If we didn't have an official bilingualism policy, I wouldn't have a near-bilingual 6-year old. People from outside this country (and from Quebec, or is that the same thing?) are amazed when I tell them that my six year old can take 100% of his classes in French. Wish I'd been able to do it when I was in elementary school.
Kudos to the government for enhancing our language options. Knowing more than one language can only be a benefit in this global world. ..Cameron ---------- Original Message ------------------------- --------- From: Scott MacLean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 11:34:25 -0500 >Poisonous fruits of bilingualism > >Barry Cooper >National Post > >CALGARY - On Wednesday in Ottawa the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, >St�phane Dion, stood next to a beaming Prime Minister and announced that >some serious spending would make the country more bilingual. A 35% increase >in his dedicated bilingualism budget generated some impressive numbers. To >the $570-million currently being spent each year, was added another >$750-million in new and reallocated money. Over the life of the program, >that amounts to about $3.6-billion, roughly the same as new spending for >the military. > >The money goes to minority-language schools, including kindergartens; to >upgrading second-language classes; and to provide bilingual services in >hospitals and courts. Because every decision of the federal government will >require a language-impact statement, there is an additional regulatory >burden as well. > >According to Dion it's worth it. Certainly there is no question of pushing >French down the throats of English-speakers. "On the contrary, it's >Canadians who are pushing us in the back. They want more opportunities to >learn their country's two official languages." He told CBC how his heart >soared listening to cute little Chinese-Canadian kids in Richmond, B.C., >chattering away in French. > >The Prime Minister saw greater significance in the new spending. "The fact >that we have two official languages," he said, "that we have people coming >from all over the world and have found a way to live in peace in different >languages, colours, and religion, and build a country that is an example to >the world, it is part of the Canadian personality that we have to continue >to build." Before being carried too far aloft on the wings of prime >ministerial rhetoric concerning our ability to live peacefully in different >colours, we should recall at least a few pertinent facts. > >In comedy and politics, timing is everything. It was no coincidence that >the announcement came the same day Quebec Premier Bernard Landry, coasting >on a comfortable lead in the polls and with no intention of making >separatism an issue, called a provincial election. Dion has long believed >that every province should be officially bilingual, following the splendid >example set by New Brunswick. If they were, he has said, "a lot of >French-speaking Quebecers would encourage their own government to be even >more open to the language minority of Quebec than is the case today." So >the new bilingualism "action plan" is to encourage Quebec. > >Consider the consequences of the last big push by the federal government in >the direction of bilingualism, which was also supposed to encourage Quebec. >In 1963, when Jean Chr�tien was still new to the House of Commons and >official bilingualism was but a wild glitter in the eye of Pierre Trudeau, >government "help" to language minorities was somehow seen as a way to fight >terrorists in the FLQ as well as the more benign separatists and ordinary >nationalists. A couple of years later the Royal Commission on Bilingualism >and Biculturalism announced that the existing language policy was "the >greatest crisis in Canadian history." Even more shocking, Canadians had no >idea how bad the crisis was. By the end of the decade, Trudeau had passed >the Official Languages Act; the constitutionalization of language rights >arrived in 1982, bundled into the new Constitution. > >Some astute analysts of the implications of the recommendations of the >Bi-Bi Commission started calling it the Bye-Bye Commission. By drawing so >much attention to Quebec and the language issue, the federal government had >legitimized a limitless sense of grievance. Ottawa unawares had enhanced >separatism. No matter how generous and understanding English-speaking >Canada might be, these analysts said, it never could be enough. So: >Bye-bye, Quebec. They were nearly right. > >Remember what happened: In 1974, Bill 22 made French the sole official >language in Quebec. It was followed by Bill 101; by acrimonious litigation; >by the first use of Section 33, the "notwithstanding clause" of the >Constitution; and by growing anglophone impatience. Terrorists firebombed a >coffee shop in Montreal in the name of linguistic purity. Following the >Canadian Grand Prix auto race, Jacques Villeneuve ran afoul of the law by >naming his nightclub after his own nickname, "Newtown." The United Nations >Human Rights Commission then got involved, objecting to the language police >measuring the size of English and French letters on commercial signs. They >thought Quebec had violated freedom of expression, which the UN was sworn >to uphold. Such were the first poisonous fruits of government action on the >bilingualism front. > >At a time when productive, bilingual Quebecers are leaving that province in >response to genuine markets for their talents elsewhere, when Canadians are >centilingual, not bilingual, this "action plan" looks like the worst sort >of retro-liberalism and special pleading by the federal government for more >government interference. The last thing the country needs is to revive the >government-generated mischief that Canadians were glad to be rid of a >decade ago. > > >Barry Cooper is a professor of political science at the University of Calgary. > >
