Quebec Told To Rewrite Language Laws
Posted on Friday, April 01 at 09:36 by Perturbed
Brent Tyler, the lawyer who masterminded the challenge of the law, said it’s impossible to say exactly how many children will benefit. It could be thousands if Quebec bureaucrats give a generous interpretation to the court decision, he said. But Tyler expressed some skepticism that will happen. “We have had to kick and fight and scream to get the slightest concession for parents (in the past),” he said.
“So much of it depends on the attitude of the Quebec government. Are they going to accept the spirit of this judgment?”
The court said provincial officials had been too narrow in their past decisions on who is eligible for English schooling, and should take a broader range of factors into account in the future. But that will have a practical impact only on immigrants and English-Canadians from other provinces — not on French-speaking natives of Quebec. In a separate unanimous decision, the court rejected claims that francophones should be free to choose English schooling for their children.
The judges said members of the linguistic majority in the province have no constitutional right to education in the minority language. Tyler said he intends to take that part of his case “to the next level” by seeking a hearing from human rights officials at the United Nations. He acknowledged that, even if he wins there, the decision would have no legal force in Canada. But a favourable ruling at the UN might put political pressure on Quebec to further loosen its rules, said Tyler.
The case had threatened to rekindle Quebec’s on-again, off-again language wars and create political problems for both the federal and provincial governments.
Prime Minister Paul Martin, with a minority Liberal government in Ottawa, could be forced into an election at any time.
His party already faces an uphill struggle in Quebec, where it lost ground in the last federal campaign to the sovereigntist Bloc Quebecois. In Quebec City, fellow Liberal Premier Jean Charest had been expected to face enormous pressure from nationalists if any part of Bill 101 was struck down. That didn’t happen, but the focus will now shift to the new administrative rules set by education officials in deciding future demands for English schooling on a case-by-case basis.
The original measures, blocking English schooling for francophones, many immigrants and even some anglophones from outside the province, were introduced in 1977. The province argued at the time that the French language and culture could be threatened by demographic shifts, especially if newcomers to Quebec assimilated to the minority English community rather than the French majority. Provincial government lawyers told the Supreme Court that restrictions are still necessary to protect against that possibility.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1112268043917&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154&DPL=IvsNDS%2f7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes
[Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on April 2, 2005]
Contributed By
Topic
Article Rating
(0 votes)
Options
Stumble It!Comments
view comments in forum
And who is antagonizing who? Perhaps we should finish Gomery first?
---
"We are all in this together somehow, some more than others somehow"
It reaffirms basic constitutional principles the country was founded on -- the rights of minorities are protected -- for Anglophones inside Quebec, and for the French inside the larger federation.
It is also a win for moderation, reigning in the more hardline element in the nationalist/sovereigntist.
A typically Canadian result. Why the gnashing of teeth?
---
If you don't like these ideas, I've got others. --Marshall McLuhan
An independent Quebec would create so many legal disputes and issues of economics that life could only get worse. Not that it matters to you.
The Liberals and PQ both serve the same economic elite, and separatism wouldn't change that.
We need a tough PM to crack a whip over the head of these separatist brats.
---
The midget, Bush, and that Rumsfield deserve only to be beaten with shoes by freedom loving people everywhere.
- Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf, The Iraqi Informat
For Quebec, democratically speaking it would be very difficult to seperate from the rest of Canada. The seperatists would have to win a 2/3rd's majority in a referendum in Quebec, the same in a referendum in English Canada, and a majority in all remaining provincial and territorial parliaments. Then Quebec could seperate. That is after negotiating with Canada in regards to the rights and well being of those in Quebec who are against seperation and what their status would be in both countries. After all of that, then Quebec can seperate.
International Law supports Canada's position in this matter and not Quebec's. Under international law since Quebec is a part of Canada by way of Confederation it is Canada's right to resolve the matter democractically and not Quebec's by force or reactionary meassures. Under international law this matter must be settled democracticaly. And countries such as the United Kingdom, the United States, and Australia would back Canada's position (all English countries, yes I know)
All said, the chances of this happening are slim at best. So where does that leave us? We can't go forward and we can't go back, and clearly the present system is failing us as I speak. So where do we go from here? To put it simply, we're stuck with each other.
I'll be honest with you I'm an English Canadian, not an English speaking Canadian mind you, but an English Canadian (or British Canadian if you want, after all there's a little bit of ginger in us all). My people came to this country and along with our fellow French Canadians and others we built a nation I'm proud of. And I'd like to keep that nation intact, not at the expense of the French identity, language, or culture mind you, but neither at my own. Granted, we in English Canada have made some pretty bad decisions in the past often at the expense of others, the Micmac and the Acadians of Nova Scotia come to mind. Granted we could of handled things better in English Canada, but two wrongs don't make a right.
As it stands French Canadians are sensitive to any change that may impact their culture or society in a negative way, and sometimes they respond in negative ways themselves (Bill 101 for instance). We don't want to see the same thing happen to Quebec that happened to Louisiana in the States for example. Do we? No we don't
But based on my experience, many English/British Canadians are upset and angry with this and as a result are insensitive to French Canadians feelings and positions over this matter. Here in English Canada we've seen much of what was once our culture, or own identity watered down our sold off piece by piece, usually replaced with American language and culture.
We are already seeing Canadian English moving closer to American English day by day and that's not what we want. But there's no protection for our culture, our identity, our way of life which is seperate from the American's culture and way of life. But inspite of all this, we're still here and we've survived.
What many French Canadians fear will happen to their identity and culture has been happening to English Canadians identity and culture for the last several decades, and if we're going to survive on this continent together we need to change the current system so that both the English and French cultures can survive side by side, without a gun to their heads held by separatists
So with all that said, I think we understand each other better than before. English and French Canadians alike have been dealing with the same issues all along.
What it comes down to is this; we need balance in this country, between the French and English cultures alike. We can't have one benifiting at the expense of the other, something that happens under a piece of legislation like Bill 101. In the same respect, we can't risk losing one over the other. With out the French, Canada can't exist. But in that same regard, with out the English, Canada can't exist either. We have some tough choices to make ahead of us. Are we really that different and that unwilling to work together to help make Canada the country it should be?
I realize many people on Vive are more sympathetic to official multiculturalism that I am, but I can't help but also say that if we are going to bring back the so-called "English-Canadian culture", then we pretty well have to can official multiculturalism if we want to be honest. It's hypocritical to subsidize and promote foreign cultures in Canada while at the same time trying to revive or protect English-Canadian culture.
---
The midget, Bush, and that Rumsfield deserve only to be beaten with shoes by freedom loving people everywhere.
- Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf, The Iraqi Informat
There's no reason why Canada has to fit a dictionary definition of nation. We can have our own version of what a nation is. Two proud European languages along with our first nations. That can be a nation.
I think what you want is 100% French control. You should remember that Scottish culture is doing fine under English control, and Quebec has more autonomy within Canada than Scotland does within great Britain.
You simply make so many assumptions and leaps of faith it is mind-boggling.
It could be argued that in practice Quebec politicians have the superiority complex.
---
The midget, Bush, and that Rumsfield deserve only to be beaten with shoes by freedom loving people everywhere.
- Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf, The Iraqi Informat