Is Census Brouhaha Based on Language?

As you probably know, the Federal government has decided to dump the long form component of the national census ostensibly over privacy concerns. The long form was distributed to about one in five families and took around 45 minutes to complete. It asked some very intrusive questions which those unlucky enough to be selected had no choice but to answer, under penalty by law.
Defenders of the long form are up in arms at the government's decision, claiming that the information gleaned is a crucial element in determining allocation of resources in key areas like the health industry.

So entrenched is the idea that the long-form is vital to Canada's future that not only has a robust campaign been launched by vested interests, a FACEBOOK group has been started up for ordinary Canadians to voice and demonstrate their displeasure at the government's decision to axe it.
But not everyone agrees, especially not the FRASIER INSTITUTE.

"The think tank, an evangelist for free-market solutions, says it's wrong for the state to coerce Canadians into handing over personal information that should instead be obtained on a voluntary basis through market research or polling.

Senior economist Niels Veldhuis says the chorus of criticism that's opposing the census change are groups that have been benefiting from relatively cheaply-obtained data gleaned from the mandatory long-form questionnaire."  Read More "No more free ride on census data, Fraser Institute says"

 Last week the language commissioner waded in as well;

"Graham Fraser, commissioner of official languages, said he would examine whether the government respected its obligations under the Official Languages Act when it made the decision late last month. The mandatory long census form is being replaced with a voluntary survey next year."   LINK

Perhaps one of the factors in the Conservative decision to dump the long-form is the general contempt that the party has for Statistics Canada, especially in light of the apparent data manipulation by some Francophones outside Quebec in the 2006 edition.

It seems that an anonymous e-mail urged bilingual Francophones outside Quebec, 'not to report' that they knew both official languages, in order to assure that the federal government would not cut services to French programs. This erroneous assumption (bilingualism has nothing to do with apportioned services) led many bilingual Francophones to declare that they only spoke French, leading to a spike in the data pertaining to unilingual Francophones. 

The Ottawa Citizen reported that Statistics Canada put a note on its website, explaining that;

"In view of the data, however, it seems plausible that the e-mail influenced some francophones in their responses to the question on knowledge of official languages,''

But StatsCan is changing it's tune, having removed the note and now claiming that they have no idea why the statistical anomaly exists.

Rosemary Bender, an assistant chief statistician with the agency, is now telling anyone that will listen, that there could be other reasons for the drop in francophone bilingualism outside Quebec.

This back-tracking seems to be a reaction to a robust counter-attack by certain francophone groups, who are claiming that the notion that information was manipulated is unproven. In an article on June 4, the Maritime-based Franco.presse.ca accused the Ottawa Citizen of carrying out a witch hunt. The article did its own analysis to defend the new StatsCan numbers.

Whether or not there was a manipulation of data is perhaps moot, the bigger problem is what would have happened with next year's census, in light of all the publicity of the false reporting.

What may have been a small problem back in 2006 may have become a massive problem in 2011 with more and more francophones aware of the gambit and climbing aboard the language fraud.

Some Quebec commentators have voiced fury over the decision to get rid of detailed questions about language because they believe that the long form will prove that French is in a precipitous decline.

'....Consider the state of French, especially in the Montreal area, where it's becoming a major concern. With the abandonment of the long form, researchers will no longer be able to monitor the situation with the same precision. "For Quebec, it is a matter of survival," wrote demographer this week in the pages of Victor Piché Forum Press. "In the absence of ethnic data and detailed language, anyone can say anything! How will we know in the future if the language policies are effective? It's opened the way for the worst demagoguery!" It goes without saying that the francophone minorities outside Quebec are also outraged.' LINK (Fr)

And so the elimination of the long-form solves the problem neatly.
The short-form questionnaire doesn't ask about bilingualism, something that infuriates the language militants, but is pleasing to the Conservatives party.

Quebec Militants Complain over Lack Of French at Toronto Protest

Some Quebec Francophones who demonstrated at the G8 Summit in Toronto are complaining  they were unjustly targeted by police and when arrested were harshly treated.  As well, some of those who were arrested, complained that they weren't 'treated' in French.

In an article by a student demonstrator in LE DEVOIR, Arnaud Montreuil complained that ordinary Quebeckers were unsympathetic to the plight of those Quebeckers arrested in Toronto;

"...the protesters from Quebec were particularly battered by the police. First, they were arrested in a targeted,  discriminatory manner, based on their home province. Then, in prison, many were insulted and told to leave the country if they were not happy, as we would say to a second class citizen.

And what is the reaction at home? According to an Angus Reid poll, 71% of Quebec respondents said the actions of police against demonstrators were justified .

It's likely that Toronto police overstepped their mandate and perhaps exceeded their authority by casting their net a bit too wide, but it's amusing to see anarchists complaining that the police weren't playing by the rules.

Now I know many of you will say that most of those arrested were not anarchists, just innocent protesters, availing themselves of their constitutional right to assemble and demonstrate, but it's hard to feel sympathy for them, given the fact that they knew exactly what they were getting into.

When I was kid, my mother didn't let me go to rock festivals because, as she said, "That's where the drugs are!"

Everybody knew exactly what was to happen in Toronto, there is a history of violence by protesters and  history of over-reaction by the forces of order, at these type of summits.

So I'll brook no crocodile tears or woeful lamentations from those who complain that they were shocked by events and the harsh treatment they received. I'm sure that most who went to demonstrate were well prepared to be arrested and perhaps found the experience more than they bargained for.

As for targeting Francophones, I've no doubt it's true. There were complaints that cars with Quebec license plates were arbitrarily pulled over for inspection and that those speaking French on the street were stopped.
It seems that police made it a policy to stop any 'suspicious' person and Quebecers stood out like a sore thumb.

The CBC posted a ridiculously biased article on its website with the inflammatory headline;

"G20 officer admitted targeting Quebecers: student"

The story told by a Montreal law student, who first claimed to be an innocent observer but then admitted that he was a demonstrator himself. He claimed officers admitted they were targeting Quebeckers by virtue of their license plates or by overhearing people speaking French on the street. One Francophone complained that she was unfairly arrested when she was found in possession of an anarchist manual!

In spite of the one-sided reporting, the public remains solidly behind the police which is frustrating the hell out of those demanding an inquiry.

My favourite story is told by Emilie Guimond-Bélanger, a member of Québec Solidaire, a separatist political party more radical than the Parti Quebecois. In a YouTube video she recounts a tearful tale of woe at the hands of the evil Ontario authorities. Flanked by the intrepid Amar Khadir, she claims to have gone to Toronto for the sole purpose of demonstrating in favour of abortion rights, but was scooped up by police and placed in detention.

Among her biggest complaint was the lack of French among the warders of the detention centre and she told the unlikeliest story about a co-prisoner, who according to Ms. Guimond-Bélanger, was borderline psychotic and spoke no English. She tried to tell jailers that she needed her medication, but to no avail, because nobody spoke French. Eventually she had a breakdown, started climbing the walls and was rushed to hospital, a sad state of affairs all due to the lack of French by the jailers.
Now I've heard bullshit stories in my life, but that one's a beauty. My advice to this lady is that in the future she wear a Medic-Alert bracelet with the word PSYCHO emblazoned upon it and travel with an English-speaking companion!
By the way, the sweet and innocent, Ms. Guimond-Bélanger is one of the few demonstrators that was actually charged with a crime. Hmmm..

I screened a bunch of videos and the level of arrogance demonstrated by Quebec demonstrators astounded me. In one particular video two Francophones approach a line of heavily armoured officers and carry on a mocking conversion at very close quarters. I'm sure the officer had no idea what they were saying and it must of made him quite nervous. If I was him, I'd bop one of these smart asses on the head just for sport.

At any rate, here is my favourite video of a dedicated G20 demonstrator.
Watch it. If you haven't seen it, I guarantee it'll bring a smile to your face!

A Big Thank You to Generous Canadian Taxpayers!

A great big thank you is owed to all the taxpayers in all the 'have' provinces, who have graciously agreed to ship billions and billions of dollars in transfer payments to Quebec. Yesterday, because of your extreme generosity, the province was able to unveil a new social program, one that will pay for fertility treatments for couples unable to conceive. The program goes way beyond Manitoba's stingy tax credit of up to $8000 per couple. Link

The fertility program, the first of its kind in North America will pay for up to three cycles of treatment, at a cost of between $10,000 and $30,000 per couple, or $25-$65 million in all, paid for by, ahem...the province.
This, according to the Minister of Health Yves Bolduc, but others disagree and see the program's cost ballooning up towards $200 million. Gaetan Barrette, the head of Quebec's doctor's professional order, pointed out that it takes just three months of residency to obtain a medicare card and he envisions women moving to Quebec expressly for the treatments, similar to those women who moved to Las Vegas in the fifties and sixties seeking a legal divorce. 
At any rate it seem eminently fair, considering that it is taxpayers from other provinces that are really funding the program.

Now to those of you out of province taxpayers who are footing the bill, you should know that Quebec is doing you a favour by trailblazing social programs that your province will be pressured to match. 

And so you can thank us for your $7.50 a day daycare, your gilded parental leave program and of course your ridiculously low college tuition fees.
"What's that you say? "
"You don't have these programs?"

Hmmmm......... Don't blame us, we've led the way. Tell your governments to get off their ass!"

And don't tell us you want to reduce transfer payments either, just because the economy is down and there's less money coming in. 

Take solace in the old joke wherein a bum complains to his benefactor that his weekly gift is much smaller than usual?
"Business is down this week, what can I say?"
"So just because your business is down,  I should suffer!!"......... HA! HA!


 By the way, Quebec City needs a new arena.....

Does Fiscal Conservatism Exist in Canada?

Many years ago, I rented a winter apartment in a South Florida beach town. One January evening a knock on the door revealed a sprightly eighty-something senior in that stereotypical track suit, who asked me if I would participate in a demonstration at city hall, protesting taxes.
I explained to this senior, perhaps a bit too condescendingly, that I was but a tenant and as such had no vested interest in the argument.
"Then you're an idiot! There's taxes built into your rent. It's people like you who don't participate in democracy that allow us all to get screwed!"

 ....Ouch!

I never forgot the confrontation, because in my heart of hearts, I knew she was right and it brought me to the sad realization that when it comes to political activism, Canadians are poor citizens, all too willing to be rolled over by politicians who buy our votes by spending our very own money.
When it comes to political issues, there's just about zero passion, we'd rather be watching hockey or sipping beer in the back yard. While it's true that every couple of years the anarchists come out to enliven the political scene, they too, eventually grow up to adopt the Canadian virtue of political apathy.
We smugly believe ourselves superior to those silly Americans who passionately believe and demonstrate their commitment to their democracy. Whether the issue is abortion, taxes or health care, the zeal at which they carry on the political debate shames all Canadians.

Even in Quebec, a good separatist rally can muster a few hundred people at best.

And so we get the government we deserve. It matters little if it is Conservative or Liberal,  they both operate exactly the same way by maintaining a policy of spending our money foolishly on lavish social and pork programs in an attempt to buy our loyalty. We're not the only country running on this dysfunctional treadmill, the whole western world is deeply in  debt because governments overspend in a crass attempt to stay in power.

Cruising along the Mediterranean and reading the news story that our illustrious Prime Minister spent over one billion dollars on the G20/8 summit didn't surprise me, it was to be expected. But the lame reaction of the public did set me back. It seems that not even a billion dollar waste of money is enough to jolt us out of a political lethargy. A CTV news poll indicated that 78% of Canadians are opposed to the billion dollar price tag attached to the G8/20 conference but apparently not enough to send Mr. Harper on a precipitous fall in the polls. In fact the latest poll, taken after the revelation about the over-spending, indicates that Mr. Harper has actually climbed a couple of points in popularity!

The CTV poll about the Summit spending is just one more confirmation that Canadians are politically lazy, the only thing of interest that I could pull from the survey is the irrefutable proof that 22% of Canadians are outright morons.

When Harper was first elected, I thought he might be different, a conservative who would break the cynical practice of buying our votes with our own money, or money borrowed on our behalf, but he proved me wrong and I take comfort in the fact that I didn't vote for him.

Sitting on my cruise ship, I took out my IPhone calculator and punched up some numbers that you might find interesting.
What would be if the Prime Minister held his Summit aboard a luxurious cruise liner similar to the one I was now aboard?
The ship is perfectly suited to the task and has all the facilities necessary including lodging for 2,500 guests, gourmet dining facilities, conference rooms and enough bars to satisfy everyone, even the press corps!

 There are a least a dozen or so "presidential' type suites aboard, so the eight leaders could still be accommodated quite nicely. There's a 600 seat theatre that could serve as a venue for all the speeches and the ship boasts an extraordinary array of facilities for whatever it is they do at these types of meetings.

 There's a massive and beautiful dining room fit for any state dinner as well as two private restaurants that could accommodate a smaller gathering. The plebes of the press corps could be fed in the buffet restaurant, as well as being housed in the cheap rooms down below. VIPS could be ferried on and off the ship via a helicopter which the ship is equipped to handle.

As for security, a couple of warships could create a 'cordon sanitaire' and the air force could declare the area around the ship a no fly zone, with coastal based jets on standby to shoo away any one silly enough to violate the airspace. It would cost a pittance compared to what was blown in Toronto. Aboard the ship, a dozen or so officers is all that it would take to maintain security.
The ship could sail along the beautiful British Columbia coastline providing attendees a breathless vista and invigorating backdrop to the conference. Why build a zillion dollar fake lake, when we could sail the entire Pacific Ocean?

How much would all this cost? Well a week long cruise on a first class boat costs about $4,000 per person, which rounds off to about $10 million dollars to rent out the whole ship, a pittance compared to what was spent in Toronto. That includes all the food and lodging. If the working press were charged for their accommodations, that bill could be knocked down by a million or so. Add in incidentals of say another $10 million for booze and another 80 million on transportation and security and you're left with a saving of about $900 million. Another plus is that demonstrators would be left high and dry ashore, twiddling their thumbs and the meeting could go off without any disruption or inconvenience.

Now for that $900 million saving, let's see what could we do with it.
Quebec's portion would be in the 200 million dollar range and placed in a long term investment might bring in about $18 million dollars a year, enough to fund about sixty new family doctors permanently.

Those sixty doctors, could carry out 7,500 consultations a year or almost half a million between them. They would help fill the gap of the more than 1,000 family doctors missing from the Quebec landscape.

Let's see the equations extrapolated to include the whole country;

A G8/20 conference held one time in Toronto

 and

o new family doctors across Canada, funded forever

versus  

A G8/20 conference held one time on a cruise ship

 and

300 new family doctors across Canada, funded forever

In light of the choice, I wonder what the 22% of Canadians (who thought it was okay to blow a billion on the G20/8) would say? Perhaps they too would agree, once they understood the real cost of wasting a billion dollars on a one-time boondoggle, that perhaps the money would better spent elsewhere.

Remember, under my cruise ship scenario, we could have hosted both the conference and hired the new doctors all for the same money.

A lot of my numbers are crude, but they are real enough.
The wasted money can be attributed straight to arrogance, incompetence and a complete disdain for the taxpayer. Those in charge should be sacked and the politicians held accountable, but it will never happen.

Harper, Ignatieff and Layton are all cut from the same cloth. While they would each spend the money differently, they would all spend it foolishly, it's in their nature.

In Canada, we don't have a true conservative politician who really believes in reducing spending and increasing efficiency. We don't have any because we don't elect any.

When a group of  Quebec intellectuals (lucides) published a letter begging for a more rational approach to government, they were roundly panned. Read the manifesto.

Like I said, we get what we vote for.

What's a real fiscal conservative? Watch this video of New Jersey governor Chris Christie.
Electable? Not a chance. I have no doubt that he would be laughed out of Canada.

We enjoy getting screwed by our politicians too much.

How To Become a Quebec Villain

For the most part Quebec Anglos remain gloriously ignored by the Quebec media and their rantings against the likes of Bill 101 or other language restrictions are paid little heed and are given little attention.
All that changes when these complaints about Quebec society are made in the United States where Quebeckers seem extremely sensitive to their image.

Mordechai Richler could have lived a life of ignominy in Quebec had he not written devastatingly critical articles about Quebec in publications like the New York Times and the Atlantic Monthly. His book, Oh Canada! Oh Quebec! Requiem for a Divided Country, a scathing portrayal of Quebec society, set the province into a raging fury. He became Quebec's biggest scoundrel and most hated Anglo. He remains today the  most powerful example of betrayal and for many Quebeckers mention of his very name still elicits a nasty response.

I never heard of Jacob Tierney before the brouhaha over an interview in Montreal's La Presse newspaper, ostensibly to promote his movie The Trotsky. In the end the interview degenerated into a panning of the Quebec film industry and as such made a much bigger splash;

"Quebec society is extremely turned in on itself. Our art and our culture shows only white francophones. Anglophones and immigrants are ignored. They have no place in the québécois dream. It’s shameful.

Macleans.ca magazine writer Philippe Gohier  commented that Tierney would probably regret having given the interview altogether and I tend to agree. Read his article here.

I'm not going to discuss the merits of Tierney's argument because I'm not really qualified. Like most Anglos, I almost never watch Quebecois films..... Hmm

But the reaction to this little known filmmaker, an ex-Montrealer now living in Los Angeles is quite telling.
Had the comments been made in Toronto or Montreal , the story wouldn't have earned more than a couple of inches of ink, but because the comments were made in the USA, watch out!

I don't think that Jacob Tierney will become as notorious as Mordechai Richlier, but he didn't win many friends with his comments and garnered many enemies. I hope he won't be showered with the the hate mail and threats that Richler and his family received but he will get some, no doubt.

The reaction to the comments made by this relative nobody is nothing less than astounding.

"Did we ask to have Atom Egoyan to necessarily portray Quebecers in all his films?"...."I think these kinds of comments are outdated and unnecessary." commented the President and Chief Executive Officer of cultural enterprise development (SODEC), François Macerola. Link

The directer general of Téléfilm Canada, Carolle Brabant, countered the criticism by saying that the investment the agency makes in English Quebec films in disproportionately higher than the what demographics would dictate.

"As is still the case unfortunately, an Anglophone Montrealer, Quebecker, Canadian has spread unfounded prejudices about Quebeckers,  Jarrett Mann, président du festival SPAS

"His rhetoric of contempt for us is deeply offensive. I do not think that that is the way to rally us to his cause. " Stéphanie Chalu

Mr. Tierney seems to describe Quebec society as a backward-looking and intolerant society, thus opening a new chapter in the book of "Quebec bashing" Reynaldo Marquez

An over-reaction? I think so.

The phenomenon isn't restricted to Anglos.

The husband of Canada's governor-General Michaëlle Jean, Jean-Daniel Lafond also drove many Quebec nationalists into a tizzy over remarks that he made in a magazine article which included this line;

 "The battle for a free Quebec died in 1970"

His bashing of the sovereignty movement  in France's L'Expresse magazine generated over 400 comments on a Radio-Canada web article about the interview.

It seems that the weight of the argument is less important than the locale in which it is expressed.

Make depreciating remarks about Quebec society in Montreal or Toronto and you'll be roundly ignored. Do it in Los Angeles or New York and all Hell will break loose.....Interesting, eh.