[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[viper37]

It's good that we live in a country where official bilinguism prevail and the French minority is treated way, way better than the nazis of Quebec are treating their English speakers.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/french-children-envirnoment-watchdog-fiscal-fall-update-1.4908180

[Malthus]

It's good that we live in a country where official bilinguism prevail and the French minority is treated way, way better than the nazis of Quebec are treating their English speakers.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/french-children-envirnoment-watchdog-fiscal-fall-update-1.4908180

Indeed. 

Eliminating a government head is hardly the worst imposition a minority has had to face.

Of the three, the worst is the elimination of the environment head. The Ford government's contempt for the environment is gonna cost us. 

[crazy canuck]

So if we're still interested in the saga of Tony Clement (I'm not particularly)

I agree, Scheer dealt with it appropriately.  I don't care about Mr. Clement's sordid private life.

[viper37]

Eliminating a government head is hardly the worst imposition a minority has had to face.

Of the three, the worst is the elimination of the environment head. The Ford government's contempt for the environment is gonna cost us. 

We'll do the same here   No wait, we can't, the Constitution we didn't sign won't allow it.

[Rex Francorum]

Yeah typical double standard.

[Malthus]

Yeah typical double standard.

Really? Please cite the provisions of the Constitution that create a double standard.

Edit: here's a link to the docments. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/Const_index.html

Also - the article states that the Ford government is cutting the position of French language Commissioner in Ontario. You guys say Quebec cannot do the same, and that this is a "typical double standard".

Let me ask you this: does Quebec have an "English Language Commissioner" right now?

[viper37]

It's good that we live in a country where official bilinguism prevail and the French minority is treated way, way better than the nazis of Quebec are treating their English speakers.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/french-children-envirnoment-watchdog-fiscal-fall-update-1.4908180

Indeed. 

Eliminating a government head is hardly the worst imposition a minority has had to face.

Of the three, the worst is the elimination of the environment head. The Ford government's contempt for the environment is gonna cost us. 

A couple of years ago (26/02/2013), The Globe & Mail (Sandy White) said Anglo-Quebecers situation was comparable to US slavery and quoted Frederick Douglas as intro to her column.

Since there's no big deal with what's happenning in Ontario, and soon New Brunswick, we should just save some money too.

[Malthus]

A couple of years ago (26/02/2013), The Globe & Mail (Sandy White) said Anglo-Quebecers situation was comparable to US slavery and quoted Frederick Douglas as intro to her column.

Since there's no big deal with what's happenning in Ontario, and soon New Brunswick, we should just save some money too.

In short - no answer to the two questions I asked.

For your convenience, I will ask them again.

1. You said there was some aspect of the Constitution which required Quebec to do things Ontario is not required to do. Rex Francorum agreed this was a "typical double standard".

Please point out which aspect of the Constitution you are talking about (See link to document).

2. The primary complaint in the article is the elimination of the office of "French Language Commissioner" of Ontario.

Perhaps this is another "double standard", if Ontario eliminates an office that Quebec has. Please point to the office of the "English Language Commissioner of Quebec".

...

For my part, I disagree with the Ford government; but of the numerous bad things they are doing, and cutting funding to minority language gardians is indeed a bad thing, cutting the Environmental Commissioner is by far the worst.

However, the notion  that this is somehow an outrage for Quebec, that Ontario is doing something Quebec could not, is positively Trumpian in its reversal of the actual facts.

[viper37]

Let me ask you this: does Quebec have an "English Language Commissioner" right now?

Anglo-Quebecers would never allow any kind of bilingual institution.   So we have:
English Schools & school boards with 100% anglo-Quebecers composition.
English colleges. (4)
English universities. (3)
English hospitals (Zero french hospitals in West Montreal, at best, approximate bilinguism)
All laws must be translated (they are published on paper, not always on the web sites).


Weird kind of slavery.


FYI, this is Ontario in 1925
October 16th, 1925, The Toronto Star publish this picture describing a KKK ceremony in London, Ont, where 1000 cloaked members initiated 100 recruits in their organisation for white supremacy.

Then a few samples of English Canada's love for its French minority





Really, there's no reason why there should be a French university, or why there should be any kind of protection for Ontario's French minority.

Next, they'll go after high school financing, just like Manitoba and British Columbia.  All in the name of "saving money", of course.

[Malthus]

I have no doubt there were plenty of bad racists in Ontario in 1925. Not sure why that is significant - those KKKers wouldn't have liked me any more than you! 

Again, the issue isn't for you to air your generalized grievances about nasty Anglophones of the past, but to support the actual claims you made.

May we assume that you aren't doing so, because you can't - because they were not actually based in fact? 

[viper37]

1. You said there was some aspect of the Constitution which required Quebec to do things Ontario is not required to do. Rex Francorum agreed this was a "typical double standard".

Please point out which aspect of the Constitution you are talking about (See link to document).

Supreme Court of Canada decision of December 1988 in the case of Ford v. Quebec (A.G.)

Anglo rights were violated for a question of signs.  Can't imagine what it would be if we cut financing to English School boards, colleges and universities like your Premier just did and will keep doing until French is eradicated from the province.

Then there's Section 133 of the Constitution Act (1867), which provides that both English and French must be used in the "Records and Journals" of the "Legislature of Quebec" and that "the Acts" of the "Legislature of Quebec shall be printed and published in both those Languages."

Where does this applies in Ontario?  Manitoba?  Alberta?  BC?  Any of the Maritime provinces?

2. The primary complaint in the article is the elimination of the office of "French Language Commissioner" of Ontario.
Perhaps this is another "double standard", if Ontario eliminates an office that Quebec has. Please point to the office of the "English Language Commissioner of Quebec".

English Quebecers have their own party, the Quebec Liberal Party.

They control all of their institutions.   English as a teaching language was never banned, schoolboard funding was never cut either (never more than their French counterpart).  Meanwhile, in Ontario, French education was subject to Regulation 17 up to 1944.  And it wasn't until 1997 that French could be given entire control of their school board. (See here)>

This is a double standard.

For my part, I disagree with the Ford government; but of the numerous bad things they are doing, and cutting funding to minority language gardians is indeed a bad thing, cutting the Environmental Commissioner is by far the worst.

It is the same: he is cutting funds to any kind of opposition.

However, the notion  that this is somehow an outrage for Quebec, that Ontario is doing something Quebec could not, is positively Trumpian in its reversal of the actual facts.

Nope.  Lean the history of your province.  People have pretty good reasons to be concerned.

[Grey Fox]

I am flabbergasted that Malthus can't see the double standards at play here both from our BS constitution & from the Anglophones Toronto media.

[Malthus]

1. You said there was some aspect of the Constitution which required Quebec to do things Ontario is not required to do. Rex Francorum agreed this was a "typical double standard".

Please point out which aspect of the Constitution you are talking about (See link to document).

Supreme Court of Canada decision of December 1988 in the case of Ford v. Quebec (A.G.)

Anglo rights were violated for a question of signs.  Can't imagine what it would be if we cut financing to English School boards, colleges and universities like your Premier just did and will keep doing until French is eradicated from the province.

Then there's Section 133 of the Constitution Act (1867), which provides that both English and French must be used in the "Records and Journals" of the "Legislature of Quebec" and that "the Acts" of the "Legislature of Quebec shall be printed and published in both those Languages."

Where does this applies in Ontario?  Manitoba?  Alberta?  BC?  Any of the Maritime provinces?

The elimination of the French Language Commissioner is not a sign that " French [will be] eradicated from the province". 

If he attempts it - then the Constitution (the same one you have yet to produce any reference to, BTW) will prohibit him from doing so.

You can't, apparently, cite it - but I can:

Minority Language Educational Rights

Marginal note:Language of instruction

23. (1) Citizens of Canada

(a) whose first language learned and still understood is that of the English or French linguistic minority population of the province in which they reside, or


(b) who have received their primary school instruction in Canada in English or French and reside in a province where the language in which they received that instruction is the language of the English or French linguistic minority population of the province,


have the right to have their children receive primary and secondary school instruction in that language in that province. (93)


Marginal note:Continuity of language instruction

(2) Citizens of Canada of whom any child has received or is receiving primary or secondary school instruction in English or French in Canada, have the right to have all their children receive primary and secondary school instruction in the same language.


Marginal note:Application where numbers warrant

(3) The right of citizens of Canada under subsections (1) and (2) to have their children receive primary and secondary school instruction in the language of the English or French linguistic minority population 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.

There, see - the same document you fear, actually prevents what you fear from actually happening!

Who would have thought it? 

English Quebecers have their own party, the Quebec Liberal Party.

They control all of their institutions.   English as a teaching language was never banned, schoolboard funding was never cut either (never more than their French counterpart).  Meanwhile, in Ontario, French education was subject to Regulation 17 up to 1944.  And it wasn't until 1997 that French could be given entire control of their school board. (See here)>

This is a double standard.

So, do you agree that there is no actual "English Language Commissioner" in Quebec (?)

Your position appears that this doesn't matter (?) 

Nope.  Lean the history of your province.  People have pretty good reasons to be concerned.

Whereas you, it appears, are like the Burbon monarchs after the French Revolution: "They have learned nothing, and forgotten nothing". 

Reciting over and over again "the history of my province" speaks nothing to the problems of the present day, which are different from those of 1925 or 1944. Things have changed. In particular, when it comes to minority language rights, there is now a document - The Charter of Rights - the very same that you were busy disparaging - which will prevent the exact thing you claim to fear.

[Malthus]

I am flabbergasted that Malthus can't see the double standards at play here both from our BS constitution & from the Anglophones Toronto media.

I am flabbergasted that, despite my citing the document and actually quoting from it, none of you can actually articulate how the "BS constitution" creates a "double standard" concerning minority language education rights. 

[Grey Fox]

I am flabbergasted that Malthus can't see the double standards at play here both from our BS constitution & from the Anglophones Toronto media.

I am flabbergasted that, despite my citing the document and actually quoting from it, none of you can actually articulate how the "BS constitution" creates a "double standard". 

As viper quoted, Section 133 of the British North American act of 1867