Last week, the Ottawa Citizen published an editorial critical of Ottawa’s bi-lingual policies. The editorial kicked up much dust as people responded with their stories of being caught up in the consequences of Quebecois demands for bilingualism merely for the sake of bilingualism.
| Read the Citizen editorial here: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/Cultural+engineering/2279442/story.html |
The following letters, published earlier today by Canadians for Language Fairness, are from correspondents who moved away because they spoke English only.
They, like thousands of Canadians, are perplexed as to why, in this English-speaking nation, citizens are denied work because they speak English.
The following individuals have taken the time to comment on this matter:
- N. O. in Georgia
- Waiting for Retirement
- Christy McCormick
- John Wood
- Al. C. Johnson
- Lou
- Pearl
- Dick
- Ross
- Orlin
N.O. in Georgia writes:
I read the Ottawa Citizen article to my fifteen year old whose response was, “Does that mean we can move back to Ottawa?”
We left Ottawa 18 months ago because, after five years of part-time teaching, I couldn't get a full time job (in teaching or the government) due to my lack of French proficiency. Job lists are predominantly filled with positions for Core French and French Immersion teachers, with a few, mostly part-time, English positions.
Though it was difficult to say goodbye to close friends, we felt that our children, who are bright but not bilingual, would be at a disadvantage competing in a French-dominated Ottawa (and the west is too expensive to consider), so we moved to the United States.
I have two points to make.
The first point is that not everyone has the ability or skill to learn languages. My two daughters are honours students, one is gifted. They maintain top grades in all their classes but struggled to learn French. After two years of struggling in Late French Immersion, they returned to English classes where they better understood the material and maintained top grades. I graduated from university and college with honours, yet I struggled to learn French and, consequently, could not become employed in Ottawa. I am happy to report that, even in this poor US economy, I enjoy a well-paid, full-time job that requires excellent communication skills in English.
The second point is that French Immersion classes are, as a general rule, restricted to students who do not have behavioural or academic challenges. These classrooms are filled with the best and brightest students. Those who struggle in French Immersion are, understandably, encouraged to leave the French Immersion program, but when they return to the English classroom, they have already missed learning their basic English skills. As an Occasional Teacher, called to teach in both English and French Immersion classes, I can say, unequivocally, that French Immersion classes, at any grade level, are a teacher's dream.
On the flip side are the English classrooms with their disproportionate number of behaviourally and academically challenged students. There are some very bright and talented kids in the English classes who have to put up with the behaviour problems and the slower-paced teaching.
Here is the point I want to make. Not all parents have the ability or money to support having their children in French Immersion. Those students who get into French Immersion have a better learning environment and will have a huge advantage over equally bright and talented kids who are in the English program. It is a very biased system, even for English-speaking kids.
I hope to see Canadian policy reflect the majority of English speaking citizens by becoming a unilingual English country while maintaining localized minority language services where numbers warrant.
N. O. in Georgia
Waiting for Retirement writes:
I have seen this getting worse and worse, slowly they work but not very efficiently.
I have been here since 1987 so I have been right in the middle of this change. It is awful that we waited this long to even notice what was going on. They have taken their time to obtain decision making positions and now we're getting it. Something HAS to be done here, it's ridiculous.
I asked for a transfer to Vancouver, my grandfather was ill with cancer, so I went to live with him for his final 4 months. I was a CR-04 receptionist in Burnaby, and I had to answer the calls with Bonjour/Hello (in Vancouver) not in Cantonese which was 50% of the population, but in French which was 1% of the population. How does this make sense?
We should need to speak the languages that are required to communicate. As for me I sit at a desk and do financial work, why would my job require me to be bilingual? None of this makes sense. If I can help you in any way, I will try and do my best. just ask!
Waiting for Retirement
Christy McCormick writes:
Kim,
Why should the universities succeed where language schools have failed? There will, of course, be francophiles who take to French like ducks to water. But the bulk of the pre-qualified university graduates, at least the English ones from Upper and Outer Canada, will learn enough to qualify and get a federal job in Calgary, Halifax or Vancouver and remember as much as they use day to day, which will be very little. So what are we going to do, re-test and re-qualify? Back to square one.
I think Mr Fraser has this idea that once one embraces the idea of French, the glory of French ("It's so exquisitely cool!), the intrinsic value of speaking French, it will be like swimming or riding a bicycle, something one never forgets.
For the true believing enthusiast like Mr Fraser and a disproportion number of women too, who do better in languages, this may indeed be the case, but for most people language is a tool that is useful or not useful depending on ambient circumstances.
In Canada, the French language is only useful to those who want government jobs or live in Quebec in places where English is absent, whereas English is useful to anyone who wants to join the mainstream human race. Even Agence France Presse and Der Speigel run their main newservices in English. Most of the signs in downtown Hong Kong are in English.
To learn a language one would want to form a closer attachment to those who speak it, which accounts for my study of Chinese because I am trying to reach those who are reaching out to me. One cannot say the same of French Canadians. If they are reaching out to the English it is to get something they should not have.
If both languages are deemed to be equal, but are spoken by groups unequal in number, then greater resources are drawn from the numerically superior language group to supply the needs to effect equality by the numerically inferior language group. Thus there are disproportionate number of French Canadians getting jobs (translating Manitoba's laws, manning state broadcasting units and through unfunded mandates such as insisting that shops in federal buildings staffed by bilingual clerks).
But I wish Mr Fraser well in his endeavor. His move, if successful, is bound to bring more French Canadians - and women - into government at the expense of English-speaking Canadians and mostly males. And this will finally bring a level of anger to bear that will end to Canada as we know it.
Quebec will go its way. It will then find its English minority of practical use in interfacing unit with the outside world rather than as a hostage population victimized to bully the rest of Canada into giving it what it should not have, and what a Frenchified federal government is disposed to give it, anyway.
So carry on Mr Fraser, carry on. All power to your arm.
Quartered safe out here,
Christy McCormick (Mr.)
Mr. McCormick is currently the Editor of the Hong Kong Shipping Gazette
| Kim adds: It can be argued that the French have exploited the bilingual requirements of jobs to the disadvantage of English applicants. The demand to have things done in French -- whether it is needed or not -- results in an artificial demand for French speakers and a disproportionate number of French job holders vis-a-vis the English. If there are a fixed number of jobs to be distributed to a group and if the minority is declared equally deserving to the majority, then each member of the minority will get more opportunities than each member of the majority. Mathematically, if there are 200 jobs, 50% of which must go to a 25% minority and 50% to a 75% majority, then each applicant from the minority will be more acceptable than each applicant from the majority. If jail cells were awarded on the same basis, that they had to be filled by English and French on a 50:50 basis, I'm sure the French would make the problem very clear to us. In the attempt to "right past wrongs" most Francophiles have turned their backs on their own kind - they have embraced the French language and culture at the expense of the English language and culture, and, in the process, have handed power to the French-speakers on a platter!! These people must be very proud that they have managed to help the process of a complete cultural revolution without any blood being spilt!! They will surely go down in Canadian history as great "heroes" while the rest of us curse them as traitors to their own kind. |
John Wood writes:
I can't help wondering why the English-speaking (many unilingual) PS employees haven't organized some kind of opposition to the government's bilingual imperative policies. This nightmare has been going on for 4 decades, and gets worse every year.
I know, their jobs are on the line, but how many thousands have already lost their PS jobs, but have not spoken up? Apparently not very many. It would be a good opportunity for a class action law suit, against the government's language discrimination.
When I applied for a position with Unemployment in the early 1960s, I had only high school and a couple of years of Community College. This was acceptable, but I was bumped by a WW2 veteran, which was OK by me. Language was not a requirement in NB at the time.
John Wood
Al. C. Johnson writes:
It is good to finally see some common sense opinions on "Bilingualism" I add mine as follows; " The irrationality of Canada's ill-conceived - ill designed and improperly identified bilingualism program."
An Officially French speaking Quebec and a bilingual ROC (rest of Canada) in which the French residency is a miniscule 3%. This in itself is reason enough to scrap this program but the following should convince any reasonable person of the futility of continuing this program.
"Government stats show that the French language has dropped to 18th position as a language of use in the world. Statistics also show that over 96% of the world population speak a language in the top ten language families, meaning that the French language is in the bottom 4% of languages used. This should convince even the most ardent supporters of the futility of trying to force Canadians to use a language that is not in common use in the World.
You cannot, as Graham Fraser insists, travel the world using French. And the astronomical, fully verifiable cost of over a trillion dollars to date, is unsupportable as is being enforced. All available records of countries that have used two or more "Official languages" have been singularly unsuccessful - the most recent example being Belgium and I believe we must admit that Canada falls within this category.
Al. C. Johnson
Lou writes:
Apparently being French is more important than the ability to do every other aspect of your job. Fascinating. Not surprising but fascinating. What part of "Kick French Quebec out NOW!" don't you get?
Of course, now that I have dismissed the Liberals, CPC and NDP as French-firsters, I am open to suggestions.
Love, Lou
Pearl writes:
Sure they are appalled by the cost of the program....but it’s the Francophones who own & run the companies that do the training, it’s the Francophones who get those 66% of all jobs, who profit from the insane policy.
They will never stop the language training due to pressure from Quebec if they tried. No matter what Anglophones do, they will lose.
Did you ever hear of a francophone going on English training???? Of course not, and many of them cannot speak a sentence in English and they cannot write in French because their education level is high school or less.
Pearl
Dick writes:
Kim, Fraser is correct. The U. of T. has a campus dedicated to that very objective. My daughter spent one year there out of high school on a scholarship about 1966. She quit after the first year and went to Waterloo for a math degree. She is now a VP and Actuary with Sun Life, the first company to pull out of Montreal when the language business erupted.
The trouble is that Fraser is all about a dedicated group of elitist linguists who will run the civil service. These people including Harper don't get it that unilingual Canadians in the long run won't put up with the exclusionary unfairness of not being able to participate in their own county's civil service or the higher ranks of the military.
I don't know if Harper and the Conservatives care anymore about the forcing of French everywhere in Canada. I think they are prepared to play along until they have the reigns of power firmly in their hands. They are hopefully letting the stew of discontent boil until they will look good getting rid of the problem.
Note that the new minorities are leaving the Liberals in droves and the grants (the bribes of money) are flowing through Conservative hands with equal alacrity as was the Liberal grease. Their "natural governing party" status is therefore gone forever.
I probably will not live long enough to see it happen, but at the moment the Liberals are hanging themselves in their utter frustration of lack of focus and bad leadership choices and the Conservatives will become a very strong party for many years into the future.
Most English Canadians have foolishly cared a lot about the concept of a united Canada. Few really care about les Francais or the concept that we are different because some of us speak French. However, a critical mass of Canadians is beginning to not care. The word is spreading. The USA knows or is beginning to know the idiocy of Canada's language and other laws affecting our justice system.
Class warfare based on linguistic ability will eventually erupt like a bursting boil and the public will turn to the government for medication. We all have to keep up the pressure and make sure the message of unfairness and class warfare gets out. We should shame Fraser for his promotion of class warfare.
Cheers, Dick
Ross writes:
Mornin’ Kim, glad to see you back in the saddle. If I were in "Languages" at University, all well and good, but if I am in any other discipline, I want to be taught in my 1st language, not having another course to allow me to study my principal one. Language in public schools, is the ONLY place to start and we see that presently at this level, there is dwindling public interest, go figure, desperate they are at the bureaucratic level..
Cheers,
Ross
Orlin writes:
This stupid idea proposed by the Quisling idiot Graham Fraser won't work any better than French immersion does in high schools.
Most people who live in English will never master French well enough for the French adjudicators to qualify them for senior civil service positions. The only solution would be to totally abolish the English language in this country and make everything French. I doubt if that is ever going to happen.
Of course they could give every senior position to a French person, but that will only create more outrage.
It is refreshing to see that many of the comments on this article are expressing real anger. Fraser may well serve as a catalyst for the inevitable backlash. The pendulum will soon swing back, I believe it has already begun.
If I were a politician I would be positioning myself on the right side.
Orlin
| Canadians for Language Fairness P.O. Box 40111 Bank & Hunt Club Postal Outlet 2515 Bank Street, Ottawa, ON, K1V 0W8 Tel (613) 321-7333 Website: www.languagefairness.ca Email: clf1@bell.net |
No comments:
Post a Comment