Monday, November 26, 2012

OQLF versus Wal-Mart ..Language Militants Lose Either Way

ATTENTION READERS!
BLOGGER is acting up and for some reason may be placing a blank text box in the middle of the piece making the blog piece unintelligible...
If that happens to you, there's a simple fix. Before reading this post, scroll to the bottom and click on the comments.
Somehow this fixes everything... Go figger?

Last week it was determined that the court case pitting Walmart and five other American chain stores against the OQLF, will be heard sometime next Spring.
The Office québécois de la langue française (OQLF) is the government agency that is charged with protecting and promoting the French language in the province and which has demanded that these store must change their masthead to include a French descriptor.

Until the disposition of the case, the threat by the OQLF to revoke the famous francization certificate from these companies has been put on hold.

Here's an article that explains the situation somewhat sarcastically, tearing a bit of a strip off the OQLF.
If you are familiar with the particulars, you can skip it and go on to the rest of the post;
"The Office Quebecois de la Langue Francaise, perhaps detecting that Quebecers have been burdened for too long with debates over such serious matters as corruption, tuition fees and the choice of government, has stepped in to offer its own unique brand of foolishness. The OQLF are the language police, those people who skulk around the streets of the province searching for threats to the French language, and inventing them where they don’t exist. It sometimes seems that whenever the rest of the country is in danger of taking Quebec seriously, the language police appear to remind us of the essential absurdity of identity politics.
In this latest instance, the language apparatchiks are being taken to court by a group of internationally-known retail giants, including Walmart, Costco, the Gap, Best Buy, Old Navy and Guess. The companies have all been careful to comply with the province’s laws on language, but are upset that the office, without changing the law, has changed the way it interprets the law, and wants changes from them, pronto" Read the rest of a very good article.
The issue is rather simple, the OQLF has re-interpreted the law that regulates language in Quebec (Bill 101,) telling businesses with English-phrased names (e.g. 'Foot Locker') that they now must add a describing French phrase (descriptor)  before or after the name to pay some sort of homage to the French fact in Quebec. The OQLF tells us that with the recent invasion of American retailers, the agency can no longer turn a blind eye to violations of the law, in order to preserve the French face of Quebec.
The retailers involved in the lawsuit disagree and affirm that a law that hasn't been changed, cannot or should not be interpreted differently after thirty-five years.

There is a legal question as to whether companies can be required to modify international trademarks and therein lies the crux of the matter, but in many cases, CANADIAN TIRE for example, which has been operating for 85 years in Quebec and for the entire life of Bill 101, an acquired right has clearly been established.

It is actually no different from the case of a fence separating two residential properties, which is determined to be incorrectly placed, infringing by a couple of feet on one of the neighbour's property. If the fence has stood for a certain number of years (I believe that number is 15,) the offending neighbour cannot be compelled to move it and has in fact, acquired the right to infringe upon the property of another.

I'm not a legal expert, perhaps a knowledgeable lawyer like Brent Tyler can wade in on the subject as to whether certain businesses have in fact acquired a de facto right.

Quebec linguiscists heading for a Humpty-Dumpty fall.
But in the cases of businesses that haven't operated in Quebec for decades and who cannot claim an acquired right, it seems to me that the OQLF can quickly shoot down the argument that they are making, that a re-interpretation of a standing law is unfair.

The PQ government can quickly put an end to this argument by passing a simple and short amendment to Bill 101 that would make descriptors necessary.
Such an amendment would actually pass, even in the minority position that the PQ finds itself in the legislature.
I cannot envisage the opposition voting against such a limited proposal, supporting English over French.
T'aint gonna happen.....

That would leave the companies with only one defence, that of trademark law and I haven't the expertise to say who will win or lose. If it goes to the Supreme Court, I would venture an educated guess that the court will rule on the OQLF side, as it has in the past over the question of French signage.

But in the end, win or lose it hardly matters, the OQLF, by initiating this action has in fact set itself and language militants up for a mighty fall, Humpty-Dumpty style.

Should the OQLF lose, language militants will go ballistic, bitching and moaning for years to come over the fact that in their estimation, Canadian courts, be they in Quebec or Ottawa are an instrument of federalism and can never fully protect Quebec culture and the French language.
It will be a whinger's paradise, with the victim card played to the hilt and frankly I don't look forward to that scenario at all but must admit that the silver lining will be the insufferable pain and angst they suffer as a result.

But should the OQLF actually triumph in court, it will be a Pyrrhic victory and French language militants who will rejoice should be mindful of the old say that reminds us to... "Be careful of what you wish for, you might get it"

Let us consider this scenario, where these companies are forced to add these pathetic descriptors to their masthead.
Of course they will comply, passing off the considerable costs of the name change to consumers across Canada, (yes across the country) who will be asked to pay a little extra to cover the added expense.

But readers, take a look a the Walmart sign at the top of the page which includes an acceptable descriptor.
Does the OQLF really believe that francophones will start using the term 'Supercentre Walmart" over just plain old "Walmart."

The entire issue is flummery, a useless pissing contest over something that is inconsequential, something that hardly affect our lives as Anglophones, nor does it make the slightest of difference to Francophones.

I have to say, that I would entirely support the use of descriptors as some sort of a language compromise. If descriptors somehow validate Francophone Quebecers and the way that they look at themselves, I certainly wouldn't want to stand in the way, it's really no skin off my nose.

But I honestly don't believe a word from linguicists who tell us that something so trivial can actually validate francophone society.

Nope, there is something else going on here.

I will refer readers to another old bit of wisdom, the proverbial story of the dog chasing the truck... the truck stops and the dog thinks to itself..."What do I do now?"

With the issue of descriptors resolved, language militants give up the defining issue of the signage debate, and like the dog who enjoys pursuing the truck, catching it is an abrupt and unsatisfactory end to the game, because it was always really about the chase.
The very worst thing that language militants want is to win, because it is the fight that they relish, just like the dog.

All across Quebec there are committees formed to defend the French language in regions that are devoid of anglophones. All the stores post signs exclusively in French and the only bone to pick is the English store name that lacks this famous descriptor.
Just recently a new Committe for the defence of the Revolution comité de surveillance pour l'application de la Charte de la langue française was formed in Quebec city, the spokesman unable to come up with any violation other than English store names.

The OQLF tells us that 80% of stores province-wide are in compliance with the signage law and that 16% of stores violate the law based solely on the lack of descriptors.

Let's do the math.
If stores comply, it will leave just 4% of stores in non-compliance and of these you're talking about Mom and Pop operations where a "Dishwasher wanted" sign is the bone of contention, hardly something to embolden the minions to man the barricades.

Now here is the delicious part, let us pretend that the Walmarts and the Foot Lockers comply with the law and add descriptors, the OQLF will then have to face the very thorny issue of enforcement, when language militants target stores with proper names that sound English.

Somebody, either the OQLF or the courts, is going to have to lower the boom on these linguicists who will be demanding that chain stores like Bentley, Simon or Quiznos add descriptors.

Readers should note that this is exactly what the Societe Saint-Jean-Baptiste, Quebec's largest French language pressure group, is demanding today.

There isn't a judge in the province who would uphold a demand by the OQLF that a company like Reitmans be forced to add a descriptor because the origin of the family name is not French Canadian.

The idea is revolting, but that is what linguicists want.
That being said I read something that did disturb me, in an article in the New York Times that discussed the Quebec sign issue;
“This is not against any language,” Mr. Bergeron said. “English, Italian or Chinese, it’s all the same.” He added that the agency will even investigate signs containing names that are not related to any known language. ” Read the NYT article
WHAT THE HECK DOES THAT LAST SENTENCE MEAN!!!

At any rate, can it be that the OQLF will cave into radical demands that proper names that aren't French rooted, add descriptors?
It is too delicious to contemplate!

Friends, this is one English rights defender who wants to see the descriptor issue end, even if it means the OQLF winning.

Regardless of the judicial outcome, the OQLF and language militants will be the big losers and for that, I can hardly wait.

118 comments:

  1. Forcing people to put descriptors is one of the most ridiculous ideas the separatists have proposed yet. Do you ever see that kind of crap in Ontario or Alberta? I doubt anyone needs a Loblaw's to have "Groceries" written below it or The Brick to have "Matresses". You have companies like Second Cup with a mug of coffee on the logo, but they still need "Les Cafés" written above for some reason. Will the flag of Quebec need to have "Drapeau" written below it as well?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lord Dorchester

      All this wind that is blowing out of the OQLF is just a ploy for them to show the Quebec tax paying public that this relic from the 1970's is still relevant. For them to insinuate that the average Québécois francophone is so daft that they don't know what Wal-Mart or Costco are is quite frankly, insulting. This is another juvenile, tit for tat language game that only language hard liners seem to be interested in. NONE of my Francophone friends have ever thought this was an issue and I imagine most reasonable thinking people feel the same. Now, if these stores used Chinese or Greek characters in their names, then yes, a descriptor would be warranted. But as far as I know, English and French share the same alphabet.

      Delete
  2. Editor, I think the expression you were seeking is the thrill of the chase. That expression very often, but not exclusively, is used to describe men in pursuit of chasing women for dating purposes, and maybe some more, but not for a long commitment.

    Trouble is, if the language nutbars win this one, they'll eventually want something else. While that may be in part to fulfill the thrill of the chase, in reality, they're just a bunch of racist malcontents who will not rest until every minuscule aspect of English is rid of in Quebec. Once that's done, they'll go after something else, like people not born in Quebec (as if they don't do enough of that now), but with English washed from their hair, they can focus more on those maudit étrangères daring to rock the boat of their homogeneous society.

    When the language legislation first came out in the mid-70s, they simply wanted people to speak French. That satisfied them. Now they want no foreign accent in the French, especially Anglo accents, descriptors on store names and a host of other things. IT DOESN'T STOP! The demands are infinite! Simply put, if they get their way on everything we know they want now by tomorrow, then they'll come up with new demands the day after tomorrow.

    I hope for a goddamn change the wishy-washy spineless jellyfish who make up the Supreme Court for once in their useless lives side with the stores. Like the example of the property easement the Editor was writing about above (the fence between the properties), there should be some kind of language easement here because the language SS did nothing for 35 years already.

    It's obvious the OQLF is looking for their raison d'être, i.e., little make-work projects to protect their jobs and justify why they should still exist in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "It's obvious the OQLF is looking for their raison d'être, i.e., little make-work projects to protect their jobs and justify why they should still exist in the first place."

      Especially since Marois needs to justify wanting to expand and increase their funding.

      Delete
    2. Think of the billions of Canadian dollars that are wasted in this province over this nonsense = it sucks. If they spent all that money to bribe the malcontents to move to the backwoods of quebec, onto a little piece of land = kind of like a reservation - they would be happy and the rest of us would be able to live in peace and harmony = Too bad the politicians and the lawyers use the money to line their own pockets to ensure they have lots and lots of money in the bank to run like hell when trouble breaks out. France will gain some new citizens when that happens in the near future - hope Parizeau has lots of room for them at his vineyard!

      Delete
    3. Foremost, as usualy you are right on the money !!! EXACTLY ! lol

      Delete
  3. There might also be rules in the NAFTA agreement againt all of this nonsense.

    This is all very stupid. What it the US demanded that Cirque du Soliel was renamed Sun Circus in the US? These idiots in OQLF as just brain dead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I somehow didn't manage to complete my post. So, I'll continue...

      The OQLF somehow seems trapped in it's thinking. It's like a mind that has run over the same ideas over and over, and it's stuck in a loop. It can't see that it's actually hurting what it claims to protect.



      Delete
  4. My understanding is that under international law, the international trademark of a company is protected from being altered by the laws of nation states. IE China cannot forces McDonalds, or KFC, to only have a trademark in China in Chinese, or to alter the design in any way.

    Also, when the Chateauguay Valley English Speaking Peoples' Association appealed to the United Nations Human Rights Commission in regard to maintaining their rights to have English language signage, an appeal which they won (against the defendant Canada who supported Quebec's right to ban English on commercial signs), it was clarified that signage in your own language was a "fundamental human right" and that nation states had to respect and accept that laws could not be passed banning languages or requiring commercial signage to be in only one language. As such, commercial entities/companies have a "freedom of expression" and cannot be legislated to have commercial signs in only one language.

    The concept of a modifier to a trademark is not new, far from it. For example, McDonalds has a little "visual" maple leaf modifier to their corporate signage in Canada. However, modifiers are added at the discretion of the company; ie changes to international trademarks cannot be legislated.
    ization certificates to require changes to internationally registered trademarks is simply a non-starter, nor can francisization certificates be used to restrict/violate/circumvent fundamental human rights in terms of legislating the use of only one language for any signage, including modifiers.

    I am sure the OQLF and the provincial govt, have done their due diligence, and know that the reinterpretation of francisization certificates to require French only modifiers would never stand up to a legal challenge, and that the corporations taking the OQLF and the Quebec Govt to court on this matter have had this fully confirmed. It seems to me that the OQLF will have no choice but to back off and return to their past position of simply "encouraging" companies to add French language modifiers, which is as it should be. What was surprising is that it was the Quebec Liberal Party who gave the green light to the recent OQLF reinterpretation of the use of Francisization Certificates to restrict fundamental human rights, and this may permit the PQ, should it wish, to claim that when the OQLF backs off, to say that they are more respectful of language rights of company registered trademarks and of English speaking people than the QLP. Ironic!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JP: Interestingly, the maple leaf in McDonald's logo is "missing" in Quebec, but no other part of Canada. Hopefully, with all these large corporations sharing the legal fees, it won't add up to too much per company that they'll need not raise prices as a result; unfortunately, the Quebec taxpayer may have to dig deeper depending if the OQLF already has lawyers on retainer, or they have to pay for more services.

      It would be grossly unfair for all Canadians to have to pay extra for retail goods because of Quebec's menacing governmental interference. Quebec and Quebec alone demands French everything, something that doesn't exist anywhere else, so it's Quebecers who must and should bear the extra costs.

      I doubt the costs of these lawsuits will put the stores out of the market and close due to the costs, but the sacrifice may be loss of jobs to recover the costs. Quebecers in Jonquière paid the penalty for trying to form a union at the local Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart WILL go to great expense to duck unions. They have done it before and they'll do it again. I'll bet Wal-Mart even put the onus on the landlord to take the hit when that store closed.

      Delete
  5. I remember when the Human Rights Commission ruled on this matter and it made no difference at all to the PQ government - they just ignored the ruling as they do with everything that doesn't suit their separatist agenda; the constitution be damned, Canada be damned, all Canadian authority be damned, use the "notwithstanding" clause to get their own way and on it goes. That's why the "notwithstanding" clause must be re-written or removed from the constitution - to stop the abuse of Canadian citizens' rights in this province. We must get rid of these malcontents to have any peace and to thrive as a nation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please note that the UN Human Rights Commission has had a huge impact on the language rights issue in Canada. Whether one likes it or not, English is now permitted on signs - something which Robert Bourassa's PLQ party had previously legislated against (he went further than the PQ on this matter) and the French only lobby lost much credibility within Quebec, Canada and, most importantly, Internationally. Whilst the Supreme Court of Canada ultimately accepted an interpretation that human rights were maintained if French signage was twice the size of English language, this is still highly questionable and no-one has sought to test it. Our Ed has often raised the issue of legibility if the English is too small to be actually readable - and how exactly is word size measured, by surface area or by length/height of particular letters or words. In any event, the not-withstanding clause was created as a short term measure to disrespect fundamental human rights, though has to be revoted on every 5 yrears. Its a clear embarracement to any government to actually use the "not-withstanding clause." All to say, the UN's Human Rights Commission and its position on language rights is very very important and ought not to be ignored, or treated as if it were meaningless. These rights also apply the other way around, as was noted by the fact that the Cirque de Soleil have an equal right to have their name in French, and I don't believe anyone seeks to change this - or even to have a bilingual version.

      Delete
    2. Blame Daddy Trudeau for the "notwithstanding" clause. Interestingly, it was the Western premiers who wanted it, but Quebec has been the one abusing it. Then again, their alibi is they never signed onto the Constitution so they don't recognize it when it suits them not to.

      Daddy Trudeau didn't want it in there knowing it's the Grand Canyon of a way to ignore the Constitution at will, but it was more important for Daddy Trudeau's legacy and place in history to be the deliverer of the Ten Commandments,....errrr...I mean Constitution, so this is what we got.

      Delete
  6. Look the Reality is about money.. Does the cost of complying outweigh the profits.. if yes then they will pack up and leave. if it doesn't they will comply. Having said that, I personally would like to see one of these close up and put many people out of work... The Nationalists need to be exposed as the frauds they are......

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately for us, quebec is not at all embarrassed about using the "notwithstanding" clause whenever it suits them. They don't have the capacity to be embarrassed about anything including their bigotry against anyone not considered pur laine. If they ever wake up and smell the coffee and start voting for a party that represents all quebecers, (and we need a new provincial liberal leader with some balls), not just the few, we may have a chance to straighten this out but not with the seppies running the show and flaunting the fact that they can run roughshod over the constitution at will. They have learned that they can break International Law and nothing is done about it so why not all laws? Sad state of affairs. Supreme Court of Canada has to grow some balls also. Either we all live under the constitution or we need to negotiate a new one with the provinces. Quebec be damned. In or out - a final vote needs to be held to rid ourselves of these racist bigots.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    4. Cutie, Cutie...still frittering away your time answering that sub-human of S.R.
      As you can see, nobody bothers answering him (or it, as he is too stupid to be a human being)


      Delete
    5. Cutie, I don’t know about you but my family is from Quebec for at least 8 generations.

      S.R moved here to our welcoming society because he was unhappy in the place where he was born. Now, he presumes to tell us real Quebecers, people whose families have been here for so many generations, that we should move someplace else just to suit his prejudices… yeah, right!

      His arrogance is breathtaking.

      If he’s not happy with Quebec the way it is and always has been, then he’s the one who should just keep moving along… he’s the one who is a foreigner here, not us. Don’t you forget it.

      Delete
    6. RS - I can't claim that my heritage goes back anywhere near as long as yours in quebec but I feel very strongly that, as a Canadian, no matter where I reside in MY country, I have the right to speak whatever language I wish and be served in one of the official languages of MY country. I assume that the constitution of Canada covers, and is supposed to, cover all of us as Canadian citizens and just because we have approx. 30% of one province claiming to be above the law, does not make it so. What if the Chinese in B.C. decide to claim that they have a right to separate from Canada with the land on which they reside just because they happened to settle there? The whole thing is stupid and very petty no matter that they are one of the founding peoples of the country. The Indians were here long before either the french or English and they are not threatening the ROC all the time. There are outstanding issues, yes, but at least they try to work with the government to find solutions. Not with quebec - everything is a continuous battle to try to sway the vote to pull the country apart without a second thought as to the consequences of their actions. They must be stopped as Mr. Sauga says because the demands are infinite and will continue. We have to partition the province and let those areas go that vote to go before it tears the whole country apart.

      Delete
    7. Vous devriez vous habituer à être une citoyenne de deuxième classe,cutie,car je ne vois pas de solution possible à vos malheurs.En passant,vous me faite rire avec vos inutiles jérémiades quotidiennes.

      Delete
    8. Cutie - I can tell you that the aboriginals are not happy with how they have been treated. But they are such a small group that its difficult for them to be heard. There are a little over 1 million aboriginals in Canada about 3 percent of the population..wheras the Quebecois are about 5 to 6 times as many. If there were only 1 million francophones then it would be pretty tough for their message to be heard.
      Personally I find it disgraceful how poorly the aboriginals have been treated by both the francophones and anglophones. In reality our ancestors stole the land from them and then gave them a few crumbs in return. I often hear many people complain about them being lazy and drunk but it was the europeans who stole everything from them, then effectively destroyed their culture but then gave them free welfare which turned many of them into dependants. Now the french and the english both act as if they were the first on this land..what hypocrisy.

      Delete
    9. I agree that they have been treated badly - I also added that they do try to work with the various governments to straighten out the mess we made of their lives instead of ALWAYS threatening everyone like the seppies do. The separatists still do not accept the fact that the Indians will vote to remain within Canada if and when there is another referendum. They have made it very clear and they will physically fight to maintain their own land.

      Delete
  7. That's the biggest problem in quebec - putting people out of work doesn't register with these malcontents because they honestly believe that the money tree will keep on producing no matter what. So they lose their jobs and go on the dole - that's just fine with them. The "government will provide", no matter what, attitude is killing this province. Bunch of bums with no desire to improve their lot in life. If they honestly cared about such things, they would be much more cooperative with their neighbours in north america. Again, selfish about everything they do. This could be resolved if we got rid of the approx. 30% who feel this way and that's why we have to vote to kick them out or they vote to kick themselves out. Whatever works to get rid of them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cutie - Well maybe you and your fellow anglos could do something about it. But instead you keep on voting for the same bums election after election. Nothing has any hope of changing as long as you continue to support the same party. The Liberals have proven over and over that they are incapable of managing this province..they are as bad or worse with their fiscal record as the PQ. If you really are fed up with the welfare state then you need to elect and more right wing party..the CAQ is as right as it gets in Quebec. But of course you would rather elect a feddie who is incompetent and corrupt then a former seppie who has business experience and many feddies in his party. So again if you really want change then you need to change the way you vote. Otherwise stop whining about the state of affairs in Quebec..

      Delete
    2. You know that you could encourage the Francophones to learn English for their own good and that being bilingual is not like having AIDS. Until they accept the fact that there is nothing wrong with being bilingual, nothing will change in this province because it is the seppies that are so socialist. Why not try that for a change instead of telling people to vote CAQ?

      Delete
    3. You have a point..there is definitely a demonization of english in this province. It seems that Quebecers will embrace almost any other language in the world except english. Its an old enemy..brings back memories of British colonization and the minority anglo domination until the 1960s. But its time to move on..you cant keep slamming english over and over because of the past. The reality is that english is the international language and if you want to do business around the world then you need to speak it well. And that is not the fault of english canadians.

      But again Cutie..you and many anglos here whine incessantly about government waste, corruption, the welfare state and so on yet you continually vote for a party that has supported and created the Quebec government monster that it is. So you can only blame yourselves for maintaining the status quo. If you want a right leaning government then the only choice is the CAQ..look at their policies..they are about as right as we will ever get and to be honest they are more centric than anything. Its the Liberals and PQ that are skewed to the left. If you want lower taxes, a crackdown on unions, a reduction of the welfare state then the CAQ is the only one proposing anything in that direction.

      Delete
  8. It is just sad...Waste of time and money for all. Glad that the companies are standing up.
    I personally think that it is insulting to francophones if they have to describe to them what the store has. Is like saying 'Costco - For you simpleton, let me explain that it is a wholesale store, aka, we sell in large quantities. It means that you buy 6 tins instead of 1 and it is cheaper price per unit...etc, etc'

    ReplyDelete
  9. Some companies put their trademark as their sign, for example the Starbucks on Ste-Catherine & university simply has their mermaid logo. OQLF knows they can't touch the logo but they can force descriptions. In a nutshell, they're saying businesses have no rights to commercial signage, trademarked or not.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Le maire de Toronto coupable de conflit d'intérêts

    Le maire de la plus grande ville du Canada a été reconnu coupable de conflits d'intérêts lundi et sera démis de ses fonctions.

    http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/quebec-canada/national/201211/26/01-4597710-le-maire-de-toronto-coupable-de-conflit-dinterets.php

    Tiens donc...Héhé!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow, I total of $3150... if you're trying to imply that Toronto approaches Montreal in terms of corruption, you've failed. He'll be able to run for office next term, no problem. Plus it's over a simple conflict of interest. The only reason this is newsworthy is because;

      a) it's the mayor of the largest city in Canada
      b) said mayor is accusing the left of political manoeuvring to get him out of power

      As usual, La Presse tries to slam Canadian politics while understanding nothing of it. Read some better coverage and you'll find it's really nothing serious at all;

      http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/toronto-mayor-rob-ford-removed-from-office/article5661417/?cmpid=rss1&utm_source=dlvr.it_tor&utm_medium=twitter

      Delete
    2. I'm almost surprised he thinks anyone here gives a shit about Rob Ford.

      Delete
    3. Evil, I've got news for you: Many people out here don't give a shit about Rob Ford! I figured he deserved his chance to govern, and simply put, he blew it. All over 3 G's, but as stated above, this is a major difference between Toronto and Montreal. Interestingly, now the two largest cities in Canada may be directed by interim mayors, depending how Ford's appeal to the court goes.

      I think Ford had good intentions, but he became arrogant and believed he was above the law. He was warned by the Ethics Officer on six written occasions this was a conflict of interest and unethical; furthermore, he was caught more than once either talking on a cellphone while driving, or texting. For all that, I think he's getting what he deserves, but he may appeal successfully. It remains to be seen. He plans to fight this as hard as he can as he feels there are zealous detractors who want to see him out.

      Delete
  11. I have a good question that I wish someone could answer. Since the Canadian Govt gave the Québec Govt control over language, which means all matters pertaining to language within the province are up the the Québec Govt to handle, does this not mean that Québec cannot state that French is a minority and therefore cannot enforce Bill 101 since French is the majority language in Québec and therefore does not require protection. Also, since the majority of all signs (whether commercial and road signs) are majority French, doesn't that mean that French is already predominant on signs and therefore the need to force the small English companies (within Québec) to post signs with French on them or bilingual but with French as predominant no longer apply as the Supreme Court never stated that indivivual signage must be predominantly French. It only stated that in order to maintain Québec's French character, the court recognizes Québec's right to require that French on signs be predominant. Therefore if any company wanted to post a unilingual sign or signs, they would be allowed since the majority of signs in Québec are predominantly French.

    Since the Supreme Court rejected a French families request to attend an English school because they tried to use the Charter's minority section as they were considered the part majority, doesn't that prove that the French language cannot be considered a minority language and therefore doesn't need protection within the province and therefore nullify Bill 101?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Personally, as a business owner, I advertise in both languages as it is good for business, not because it is the law. I also ensure that both English and French are EQUAL in letter size. I refuse to make one predominant over the other as I want to respect both equally.

      Je suis très fier que mon entreprise est capable d'offrir les 2 languages sans question ni hésitation. C'est un question de respect pour mes clients!! J'engagera jamais un unilingue anglophone ni francophone lorsque mes employees doient être capable de servir mes clients dans la langue qu'ils préferent. Ce n'est pas à mon employee de décidé la langue, it's my client's !! It's called customer service et c'est temps qu'on commence à respecter nos clients peut importe leur langue d'usage.

      Delete
    2. Mike tu as raison. French is the predominant language in QC and hardly in danger. The rhetoric should be that the English language is in grave danger, and truthfully, it is in this province.

      Delete
  12. Thank you Mike and good questions about Bill 101. I hope some lawyer on line can give us a brief but pertinent answer to your questions. I would hope that all businessmen in your situation provide service in both languages because what is happening in my area is that if service is not provided in the language of choice, I, for one, will hop into my car and go across the bridge to Ottawa to shop or whatever. They are only hurting themselves if they are bigoted about providing services to the English speaking community because we just plain won't shop there any longer. Shoot themselves in the foot so to speak.

    ReplyDelete
  13. FROM ED BROWN
    I don't know that language was ever legislated by Canada and I don't think Canada gave Quebec the power to control language. Queen Victoria, as sole ruler of the Empire decided that the French people could keep their language and religion. It was of course taken for granted that people would talk whatever language was comfortable for them. I doubt any Canadian Law has ever been passed that was intended to be allowed to control someone else's language. Ed

    ReplyDelete
  14. "With the issue of descriptors resolved, language militants give up the defining issue of the signage debate, and like the dog who enjoys pursuing the truck, catching it is an abrupt and unsatisfactory end to the game, because it was always really about the chase."

    Editor I am not sure I agree with this. The signage issue is not a stationary, but a moving target. It's the same thing with the knowledge of French. It used to be that the problem was that anglos and some allos did not speak French. Once the 101 generation learned French, the problem was that they went to English language Cegeps and universities. Then as more of them started staying in the French system, the problem is that people consume English language (US) entertainment and that they don't know Marie Mai. And now it seems that having an accent is a problem as well. So the target just keeps on moving with the purpose being that a non-francophone can never actually hit it.

    Same thing with signage. If they win on the descriptor issue, they'll just find something else to complain about, whether that is more enforcement of current regulation or demanding new laws.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Quebec will only further isolate itself from the rest of the world. Scare away businesses, bad publicity out of Quebec. Some strange folks with even stranger rules.
    Kinda like some twisted form of North Korean socialist worker paradise thingy in Quebekistan.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. God No!!!!! never will I refer to any Quebec Nationalist as "Dear leader" having Nightmares already!

      Delete
    2. Actually, I'd find it comical to see North Korea-style shenanigans where tens of thousands of Quebec-Libre boneheads dress up in blue and white to form a gigantic fleur-de-lys flag and shift left to right to give it the appearance of flapping in the wind.

      Delete
    3. Funny and sad at the same time, you could actually picture it.........

      Delete
  16. S.R, I have a favor to ask of you - would you care to oblige me?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Now listen up you guys - over at IF, they are asking that the bigots send e-mails supporting the STM employee that refused to speak English to a customer. Needless to say, this is his third suspension and he feels that it's affecting his health. Next thing you know, he will be out on sick leave or disability so I want you all to please send e-mails to the STM congratulating them for using common sense. They have provided 3 e-mail addresses. The first made sense; the last two not so much. I'm guessing this is how it should read: I'm sending them off tomorrow morning, first thing - giving them a pat on the back! Please, please do the same. Strength in numbers and all that good stuff.
    commentaires@stm.info
    michel.labrecque@stm.info
    marianne.rouette@stm.info
    Don't waste your time commenting seppies.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Sent off the first one to commentaires and it seems to have gone through OK. Will send the other two in the morning and am presuming that they will also go through.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Vous croyez qu'ils prennent le temps de lire vos gribouillis en globish?

      Delete
    2. ...et pourquoi pas? Toi, ...tu prends le temps pour en lire, n'est pas?

      Delete
  19. FROM ED BROWN
    Evil, Why are you inviting S R to participate. You know it will be something stupid that insults all of us. You are the only one doing this, even though EDITOR has asked us not to. Ed

    ReplyDelete
  20. I just want him to call into the Dean Blundell show on 102.1 The Edge. I don't want to read his stuff - I want to hear him verbally sound off to a couple of guys who'll have a field day with him.

    Anyways Ed, if you're up between 5 - 10 am, that's the run of the show each weekday morning:
    http://player.edge.ca/

    ReplyDelete
  21. Une seule personne me fascine et m'intéresse sur ce blogue et j'ai nommé cutie.Elle est devenue mon obsession : Une canadienne typique qui me rappelle chaque jour les raisons pour lesquelles j'aime tant le canada et sa mentalité progressiste.Désolé Résidu Evil.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The e-mail went through to michel labrecque but not marianne. Please send thanks to them. I'm sure they appreciate hearing that we notice they do not ignore the English speaking community.

    ReplyDelete
  23. TVA Nouvelles never disappoints.

    http://tvanouvelles.ca/lcn/infos/regional/quebec/archives/2012/11/20121118-234333.html

    Right off the bat we discover that even UR2B is in violation of the holy charter. This UR2B (whatever it is) "...et autres font aucun effort pour respecter la loi sur la langue d'affichage". Way to project the arrogance of the said law and of the militants on the targeted commercial chains, not to say victimized chains (the language militants in Quebec have managed to do an impossible - to give a certain aura of victimhood to corporations, quite a feat these days, I must say.)

    Not mentioned in the "report" is how draconian or absurd this law is (imagine saying that these arrogant Negroes make absolutely no effort to obey the law that puts them in the back of the bus...Rosa Parks is such an arrogant hag). Not mentioned either is the fact that the (lack of) effort is not with obeying the law, but with keeping up with the OQLF's interpretations of it. This descriptor nonsense is a pretty new invention. It's not something that was pursued before.

    The rest is a typical propaganda piece which even includes high-spirited anglophone tourists who are shown to feel so "comfortable" with all this English signage around, plus the militant lady saying that a "Foot Locker" sign interferes with the French feel of the city. The funny moment comes at 52 seconds and 55 seconds, when first the "reporter" and then the militant mispronounce the word "wholesale". Wawsale? Wtf?

    Generally speaking, methinks that the mainstream francophone media is really scared of the day when there will be no need for them. So they picked themselves an ally. Petite bourgeoisie of Montreal in bed with the nationalist movement, since the 1950's. First used them to change the status quo, now using them to desperately maintain it, so that Richard Martineau and other high priests can continue preaching from the pulpit of Tout Le Monde En Parle. Something that may be both elusive and hard to give up, I suppose, given how propagandistic and desperate these people have become.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Regardez-donc ce que les Chinois font avec McDonald's,par exemple :

      https://www.google.ca/search?q=mcdonald's+china&hl=fr&tbo=u&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ei=BeW0UKK9MfPI0AHHkIGQDQ&sqi=2&ved=0CD4QsAQ&biw=1920&bih=961

      Delete
    2. You know that I have had friends from elsehwere in North American come to Montreal and be surprised at how much english they hear and read. A lot of them are disapointed as they expected it to be more like France. I really dont care if they francize some stores..if walmart becomes le walmart then what does it really matter in the end. And please dont compare anglos in Quebec with Rosa Parks..the anglos are not even close to the cppression that black people had to put up with in the 1950s. Black people were told to sit at the back of the bus, were only allowed in certain establishments, had to enter via back doors, had vastly inferior schools, were killed for their colour and so on. Its really insulting for you to use this analogy. There is an argument to be made that the anglos in Quebec are still one of the best treated minorities in the world..still have english hospitals, english schools, 2 major english universities, several english media outlets, a large anglo dominated suburban area (west island) where you hear way more english spoken than french, and 90 percent of the time served in english at businesses. So for all the whining on this forum right now the english are treated fairly well. My big beef with the PQ and with many francophones is the mishandling of the economy and the massive debt we have - we need to shape up quickly or the whole english/french debate wont mean much if we are all destitute.

      Delete
    3. Après les nazis,Rosa Parks...Certains anglos m'étonneront toujours :)

      Delete
    4. Forget the Rosa Parks bit, focus on the propaganda piece that the TVA has put out. You made a lot out of one sentence, and dismissed the rest because your "big beef" is "the mishandling of the economy and the massive debt we have". So if my post doesn't jive with your "big beef" or "beefs", does it mean that I shouldn't post it?

      I think it matters if "walmart" becomes "le walmart" or not. I think it makes a difference given the circumstances under which such transformation would take place.

      I do agree economy is more important. I'd like nothing more than the end of language reports on mainstream television which keep the flame burning (not without a purpose either).

      Can I then assume that you're writing a letter to the TVA right now to say that "the whole english/french debate wont mean much if we are all destitute"?


      Delete
    5. Oh dont worry I have sent my share of emails to media outlets lamenting the sorry state of Quebec finances. But I find that the whole language debate really is distracting both sides from the pressing issues at hand. We need a government which will clean up the fiscal mess that Quebec is in..and there is no easy way of doing this..it will require scarifice from everyone. It means big job cuts in government..it means cuts to health care and education..it means cuts to business subsidies..it means higher tuition fees. All this wrangling about language is really not going to get us anywhere..we have the stubborn seperatists on one side and the equally stubborn old anglos on the other side. Meanwhile the house is on fire..wake up people. Many people on this forum are part of the problem. Another 4 years of the Libs or PQ will be a disaster either way.

      Delete
    6. Quebec vs. China. A descriptor-less society with the OQLF lurking in the shadows, vs. a descriptor society with no OQLF. Descriptor-phobia despite enforcement (bullying), versus descriptor-philia despite the lack of enforcement. What's the lesson here? Maybe it's that bullying is not the way to go? Or maybe it's the relative market size, making one market crucial and the other peripheral. Is it the smallness of the market here that condemns the Quebecois to this perpetual "disrespect" they feel? Or is this "disrespect" pretty much invented, hyped up, exaggerated, and overshadowing the obvious: adding a descriptor in China might make practical sense whereas in Quebec it only makes ideological sense.

      Is it arrogant for you to ask for what the Chinese get without asking? You can make that case, but I think it is still is arrogant. The arrogance is in going after every single store, and in making it more ideological than it needs to be. It's in thinking that you're bigger than you really are.

      Think about this over lunch, while stuffing yourself with Big Macs you got at a disrespectful McDonalds outlet. Bon appetit.

      Delete
    7. "Oh dont worry I have sent my share of emails to media outlets lamenting the sorry state of Quebec finances."

      Forget the "finances" for a second. Tell me this: have you written to the TVA and Radio Canada specifically about the "the whole english/french debate" which "wont mean much if we are all destitute"? Yes or no?

      Or are you only sharing this obvious cliché here while giving those who really keep the thing going a pass?

      Delete
    8. "I think it matters if "walmart" becomes "le walmart"..."

      Supercentre Walmart

      Delete
    9. It's interesting to ponder the spin that Complicated served here. He's effectively saying that we're wasting time with this language nonsense because it's the economy and finances are truly important, yet this is exactly what we have been saying all along. And my point was essentially to point it out. So he takes what I'm saying, and flipping it around to suggest that it's me who's stoking the "language debate" while I'm just commenting in a critical manner on the stoking of this debate by someone else.

      The fact of the matter is that it's not this blog that keeps the nonsense going. It's the institutions like the TVA, Radio Canada, the SSJB, the PQ, the OQLF.

      Delete
    10. Yes, complicated, if all the money spent on this damned on-going debate of french vs english in this province, was poured into the education and/or the health care system, we would be a hell of a lot better off financially. Billions and billions on language police, politicians that don't give a shit about anything else besides stirring up trouble and lawyers that are continuously in court fighting every damned english sign and paper, would be spent on other more worthwhile endeavours. Start putting the blame where it belongs - bribing the unions for votes, sponsoring the likes of IF, paying the politicians for nothing other than enforcing stupid laws that only cause problems for everyone and on and on. When this matter is settled, one way or the other, these politicians will have to face the reality of a bankrupt province that has deliberately driven away businesses for years because they can't keep their noses out of every aspect of their lives plus drain every cent of tax possible from their coffers!

      Delete
    11. "Black people were told to sit at the back of the bus, were only allowed in certain establishments, had to enter via back doors, had vastly inferior schools, were killed for their colour and so on. Its really insulting for you to use this analogy."

      Yet the issue that made Rosa Parks famous was about sitting in the back of the bus. Despite all other injustices she had to suffer, it was being relegated to the back of the bus that made her snap. And she was given every excuse in the book: you still get to your stop no matter where you sit, and you still pay the same fare as the whites, so what's the big deal? The big deal was in the statement about the blacks inherent in forcing them to the back of the bus.



      "There is an argument to be made that the anglos in Quebec are still one of the best treated minorities in the world"

      There is such an argument? No way. (seriously, this argument is the major bs in the pequiste handbook which you probably keep under your pillow.)

      You're confusing two things here: what the Anglos have and how they are treated. You're forgetting that one can have a hospital, a school, a mansion, and a private jet, yet still be badly treated by others, by the govenremnt, by competing institutions with vested interested. So you're conflating two things that may go together on some occasions, but not always do.

      Delete
    12. Honestly give it up with the Rosa Parks analogy..there is no comparison between the African-american saga and the anglo minority struggle in Quebec. First of all the african-americans were much poorer than the majority white population, were often beaten up and/or killed because of their color. Are we even in the same ballpark here..come on adski..admit its a horrible analogy.
      There is no doubt that there is a certain disdain towards anglophones from some francophones. And yes we have the crackpot STM employees and other governemnt employees who treat anglos as second class but thats the exception to the rule. The vast majority of the time anglos are treated quite well..I have rarely been refused service in english over the past 10 years or so in Montreal. An anglo could pretty well live their whole lives in parts of Montreal and never speak a word of french. There are many services in english provided in Montreal. If you compare that with how most francophones are treated in the rest of Canada then the anglos have it pretty good here. A francophone in the rest of Canada has to speak english on a regular basis and go out of their way to get service in french and it may be impossible. Please give me some concrete examples of real persecution..I really dont see it.

      Delete
    13. adski - My point is that there is much more talk on the language issues than the really important issues..ie the debt and the economy which are in a mess. People here just harp on and on about language and talk about every little conflict between the english and the french ad nauseum. If one only listend to this forum you would think that there was a war going on between the french and the english. And one would think the anglos are being plucked off the street and taken to the gallows. There is a lot of hyper-sensationalism on this forum from some very sensitive anglos.

      At the same time there is much whining about the bloated government, about high taxes, about corruption, about the welfare state. But what do most anglos do..they continue to support the failed policies of the Liberal party..I call that insanity. Nothing will change with more of the same..you can all come here day in and day out and whine all you want but if you are all in the end going to just support the same tired party then you better pack your bags as things are only going to deteoriorate. I am not quite sure what you all hope to accomplish here..do you honestly think that partition is an option..it sounds like the only real strategy that I see here. If thats the case then God help us all..

      Delete
    14. I think I located the major problem with you. It's where you say: "but thats the exception to the rule". Where you see random exceptions to the rule are more systemic and cultural aspects involved.

      In order to accept your innocence theory, I would have to take too much on faith. For example, I would have to accept that this "crackpot STM employee" or this "other government employee" are just oddballs, whackjobs, people who are just rude and unpleasant by nature. I would have to discount all the political and cultural conditioning that these employees have undergone in their lives but also on the job, discount the culture of permissiveness and encouragement, things like the temporal correlation of PQiste rhetoric in the months leading to the last election and these events happening in more frequency and intensity at the same time.

      So I don't think we'll see eye to eye on this. There are cultural and political forces involved here, and you want to reduce it all to some freak incidents.

      Delete
    15. "you can all come here day in and day out and whine all you want but if you are all in the end going to just support the same tired party then you better pack your bags as things are only going to deteoriorate"

      You come here to whine pretty often yourself. So why don't you lead by example and not come anymore.

      Delete
    16. Well if I listened to you then I guess I would have to believe that most Quebecois are out to get the anglos. I would also have to believe that every seperatist and PQ person is pure evil. I would have to believe that the Liberals are our saviours. I guess one would have to accept that the poor downtrodden anglo is routinely trampled on. Its funny but all the anglos I know seem to be doing just fine in Montreal..sure they get sick and tired of listening to the PQ and their rhetoric but overall their living a pretty good life here. Keep in mind that the english media has been hyper-sensitive since the PQ has been elected..they report every single conflict. The media is a large reason why so many people are anxious all the time because they always focus on the negative.

      I have to admit I am really starting to wonder why I come here. I came here at first out of curiosity around the election. I sadly realize that for the most part it seems to be the grumpy old anglos club well entrenched here. No room for compromise..no hope for real change..just more angry rhetoric.

      Delete
    17. "no hope for real change" - not as long as they keep pushing the anglos and allos to their max which they are bent on doing and you excusing them every post accomplishes nothing but frustration for all of us except the seppies. We've compromised more than enough for 40 years so call us what you will and rest well tonight knowing you are missing nothing but more of the same on this blog because we intend to stand up for our rights as Canadian citizens of our country Canada.

      Delete
    18. "I would have to believe that the Liberals are our saviours"

      This you certainly didn't get from me. A lesser evil - maybe. Saviors - not a chance.


      "sure they get sick and tired of listening to the PQ and their rhetoric but overall their living a pretty good life here"

      I really don't get your point man. I brought an example to the forum of a biased report from TVA, the kind of biased report on language that is pretty frequent lately on tv. you said nothing on the report. Instead, you veered off to the economy, to the blacks in the US based on one remark that I was very specific about, and now to some anglos living "a pretty good life here". What does this have to do with my original post? What is your point? That I should not come to this blog with a hyperlink of a TVA piece and share my remarks only because your "big beef with the PQ and with many francophones is the mishandling of the economy and the massive debt we have"?

      Does the fact that the economy is in dire straits mean that we can't comment on other things that are thrown in our faces in the news every day? Should this blog be renamed "No Dogs or Anglophones, and no topics other than the Economy of Quebec"?

      Delete
    19. In fact, it was SR who brought a relevant point, with the picture of a McDonald's sign in China sporting a descriptor. That was a good point.

      You, on the other hand, did nothing but digress.

      Delete
    20. I saw the TVA report and honestly didnt find anything shocking about it. Is it so much to ask that companies put a bit of effort into respecting the laws of the land. Personally when I go overseas I get annoyed when I see mulit-national chains all over the place. Do we really need Gap and Foot Locker all over the world..the planet is becoming one giant shopping mall with the same stores everywhere..mainly American ones. And you brought up the Rosa Parks analogy which is really totally out of line with what the story was on. We are talking about adding a few french words in a province where 80 percent of the population is francophone and you are flipping out..I think you are the one who is biased here. Tourists flock to Quebec City for the french culture and history..they dont want to see more American chains all over the place.
      Heaven forbid that Walmart becomes Le magasin Walmart or that Foot Locker becomes Chaussures Foot Locker..how will you get on..oh my the persecution on our poor anglos is unbearable..

      Delete
    21. It's funny that the main concern of these dummies in regards to multinationals is the language of the signs. I think that the major source of annoyance should come from the sweatshop labor practices, not silly things like the lack of descriptors.

      And I will mind if Walmart becomes "Le magasin Walmart" or that Foot Locker becomes "Chaussures Foot Locker" based on a principle of standing up to bullies who seek arbitrary concessions, and on a principle that a store name is proprietary. Walmart is Walmart and Foot Locker is Foot Locker. I would not mind Chaussures Foot Locker is it was some local guy starting his own chain and naming it Chaussures Foot Locker. But I do mind a local guy going after an existing Foot Locker and trying to tinker with its name, instead of punishing the outlet economically by not shopping there.

      We are talking about adding a few french words in a province where 80 percent of the population is francophone and I am flipping out because my beef is with the mishandling of the economy and the massive debt we have. Instead of addressing this massive debt, the government and the media get bogged down in this re-naming/adding a descriptor nonsense.

      Delete
    22. "there is no comparison between the African-american saga and the anglo minority struggle in Quebec. First of all the african-americans were much poorer than the majority white population, were often beaten up and/or killed because of their color"
      You know, Complicated, I'm starting to realize the futility of having a debate with a one dimensional thinker, but I haven't given up on you yet.
      You are correct: the blacks in America had it MUCH worse than the Quebec Anglo/Allos No one is arguing otherwise. The problem is one of direction and momemtum. The restrictions on the use of english is getting progressively worse, not improving or even stabilizing. By your way of thinking, it's not a problem until Anglos are being lynched by seppies wearing white sheets. Like gangrene, the persecution of minorities is a problem better dealt with sooner than later.

      Delete
    23. The guy is dismissive of the bad will behind all these practices, and of the systemic, cultural, and politcal aspects involve. To him, it's all benign and innocent, it's either just a matter of "putting a little effort into respecting the laws of the land" or a totally random and rare "crackpot STM employee".

      It ceases to be benign only when we start talking about it. Then it's serious because our beef should be with the economy.

      Delete
    24. Good try Diogenes but it won't work with complicated - his sympathies lie directly with the bullies and I'm sure he'll publish his name when the time is right so they can help him when it comes time for his persecution by the same bullies. Just as there were Nazi sympathizers, we have complicated.

      Delete
    25. Oh boy you guys are really being dramatic. One dimensional thinker describes perfectly the majority of people on this forum..most of you all think the same way..you freak out about minor issues like the signs of some multinational corporation. Meanwhile the province is going bankrupt and you keep supporting the same party which in large part is responsible for the debt. Restrictions of english have really not gotten any worse since Bill 101..if anything things have loosened up somewhat. The problem with you adski and many here is that paranoia has gotten the best of you..you are always on the lookout for anything that might offend anglos and their precious rights. The reality again is that anglos live very well in this province in general..especially on the island of Montreal.

      Delete
    26. Vous avez toute ma sympathie Complicated mais je crois que vous n'aurez pas le dernier mot avec cutie,Ed...Et Mr.Suga.

      Delete
    27. complicated is S.R. but with much better English! What am I saying, he's S.R. with English period. I cannot believe how he tries to downplay some pretty important and significant issues. I do agree that there are much more important problems this province faces other than Language and that is the Economy, but to minimize the fact that fundamental rights are being denied to citizens right here in North America, THIS IS NORTH AMERICA !! HELLO!!!!! It is abhorred that it happens in any way shape or form in what is suppose to be an evolved society.

      Delete
    28. Complicated, I get it. Your priorities lie with the economy. That's cool. You may be perfectly happy with the status quo, as is your wont.

      I, however, tend to agree with adski and Diogenes' way of thinking. Specifically;

      "You are correct: the blacks in America had it MUCH worse than the Quebec Anglo/Allos No one is arguing otherwise. The problem is one of direction and momemtum. The restrictions on the use of english is getting progressively worse, not improving or even stabilizing. By your way of thinking, it's not a problem until Anglos are being lynched by seppies wearing white sheets. Like gangrene, the persecution of minorities is a problem better dealt with sooner than later."

      Quebec radicals have the nasty habit of never being satisfied with anything. Whenever they get it into their heads to demand something, they push and push and once they get it, fifteen minutes of celebration and feelings of vindication later, it's something else that they want.

      There's lots of hatred and violence going on against anglos on the island, not as bad as if we were African Americans in the 30's, but what's it going to take before people deem it "a problem"? Does an anglo have to die for the simple crime of being anglo first?

      I'd rather not that someone have to be mortally injured in order for people to finally go "hmm, maybe there's an issue to address here...". Then again, even if someone does eventually die, it'll probably be our fault.

      We'll were 'provoking' them by having English as a mother tongue or something. Like Muslim women 'provoking' men into rape when they're not wearing their burkas.

      Delete
    29. Complicated: "Is it so much to ask that companies put a bit of effort into respecting the laws of the land."

      "The law is made by very mortal people. Very limited people. Very opinionated people. People who have very special interests. They make the law. They tell us what the law is. And then they act as if it’s the holy writ." - Howard Zinn

      Delete
    30. Complicated: "Tourists flock to Quebec City for the french culture and history..they dont want to see more American chains all over the place. "

      Who are to to say what they want to see? Are you a reader of every single mind?

      In the TVA's "report", American/Canadian tourists are shown to be jolly, happy, and ecstatic because of "all this English around". They are so comfortable. They feel at 'ome, mon dieu, 'ere in Quebec, they feel "chez eux". But methinks that as the TVA's spin is exaggerated, so is Complicated's contradictory spin that these tourists are just floored when their alleged image of QC is destroyed.

      But for those tourists that are disappointed, my reply to them is the same as to QC militants. It's not your place to decide these things. The tourists, like the militants, are not the ones to play god with these things. Just because some guy from the US is disappointed that I'm diluting his image of Quebec, then there is nothing that I can do about it. It's not my fault that he was misinformed by friends or QC's official propaganda which claims that people like me don't exist here, that Montreal is the "second largest francophone city in the world" (which curiously is also "anglicized" - contradictions are apparently lost on those who operate in a state of zeal), that in QC "ca se passe en francais". And we pretty much established that the law can't do much about it either besides being a 35 year old annoyance and a pest that is destroying the image of the language it purports to protect.

      Delete
    31. Most tourists from around North America come to Quebec thinking its like France in North America. Believe me they dont come here because they want the same American chains back home. What makes Quebec unique is the french language and culture. I dont even know why I need to explain this..its so obvious.

      I just find that once again its anglo arrogance..this notion that anglos should be able to go anywhere in the world and be served in their language. There are very few groups other than english speaking people that seem to really believe they are entitled to this privilege. Is it really again so much to ask that most signs..at least in Quebec City..are in french?? 90 percent of the population in Quebec city are francophones..it seems that a reasonable person would accept that most signs be in the main language.

      Delete
    32. For the sake of argument, let's say it is so. Even if is so, you're discounting the fact that the tourists' impressions or desires do not constitute an excuse and do not outweigh my two principles: standing up to bullies and ending the escalation of demands. You're also discounting the fact that a tourist is coming to a province with historical anglo presence and a de facto presence of English speakers, not all of them anglo. So who's at fault here, the English-speakers, who by being themselves destroy the "idyllic" image the tourist may have, or the tourist who is misinformed about the reality when forming the image?

      You're mixing in the issue of anglo arrogance, which I think is real, as in how they assume things when they travel. But we're talking about a context where there are actual anglo natives, not non-anglo natives who are railroaded into speaking English by anglo visitors. We're talking about a context where the excuse of Anglo arrogance is used to deploy our own home-bred arrogance against a minority we hold guilty by association.

      So that's for English speaking. As for English signage, any tourist in the 21st century has to live with the fact that anywhere he goes, he will encounter English signage. Such is the nature of globalization with English as the lingua franca. Not a good situation for anglophobes, I know, but to take revenge on the anglo population here while citing anglo arrogance elsewhere is low. It's using the arrogance of others as an excuse for the arrogance of our own against those who are declared arrogant, as a group, by association.

      Delete
  24. I agree that I don't want these stores to have to change their names to suit these language militants because it justifies their continuous harassment of anything to do with the English language. More bullying, more things change, at their behest. There will never be end as the demands are infinite as Mr. Sauga says. They have to be stopped from this aggression against anyone and anything that is English. They push and push and we have to push back - we've sat back for far too long and let them get away with their outlandish behaviour because we wanted to keep peace and thought that, once they became secure that their language was safe and protected within Canada, they would put a stop to this nonsense. They have proven that NOTHING is good enough for them and it must end or they must be allowed to democratically leave this country. On with partition.

    ReplyDelete
  25. By the way, received a form letter back from the STM, thanking me for my comment - in English I might ad!

    ReplyDelete
  26. French has 87 000 words

    English has 1 million

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Si vous êtes en mesure d'apprendre 1 million de mots,pourquoi pas 87,000 de + ?

      Delete
    2. Anonymous,

      How do you explain this phenomenal difference?

      Delete
    3. This is a dumb argument.

      In French read...http://is.gd/O9744c

      "Richard Lederer, a lion among linguistics, tells us that English is the most cheerfully democratic language in the history of mankind. It has 616,500 entries in the Oxford English Dictionary. This compares with a vocabulary of about 185,000 words for German, 130,000 for Russian, and 100,000 for French. Yet the average English speaker possesses a vocabulary of 10,000 to 20,000 words, Lederer observes, but actually uses only a fraction of that, the rest being recognition or recall vocabulary."

      Delete
    4. Of course, this is a dumb argument.

      Some more about this :

      "(...) la comparaison était fausse.

      Elle se base sur le Oxford English Dictionary, qui se veut un inventaire de l’anglais. Le chiffre pour le français se fonde sur le Grand Robert, 100 000 mots, dont la fonction est normative. Alors forcément, le français a l’air d’avoir moins de mots.

      La linguiste Henriette Walter (...) a réfuté cette opinion.

      Si on ajoute le demi-million de termes techniques de la langue française aux quelques centaines de milliers de nouveaux mots créés depuis les années 1960 qui ne paraissent pas dans la dictionnaire, on en arrive à un total estimé de 1,2 million de mots différents. Et cela n’inclut pas le vocabulaire sorti de l’usage avant 19e siècle!" (Jean-Benoit Nadeau, http://nadeaubarlow.com/un-million-de-mots/)

      If english had basicaly ten times more words than french, it would mean that roughly nine out of ten words that our clever anonymous linguist uses would have no translation in french. Ce qui est tout simplement ridicule.

      Delete
    5. Sans compter la quantité phénoménale de mots d'origine française dans le vocabulaire anglais.

      http://french.about.com/od/vocabulary/a/frenchinenglish_3.htm

      Editor +1
      MP +1

      Delete
    6. Wait, I have a better solution;

      Who cares?

      Delete
  27. Commission Charbonneau :

    Le Parti libéral du Québec et la Ville de Montréal sur la sellette

    http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/dossiers/commission-charbonneau/201211/27/01-4598067-le-parti-liberal-du-quebec-et-la-ville-de-montreal-sur-la-sellette.php

    Quelle surprise !!

    ReplyDelete
  28. FROM ED BROWN
    Adski, Your Rosa Parks analogy is right on. I feel like I'm expected to sit at the back of the bus. I've been waiting a year and a half for a scooter (Transporter) with help through the Provincial Government. I have been told for a year it would happen in December. Now they tell me the Doctor that signed my application is not enough. The rules are changed, it must be done by a Rheumatologist. The Hospital tells me the appointent can only be in March.
    I like your posts, they are informative. Don't pay attention to what Complicated says, he is only being negative. If you say white he'll say black. Have you noticed that when he does it , it's complaning. When we do it we're whining. Cutie has told him to get lost along with several others. Even the patient and helpful Mr.Sauga has been upset with him. I myself ignore him. The end will be when SR tells him to get lost. We'll know he has really hit a nerve. Ed

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ed, first of all, thanks for keeping me in mind. I've implored contributors to this blog in the past, and now, not to get into arguments with the likes of Complicated and S.R. They're instigators, and by arguing with them, you're giving them exactly what they want. Retaliation just fuels their fire.

      Delete
  29. Ed - Yeah I am sure its because you are an anglo that you are not getting the scooter. And even if this was the case..hard to compare you waiting for a scooter then what happened to the average african-american. You have it pretty good Ed.
    I am not here to pat you all on your backs..sorry but I dont want to be a member of the grumpy old anglo club.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Ed - If you think it will help and that you're having problems with the system because you're anglo, ask the Quebec Office of the English Language if there is a group that can assist. I know in my area there is one. Let me know if you get assistance please. Good luck.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Announced on CTV that the opposition will not support any changes to Bill 101 - let's hope that holds.

    ReplyDelete
  32. JP - You mentioned that the notwithstanding clause has to be voted on every 5 years. Do you happen to know when this comes up again? Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  33. FROM ED BROWN
    Cutie, I have found out who the Rheumatoligist is! I know him from way back. He's a jolly fellow whose clinic is on Mondays. So next Monday I will be at his table in the staff and patient cafeteria. He can fill out my papers while I'm paying for his lunch. This is not an Anglo thing. The man in chaarge is a sttraight up fellow. juss doing his job according to the rules of his government. Ed

    ReplyDelete
  34. Way to go Ed - so happy for you - sometimes it helps to have been around awhile in the same area and getting to know people. I do hope he can assist you to get a chair in a faster time frame.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Contrarianism is unfortunately a common mindset. I remember I used to be a contrarian. I simply disagreed with the opinions of others or what would be considered the "normal viewpoint" for no reason whatsoever. Sometimes even if the "normal viewpoint" was going a certain way, and I disagreed with it, if I found someone else who disagreed with it, I would change my mind and agree with the "normal viewpoint" simply to disagree with that person. I never really realised why I was like this for so long, but with firsthand experience with contrarianism, I can clearly spot the symptoms of it. In truth, the only real reason I can come up with why people follow this mindset is simply due to lack of self-esteem in one's knowledge or intelligence. By disagreeing with someone, it gives you the impression that you are making it seem as if you have superior knowledge on the issue. In reality, the only impression you are making is a negative one.

    ReplyDelete
  36. FROM ED BROWN
    EDITOR, I often wonder when I am filling in an application that asks which English I prefer, whether I should choose - 1. English - Canada, 2. English - U.S. or English - U.K.
    If I choose English U.S. I Know that my spell check will be pissed off with all the iouses. I am in Canada but the American English is renewing itself everyday with the new words they constantly make up.
    British is out I don't have the proper manners needed to use it the right way. Most have trouble with French, seems like I can't decide on English. Ed

    ReplyDelete
  37. FROM ED BROWN
    EDM I know where you're coming from. I started to be like that in high school. My Father said, "You want to be contrary, I'll show you contrary."
    Whatever I asked he blocked being negative. I smartened up. My teachers noticed the change and said they were pleased. Perhaps Complicated wasn't lucky enough to have my Father. Ed

    ReplyDelete
  38. Personally, I'd like to see Uncle Sam come in and give these guys a spanking. It would be interesting to see how the Seppies react when they're dealing with an entity that does not give a crap about their incessant whining. Ultimately, this is not going to be Quebec's choice. It's going to run smack into NAFTA:

    Chapter 17:

    10. No Party may encumber the use of a trademark in commerce by special requirements, such as a use that reduces the trademark's function as an indication of source or a use with another trademark.

    Maybe someone has misread this:

    12. A Party may provide limited exceptions to the rights conferred by a trademark, such as fair use of descriptive terms, provided that such exceptions take into account the legitimate interests of the trademark owner and of other persons.

    ...but can't see how it would apply. It's written to protect other companies from abusive trademark registration and the phrase "take into account the legitimate interests of the trademark owner..." makes that very clear.

    ReplyDelete
  39. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Rbluw7FhVc&hd=1

    IT'S ALL HERE IN BLACK AND WHITE

    "You can't all of a sudden decide you want to change something without changing the law..."

    ReplyDelete