the judgement can become an insult.
    
    Stuart

    Once again the Francophone community can make a statement (You are not
    one of us so you can't comment) and get away with it, while if the
    English community makes the same statement (you are not one of us blah
    blah blah) and gets both an explaination why a Francophone can
    legitamatly speak for an Anglophone, and a warning to watch out about
    making value judgments. If this double standard continues I will have
    to delete this confrence as it is becomming obvious that the English
    side of the equasion is not playing by the same rules as the French
    side, and as such is disadvantaged.
    
    							Derek.

    Derek,
    
    Methinks your logic is becoming emotional!
    
    Ted.

    RE: .39
    
    Well Derek, was it not you who said "You are not English..." in this
    stream?  A wee case of the pot calling the kettle black, don't you
    think?  Please don't take the "they're my toys and I'm going home"
    stance.  I for one enjoy your input here, because ALL opinions are of
    value, especially to oneself, and I believe in IDIC (Infinite Diversity
    in Infinite Combinations).  That's what makes us intelligent beings
    able to agree and disagree and have these interesting discussions!
    
    My 2� worth,
    Otto.

    When I read the moderator's caution, my reaction was exactly the same
    as Derek's, however I chose to not make an issue of it - the last time
    I commented in this conference about the moderator's actions, my note
    was deleted and I was asked to take such issues up off-line...
    
    In any event, I think if you were to objectively scan any one of
    several topics, you would find a number of statements of the sort
    "your're not francophone or you don't live in Quebec, so you can't
    comment".  I don't recall any moderator action when these statements 
    were made, so it does seem somewhat of a double standard when Derek's 
    similar comment has apparently provoked a warning.
    
    Garry

    OTTO,
     If I did say that it was only after I was told my input was invalid on
    Francophone issues because I was English. I am only trying to show that
    when the logic used by a Francophone to counter an Anglophone is
    used by an Anglophone to counter a Francophone it is no longer
    accepted. If this is the case, why was it so blindly accepted in the
    first instance? I believe very strongly in logic, and this type of
    discussion defies logic. If there cannot be a basis of logic to the
    discussion it is by definition pointless. That is why I would delete
    the confrence, not because "they're my toys and I'm going home"
    
    
    							Derek.

    RE: .42
    
    While I agree with your sentiments about objectivity and
    double-standards Garry, I still believe it is better to speak from
    experience than from speculation.  I get miffed when people make claims
    or assumptions about how, for example, the English school system in
    Quebec works, or what the rules are to send a child to English school
    in Quebec, without first-hand experience.  I don't want to create a
    huge debate or arouse resentment towards individuals, but if we all
    spoke more carefully without assuming the "You don't know or understand
    because..." attitude, and back up our positions with facts, then we can
    continue without remorse or moderator intervention.
    
    And most important, there is a huge DIFFERENCE between: "In My
    Opinion..." and "even though I've never visited or lived in XYZ place,
    I KNOW it's impossible to get good salami on rye there".
    
    In an ideal world (and if we all work on it, in this conference), there
    would be no more double-standards, name-calling, or belittling of other
    people's views.
    
    $ SET SOAPBOX/OFF
    
    Otto.

    RE .43
    
    Point well taken, Derek.  I should have scanned further back, and it
    was probably unfair of me to give my opinion of your feelings. 
    Please read .45, and I promise to re-read it too!  :-)

    Re. 45 and speaking from experience:
    
    Otto, you're absolutely correct that speaking from exprience, and more
    importantly, stating accurate facts is better then expressing an
    opinion.  Assuming that what you wrote about changes to Quebec
    education law is correct, then what I wrote is wrong and I'm
    deliquent in thanking you for correcting me.  I won't bother to rattle
    on and on about how this change has no real impact for the folks that 
    want the simple right to freely choose..
    
    Re: the new tangent about double standards:
    
    My comments in supporting Derek are related to how the moderator is 
    dealing with Derek's (and others) comments re: "you're not ... so you 
    can't ...", not whether or not Derek (or anyone who uses this logic) is 
    correct in using this logic.  Personally, I think the logic sucks - one 
    does not have to personal knowledge of something to have a valid opinion.
    
    The moderator, by entering a cautionary note (which I believe was aimed 
    directly at Derek) without having done so in the past, has created the 
    perception of a double standard which I would like the moderator to address.
    
    But, as another noter asked "what's the use"!!
    
    Lockyer

    SET MODERATOR
    
    I have asked in the past and I will ask again, if you have questions
    about moderation, please contact me by mail ...
    
    But anyway ... here's the explanation ...
    
    I do not want to show double standards, and for anyone who got the
    impression that I was being biased, I can assure you that that was
    definitely not the case.  The request was simple ...please be careful
    when making value judgements on whether people are in a position to 
    make valid comments.  The reason for the request was because of the 
    appearance that this was going to decline into insult slinging, based 
    on previous experiences in earlier notes.
    
    I asked you to be careful to avoid turning such value judgements into
    insults ... that's all ... everyone noting here is pretty well aware
    of what kind of comments will start provoking an insult slinging match.
    
    Understand that, after the fun of the last insult slinging match, I
    don't want to attempt to moderate another one.  Hence the warning.
    
    The warning had NOTHING to do with who was telling who they couldn't
    make valid comments.  I would have made the same warning if the tables
    were the other way around and it looked like insult slingning was
    beginning.
    
    I do not enjoy moderating insult slinging.
    
    Stuart

	
	 Going back to the original topic, here is a few notes to what has
	been discussed before. This is how I saw it 7 years ago (might have
	changed by now):
		1. The 7 month French training program for immigrants (COFI)
	was paid for by	the Federal Government. That's perhaps why some
	thought they should have a choice of English.
		2. This program was voluntary to a point (E.g. for a 
	person under 30 the Quebec welfare was $170 a month in 1985).
	The obvious choice was to find another source of income, take
	the French courses, or starve to death.
		3. "If you do not like it, move west." Well, many were
	thinking real hard on this one. It certainly helped if you had
	money to buy the ticket,  spoke enough language to ask for 
	directions, and had an idea what you were going to do when you 
	get there. Also the general understanding was that you could not
	move out of the province before your paperwork had been processed
	(1.5+ years).

		As far as the Quebec legislation regarding the elementary
	education is concerned, I thought that in the essence it was aimed
	against those francophone Quebecers who were thinking that the kid
	had the French at home and it would be to his/her advantage to take
	an English school. Some people  could be over sensitive to the fact
	that there was a piece	of legislation that determined the rights of
	the children based on their parents' background.
		
	George

Back to business...
    
I heard last night on Prime Time News that the Supreme Court has awarded
to French schools in Manitoba the right to have their own French school
boards.

Although French in schools is *no longer banned*, French schools remained
under the jurisdiction of English school boards.  I always assumed that French
schools across Canada were run by French school boards.  It took the Supreme
Court to decide that the present system in Manitoba is "unconstitutional".

Before I get a barrage of notes, the English schools in Qu�bec are run
by English schools boards and have always been, as far as I know.

Normand    

    In Quebec the boards are presently Protestant (Mostly English) and
    Catholic (Mostly French). They will be changing this to English /
    French boards. I wonder if this will create a privately funded Catholic
    board in Quebec. There has to be some resistance to the change.
    
    Glenn

    Normand, your anticipation is excellent, so I'll ask some different
    questions:
    
    How is having the Quebec government (dominated by a fracncophone majority) 
    in control of who can attend your school system much different than not 
    having a separate school board?  If some other group has control of a 
    major input to your "business" (and in fact can absolutely stop the
    inflow), then you can not be in control.  What are the regulations in 
    Manitoba and other provinces re: who can attend which school system and
    would the decision in Manitoba be hailed as a victory if the Manitoba
    government enacted the same regualtions as Quebec has re: who can attend 
    the English system in Quebec?
    
    Regards,
    
    Garry
    
    

    
>   How is having the Quebec government (dominated by a fracncophone majority) 
>   in control of who can attend your school system much different than not 
>   having a separate school board?  If some other group has control of a 
>   major input to your "business" (and in fact can absolutely stop the
>   inflow), then you can not be in control.

Garry,

All I do is mention a Supreme Court decision on the Manitoba school system,
and I get a list of questions on Qu�bec's school system.  It feels like
"baiting" to me...

In Manitoba, French schools are governed by the Manitoba government
(dominated by an anglophone majority) and by English school boards.

In Qu�bec, English schools are governed by the Qu�bec government (dominated
by a francophone majority) and by *English* school boards.

<FLAME ON>

If you can't see the difference between the two, and the bias in the
first situation, then, THANK GOD WE HAVE A SUPREME COURT WHO CAN!

<FLAME OFF>

> What are the regulations in 
> Manitoba and other provinces re: who can attend which school system and
> would the decision in Manitoba be hailed as a victory if the Manitoba
> government enacted the same regualtions as Quebec has re: who can attend 
> the English system in Quebec?
    
Again, the group of people most affected by our laws pertaining to
primary and secondary education are immigrants to the province.  I never
realized that the ROC were so concerned about immigrants and their right
to English education in Qu�bec.

Perhaps if the ROC would look more closely at their own educational systems,
and less at what Qu�bec is doing, they wouldn't be wasting taxpayer's money 
in court cases with the Supreme Court.

Normand                              

    Geez, Normand, I didn't mean to get you all steamed.  I merely wanted
    to contrast and compare how the new laws in Manitoba compare to the
    current laws in Quebec.  I was careful to ask questions as I don't know
    precisely what the laws of Quebec are, nor precisely what the laws of
    Manitoba will be.
    
    While, you may feel that I'm baiting you, my impression as a result of
    your response, is that you don't like or want to discuss the relevence
    of the Manitoba decision.  Why did you raise the Manitoba decision in a
    topic about Quebec and langauge education?  Why are your so defensive?
    
    Regards,
    
    Garry, who applauds the Manitoba decision!!
    

    I got steamed because your note inferred that even though the Manitoba
    system was found to be inconstitutional, that, in fact, it is more
    fair than what is happening in Qu�bec.
    
    If I misread you, I'm sorry.
    
    My point in bringing up the Manitoba decision was to prove that even
    though Qu�bec has a bad reputation about its education system
    and choice of language, when you look more closely elsewhere, you find
    blatant inequities that go unpublicized.
    
    Normand         

>    		....	when you look more closely elsewhere, you find
>    blatant inequities that go unpublicized.

But that doesn't make the inequities in Quebec any the less wrong.

Stuart

> But that doesn't make the inequities in Quebec any the less wrong.

    No, you are right, although I fail to see which inequities you are
    talking about.
    
    The only inequity that you could argue (pertaining to language
    instruction) is that immigrants do not have access to public English
    education in Qu�bec.  Afterall, you could argue, English is one of
    Canada's both official languages.
    
    I don't see this as an inequity.
    
    But, if you do, are you willing to fight for (and pay for) French
    education to immigrants in the ROC?
    
    Remember, availability is not a factor.  A right is a right is a right.
    If you give rights to immigrants to choice of language for primary
    and secondary education, then that right must apply throughout Canada.
    
    Normand

    The rights of citizens of Canada tave their children educated in the
    minority official language of a province 
    "(a) applies wherever in the province the number of children of
    citizens who have such a right is sufficient to warrant the provision
    to them out of public funds of minority language instruction; and
    (b) includes, where the number of those children so warrants, the right
    to have them receive that instruction in minority language educational
    facilities provided out of public funds."
    
    Where there are such numbers, and such facilities exist, I suspect
    immigrants have access to them (outside Quebec.)
    
    The Canadian constitution doesn't provide an "absolute right" to
    minority official language education, even to the children of citizens;
    it does require provincial governments to provide such instruction
    "where numbers warrant."  Quebec chooses to deny the children of
    immigrants access to the existing English-language schools.  Manitoba's
    treatment of its French-language minority has been far from exemplary. 
    100 years too late, some would say, changes are being made.  Quebec is
    moving in the opposite direction.  It seems to me perfectly reasonable
    to oppose this by arguing "2 wrongs don't make a right."
    
    -Stephen

    re .57:
    
>    But, if you do, are you willing to fight for (and pay for) French
>    education to immigrants in the ROC?
    
>    Remember, availability is not a factor.  A right is a right is a right.
>    If you give rights to immigrants to choice of language for primary
>    and secondary education, then that right must apply throughout Canada.
    
    
    But Normand, not even New Brunswick can promise french and english
    education to everyone everywhere in the province under any
    circumstances!  While there are rights, there are realities governments
    must deal with.  So rather than focus on the individual's right to 
    obtain education in either official language, why not focus on the
    (minority language) group's right, to have education in the official
    language of their choice?
    
    Once we think about it in collective terms rather than individual
    terms, the working policy matches the rights.  The working policy
    being: minority language education available and offered where numbers
    warrant!
    
    It's hard sometimes to balance off individual rights vs collective
    rights, and collective applies on many levels (a minority group,
    Quebec society, Canadian society)...
    
    Pieter
    

It is true that historically the English-speaking provinces were not keen on
providing separate schools for their French-language minorities.  This was 
complicated by the strong role of the Roman Catholic Church in French-language 
education and culture in Canada, and the strength of "Orange" anti-Catholic 
feeling in some English-speaking areas.  There were major political fights over
these issues in a number of provinces, many years ago.

There is also something to be said on behalf of French-speaking minorities who
wish to keep anglophone children out of their school systems.  If the purpose
of such school systems is to preserve the francophone culture of the minority,
it makes sense to prevent them from being swamped by the children of the
anglophone majority, whose parents want them to learn French as a second
language. 

In Quebec, the goal apparently is to try to make immigrants assimilate to the
francophone majority culture, rather than weaken it by becoming anglophone
North Americans.  The result is that the majority of immigrants, who are more
interested in economic opportunity than in the siege mentality of the
Qu�b�cois, move elsewhere.  This may be good for the future of the francophone
culture; I don't know.

-Stephen 

> In Quebec, the goal apparently is to try to make immigrants assimilate to the
> francophone majority culture, rather than weaken it by becoming anglophone
> North Americans.
    
    Herein lies the dilemna Qu�bec faces.  It wants to protect its
    French culture on a continent that is predominantly English.
    Only time will tell whether this is at all feasible.
    
> The result is that the majority of immigrants, who are more
> interested in economic opportunity than in the siege mentality of the
> Qu�b�cois, move elsewhere.  This may be good for the future of the francophone
> culture; I don't know.
    
    I don't like the "siege mentality" phrase, but that is your point
    of view.  To an immigrant who would complain to me about this, I would
    ask him/her why they chose Qu�bec if they didn't want to live in a
    predominantly French province.  There are 9 other predominantly
    English provinces.  Take your pick.
    
    Normand
    

>    I don't like the "siege mentality" phrase, but that is your point
>    of view.  To an immigrant who would complain to me about this, I would
>    ask him/her why they chose Qu�bec if they didn't want to live in a
>    predominantly French province.  There are 9 other predominantly
>    English provinces.  Take your pick.

Sometimes it's just a matter of going where the jobs are ... sometimes it's
because contact to a job in Canada has been done through one of the trade 
delegations abroad like Quebec House in London England ... companies looking
for employees often make use of the trade delegations.  Sometimes it's simply
a matter of where the plane lands from their country ... Montreal is a major
port of entry.

Unfortunately a totally realistic picture of Canada is NOT painted for
prospective immigrants.  They hear that Canada is bilingual and assume that
they can go anywhere ... so why not Montreal ?

Hey presto ...

Stuart

    
    > Unfortunately a totally realistic picture of Canada is NOT painted for
    > prospective immigrants.
    
    I'd agree with you on this one.
    
    > They hear that Canada is bilingual and assume that they can go
    > anywhere ... so why not Montreal ?

    An immigrant looking for a bilingual environment that lands in Montr�al
    is one of the lucky ones.  Just imagine an immigrant with a bilingual
    view of Canada that lands in Vancouver, Halifax or Calgary... poor
    sucker.
    
    Of course if that same immigrant in Montr�al wants instruction for his
    children in English, then he'll be out of luck.
    
    Normand
                                                                   

A highly visible aspect of Quebec's francophone culture is the constant stress
on its precarious status in North America, and how eternal vigilance is
necessary in order to preserve the language and culture.  This is what I meant 
by "siege mentality."

I suggest that this is not attractive to immigrants.  If you were starting 
life in a new country, would you join a group that considers itself to be a
beleaguered minority?
 
-Stephen

>    > They hear that Canada is bilingual and assume that they can go
>    > anywhere ... so why not Montreal ?
>
>    An immigrant looking for a bilingual environment that lands in Montr�al
>    is one of the lucky ones.  Just imagine an immigrant with a bilingual
>    view of Canada that lands in Vancouver, Halifax or Calgary... poor
>    sucker.
>    
>    Of course if that same immigrant in Montr�al wants instruction for his
>    children in English, then he'll be out of luck.

When I said that they understand that Canada is bilingual, what I mean is that
they expect that they can live and get along anywhere in either English or
French ... so they arrive in Montreal and think that they can get along
perfectly well in English ... ooops ... in your words ... "poor sucker".

And yes, the converse applies for expectations of French in other cities.

The major difference is that Quebec stands alone in limiting the use of
English by legislation.  In other provinces, today (don't quote days of
yore in Manitoba as an example), the use of French is limited by numbers,
not by governments trying to save English from becoming infected by other
languages.

Stuart

>	An immigrant looking for a bilingual environment that lands in Montr�al
>    is one of the lucky ones.  Just imagine an immigrant with a bilingual
>    view of Canada that lands in Vancouver, Halifax or Calgary... poor
>    sucker.
    
>    Of course if that same immigrant in Montr�al wants instruction for his
>    children in English, then he'll be out of luck.

	Interesting how an immigrant going to Vancouver, Halifax or Calgary
	to find bilingualism is a poor sucker and an immigrant in Montreal who
	wants instructionfor his children in English is simply out of luck.

	Ben

    I suggest an immigrant going to the ROC would be able to enrole their
    child in either French immersion, or regular English school. This does
    represent the bilingual nature of the country. If the same immigrant
    were to go to Quebec, would they have the same choice ? In this light,
    which part of the country better reflects the bilingual nature of
    Canada?
    
    						Derek

Service                         C H O I C E  of  L A N G U A G E
                                     R O C           Qu�bec
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Daycare                             limited           YES
Primary School                      limited           NO
Secondary School                    limited           NO
college                               NO              YES
university                            NO              YES 
Health Care                           NO              YES
Local TV                              NO              YES
Local Radio                           NO              YES
Federal Services                      NO              YES
Activities (health clubs)             NO              YES
Working Lanaguage                     NO         Most companies
Movies, Theater                       NO              YES


So which is the more bilingual?  The ROC because of two criteria?

How is this fair?

Normand

Let's fix this comparison chart ...


Service                         C H O I C E  of  L A N G U A G E
                                     R O C           Qu�bec
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Daycare                             limited         limited
Primary School                      limited           NO (exceptions by LAW)
Secondary School                    limited           NO (exceptions by LAW)
college                               NO            limited
university                            NO            limited
Health Care                         limited         limited
Local TV                            limited         limited by law
Local Radio                         limited         limited by law
Federal Services                     YES	      YES
Activities (health clubs)           limited         limited
Working Lanaguage                   limited         limited by law
Movies, Theater                    v.limited        limited by law
Provincial Services		     SOME	    limited

Notice that the R.O.C. does not limit your choices by law ... just by
demand.

Stuart

    You most certainly can obtain a post secondary education in French in 
    Ottawa (Ontario). As I do not live elsewhere, I can't really comment.
    
    I wish more people would show such restraint.
    
    						Derek.

Oh really?

Here are my examples.  I am anxious to see your French language examples.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service                         C H O I C E  of  L A N G U A G E
                                     Qu�bec ( English examples)
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Daycare                      YES - Montessori Schools, MANY others
Primary School               NO
Secondary School             NO
college                      YES - Vanier, Dawson, Champlain
university                   YES - McGill, Concordia, Bishop's
Health Care                  YES - Royal Victoria, Montreal General, St-Mary's
Local TV                     YES - CFCF, local CBC
Local Radio                  YES - CJAD, CJFM, CFQR, local CBC
Federal Services             YES - Post Office, Internal Revenue
Activities (health clubs)    YES - West Coast Gym, YMCA (Downtown), Weider
Working Language         Most companies - Digital, CN, Royal Bank, Rolls Royce
Movies, Theater              YES - Centaur, Black Theatre Workshop, Od�on
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Contrary to your comments, (which are misleading), there are no laws
    against English colleges and health care institutions.  And by the way,
    these are all first-rate institutions.

Normand

P.S. The St. Pat's Day parade was just lovely in Montr�al this year.  I enjoyed
it immensely.  And contrary to rumor that the SQ (Qu�bec's version of the SS)
were preparing to gun down anyone wearing a shamrock, the event went by 
flawlessly.  The City of Montr�al painted a green stripe down St. Catherine
Street.  This was Montr�al's 169th St. Pat's Day parade.

How was the St. Pat's Day parade in Toronto?

You can drag all this garbage into this all you like, but the basic fact we
were discussing was that there are provincial LAWS which restrict the use of
language in schools and in business that no other province now has enacted.

THAT IS A FACT and whether other services are available in other languages
depends on the demand and viability in the almost "open" market.

So stop polluting the issue with all this trash ...  the fact is that a
Quebec government is denying people essentially an aspect of free speech
and that is to use the language of their choice.  Yes, other provinces did
this in the past to French ... but things have changed.  It's time Quebec
did too.

Stuart

    Getting a little hostile, Stuart??? :-)   Apart from signs for
    businesses operating in Quebec, and the Elementary and High School
    RESTRICTIONS (note: not if you "qualify" for English education), the
    rest is as Normand states in his most recent reply.  Whether these 2
    laws (above) are "right" or not, and I believe they are not, the facts
    remain.  Open market or not has little bearing on the present
    situation.  The Quebec government could theoretically wipe out English
    Universities if they wanted.  The uproar however would be heard and
    felt around the world.
    
    Otto.

    In a way, yes I am getting a little hostile ...
    
    Normand implies that my reworked table is misleading ... In preparing
    that table, what I am trying to get over is that his table is
    misleading too ...  
    
    If you go into anywhere but the major cities, the availability of the
    of services in English in Quebec is as minimal as French in Southern 
    Ontario!  
    
    Part of my family comes from Port Colborne, Ontario and I spent a few
    years of my life living there and visit regularly... it has a significant
    French population and stores display signs in French there.  There are
    French language elementary and high schools there too.  There are NO
    laws which force the stores to use English, nor immigrants to send
    their children to the English schools, nor make businesses correspond
    in English.
    
    This is what I meant by the "open" market ... whether there is
    sufficient demand to make the use of the minority language a) viable
    and/or b) where appropriate profitable by catering to the minority
    population.
    
    So to say that French is NOT available in the Rest of Canada is like
    saying that Quebec caters well to anglophones by having McGill.  It is
    only part of the story.
    
    The bottom line is whether language restrictions by LAW is right or
    fair.  All this other talk about language availability is just a big
    red herring and can be twisted and distorted by either side.
    
    Stuart

    Regarding a suggestion that I responding as a backlash at Normand ...
    
    I apologise if it sounds that way ... it is not personally aimed at
    anyone.  The response was strong because I am tired and annoyed with
    *both* sides of this issue in this conference and elsewhere throwing 
    up smoke screens and presenting as absolutes, things that aren't and
    Normand and I have quite clearly demostrated that.
    
    This also clearly demonstrates that even though I may be a moderator,
    I also have strong opinions and there are times when I may wish to
    express them just like anyone else.  I then have to ensure that
    anything I write personally would also be moderatorially acceptable
    without being unfair to others.  In this instance, were my response
    written by someone else, I do not believe that I would have interfered,
    unless a complaint was lodged.  Were a complaint lodged, I feel that
    a clarification such as this would be reasonable.  My first reaction
    would not have been to remove the note.
    
    Any further comment or questions, please send me mail.
    
    Stuart
    
    

I don't think comparing availability of minority language services really
addresses the problems people have with Quebec language laws.  Having legal
restrictions placed on the right to do business or educate your children, 
in Canada, in the English language, is something many Canadians whose mother 
tongue is English are simply not willing to accept.  Especially when the
necessary institutions, as you point out, are already in place.   

Having said that, the comparisons that have been entered are misleading for
several reasons.  One reason is that there is no such entity as "ROC".  It's a
big country.  Some areas do a pretty good job of providing minority language
services, others don't.  Provinces were settled at different times, by
different ethnic groups, had different political and constitutional histories,
received later groups of immigrants at different times and in varying
quantities.  Lumping everything outside the borders of Quebec together as "ROC"
is hopelessly simplistic.  Just looking at post-secondary education, I know
that university education in French is available in Ontario, New Brunswick,
and Nova Scotia.  It may be elsewhere; I don't have a comprehensive knowledge
of the country's universities.  Admittedly, none of these institutions is of
quite the calibre of McGill, which was created by the old Anglo elite of
Montreal, but they do exist.

The PQ have hinted that if and when sovereignty arrives, they'll feel secure
enough to be more tolerant with their minorities.  I think the Qu�b�cois have
at least as much reason to feel secure in a federal Canada committed to the
survival of French as they would in their own shaky mini-state.

-Stephen

    I attended McGill from 1968 to 1973 and during that time the Quebec
    government stopped funding English language universities in Quebec. I
    don't know if things have changed since I got married and moved to
    Ireland in 1976. But I regularly get a McGill magazine sent to me on a
    quarterly basis and frequent requests to make a donation to McGill. So
    this leads me to assume that the "English language universities" still 
    receive little or nothing from the provincial government in the way of 
    funding.
    
    If this is still true then the Quebec government may "allow" English
    language universities but does nothing to help them survive. And this
    is plainly a way of letting them slowly die. I can't see how McGill
    can harm the survival of the French language in Quebec since there are
    native French-speaking Quebecers who attend and teach at McGill and 
    Concordia and Bishops.
    
    Ted. 
    
    P.S. I am a native Montrealer and grew up there. I speak French and my
    mother is fluent in both English and French. So I think this gives me
    the right to comment even though unfortunately I no longer live there. 

Stuart,

I don't know why you got so upset just because I backed up my 
comparison chart with examples.

It's a question of perception.

You perceive the choice of attending McGill, Concordia or l'Universit�
de Montr�al as a limited choice.

You perceive the choice of the Royal Victoria Hospital, St. Mary's
or Notre Dame as limited choices.

The latest issue we were dealing with was "Where would you send an
immigrant to Canada who was looking for a bilingual environment".  I
suggested Montr�al.  You suggest Port Colborne, Ontario.

So we'll agree to disagree.

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

I understand that some of Qu�bec's laws may appear discriminatory... 
particularly to immigrants who want their children educated in English.
Notwithstanding the fact that Qu�bec does have a thriving English
primary and secondary school system, it is the wish of the Qu�bec majority
that immigrants be asked to learn the language of the majority, which
is French.  And because it is easy (to say the least) to lead a full
and long life in Qu�bec and not speak or understand a word of French,
ensuring that immigrants learn the language of the majority is difficult,
if not almost impossible.

I am not saying that this is "correct".  I am just stating facts.  Again,
immigrants do not have to immigrate to Qu�bec.  They do so because of 
Montr�al's international reputation of being cosmopolitan catering to
many different ethnic communities.  In fact, odds are that they would choose
another province which would permit them to send their children to French
or English schools (numbers permitting)... since there is 1 majority-French
province to 9 majority-English ones.

This argument has enlightened me on one issue.  I was not aware that the
ROC were so concerned about immigrants' rights in Qu�bec, although I must add 
that the thought is both comforting and disturbing.

The argument that the ROC is not a monolithic entity is a correct one.
I was waiting for someone to bring it up.  Qu�bec is not a monolithic
entity either.  But, in general, due to Qu�bec's English and French heritage,
an immigrant looking for a bilingual environment would do better in Qu�bec.
Even Qu�bec City has a thriving English population, though, admittedly,
services in English would certainly be limited there.

As for English universities being threatened with subsidy cuts, this is
probably true.  But, let's look deeper at this situation.  Most of the English
universities are "have" universities.  The French universities are "have not".

If you went to McGill, you probably remember some of the names of the
buildings, as an example the Samuel Bronfman Building, *donated* by the Bronfman
family to the university.  And who can forget those incredible mansions
on Pine Avenue, for the most part donated to the University, all bearing
the names of their donors.

Such a phenomenon reflects the affluence of the English community in Montr�al, 
and its power to build and support these incredible institutions.  It is
also a testimony to their insight and their dedication to education in Qu�bec.

But if you go to the Universit� de Montr�al, you see quite a different picture.
The names of buildings are different... Pavillon Principal, �cole
Polytechnique, Hautes �tudes Commercial, etc.  Funds for this
university have had to come from the public, instead of private donations.

(By the way, I also get solicited from McGill for money as does my sister from
l'Universit� de Montr�al.)

Although funds in Qu�bec *may* be directed more to the "have not" universities,
the reason is not discriminatory, but equity.  I suspect that Concordia
gets more funds than McGill.  It has a larger student population (part-time
included) and it has far fewer trust funds, scholarships, etc.

Let's not forget funding to English colleges Vanier and Dawson comes from the
French-language majority, as does funding for the English primary and
secondary school system.

Normand

    The "ROC" is not an entity at all.  It is a bogus construct.
    
    As you point out, Quebec is also large and diverse.  Many of the
    English-language services available in cosmopolitan Montreal are not
    available elsewhere, even in Qu�bec, the old capital and the province's
    2nd city.  In Ontario and other provinces, there is similar diversity.
    
    -Stephen
    
    

Normand...

I didn't get "upset" at your examples per se ... I'm quite sure we can
provide you with lots of examples of the availability of French language
services in other areas of Canada if you so desire, but I don't think that
is a particularly profitable thing to do.  Limited availability means that
such services are NOT UNIVERSALLY AVAILABLE ... i.e. in lots of places in
the province ...  In most cases, the availability of services in a minority
language in any part of the country is LIMITED.  French services in parts
of Ontario are VERY limited ... in other areas, they are freely available.
Across the province as a whole the average is LIMITED.  Just because services
are available in English in Montreal and Quebec predominantly doesn't mean
that Quebec provides widespread English services ... again, they are limited.

I didn't beleive we were talking about where you'd send a bilingual immigrant,
but rather, say the expectations of an immigrant that he could arrive in
Montreal and expect that he could survive totally in English ... which he
(and his family) cannot.  He must learn some French to be a fully functional
part of the society.

What gets me upset is that we can quote all these examples of bilingual
imbalance and use them as excuses for not changing the basic problems
because we can present "limited" availability as NOT AVAILABLE as you
and I have done here.  Availability must be based on need and the viability
of providing the service ... not on whether some other part of the country
provides the service.

It is certainly reasonable to expect that immigrants should learn the
majority languange ... but by forcing immigrant's children to go to a
French language school is not the way.  Allow them to go to an English
school, but ensure that French is a part of the curriculum.  As for
immigrants themselves, that is a greater problem really than their
children, because if the immigrant does not wish to speak French, then the
chances are they'll move out.  It is necessary to find ways to help and
encourage immigrants to learn French but without FORCING them, say through
their children.

>This argument has enlightened me on one issue.  I was not aware that the
>ROC were so concerned about immigrants' rights in Qu�bec, although I must add 
>that the thought is both comforting and disturbing.

I think you'll find that most Canadians are concerned not with just
immigrants rights in Quebec, but the rights of ALL in Quebec and elsewhere, 
which is why all of Canada has problems with Quebec's language laws ... 
But please don't quote other rights inequities, like native rights etc,
because that just makes it look like "We won't give people their human
rights because you don't".  I have often heard Quebecois quoting Canada's
native rights violations as a response to the language rights violations
in Quebec.  Effectively saying "Put your own house in order before looking
at us".  Well, imagine saying that Quebec won't do anything about language
rights because of apartheid in South Africa.  It amounts to the same thing.

It is up to all of us to recognize and correct rights violations in our
own areas ... regardless of the progress of others in fixing theirs.

Stuart

> I didn't beleive we were talking about where you'd send a bilingual immigrant,
> but rather, say the expectations of an immigrant that he could arrive in
> Montreal and expect that he could survive totally in English ... which he
> (and his family) cannot.  He must learn some French to be a fully functional
> part of the society.

Well, actually, this is not entirely true.  Apart from the children
attending French primary and secondary schools, the family could function
fully in English in most parts of Qu�bec... certainly Montr�al and its
suburbs, the Townships, and most communities between Montr�al and
the Ontario border (Hudson, St. Lazarre, etc.)

In fact, an immigrant in these areas would have a social, financial, and
cultural quality of life *in English* that even an *anglophone* in Victoria
would envy.

What is missing?

English language universities: McGill, Concordia

Hospitals: Royal Victoria Hospital, St. Mary's

Local TV: CFCF, local CBC

Local Radio: CJAD, CFQR, etc.

Theatres: Centaur (several halls, 12 months/year)

Movies: At least a dozen English movie theatres

Health Clubs: YMCA - Pointe Claire, YMCA - Westmount

Museums seminars: Museum of Fine Arts

Major Stores: Eatons, The Bay, Ogilvy's

Curling Clubs: Royal Montr�al Curling Club

Employers: Digital (apart from sales), Royal Bank, Pratt & Whitney, CN, CP,
           Rolls Royce, Northern Telecom, etc.
           
            One of my French friends worked for 10 years for both Rolls Royce
            and Northern Telecom and he never spoke a word of French! 
            
            Before Digital I worked for 5 years for CN and never uttered
            a French word.  My boss was from England, and so his
            whole staff (mostly French) spoke English among themselves
            so that he could understand.  Thank God we were all bilingual.

Broadway shows: The Phantom of the Opera (English only)
                Les Mis�rables (English version)

Tell me what more an immigrant needs to be "fully functional" in English
in Montr�al?  What?

> It is certainly reasonable to expect that immigrants should learn the
> majority languange ... but by forcing immigrant's children to go to a
> French language school is not the way.  Allow them to go to an English
> school, but ensure that French is a part of the curriculum.  As for
> immigrants themselves, that is a greater problem really than their
> children, because if the immigrant does not wish to speak French, then the
> chances are they'll move out.  

I look at it differently.  If an immigrant "does not wish to speak French", I
would hope that they would immigrate to a province where the majority 
doesn't speak French.  It appears logical to me but, obviously, not to you.

Like an immigrant from France who "does not wish to speak English" and
immigrates to Ontario.  What's the point?

Normand

From my own experiences visiting Montreal, I don't feel comfortable that
I can fully function and be happy there, even though I can speak, and write
some (albeit limited) French.  I could SURVIVE there ... but that's not the
same thing.

As I said in an earlier note, unfortunately, some people who arrive in
Montreal believe it to be fully bilingual and therefore they could get
along happily in English.  And there are people who arrive in Ontario and
only wants to speak French ...

And finally, there are those who arrive in Canada and have no desire to speak
EITHER!

Sometimes the point is that they just want to get out of their native country.

Stuart

    Well, having lived in Montreal, and as recently as last summer visited
    there (with friends from B.C. who neither speak nor understand French),
    I once again found absolutely no need to use my French anywhere I went. 
    This included restaurants, the motel we stayed at, Metro stations, Old
    Montreal, asking directions, etc.
    
    More than that, I found no one that even thought twice about answering
    me in English when I asked for anything.  I maintain Montreal is fully
    bilingual in all areas, and any discomfort a visitor may feel is likely
    to be self-imposed (IMHO).  The Eastern Townships are predominantly
    English in some areas (Knowlton is a good example).
    
    However, my French was invaluable on a visit to Quebec City in 1987. 
    Not to say I couldn't have survived without it, but it was easier.
    
    What's my point?  I don't know if there is one, except maybe that
    English services are not as rare as people may think.  Then again,
    French pockets can also be found even in Vancouver.  I only wish it
    wasn't such a big deal in ANY part of our country.  All Canadians
    (including those in Quebec that wish to remain Canadians first, yet
    protect their heritage) should, in my opinion, be or try to be fully
    bilingual.  That's not "shoving French down peoples' throats", as I
    heard so often when I worked for the Federal Government's Language
    Training Branch, but only what I think would go a long way to making us
    a united country once and for all.  Seeing as many people are providing
    that path for our children, maybe it's not a fantasy, but a future
    reality.  Naive optimism?  Maybe...
    
    Otto.

    RE. .84

    If you had gone further east, say past Pie IX Boul. , then you would
    have seen people thinking twice. The further east you go, the more
    unilingual French it becomes. I used to live in Ville D'Anjou which has
    become almost entirely French. It's very different there than the
    downtown areas. Montreal has developed an East/West polarisation over
    the last decade or so.

    Glenn

    (Maybe it's because of the Grand Canal?)

    I don't think the polarisation has developed in the last 10 years it's
    been there longer than that. I don't like the term "polarisation"
    either it sounds like there is some kind of conflict going on. It's
    just the way the city developed. 
    
    Montreal may not be completely bilingual ( I don't think any place can
    make that claim) but it's much closer than most places in Canada
    let alone the world. You can't honestly admit that you expect everyone
    in a city the size of Montreal to be able to speak both languages
    fluently. Although I think more Francophones can spaek English better
    than the Anglophones can speak French. Which leads me to assume that
    they had to learn French while the Anglophones didn't.
    
    Stuart! You'd be able to function in Montreal quite nicely. And your
    French would hopefully improve through continued use. You mightn't be
    happy but wouldn't that be because of your attitude to the language. 
    One of the basics of any form of learning is that if you can make it
    enjoyable and relevant people learn much more quickly. I found that the
    French I knew came flooding back and I learned many more new phrases
    while I was holidaying in France because I had to use it everyday. And
    the people were very helpful once they saw me struggling. The fact was
    that I made the effort.
    
    Normand, I see your argument about the funding of the different
    universities i.e. the "haves" and the have-nots" . I never really looked
    at it from that point of view before. Gives me a completely different
    slant. Thanks.
    
    Ted.  

    That last note should read 
    
    "which leads me to assume that the Francophones had to learn English
    while the Anglophones didn't have to learn French."
    
    The shoe is on the other foot now.
    
    Ted.

>    Stuart! You'd be able to function in Montreal quite nicely. And your
>    French would hopefully improve through continued use. You mightn't be
>    happy but wouldn't that be because of your attitude to the language. 
>    One of the basics of any form of learning is that if you can make it
>    enjoyable and relevant people learn much more quickly. I found that the
>    French I knew came flooding back and I learned many more new phrases
>    while I was holidaying in France because I had to use it everyday. And
>    the people were very helpful once they saw me struggling. The fact was
>    that I made the effort.

Ted, you imply that I have a negative attitude towards French ... nothing
could be further from the truth ... The biggest problem I had with the French
courses I was taking while in the Canadian CSC was fitting them in with work.
Moreover, I couldn't fit courses into my personal time either ... consider
that with 3 kids, 90% of the "novels" I've read in the last 10 years started
"Once upon a time"!!!! :-).

I have been to Montreal and through Quebec several times.  On several
occasions in Montreal, People were anything BUT helpful while I was
struggling with French ... and then when I politely asked if they could
speak in English ... I quickly discovered they could ... by SHOUTING at
me!  I was not impressed.  On the other hand, twice we've driven to 
PEI via the south shore ... In Quebec city and East, while fewer people
spoke English, they were FAR more accomodating and helpful with my struggling
French.  So, You wonder why I wouldn't feel happy in Montreal ?  I could
only take advantage of "half" the city ... as I said, I could survive there
... just as I could survive ANYWHERE.

But you make one very good point ... and this is one of the reasons I keep
saying and will always say that language shouldn't be legislated.  If you
give people reason to learn a language and make it enjoyable, them most
people will learn.  You shouldn't force people to need to learn it.  Nobody
likes being FORCED to do anythng.

Stuart

    Stuart,
    
    No argument with anything you said in your last reply. I did not grow
    up with a very good attitude to French mainly because in primary school
    my regular teacher had to teach French as well as every other subject
    and she wasn't too hot at French herself which came across
    in her attitude.
    
    In high school I suffered even more because there the French teachers
    were native French speakers and mainly French-Canadian. I wanted to
    learn French but because I was not up to standard in their eyes, they
    often made jokes at my expense which didn't give me the confidence to
    speak in class or out of class for that matter. However, when I taught
    in high school in Montreal, I was fortunate enough to have my desk in
    with the French teachers and they were terrific. I had to work closely
    with the French teacher  who taught my homeroom class and she was
    the epitome of what a language teacher has to be, i.e.encouraging, patient
    understanding. And she was just that, not only with the kids in class
    but also with me speaking French outside of class. All the French
    teachers in the school in which I taught were excellent. It was the
    students who were awkward most of the time. Not all of them mind you
    but some of them were "real sweat-hogs". It was hard enough teaching
    them in English let alone in French. 
    
    I'm sure many have had similar experiences and that includes French
    speaking Canadians in English speaking parts of Montreal let alone
    other parts of Canada. I know this sounds shmaltzy but what used to
    impress me when I was a kid was the way French speaking hockey players
    like Jean Beliveau, Henri and Maurice Richard, Yvan Cournoyer could
    speak English so well whenever they were being interviewed on the
    Hockey Night in Canada English broadcasts. Guys like that made me
    really work harder at learning French. It was nice to see Larry
    Robinson, Bob Gainey, and several others speak French so
    well too.
    
    You're right Stuart! It's all in the attitude. Wherever you come from.
    Normand made an extremely important point in an earlier reply.
    Learning any language can only enrich a person. It's only when you
    learn the other person's language that you can really understand the
    way they think let alone what there saying.
                                     
    Ted

    How do you think learning english was for us?  I can well remember
    being smuggly coorected by a sales lady in a Morgan's (now La Baie)
    Altough it hurts, only perseverance can teach you a language.
    
    BTW I was also smuggly corrected by a Parisian because he didn't
    understand my "accent",  I also got a similar treatment in New York and
    Toronto.  My conclusion, I do not judge a country by it's major cities.
    
    
    Jean
    

    Jean,
    
    I'm sure some of those prissy English salesladies probabaly corrected
    the English of us Anglophones too, so I understand exactly what you're
    saying. I can all too often remember Anlgos making fun of 
    French-Canadiens speaking English, so I know what you mean. Ignorance
    is universal. 
    
    I have acquired a slight Irish accent since I've been living here and
    have had people slag my accent whenever I go to the UK to work.
    
    
    Ted

    <<I have acquired a slight Irish accent since I've been living here and
    <<have had people slag my accent whenever I go to the UK to work.
    
    
    Ted, I thought the Irish also slagged your accent ���
    
    
    Pat

    Hi Pat,
    
    Heck, my wife and kids slag my accent.
    
    Ted (no respect)
    
    P.S. Will have map info shortly.

    >> P.S. Will have map info shortly.
    
    Is this a slag map of some sort? 
    
    If so, I'm interested.....
    
    ;-)

    For you, Glenn, we'd slate ya - forget the slagging.

    Boy. I seem to be taking it on the chin a lot lately. 
    
    I can hear everybody cheering.....
    
    Mr. Slag