I cannot say that I'm stunned by Trudeau's woke appointment of Mary Simon as the next Governor-General. We've come to expect form over content and a Prime Minister who makes decisions not on what is best for the country, but is best for his image.
I am however stunned at the muted opposition and the unacceptable silence by the cowering media and political class who remain too afraid to say out loud what they really think.
That is that the choice of a Governor-General who doesn't speak one of the two official languages is unacceptable on any level.
It a sickening pandering to wokeness that clearly proves that diversity hires are almost always less competent than the alternatives, more competent candidates that are downgraded because they don't have the right skin colour, religion or ancestry.
It is sickening.
Choosing a candidate who doesn't speak French breaks the essence of what Canada has evolved into, or more to the truth, the ideal that Canada has set for itself, a country dedicated and respectful to the founding nations, the French and the English.
I have no problem recognizing that Canada's founding mosaic was flawed in that it excluded Canada's aboriginals and steps being taken to right this historical wrong are to be applauded..
But for Trudeau and the Liberals promoting the aboriginal's right to be included as respected partners seems to be a zero-sum game, where in order to accommodate them, someone has to give up their place.
And make no mistake, the position as a founding nation for French Canada is being downgraded and disrespected in order to fulfill the rush to be 'inclusive.'
The position of Governor-General may constitutionally important but let us be honest, the job is largely ceremonial and meant to foster unity and pride. The GG gives out awards and prizes, cuts ribbons and visits hospitals, she is a poor colony's stand-in for the Queen who towers by comparison.
You would think that the number one occupational requirement for the job is excellent communication skills followed by personability, both skills that will be absent when communicating with 25% of Canada's population who speak French.
A great deal is made that she is indeed bilingual, but not with French, rather English and her native Inuktitut, a language that is so exotic here in Canada that less than 35,000 people speak it, which places just above Swahili (30,000) in importance of languages spoken in Canada
In Canada bilingual means French and English, not Punjabi, Italian, Spanish or Cantonese.
98% of Canadians speak English or French and so a job that entails communicating with these citizens would make bilingualism an iron-clad requirement.
And the notion that she will become proficient in French in her seventies is a laughable lie.
I live in an affluent majority-English town in Quebec which boasts a unilingual English mayor who also promised to learn French when first he knocked on my door seeking my vote 15 years ago
We are still waiting.
I shudder in morbid anticipation of a throne speech given partly in pigeon French, written out for her phonetically and delivered without a clue to its content.
I can only imagine a medal presentation or a meet and greet.....
BONE-JEWR, KOH MAH SAW VAH, MOAN SEWER MAR TEEN OH
PHILLY-SET-ASS -IONES
Argghhhhhh!!!!!!
There are those who are already clamouring that being bilingual be dropped for important political, bureaucratic and diplomatic positions in Canada. Any relaxation in the requirement reduces the impetus for those seeking public life to learn French.
Can you imagine a choice for governor-general who only spoke French?
For those of us in Quebec preaching for more bilingualism, it is incumbent on us to defend it in our federal institutions.
I am utterly disappointed in all of us. We are so afraid of defending what is right out of fear of seeming insensitive and un-inclusive.
The appointment of the utterly unqualified Mary Simon is poisonous and destructive because, in Canada, inclusiveness doesn't mean downgrading one to boost another.
Shame on Trudeau, the Liberal party and everyone who supports this hire.
Shame on Canadians who are too afraid to stand up for what is right out of fear.
PART I
ReplyDelete98% of the time I am in full agreement with Philip. This is one of those instances which fits into the 2%.
I couldn't give a rat's ass who the PM appoints as GG because, frankly, my idea of that position's job description is so far off from everyone else's anyway. And, yes, my ideal would most definitely include the GG's liberal use of the constitutional power of disallowance and instructing any of the GG's 10 provincial Lieutenant-Governors to implement the constitutional power of reservation.
Ever since the push for "bilingualism" started in the era of Pierre Trudeau, there has been a deep misunderstanding of the term. There must be a distinction made and understood between the terms "Official Bilingualism" and "individual bilingualism." Sadly, when the word "bilingualism" is invoked, the speaker/writer often means the former and at other times means the latter. Yet, in a very real sense, the two terms are polar opposites.
Official Bilingualism means that government services are provided in both official languages; individual bilingualism means that the individual being described can speak both official languages.
Why are they opposing concepts? Because as former MNA William Shaw once observed: "What's the point of bilingualism if everyone is?"
Imagine a world in which every Canadian was individually bilingual in both English and French. If that were the case, there would be zero need for Official Bilingualism because no one would give a hoot in which language their government services were being provided because that individual could understand the services provided in either language. Thus, Official Bilingualism is not for the bilingual individual; it is for the unilingual individual.
I completely disagree with the following observations Philip makes:
"That is that the choice of a Governor-General who doesn't speak one of the two official languages is unacceptable on any level."
...and...
"Choosing a candidate who doesn't speak French breaks the essence of what Canada has evolved into, or more to the truth, the ideal that Canada has set for itself, a country dedicated and respectful to the founding nations, the French and the English."
PART II
ReplyDeleteWhy unacceptable "on any level"? On the level of Official Bilingualism, I see absolutely no problem with a unilingual English speaker (or, in this case, a bilingual person but not of both English and French) representing the very essence of who a major government policy is intended for: a unilingual English or a unilingual French speaker. Indeed, the vast majority of Canadians fit into either of these categories.
As for "choosing a candidate who doesn't speak French breaks the essence of what Canada has evolved into," I ask: when and where did this happen? As I observed, above, Official Bilingualism is for the unilingual individual...and unilingual individuals is the essence of what Canada has not only evolved into, it was its essence even before this wonderful utopian ideal was imposed upon us. This "ideal that Canada has set for itself" is one that a federal government has thrust upon us in a sad attempt at social engineering, one that has not caught on to any great extent anywhere, except in the halls of government bureaucrats who are now burdened with taking French courses for the most part in a money-wasting and time and effort wasting attempt to get a decent job and salary. Sure, there is a cottage industry of flag-waving unthinkers who trot their kids off to bilingual schools and French courses in an attempt to be "good Canadians' or, more cynically, in a long-plan vision of grooming Junior to become a well-paid federal civil servant...but, for the most part, it is a pain in the ass that most Canadians simply are resigned to.
Philip writes that individual bilingualism is "the ideal that Canada has set for itself, a country dedicated and respectful to the founding nations, the French and the English."
Nope.
All the French and English get -- or should get -- for being the founding peoples of Canada is Official Bilingual status...and that's it. Anything above and beyond that is not only social engineering but would be unconstitutional if "language" had been included -- as it was in earlier drafts -- of section 15 of the equality provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It was specifically left out so that the federal government COULD impose silly programs to socially engineer Canadians into learning both official languages, as if Canadians knowing both languages would somehow bring us closer together (it has actually done the exact opposite, of course; knowing your neighbour's language sometimes inadvertedly gets you to know him so much better that you find you like him even less than you did before. Ask the Serbs and Croatians whether knowing and speaking the same language makes them like each other more).
That's it; official language status and nothing more. Outside the orbit of government services, French and English are on par with Swahili, Portuguese, hundreds of other mother tongues spoken by Canadians, and any of the dozens of aboriginal languages. Indeed, by virtue of the fact that English and French get official status -- such as the language of education -- gives these two languages such an incredible foot up on any other language means that their influence in the private sector/non-government services sector is so huge that we must be vigilant in not giving English or French ANY favors or benevolence. Language is part and parcel of free speech...and English and French must necessarily be at the bottom of the list when it comes time for doling out either legislation or grants to these two language groups.
PART III
ReplyDeleteAnd that should include this silly idea that appointees to high government positions should speak the two founding languages. Heck, if there is one position that doesn't need individual bilingualism as a job description, it is those of high-positioned government appointees or electees. MPs have every word they utter while at their place of business (ie, the House of Commmons) automatically translated in both word and orally, into the other official language; same with the Supreme Court. So, no need for individual bilinguals there as its done for 'em. Without looking it up, I can assure you that the GG's annual budget includes a hefty wad of funds set aside precisely for translation into the other official language. So of all the positions available for employment in Canada, GG is right up there for NOT needing an individual who is individually bilingual.
Indeed, the one appointee position in government in which I'd like to see a unilingual person is the Commissioner of Official Languages. Since Official Bilingualism is for unilingual people, why not have a representative of the group of Canadians meant to be serviced by that government official truly represent them? Isn't that what we thrive for?
So on the one hand, all the federal party leaders say Quebec's Bill 96, a pro-French anti-English law is OK, so why not appoint a First Nation's person to be GG? There is NO way on G-d's green earth that woman will learn French given her age.
ReplyDeleteOur Crime Minister has been placing form over substance since the day he became leader, isn't much for vetting, and is a bloody idiot to begin with.
The only thing I'm waiting to hear is how Quebec is going to react to the situation. If they moan and groan, goody! I'm anti-monarchist, so the GG is just overly expensive parsley dressing a plate of food. Payette is going to keep her pension despite serving no more than two years on the job? What a goddamn joke we taxpayers are going to have to eat unless someone has enough sense to revoke her pension for her abhorrent and unprofessional behaviour. She wants to fight it in court? Let her knock herself out!
Verry thoughtful blog
ReplyDelete