French versus English Volume 97

81% of Quebecers say that Montreal is a bilingual city.

"Montreal is spoken of as a ‘bilingual city,’ but what do the citizens of Montreal actually think? The Francophones, Anglophones, and Allophones (people whose native language is neither English or French) who live in Montreal obviously have a much better grasp on how bilingual and multicultural Montreal really is.  MBA research conducted a study last month and asked Montrealers of all demographics how they feel about the level of bilingualism and multiculturalism in the city. The results, while overall positive, did show the conflicting views between Montreal’s different language-demographics.

The Big Warm and Fuzzy Picture

As a whole, the study found that Montrealer’s have a positive outlook on the city’s bilingualism. Major points include:

• 81% of Quebecers say that Montreal is bilingual
• 69% of Quebecers say that Montreal should be bilingual
• 76% of Quebecers believe Montreal benefits socially and 85% believe Montreal benefits economically

Great stuff, we all love each other and our languages, positive points specifically highlighted on the study’s infographic. A closer look, however, shows some discrepancies among certain populations.

Should Montreal Be Bilingual

Let’s take a closer look at the stats of the 69% of Quebecers. Unsurprisingly, 97.1% of Anglophones and 80.5% of Allophones strongly agreed that Montreal should be bilingual.  Only 65.7% of Francophones agreed, with far less strongly agreeing. This is still a majority of Francophones, but when compared to like minded Anglophones and Allophones, the desire for Montreal to remain a bilingual city is not nearly as positive in comparison." Read the rest of the survey

Andre Boisclair enjoying his stay in 'Club Med'

Many years ago a story appeared in a Montreal newspaper detailing the fact that certain City of Montreal employees who fell into disfavor were relieved of their position, usually from a senior job, but not fired because union rules.
They were put into a pool of employees waiting to be re-assigned, sometimes for years, all the while collecting a full salary.
The term used to describe their situation was;
'mise en disponibilité'

And so they came to be known by the disparaging term of attending 'Club M-E-D.'

I haven't heard about developments in that story for a decade, but was sharply reminded that André Boisclair is firmly ensconced in the well-paid confines of Quebec city's own version of 'Club Med,' where he hasn't worked since his removal from his job as delegate-general in New York City, yet continues to collect his salary.
How much?
Since his return to Quebec and his entry into Club Med, Boisclair has collected an astounding
$36,712 so far, almost $600 a day for doing absolutely nothing.
Next week that sum will rise to; $40,512 and if he isn't re-affected by  Christmas, it will mean that he'll have piled up almost $60,000 all for doing squadouch.

Yup, Each and every week after that, and as long as he remains in Club MED, he'll collect another $3,800.
And a ministry spokesman confirms that until now, Boisclair is still in Club Med... Link

No doubt Pauline will have to find him some busy work to give the impression that he is earning a paycheck but in the meantime, while he is being paid to twiddle his thumbs,  the delegate-general position in New York is vacant.

Remember that the delegate-general job is at the pleasure of the Premier, which means Marois could fire Boisclair at will, but she has chosen to send him to purgatory, where perhaps he will be forgotten.
It should be noted that there was no need for Boisclair to resign or step aside, while his lawsuit remained active.
Many politicians including Lucien Bouchard kept working while party to a lawsuit.
In fact if every politician stepped down just because of a lawsuit it would be worth risking $250,000 as a potential settlement in slandering Pauline Marois, if it meant she would step down while the lawsuit wound its way through the courts for five to ten years!

Martin Patriquin too much intellect for sad sack Pequist.

You might recall the letter printed in the New York Times by Martin Patriquin, the Maclean's journalist who wrote the infamous article accusing Quebec of being the most corrupt province.

"Bernard Drainville, the provincial minister responsible for the ban, part of a so-called Charter of Quebec Values, said it was necessary to “recognize and affirm some of the fundamental values that define us as Quebecers.” But far from unifying the province, the issue has underscored the divisions between the chaotic, multicultural island city of Montreal and the mostly white hinterland beyond its shores.

This may be the unspoken goal of the Parti Québécois, which came in first in provincial elections last year but had to form a minority government. The Parti Québécois’s aim is to remove Quebec from Canada. By targeting Quebec’s religious minorities — in particular, veiled Muslim women, mostly in and around Montreal — the party is rallying its overwhelmingly white Francophone base. The bill has already stirred anti-immigrant resentment: several women’s shelters have reported an uptick in harassment of Muslim women."  Read the rest of the story in the New York Times.

It befell to Bernard Drainville and Jean-François Lisée to defend the honour of Quebec in a rebuttal article, printed in that same newspaper

"According to Martin Patriquin (Op-Ed, Nov. 13), Quebec is living a “Tea Party moment.”

We’d rather say it’s living a “Jefferson moment,” since the proposed legislation the writer thinks is regressive would in fact enshrine into law Jefferson’s “wall of separation between church and state.”

Quebec was a very religious place until the 1960s, when it gradually moved toward secularization. For the majority of Quebecers who support the legislation, declaring gender equality paramount when considering religious-based requests for accommodations or asking public employees not to wear conspicuous religious symbols on the job are just logical next steps. Read the rest of the story in the New York Times.

But in a more interesting exchange Patriquin defends himself from ex-militant and now sovereigntist journalist Stéphane Gobeil who attempted to discredit the piece Patriquin wrote in the New York Times. In an opinion piece in L'Acuailte magazine, Gobeil slowly goes through Patriquin's piece, ripping and tearing at most of the points Patriquin brought up. Link{fr}
It sounded pretty good until Patriquin himself retaliated by critiquing the article written by Goboeil where he absolutely shredded the half-truths and misinformation provided by Gobeil, proving the point that its better not to enter into a debate with your betters.
You'll recall how half of Quebec journalists ripped and tore into the article Patriquin wrote about Quebec being the most corrupt province, while Patriquin remained unbowed and unapologetic, only to be completely vindicated by the facts over time.

The two articles are interesting reading and if you have French, read both, Gobeil's most egregious nose stretcher,  shot down by Patriquin, is this one where the author uses some sleight of hand to convey a truth that doesn't reflect reality.

Gobeil is trying to convey the message that Montreal is not so different than the rest of Quebec in support of the Charter.
He provides this table and says.

"In reality, it is apparent that on the Island of Montreal, amongst the francophone population , support for the charter is stronger"
("....En fait, c’est bel et bien sur l’île de Montréal, au sein de la population francophone, que l’appui à la charte est le plus fort :")

Do yo see the fly in the ointment?
Mr. Gobeil totally ignores the English and Ethnic component to the survey, telling us that in Montreal Francophones see things the same way other francophones in the rest of Quebec, ergo... Montreal is no different than the rest of Quebec

But he fails to count 'les autres' who when included in the survey clearly shows that Montreal is against the Charter 49 % to 40%.

Once I spotted the clear deception and shameless misrepresentation of the facts, I discounted the rest of the article as pure spin, disinformation and propaganda,

If you want to discredit Mr. Patriquin, you'd better get up a lot earlier in the morning and bring your 'A' game.
For Mr. Gobeil, ......it is Check and mate!

By the way, in the letter to the New York Times, the PQ claims that they are in favour of removing the Crucifix from the National Assembly, but this provision is absent from the actual law.
The PQ has said that the issue will be subject to a free vote by all MNAs at a later date, a terrific deflection, making the entire National Assembly responsible for its removal.

If I was Couillard I'd vote to have the Crucifix remain in the National Assembly as a final act of humiliation towards the law, a symbol of Quebec's everlasting hypocrisy.
Remember, the PQ would have had the opportunity to include the removal of the Crucifix in the Charter of Values and failed to do so out of expediency, hoping to share the blame for this unpopular move among all parties.
Quebec would be mocked for ever after and the PQ would either have to act unilaterally or suffer eternal humiliation.

  Dissension in party ranks

The Liberal Party of Quebec suffered a serious setback as one of its ethnic members came out in favour of the Charter.

"The Liberals have always defended civil rights and freedoms, including freedom of religion.
Couillard said he’s now ready to take a serious look at Houda-Pepin’s proposal to ban religious signs for some civil servants, on one condition:
“It has to be done in total accordance with the charters of rights, both the Canadian and the Quebec Charter,” he said.
The change in position didn’t go unnoticed.
“Mr. Couillard only needs one MNA to change his position?” wondered CAQ leader François Legault.
“Mr. Couillard and the Liberal party, since the beginning, have been very weak on the issue of the charter,” said Democratic Institutions Minister Bernard Drainville. “They’ve been weak and weak and weak. Now they seem to be a little less weak but it’s still very weak.”
But as discussion about the charter evolves, there still appears to be little room for compromise.
“The debate is bringing even very reluctant political parties like the Liberals to move forward towards our position. I think we should give them more time to move even more forward,” said Jean-François Lisée, PQ minister responsible for Montreal.
The PQ maintained the ban should apply to all civil servants. Public consultations are set to begin January 14th 2014. In the meantime, the Liberals appear united once more…but for how long?" Link

This led to leader Philippe Couillard to a change of policy, whereby he said the party would now consider certain restrictions and quite possibly accept a toned down version of the Charter.
For Couillard, it is a case of getting through the Charter debate as fast as he can as the hovering debate favours the PQ.
To his mind, passing a toned down law will end the debate, return things to normal, where the government will fall in the spring over the deficit budget and disastrous economic situation.
It's a bit cynical, but this is politics.
I still maintain the best course of action is a CAQ/PLQ coalition government.

So was this change in policy music to the PQ's ears....I think not.
The PQ is hoping the Charter issue will bring the province to a general election, fought on the one and only issue where the PQ has a fighting chance. Screen a news story

In the meantime, the Youth wing of the PQ is not entirely enamoured with the Charter itself, voicing much dissension at a party congress a while back.

Picture Drives Hysterical controversy

This picture is making the rounds of social media and has now appeared in LeJdeM.

 It shows two daycare workers in Verdun tending to their flock wearing full face coverings. The daycare involved is private, so these ladies would not even be subject to the charter of Values, providing more fuel to the fire.
By the way, it should be noted at the onset that the teachers remove the face-covering in class and in the presence of mothers.

The reaction to the picture was virulent and loud, provoking this letter written by the parents of the children;

"We are the parents of the children in the photo. We are the parents of the identifiable 3 year old children in a photo that has quickly made the rounds of media in Quebec and internationally online
There were nearly 9000 Facebook shares in just 48 hours. We are the parents whose children attend a private daycare where the educators wear the niqab. This photo leaves in its wake a huge range of comments, some violent (2 bullets; it's hunting season, let's go!)
Some Islamophobic (Let's burn these women and rape them like pigs!
Some calling for tolerance (“These children look fine and don't seem affected by the difference), some ignorant (“These children must have nightmares at night after seeing ghosts all day”).

We are the parents of the children in the photo. This is the point we want to discuss. Not to debate the charter, one way or the other, not to push our positions, not to talk pro or anti-hijab/niqab..
We just want to talk, as parents.
Maybe we have something in common, being a mother or a father.
When it came time to find a daycare space for our child, we visited plenty of spaces with a long list of criteria in mind, the location and its surroundings, the philosophy, the staff, the history. These fairly “rational”criteria counted for a lot, but there was also another factor that couldn’t be ignored:what did your heart tell you?
From the first phone call, once all our “rational”criteria were satisfied, the daycare’s owner announced from the outset that she wears the niqab. That she’d understand if this made us uncomfortable and we preferred to find another daycare.
This of course brought up a flood of new questions (this article by Jenn Hardy recounts the experience wonderfully: Link)

It also awoke a voice at the core of our beings never ever would my child attend a daycare like that.
But whether it was because of the honesty (which is so essential) on the part of the owner, out of curiosity or to simply go through all of our options with a fine tooth comb, we went to visit the daycare.
Our heart: what allows any parent to make the decision that they believe to be best for their child. And thus, upon visiting the daycare, we were introduced to the whole family. We were able to ask all our questions, including some of the more embarrassing ones. We were introduced to their philosophy, their vision on educating their children, their gentleness, their kindness, their openness. The mothers and children were able to see the faces of the educators (who, to be clear, remove their veil for the entire day in the presence of the children). The fathers had to make an additional effort to get past this physical barrier. But the trust came. And with that, our apprehensions, our fears, our doubts all quietly faded away.

But this feeling that has bombarded us since this photo was published online has shaken us.
Our fears and doubts have nothing to do with the daycare our children attend. The source is external, in our neighborhood, and it is targeting our children. It comes from the horrible scenes where people empty their glass in the face of the educators, insult them in the park
in the presence of our children. Take their photos, and those of our kids as well. This time, our heart
tells us that our kids are in danger. Is being parents something we have in common? How would that make you feel, seeing your child in a photo generating so many hateful comments?
Because we , after two years of standing alongside them, know that these women were born and/or raised in Quebec. We now know that their husbands support them every step of the way in their choice to wear or not to wear the veil (conscious of the fact
that not wearing the niqab would certainly be less stressful for their family!). We know they are university-educated, that they speak English and French. That they are loving. We know they take care of our children as if they were their own. Their niqab is, in our eyes, a decision that is their own. No matter what the reasons. The important thing, for us and our children, is who they are as people. In the same way that we’ll eventually disagree with the questionable clothing choices of our future teenagers. Or that we disapprove of our parents’divorce, or the red square on the cegep teacher’s jacket. The people around us that we care about, in our family, in our circle of friends, sometimes make decisions that we disagree with or that are far removed from our values. But because we’ve had access to these people, because we’ve taken the time to know them, above all else we appreciate them. And we choose to respect them as individuals. To the people shouting their insults and taking photographs: these women, and their husbands as well, open their doors to you to discuss. They do not want to indoctrinate the children of those who don’t share their faith. They want nothing but the best for them. Our childrens’smiles when speaking about them is all the proof we need. And if you don’t want to meet them, so be it. But above all else, if you don’t agree with their choices, we beg you:respect them, and our children too.

signed by 13 parents. (names withheld by editor)

How crazy are things getting?
Here's a letter from a reader re-printed in a column in  the JdeM under Sophie Durocher's byline. I wonder what purpose printing it actually serves?

"I would like to form a new movement ... which consists of this.  First, I want to tell you that when I meet a veiled woman on the street, it really offends my sense of values ​​... So I've decided to teach them a lesson in return for my discomfort these people caused to me over the years. When our paths cross, I make a sign of the cross, large enough to make an impression on her.

So I keep my head up high, mindful that this is not an attack because I think I should have a right to make the sign of the cross wherever and whenever I want ... YOU SHOULD SEE THE stunning REACTION ! ! !

This isn't the sign of the cross  as per se, but rather a message being sent. 
But there are conditions in doing it .. It is not for anytime and anywhere ... You must be careful and strategic ....

The best is on a girl ... And make sure that the person that you meet on the street is not someone you will cross paths again in the morning.

Some people tell me that this is a provocation ... I say so that  I think these people are brazenly shameless and that it is I make the sign of the cross symbol  only  to demonstrate  how I feel.
The women who I target are flabbergasted .....
Thank you for reading ...  Link

Let us remember what Premier Pauline Marois told us:
“The Charter of Quebec Values will become a strong unifying factor for Quebeckers, 

Quebec compared to Kazakstan.

"According to a study made ​​by the Fraser Institute on the oil and gas industry, Quebec is one of the worst places in the world to invest placing 141st out of 157, in the global ranking ,not far from war-torn countries such as Syria, or isolated and corrupt countries like Kazakhstan.. Link{fr}
 "Mining projects worth $ 2.8 billion were interrupted in Quebec since the election of Marois government, says the CAQ, which accused the Minister of Natural Resources, Martine Ouellet, of hiding the information.

The spokesman for the CAQ for natural resources, François Bonardel, said Tuesday that the department had redacted information in response to one of its access to information requests.

The CAQ was able to get the full value of each mining project in Quebec over the next 10 years and has been able to establish that there are eight suspended or arrested for a total of a $ 2.8 billion project." Link

"One investment banker added that investors are “more comfortable” putting money into oil and gas projects in Iraq and Africa than into Quebec projects.
“We have a real problem in our industry,” Mr. Binnion said. “We are losing the war and we are losing the winning conditions that we have taken for granted for 100 years or more. [By] winning conditions I mean that you have a political culture and a political environment where your projects are welcomed and succeed subject to being good projects.
“We do not have those conditions in Quebec. Even a very good project three years ago was not welcomed. Link

"At the other end of the scale, Quebec stands out as the Canadian jurisdiction with the greatest barriers to investment, ranking in the fourth out of five quintiles – a grouping that includes Syria and Libya.
Quebec fell from 101st (of 147) in 2012 to 141st (of 157) in 2013 – due to poorer results with regard to the cost of regulatory compliance, taxation in general, uncertainty concerning protected areas and policies discouraging investment in hydraulic fracturing." Link

Is this what sovereigntists mean when they hail the famous "Quebec model'

Attention Militants : Countries with  better English have better economies'

"Billions of people around the globe are desperately trying to learn English—not simply for self-improvement, but as an economic necessity. It’s easy to take for granted being born in a country where people speak the lingua franca of global business, but for people in emerging economies such as China, Russia, and Brazil, where English is not the official language, good English is a critical tool, which people rightly believe will help them tap into new opportunities at home and abroad.
Why should global business leaders care about people learning English in other parts of the world? 
Research shows a direct correlation between the English skills of a population and the economic performance of the country. Indicators like gross national income (GNI) and GDP go up. In our latest edition of the EF English Proficiency Index (EF EPI), the largest ranking of English skills by country, we found that in almost every one of the 60 countries and territories surveyed, a rise in English proficiency was connected with a rise in per capita income. And on an individual level, recruiters and HR managers around the world report that job seekers with exceptional English compared to their country’s level earned 30-50% percent higher salaries: Read more

Hasids skip town to avoid having children taken

"Forty Jewish families in Ste -Agathe- des-Monts members of the extremist sect Lev Tahor fled their home in company of minors to avoid the likely withdrawal by DPJ .About two hundred members of what is agreed to call " the cult of Lev Tahor " fled Quebec, on Monday night, aboard three buses to Chatham- Kent , Ontario.Members of this group of Jewish extremists in Israel dubbed the "Jewish Taliban" have feared the imminent withdrawal of about 130 minors in the child welfare youth.Reportedly, an investigation of abuse and maltreatment against children group was triggered by the DPJ , which would obviously not have come in time .Because of the leak, the group rushed to escape a summons to appear before the youth court scheduled for yesterday, relative to allegations of abuse against children. Link{fr}The DPJ Laurentian refuses to answer our questions in this matter .Located in Ste -Agathe- des-Monts since 2001 the fundmentalist Lev Tahor group founded by Rabbi Shlomo Helbrans was in the hew in October 2011 in relation to the practice of forced marriage.Alerted by Interpol , the Immigration Service had intercepted two young Israeli 13 and 15, at Trudeau airport.

Read a complete account of this bandit cult in a Israeli newspaper in English:

"According to Oded Twik, an Israeli whose sister and eight children have lived with Lev Tahor for the last eight years, the Israeli Foreign Ministry and police worked through the night Tuesday to get information about the safety of the children.

About 200 people traveled in three hired buses to Ontario, where they rented a small number of hotel rooms. “The Canadian police have confirmed that the group planned to go to Iran,” said Twik.

Lev Tahor is led by charismatic convicted kidnapper Shlomo Helbrans. The group, mainly native Israelis and their Canadian-born children, lived in the resort town of Ste. Agathe-du-Mont, Quebec. Only five members have legal status in Canada and the children do not hold passports.

Born to a secular family as Erez Albaranes, the Lev Tahor leader currently calls himself Shlomo Helbrans, the Admor (hasidic rebbe) of Riminov.

Protest in front of Canadian Embassy in Israel to free imperiled children

Canadian Embassy protest (photo credit: courtesy of Oded Twick)

He studied in Jerusalem yeshivas in his youth. In the mid-1980s, despite lacking rabbinic ordination, he opened the Lev Tahor yeshiva in Jerusalem at age 23.

In 1990, after an Israeli investigation for ties with what was then the Islamic Movement in Israel, Helbrans fled to the United States with about 20 followers.

In 1994 Helbrans was imprisoned for two years in the US for kidnapping Shai Fima, whose secular parents had sent him to Helbrans for bar mitzvah lessons.

Post-release, Helbrans and his followers moved to Ste. Agathe, about 100 kilometers north of Montreal. There, Helbrans successfully petitioned the Canadian government for refugee status, claiming persecution in Israel for his anti-Zionist opinions.

Oded Twik has urged the Canadian authorities to remove all 137 children from the community. Dozens of family members and supporters attended a demonstration outside the Canadian Embassy in Tel Aviv on October 14. Many family members have not communicated with their relatives for eight years." Read the rest of the story

Let us not equate this cult with mainstream Jewry in Quebec. They have about as much in common with Quebec Jews as the Raëlism  have with ordinary Quebecers.

Citizens of all faiths should denounce these perverted fanatics who abuse their children.
There is no place for this type of fanaticism anywhere, particularly in Quebec or Canada.

Only Catholic holidays to be celebrated as public holidays in Quebec.....because it's only fair

Bernard Drainville:;

"We cannot start saying we are going to change the highway code and the parking signs according to different religions. It will never end. We will have parking signs for Jewish holidays, then we will have parking signs for Catholic holidays, and after that parking signs for Muslim holidays. It makes no sense. We cannot manage a society like that."  Link

And so the Charter of Values will seek to eliminate any accommodation for holidays other than Christian holidays, which are already enshrined as public holidays.

In Quebec, supporting minority religions is heresy (pardon the expression) where the majority of francophones support limiting minority religious rights.

Mr. Drainville claims that to accommodate these religious requests would cause chaos, but let us see what is going on elsewhere.

"No matter who is elected mayor (of New York) next month, city kids will likely find two new vacation days on the school calendar: Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha, the holiest days of the Muslim year.
Both Democrat Bill de Blasio and Republican Joe Lhota say schools should close on the two holidays, just as they do for major Jewish and Christian days.
It's a matter of "respect" for a religion practiced by an estimated 13 percent of city school kids, de Blasio said Wednesday at a campaign rally with Muslim groups in Brooklyn." Link

Schools in NYC close for three Jewish holidays (but one coincides with the break week that includes Easter.)

And no it doesn't represent any type of disaster described by Drainvile. 

In fact, the Journal de Montreal described how out of step the Charter proposal is with what is happening in the United States.

David Weprin, member of the NY State Assembly tabled a draft bill last year , allowing firemen and policeman the right to wear religious symbols

New York State wants to pass a bill that would allow all New Yorkers the right to wear  symbols at work. The city of Washington now allows its officers to wear turbans and California recently passed a strict law that prohibits religious discrimination at work.

Generally, in relation to religious accommodation, the United States is situated at the completely opposite end of the scale in relation to the draft Charter of Quebec values​​.

This is a real problem in New York, we have large Muslim and Sikh communities and they are excluded from some jobs because of the uniform, " said Weprin , who is representing District 24 in Queens, the most diverse neighborhood  in the country - where more than 200 nationalities are represented .The bill will be passed by the Senate in New York in January. As adopted by the Assembly unanimously, Mr. Weprin is hopeful that the Act will soon come into force ." There are no regulations in the U.S. that prevents the wearing of religious symbols , the only time we see problems is in jobs where you have to wear a uniform and where safety is at stake "said Dan Barker Co-Chair of the secular organization Freedom from Religion ."For teachers, postal workers , employees of transport networks , there is no problem," he says.In the United States , pursuant to Article VII of the 1964 Act on civil rights , an employer in the public or private sector should allow the wearing of religious symbols unless it creates a safety or interferes with work .Some employers use this condition to refuse to accommodate their employees. For example, in 2002 , a Sikh police officer was dismissed from the NYPD ( police department of the city of New York ) because he refused to cut his beard and remove his turban.He sued and was eventually rehired. The NYPD now allows beards 1 mm long and the turban ."This is a convenience, but they are mostly exceptions. We want to ensure that all are treated equally with the law, "said David Weprin .The New York Jewish police can wear the yarmulke under their cap and do not have to work after sunset on Friday and Saturday during the Sabbath, as well as during the various Jewish holidays.The NYPD hired its first Hasidic Jewish policeman in 2006 , and are now almost 25 .WASHINGTON The City of Washington D.C. goes further . Since May 2012, the Police Department ( MPD ) allows its officers to wear turbans . Washington became the first major city in the country to explicitly allow U.S. Sikhs to wear the uniform with their religious symbols ." There is no police patrol , but is a Sikh cadet training. This is a huge step forward , "said Jasjit Singh , Executive Director of SALDEF , organization defending the rights of Sikhs. Approximately 700,000 Sikhs live in the United States.The organization has been active since 11 September 2001 that the Sikhs do not have to remove their turbans during security check at the airport. "Now they have the option to make themselves frisk their turban and then tested for the presence of explosives on their hands ," says Singh .CALIFORNIA In September 2012, the California Governor Jerry Brown signed the strictest in the country preventing religious discrimination in the workplace law.The new law prohibits employers to insulate employees because of their religious practices and make them work behind the shop, for example. Link{fr}

Of course in Quebec, all this is just too impracticable and bothersome....

An accommodation too far?

Should the city of Montreal be obliged to provide foreign language books for immigrants who can't speak either French or English?

The editor thinks so, it's an accommodation too far.

SCOOP;
AS I HINTED BEFORE IN THE WEEK, RELIABLE SOURCES HAVE INFORMED ME THAT PROSECUTORS ARE CLOSE TO INDICTING TWO EXECUTIVES OF THE MMA TRAIN COMPANY THAT DERAILED IN LAC MEGANTIC, KILLING OVER FORTY PEOPLE.
 ED BURKHARDT IS NOT ONE OF THOSE TO BE ACCUSED.

 SCOOP;
EARL JONES WILL SOON BE GIVING UP HIS COUNTRY CLUB JAIL FOR COMPLETE AND UNSUPERVISED FREEDOM AS HE APPROACHES HIS MANDATORY RELEASE DATE.
INTERESTINGLY JONES WAS UP FOR PAROLE LAST YEAR BUT PREFERRED TO STAY INSIDE.

To the lighter side

 

What city is this????

And what new level of state intervention is this!!!

A $10 fine for not including crackers in your child's lunch????

Have a great weekend!

Bonne Fin de Semaine