Bilingualism in Canada – The Great Language Debate
Jean Charest is upset with the Supreme Court's ruling on Bill 104
Bilingualism in Canada is undeniably one of the most prevalent aspects of our international identity. All of our federal documents are printed in both English and French, despite the fact that only one of our provinces is officially bilingual (and no, it’s not Quebec – only New Brunswick is officially bilingual, meaning the provincial government prints documentation in both languages). Despite all this, language laws have often been a topic of contention within the country and particularly within Quebec. Almost one hundred years after the first language law passed in Quebec, we still find ourselves unable to reach middle ground when it comes to our languages – particularly in the education system. Up until recently, there was a loophole in the Quebecois language laws which allowed parents to send their children to English public school if they had previously attended an English private school. The majority of children in Quebec, however, are required to attend French public school. In 2002, Jean Charest’s government closed the loophole (Bill 104) thus preventing a much larger percentage of students from attending English public school in Quebec. Without the loophole, only students who passed a lengthy assessment of circumstance were granted permission. Yesterday, a disgruntled group of parents who opposed Bill 104 and had taken their displeasure up with the supreme court won a “partial victory” when the supreme court ruled Bill 104 as “unconstitutional and excessive”. Naturally, the Quebecois government is upset, claiming that by allowing a larger minority of children to enroll in the limited English school system in Quebec, the French language is not being preserved.
Of course, the issue raises a huge amount of debate. In a democratic nation, shouldn’t parents have the right to send their children to whichever school they wish? Is it not a form of discrimination to disallow students the right to learn one language over another? Conversely, by allowing students easier access to English education, are we losing and devaluing the French language as an equal part of our country’s identity and as its own culturally significant faction? Is it not the responsibility of the provincial governments to control educational standards and curriculum, deciding what is best for the students within the province?
In Canada there exists a real divide between Anglophones and Francophones but there is no reason why every student attending a predominantly English school should not be learning French and vice versa. It is a gift that in our schools we teach language – as not only does it offer great opportunity within our own country but vast opportunities abroad. While I do not believe Charest should restrict the students going to English public school in Quebec, I do believe that curriculum must be re-evaluated all over the country to better include French, to preserve the language which forms such a pivotal part of our country. It is always important to recognize both languages as necessities and to leave behind the mentality of them vs. us. Parents should have a right to decide what schools their children attend but at the end of the day, all levels of government must recognize and enforce the preservation of both our national languages. The Supreme Court has allowed Quebec one year to ratify Bill 104.
Related posts:
- Supreme Court of Canada Renders Quebec’s Bill 104 Unconstitutional On October 22 2009, the Supreme Court of Canada judged...
- Quebec Votes – 2008 Who are you going to vote for? Here is...
- There Are Great Life Lessons to be Gleaned by Watching Politicians and Reading Political History That’s Wilfrid Laurier from Quebec. He has no future. He...
- The Quebec Problem in Canada The recent victory by Quebec separatist groups to cancel the...
Tags: Bilingualism, bill 104, language, quebec
Loading ...
October 24th, 2009 at 3:08 am
Well you can’t knock down a SCC ruling. Done is done. Education is administered provincially and since there are no offical federal educational polices that are constitutionally allowed in Canada you then face this age old question: why should some provinces bother to learn French? BC, for example – it would be more sensible to learn Mandarin, Viet, Hindi,or Japanese – I mean they are the ones, other than English speaking Canadians, who are investing all their money and creating jobs. Where is the big French demand in Vancouver other than the government? Really, do you think that in a Province with 4 million+ that we should all learn french just fo the 2% native speakers that live there (and by the way to survive there must know English)? Cost benefit analysis don’t work. Other than dealing with our stoggy government there is no reason for anyone not living in Quebec to learn French – should our edcuation system really be training students in preperation for government service – really? Good luck getting the averge voter behind that. Oh and my arguement, if English and French are reversed, is the same one used in Quebec. My should anyone bother to learn English if it only preparedthem for government work? I say that if our forefathers had a little more foresight we wouldn’t have been so careless as to waste such a tremendous amount of time a resources dealing with two national languages. People should be preserving their own culture. The Chinese come here and do it, the Koreans do, the Hindus, Sikhs, and Arabs do- and they are free to and they should.Diversity should come from the people, not the government! I like French as a culture and a language but I just don’t think that the French should have been given a governmental pass so that the tax payer can pick up the tab on for them. If they don’t like it the constitution grants you both the right to enter this country and the right to leave it – and with the birth rate in France being so low, save for undesirabe immigration, they may be looking for a wave of immigration in the near future just to save their own culture. Oh well, stupid constitution, I guess that I am going to have to live with it.
October 24th, 2009 at 10:25 am
The debate continues! You are right to a certain extent Travis, and I wouldn’t dream about “knocking down” their ruling. I agree with it, because ultimately I believe parents should have the decision to send their children to whichever school they please. For example, I am from Toronto (where you most certainly need English to survive, like Vancouver – don’t shoot me for comparing the two) but my parents made the decision to put me into French Immersion from kindergarten to the end of high school. I am thus certifiably bilingual where many people I know who were “required” to take french to grade 9 cannot speak a word of it or of any other language for that matter. I also took Mandarin in University, which was my own choice and of course was a higher level of teaching caliber than the small potential provincial funding would go towards. Realistically, you aren’t going to see much provincial funding go to any other languages in PUBLIC schooling, beyond the random Spanish or Mandarin night class.
I think though you are dismissing the importance of French a little too quickly. It isn’t only our “stoggy government” that sees multi-languages as a benefit. In fact many jobs with the UN, the World Bank, within the service industry and even many of those ugly faced corporations (if that is who you are most concerned with) find having both English and French a huge advantage over someone who doesn’t.
As you say too, much of our Canadian cultural mix does come and preserve their own cultures. So imagine then the benefit of a child who speaks a third language at home and learn both English and French at school? I’d say they are in the best position.
Let’s try not to perpetuate this mentality of “them vs. us” – afterall, we are one country and regionalism is often what causes some of our biggest problems.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:44 am
Interesting and necessary commentary! I am happy to see young Canadians thinking about their Governments’ (at all levels) policies and programs. The French/English debate in Canada has held the spotlight in this country for well over 2 decades. I believe that linguistic duality is important however I also believe many people do not understand that it can also be divided into an urban vs rural issue. Studies have shown that in the majority of Canadian cities – english is the first language used, often due to the presence of big business. Conversely, rural areas typically house minority language households. For example, in New Brunswick and Quebec, french as a first language is more often found in rural areas than in urban regions. Governments need to stop looking at language through a single lens and consider it from a broader perspective…. thoughs from an individual currently on French Language training.