"It is the French dimension of our
national personality that constitutes the
soul of Canada and its impact at the
national and international level."
Prime Minister Brian Mulroney
Toronto Star, July 13, 1989
WELLAND (Jan. 1990) - Freedom Party has officially gone on record against forced bilingualism with the participation of Fp representative Barry Fitzgerald in a public protest against the hiring policy of the Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO). Central to the issue are the legal provisions of Ontario's French Language Services Act, which along with other similar federal laws, discriminate in favour of francophones.
Says Fitzgerald: "We're all going to have to pay for the costs associated with (official bilingualism), one of which is making it a qualification for jobs in the provincial government."
As if to drive his point home, he adds "We don't have enough money to operate our hospitals now, but the Ministry of Health can find enough money to implement French services."
Official bilingualism has been a brewing divisive issue since its very beginnings in Canada, though most Ontarians have never been overly concerned. Now, official bilingualism has come to Ontario, and the issue is much more visible. This has in large part been due to the formation of various groups specifically created to fight official bilingualism, particularly the Alliance for the Preservation of English in Canada (APEC) and the Confederation of Regions party (COR). Both groups were represented at the Welland LCBO protest.
Unfortunately, some types of supporters attracted to these organizations have often done more harm than good to their cause. It must be admitted that there is often a great deal of anti-French sentiment, resentment, and growing intolerance providing the incentive to lobby against official bilingualism. As a result, the media and politicians have often painted these organizations with a tainted brush.
To complicate matters further, the leadership of these groups is often undermining their objective by advocating principles that represent the very thing they are fighting against. For example, in APEC's January 1990 newsletter edited by Pauline Leitch, in the lead article entitled "What does Canada really want?", the writer proposes that "There must be no provincial right of veto or right to opt out of any Federal program and it follows that there would be no compensation to provinces which refuse to participate. Laws and programs under Federal jurisdiction shall have a Federal presence in every province." If this is what APEC stands for, how can it possibly justify its stand on official bilingualism without sounding intolerant and contradictory?
"Canadians want the right to control their own destiny," concludes the article. "The right to be a democracy in the true sense of the word. A democracy where the will of the majority prevails... (Canada) wants to be a nation whose destiny is determined by the expressed will of all its people and not by government decree." Clearly, one cannot have it both ways; either each individual is permitted to control his own destiny or the will of the majority prevails. Freedom of choice and majority rule are direct opposites and official bilingualism is a direct result of majority rule. Moreover, "government decree" is the very instrument by which the "expressed will of the people" is exercised through the majority rule process.
In an intellectual vacuum of such magnitude, political polarization of the official bilingualism issue is a foregone conclusion. While one side senses injustice and unfairness in the application of official bilingualism rules without properly identifying the cause, the other side senses bigotry, racism, and intolerance without examining their causes. Yet, from both perspectives, the cause of the conflict is the same: a denial of each individual's freedom of choice in language.
In an effort to combat the confusion and lack of focus being generated by both sides in the bilingualism debate, Freedom Party has produced a pamphlet entitled Official Bilingualism is Forced Bilingualism. "Unless official bilingualism is abandoned in favour of freedom of choice in language," says the pamphlet, "tbe future of English- French relations in Canada will be doomed to a bitter never-ending political conflict resulting in increased intolerance, division, racism, and even violence." Of course, this trend is exactly the path on which our federal and provincial governments have embarked upon today --- through the enactment of official bilingualism laws.
However, Freedom Party draws a sharp distinction between the language a government chooses to operate in versus the policy of dictating language practices to private citizens. On the latter, our policy is clear: "Government has no business dictating language policy to anyone."
For more details or information on how to get involved, order pamphlets, etc., contact us at e-mail.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Page
last updated on April 28, 2002
