In Response to a Plea from Thomas Mulcair for Money

Sir,

I do not vote NDP.  I am a firm believer in capitalism, free markets, and governments that shun excessive welfare and regulation.  Governments that coddle their people with too much welfare and needless services, transform many independent folks into dependents. My motto is simple: the more governments do for their people, the less their people can do for themselves.

My political heroes are Winston Churchill, Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, Joey Smallwood, and Peter Lougheed.  Tommy Douglas was a well-meaning man, but I did not vote CCF because I distrusted his progressive inclinations.  I once believed that John Diefenbaker might be a good PM, but he fell short. When he cancelled the AVRO CF-105, my modest admiration for the man turned to scorn.

Pierre Trudeau, with his Francophone-enabling multiculturalist policies, his cumbersome, coercive, intrusive, and immensely costly language legislation, was, undoubtedly, our worst Prime Minister. His National Energy Program was an absolute disgrace and an immense burden on Alberta. I despised the man and I despise his memory.

I believe that Jack Layton was a self-serving man who, had he become PM, would have enriched himself at the expense of the nation.  And, quite frankly Mr. Mulcair, having watched, listened, and studied you since Mr. Layton died, I am inclined to believe that you may well be cut from the same cloth. 

I do not particularly like Stephen Harper, but I vote for his party because I distrust him far less than I distrust either you or Justin Trudeau.  I believe that if either you or Mr. Trudeau were to form the government, you would not only seriously mismanage Canada, but you would also eagerly give Quebec ever more of Canada's, i.e. Alberta's, wealth than that besotted province is currently receiving, and certainly far, far more that it deserves or, indeed, has earned. 

Quebec is a millstone on this nation. It is the only province that has earned the title of the most corrupt place in Canada - ever. It is a place in which corporations, governments, and politicians walk hand-in-hand with the Mafia.  And not only are Quebecers seemingly comfortable with corrupt practices, they are also imbued with such a deep sense of entitlement that it beggars the imagination.  

Mr. Mulcair, it can't have escaped your notice that Quebecers have matured little since the days of their French ancestors.  Napoleon Bonaparte, an astute observer and not one to mince words, once described the French as "de grains de sable, epars, sans systeme, sans reunion, sans contract". In other words, Mr. Mulcair, Quebecers are, in essence, neither chalk nor cheese.

Politicians who favour transferring ever more money into that swamp of petulant, corrupt, statist, and inept people, and who are intent on forcing official bilingualism into the nation’s fabric, must be cast in the very same mold. I gather that you, sir, are just such a politician.

Gerry Porter
Ottawa
December 22, 2014

How the feds poisoned the well of official bilingualism

Ottawa Citizen, August 29, 2014

By Kelly Egan

On Sept. 9, Canada’s Official Languages Act turns 45.

Expect no candles, no cake: 1969 is a foreign country, never to be visited again.

The idea of an officially bilingual city of Ottawa is an idea that was born in that era, only to slip into a coma from which it sometimes wakes.

A group is lately pushing the proposal as a 2017 project (Canada’s 150th), and there was Ottawa-Vanier MP Mauril Bélanger supporting the idea in a newspaper interview this week.

Many, including Mayor Jim Watson, have indicated this is a bird without wings, destined to stay flightless for the foreseeable future.

But no one has expounded on the real reason, which is this: In a government town like Ottawa, where thousands have been forced to drink the Kool-Aid, the feds have poisoned the well.

The workers in the public service know that official bilingualism, which is a fine idea in theory, has been implemented in a way that makes people cynical, if not crazy.

Designated jobs. Language training. Oversight bodies. Endless translation. Put it all together and, from the rank and file, you hear stories of colossal career frustration, wasted millions, immense personal stress — all of which produces a work environment where English still dominates and a person’s “weak” language is used for pleasantries at the start of meetings.

I’ve written close to 1,500 columns since 2003 and no topic generates as much feedback as codified bilingualism in the public service. The level of simmering resentment, in a workforce already demoralized, is scary.

Rightly or wrongly, people see careers topped out, advancement of the less qualified, language training that takes months, or years, to no great avail. The total cost is only to be gaped at.

Watson, of course, knows this and he’d be a fool to invite this multi-spoke language machinery into everyday municipal life.

We actually know, by using unofficial bilingualism, how to get along in this city.

Once you enshrine these things in law, you get the guy who takes Air Canada to court because he couldn’t order a 7Up or Sprite in French. Or somebody complaining about John Baird’s mostly English twitter account. Or inspectors checking out signs in airports.

Take a flip through the public materials offered by the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages. Honestly, you don’t know whether to laugh or cry.

We live in a country where wounded military veterans are on the verge of suicide for lack of timely help and young native women, culturally adrift, are being dumped dead by the side of the road. And we have money to spend on an inspector who ensures signs at airports are fully in both languages?

“In 2012, the Office of the Commissioner conducted 1,792 observations in eight international airports in Canada to determine how well airport authorities and federal institutions were meeting their obligations under Part IV of the Act, which concerns communications with and services to the public,” reads the office’s last annual report, followed by charts galore.

To read this stuff is to be left speechless.

“Over the past five years, the $1.1 billion Roadmap for Canada’s Linguistic Duality 2008-2013: Acting for the Future has been the federal government’s primary tool in supporting official languages.”

$1.1 billion roadmap? How about $1.1 billion on an actual road?

It is not, of course, the fault of the commission. It is merely the cop/carrot or inspector/enforcer that needs to be set up when language is “officially” set up as a legal right in the workplace and service world.

Surprisingly, if such a thing is still possible in this language sphere, the most complained about federal institution under Part VII of act, from 2009 to 2013, was CBC/Radio-Canada. It had 896 complaints over the loss of French broadcasting in Windsor.

In Ottawa, as we daily inhale this stuff, we love to whine.

“Most complaints received by the Commissioner between 2009 and 2013 came from the National Capital Region and the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, and primarily concerned a lack of French on the part of federal institutions.”

In Ottawa, meanwhile, there was a brief flap when incoming fire chief John deHooge was hired in 2009 without the ability to fluently speak French. I know, yes, the horror. He pledged to take lessons and one can only hope Vanier or Orléans is not burning because he’s busy looking up the word feu.

Ottawa should not stay away from official bilingualism because it’s a terrible idea. We should stay away because we don’t have a sensible plan to make it work, only a bad one to run from.

From: http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/egan-how-the-feds-poisoned-the-well-of-official-bilingualism

Quebec: Les Enfants

By Kim McConnell, Canadians For Language Fairness

From: http://languagefairness.net/

Canadians who, initially, were deeply concerned about the Official Languages Act (OLA) and its disastrous consequences, are getting old.  When this battle for the English language was started (by APEC – Alliance for the Preservation of English in Canada in 1977* - see below for short history), there were many public servants who were directly affected.  It wasn’t too difficult for APEC to get the attention and support of English-speaking public servants and get them to write letters and organize protests. 

Remember that, since the passage of the Official Languages Act (1969), Canada was under the control of the Liberal government (except for the short stint under Mulroney), and it wasn’t until 2006 that Stephen Harper’s government took over. 

During the years between 1969 and 2006, the Liberals - led mostly by Quebecers - made huge strides in increasing the power and influence of Francophones simply by entrenching Official Bilingualism, the Official Languages Act, and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in our Constitution. Francophones gained even more power when Quebec-friendly policies, such as Equalization Payments and Multiculturalism, transferred massive amounts of cash into Francophone hands, and allowed them to establish thousands of well-organized, and well-funded, Francophone groups right across Canada.  It is very easy to attract prominent leaders to your cause when generous funding is readily available.

Anglophone politicians are easily cowed into silence by the threat of legal challenges mounted by the well-funded French groups. Not a single Anglo politician has spoken against these measures because they know that the courts and judges are governed by a Constitution mandated to Protect, Preserve and Promote the French language. 

In 2012, Galganov and Brisson mounted a legal challenge to the Russell Township by-law which declares that all business signs must be in English and French, and that it is illegal to use any other language. Even as the judges admitted that the bylaw infringed Section 2b (Freedom of Expression) of the Charter, they applied their interpretation of the Notwithstanding clause (clause 1) to over-ride that infringement.

So, having no recourse to our justice system, Canadians can either meekly accept the tragedy of Official Bilingualism – or we can fight back.  We expect that, as more Canadians understand why we are fighting so hard against the Frenchification of Canada, they will pressure the Conservative government to curtail the immense, unearned, power and influence given to the French.  The CPC is already doing it in small steps (such as ending the $800 annual bilingual bonus to people who got their jobs because they were bilingual).  This was initiated in the CRA, but I’m not sure if it has been extended to other departments. 

The unions (controlled mainly by the French-speaking public servants) are a powerful group (weren’t they largely responsible for the recent Wynne government’s majority victory in Ontario?), so the Conservative government has to tread carefully. They are hoping that tax cuts resulting from cut-backs in the public service might persuade Canadians that money in their pockets is better than money sent to the government in the form of taxes.  We have about 30 – 40% of Canadians who perpetually live off the government so it is up to the rest of us to make sure that the socialist parties like the Liberals and the NDP don’t assume power next year!

Kilroy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWcMg6pKxHg) has done excellent work in reaching more people with his very effective videos, and I have attached some to this message.  We need more young people to help us fight because it is really their future at stake.  If anyone has ideas that we haven’t tried, please feel free to forward them.  In the meantime, do what Sharon has suggested – keep a short message that you can send to any company that gives prominence to the French language as opposed to the English language, and ask them why.  A threat to boycott their product will also help – several people have sent me examples of their own efforts to do this and these efforts have brought results.

As I say, this is not just a battle for Canadians for Language Fairness – it is a battle that all Canadians must take on as their own.

Here are two links to some very effective video messages that Kilroy has created:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abOWJkf-Vh8&feature=player_detailpage#t=579

Complete video on Quebec and how the French are using the OLA to retake Canada from the English victory on the Plains of Abraham

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BW33xkVB-oI&hd=1

The boiling frog syndrome

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_for_the_Preservation_of_English_in_Canada

Quebec in Canada, Still

Some years ago, Quebec declared itself officially unilingual, and promptly began a campaign to rid itself of the English language, and as much evidence of Anglophone culture within its borders as possible. Having contemptuously spat upon Canada and Canadians, Francophones then demanded that the rest of Canada arrange its affairs to accommodate Quebecers, in French, across the nation.

And what did Canada do? Canada meekly complied. Canadians did not, does not, have the courage to simply say "No. We don't do business that way." We said "Yes Sir. By all means, Sir."

While millions upon millions of people around the world teach themselves and their children to speak and write the English language, Canadians feverishly teach their children French. While Asians and Australians also teach their children Mandarin, Canadians force their children to learn French.

Canada gives Quebec about $1.3B each month, money that it uses to heavily subsidize electricity, day care, and tuition. While we pay top dollar to educate our children, we also pay Quebec top dollar to teach their children to live and work in a language that is spoken in France, Haiti, and in a cluster of failed states in Africa.

Quebecers migrate down the 417 and the 401 into Ontario where the promptly demand that we provide them full services in French. Ontario kneels and provides the required funding - no questions asked.

The Charbonneau Commission is investigating crime and corruption in Quebec's provincial and municipal governments, unions, and construction industries. La belle Province is under investigation, no one else.

Canada distributes money - Equalization Payments - to the provinces to ensure that each can provide services approximately equal to the national average. Since the program's inception, the federal government has distributed just some $300B. Quebec's haul? $150B - precisely half. Alberta, a major contributor, receives nothing - precisely zero.

Quebec insists that it needs this funding and legislation to avoid being assimilated by the Anglo majority. Hmmm.  If that were the case, one would guess that other cultures, such as the Chinese, who have immigrated to virtually every place on Earth, would similarly lose their language and their culture.  Has that happened? Not at all. The Chinese are resourceful, diligent, intelligent, and, they work hard - at whatever they do.  The Chinese do not need coercive, cumbersome, and incredibly expensive legislation to protect their language and culture.

But Quebecers do. What is wrong with Quebecers? Are they unable to fend for themselves? Apparently not.

If Quebecers were imbued with even a small measure of those traits that characterize the Chinese, they would be partners with Canadians, working with us to build a nation for everyone. But Quebecers don't function that way. Quebecers declare their province to be French only, and then demand that the Rest of Canada arrange its affairs to accommodate them.

* * * *

Justin Trudeau and Thomas Mulcair are both avid supporters of Quebec's aspirations. Listen closely to their remarks during this current federal election campaign. –JGP

Supreme Court of Canada dismisses Quebecer’s Seven/Sprite suit against Air Canada

Response from a Quebecer: Cue the monolingual anglo whining section, proud Canadians all, as long as they don't have to speak, read, or hear the "other" Canadian language.  It tires them so.

My response: We do not have a problem with the language spoken in Quebec. We do, however, have problems with the puerile people who speak it.

If Quebecers were resourceful, diligent, and honest folks who worked hard and earned their way, you would not need the incredibly cumbersome, coercive, expensive, and divisive language legislation that has been enacted on your behalf.

If you were a proud people with an exemplary history, you would be too ashamed to accept the $1.3 billion in welfare that we ship to you every month.

So, a proud people with an exemplary history you are not.

And suing an airline for not serving you in your own language? That really is quite childish. That act alone tells us that you have some years to go before you are old enough to vote.

Grow up and we will welcome you in Canada. Continue as you are, and you will continue to earn our contempt.

Gerry Porter
Ottawa

Champlain Bridge

To: Prime Minister Stephen Harper,

Sir, if Quebec wants a new Champlain Bridge, they will pay for it themselves. Every bridge built within provincial boundaries is a provincial responsibility, and this particular bridge is no different; Quebecers must foot the bill for their bridge, not the rest of us.

Cuddling and coddling Quebec and Francophones has become the default position of every level of government and we, citizens of the Rest of Canada, are sick and tired of our money going into Quebec coffers, ~$1.3B/month, simply because they happen to be French.

When Canadians need something, we buckle down and we work for it. It is high time that Quebec learned this simple lesson.  Whatever became of diligence and plain old hard work.

Gerry Porter,
Ottawa

Can Francophones earn their way, or do they really need BOLA - Babysitter Official Languages Act?

A Frank talk about Francophones

(This essay was written in response to comments published in the link. The author’s name has been replaced here with ’Monsieur’. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSiBY6UIINk)

Monsieur,

As a consequence of Britain’s legacy of military successes against France et al in the 15^th, 16^th, 17^th, 18^th and 19^th centuries, North America became an English-language place, as indeed did various other places around the world.

North America’s expanses were quickly filled with Europeans and Asians of every stripe, but despite its polyglot cultures, North America retained its English language. (Indeed, in modernity, of Earth’s ~7.2 billion people, ~2.5 billion speak English, while some 400 million people, mostly in failed African states, speak French.)

In the New World, both the English and the French were just two cultural and language groups not unlike all the others, except in one critical manner; unlike all the other cultural groups that flooded into North America, put down roots, and succeeded, the French remained, in your own words, a “… fiefdom of a small group of wealthy Anglo oligarchs.”  You dutifully list all the legislative initiatives taken by various Canadian governments at various times demonstrating that French studies were banned.

Well, Chinese, Japanese, Jews, and other cultural groups, at different times and places, have also been subjected to restrictive and offensive laws over the intervening centuries. But guess what, these folks survived and thrived on their own, and have kept their cultures and languages alive and vibrant despite centuries of oppressive legislation.

So, why are the French in Canada unable to flourish like other cultures? Hmmm.

The French in Canada never really came into their own until they were given a security blanket: the Official Languages Act. The OLA is an odious piece of legislation that transformed Canada into an Officially Bilingual nation. Without this legislation, Francophones would have had to compete in the market place just like everyone else. However, with this babysitter legislation, BOLA, there is no need for you to be resourceful, diligent, and hard-working. With BOLA riding shotgun, you can coast; you can have it all – without having to really earn it.

Francophones immigrate down the 401 into Ontario and are instantly coddled by our French Language Services Act. Beyond whatever taxes you pay, you are not required to contribute a dime to the vast array of extras - welfare by other means - that we give you: your very own unilingual schools, school buses, school boards; cultural and social facilities; your very own unilingual television network, and your extensive network of organizations scattered across the province, each of which is dedicated to promoting, protecting, and preserving French language and culture, and ensuring that, if an English sign is displayed, there will be a Francophone lurking nearby to insist, nay, demand, that it be replaced by a bilingual version – even if the local Francophone population is zilch.

Now, there is nothing wrong with such organizations, per se, except for the fact that funding for them comes out of the public purse; Francophones are not required to contribute a dime beyond what you normally pay in taxes. We also pay taxes, but part of our taxes that would normally operate our bilingual schools, pave our roads, and build our subways, gets diverted to fund your Francophone groups, who, evidently, are unable to do for themselves.

And let us not forget the other side of this sorry story; while we coddle and cuddle Francophones in Ontario and the rest of Canada, Francophones daily demonstrate their utter contempt for Anglophones and everything English in Quebec. While, each month, we pump $1.3B into Quebec’s coffers, Quebecers spew us with spite and spittle. 

While we are not angels, and we do have Rob Ford, we do not have the equivalent of the Charbonneau Commission - anywhere in the Rest of Canada.

Monsieur, we are told that Francophones are desperately afraid of being assimilated. Francophones, we are told, will shrivel and disappear unless we Anglos protect you from the wayward winds that  gust and swirl through this 21^st century world.  We are told that your Francophone language and culture are so fragile, that, without our hugely expensive, intrusive, coercive, and bloated body of municipal, provincial, and federal laws to coddle and cuddle them, they would become as dust.

However, we understand that this dreadful fear of assimilation is contrived; it is an artifice.  If your culture and your language were as weak and fragile as you claim, they would not be saved by immensely cumbersome bodies of legislation and massive amounts of cash.

Language and cultural attributes are sustained by people imbued with character, courage, fortitude, and competence.  If you have these qualities, you don’t need all that you demand of us.

If you refuse to make the effort to stand on your own, we cannot, we will not, stand for you. 

Gerry Porter, Ottawa

Mr. D. replied in French, May 3, 2014 (Google translation):

Typique give what condescendence O thank you so generous (wasp) white man to have hanged Louis Riel ... And destroyed the French communities outside Quebec.
By the way what is your contribution and your culture Canadian English blade American copy or allegiance to a foreign crown.

Not even fucking have you do a clean identiée you're a translation of your name to your Candian hymn O Canada nothing but a translation ... When you have a clean culture you a real identity may instead you hide behind multiculturalism have seen what has to be proud and want to share.

Original follows:

ypique give quel condescendence merci O si généreux (wasp) homme blanc de n'avoir pendus que Louis Riel...Et détruit les communautés Française hors Québec.

En passant quel est votre contribution et votre culture English Canadian une pale copie américaine ou une allegéance a une couronne étrangêre.

Même pas foutus de vous avoir fais une identiée propre a vous vous n'êtes qu'une traduction de votre nom Candian a votre hymme ô Canada rien d'autre qu'une traduction...Quand vous aurez une culture propre a vous une véritable identité peut-être au lieu de vous cachez derrière le multiculturalisme vus aurez de quoi a être fière et vouloir la partager

My response:   Monsieur, you mention multiculturalism as something we Anglos hide behind. On the contrary; Mr. Trudeau, the elder, introduced the asinine concept. Under the precepts of multiculturalism, all cultures are deemed "equal" and are thus protected from all criticism, a cloak that shields such practices as genital mutilation, from its critics. Francophones, your language, and your culture, are, under that very same blanket, similarly protected. 

As for the remainder of your response, I leave it to your readers to decipher. I'm not sure what you are trying to say.
Gerry Porter, Ottawa

 

Francophones Must Learn to Earn Their Way

Jack MacLaren, MPP for Carleton Mississippi Mills

There is matter that I would bring to your attention. Although it is not your concern politically, it is a matter that concerns us, the people of Ontario. I refer to the extent to which Francophones have quietly, but resolutely, insinuated themselves into the political and social fabric of Ontario, and the staggering costs associated with that process.

We recently assembled a list of some of the Francophone organizations operating in Ontario, and are in the process of determining the costs to Ontario taxpayers to fund these agencies and organizations.  We do not expect the number to be insignificant.

The list, attached, is impressive and exceeds anything we might have imagined. I do not expect you to read it, but merely leafing through it, leaves one with the impression that Francophones have been very active over the past several decades, building, with public funding, a solid infrastructure of unilingual Francophone schools, community centres, agencies, and their very own television network. 

And now, with their unchallenged power and influence throughout Ontario, Francophones confidently fly their fleur-de-lis flag fly above our Ontario flag and the Canadian flag - in contravention of federal legislation. They are also demanding that we build more French-language universities to serve francophones - and anyone else who will study in the French language. Despite the fact that about a quarter of Earth's population speaks English, and the vast majority of global commerce is conducted in English, Ontario's Francophones demand that we immerse our children in French-language studies - where is the wisdom?  Is there a politician with the courage to stand and object?  Such a principled individual has yet to step forward.

Francophones are treated extremely well under the sheltering FLSA, a circumstance that is not replicated for Anglophones and the English language in Quebec.  In Quebec, we are daily denigrated, despised, and physically mistreated. We shudder when we  hear of yet another Anglophone being shoved about and shouted at while seeking medical treatment in a Quebec hospital.

Canadians are largely unaware of Francophone activities outside Quebec's borders; our focus tends to be on Quebec's obsessive dalliance with its own nationhood. However, some of us are aware of, and deeply concerned for, the long-term viability of English Ontario.

Mr. MacLaren, we do not deny Francophones a rightful place in Ontario, but we do insist that they earn their way rather than rely exclusively on extensive, and expensive, legislative interventions by municipal, provincial and federal politicians acting on their behalf.  We must ask ourselves why we feel obligated to yield to Francophone demands for ever greater levels of funding for more programs that serve only to anger us and aggravate Ontario's serious indebtedness.

Francophones insist that such funding is necessary to prevent their culture from being assimilated. Our response is simple: if the Francophone culture is vigorous and vibrant, it will survive on its own merits - as do sundry Asian and European cultures in regions scattered across North America. If Francophone culture is otherwise, no amount of public funding will invigorate it.  We cannot do for them with cash what they are unable to do for themselves.

There is, of course, the need to live with the realities of official bilingualism. As it currently functions, OB is essentially a dictat that promotes, protects, and preserves the French language and culture at the expense of the English language and Canadian culture. OB is not an intelligent route to national unity; it is, in fact, an act that divides the nation more effectively than any legislation since conscription.

We cannot afford to coddle folks who simple refuse to do for themselves. Let Francophones do what the rest of us do; let them earn their way.

Gerry Porter
Ottawa