Canadians for Language Fairness

End the unfairness of official bilingualism. Stop wasting our tax dollars.

Thursday April 9, 2015

Thomas Sowell: Rosa Parks & History

Segregation - in Canada?

Segregation - in Canada?  This must be a joke!!!  No, actually, it isn’t!!  It is happening in the province of New Brunswick, the only officially bilingual province, which has sanctioned the policy of SEGREGATION - the French-speaking children are so “fragile” in their struggle to retain their French language & culture that any contact with English-speaking children is considered bad (they might get assimilated and that’s considered “unconstitutional” & against their charter rights, according to the provincial Liberal government under Brian Gallant).

The Charter of Rights & Freedoms (part of the very flawed 1982 Constitution) is invoked as the reason why French-speaking children must not travel in the same buses as English-speaking children.  Never mind that it will cost more to have half-empty buses going the same way - the need for segregation is more important!! There was a time when “segregation” was a bad word - it kept races apart by denying one group access to public services.  Now it is apparently to be promoted because the “all-powerful” English language might contaminate the very fragile French language!!!  This is happening in Canada - hard to believe that we still consider ourselves a 1st world nation with such outmoded ideas still supported by people - and with a straight face too!!!

President (CLF)


N.B. education minister angry after learning French and English students have been sharing a school bus

Dan Delmar: Quebec soldiers on in defence of French, despite no sign of a threat

French CBC article


"In December 1955 in Montgomery Alabama, Rosa Parks a middle aged African American woman defied segregationist policies and refused to go to the back of the bus and give up her seat to a white passenger. Her defiance was the start of a cataclysmic change of events that has forever changed race relations in the United States, making African Americans equal under the law. Though times have changed, and societies have moved forward, in New Brunswick segregationist policies still exist. When Domique Cardy suggested that Anglophone and Francophone students share the same bus as a cost saving measure, the Office of the Attorney General said “NO”, the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages said “NO”, and the Premier said “duality is not on the table.” Imagine for a moment that New Brunswick is Montgomery Alabama with the only difference in the analogy being that African Americans and Whites actually could ride on the same bus whereas in New Brunswick Anglophone and Francophone students cannot. The government officials of both days support segregationist policies, one based on race, while the other based on language laws through judicial and government interpretation of the day.  Jim Crow laws in the Southern United States enforced segregation between African Americans and whites in public schools and public transportation, in order to prevent any contact between the two groups. In fact in 1896 the US Supreme Court solidified the segregationist policy with the “separate but equal decision” in the Plessy vs Ferguson case. Fast forward to modern day New Brunswick, where government officials are determined to uphold segregationist type policies at any cost by citing their interpretation of current Supreme Court of Canada decisions. Segregation is segregation whether it is based on race or language. Imagine today that if the Anglophone East School District and District Scolaire Francophe Sud were school districts separated on race versus language. Would we even be having this discussion if our children can ride the same school buses together? As societies evolve, so do the decisions which are made by the Supreme Courts. It is time for New Brunswick to step away from Montgomery Alabama and allow our children from both linguistic groups to ride the same bus together."

Tim Williams, Moncton


According to the Atlantic CTV news poll, bilingualism is not popular.  Why then would the politicians still behave as if it is?  Is this the same old story of the English-speakers NOT making their wishes known at the voting booth?  Why?  Are they still suffering from the socialist belief that the French were badly treated under their English masters and now it is pay-back time and we must give the French their “day in the sun”?


March 26, 2015



It has just been proven again that you can achieve most any desired result(s) with statistics. Plus it only cost the taxpayer $50,000.00 for the language commissioner to make her biased point.

It was stated that two English to one French is the ratio of linguistic employment in N.B. Right!

Yes, that is right, if you survey a select group that are mostly employed in the “Call Center Business”. It makes sense, as a large portion of their business is with the USA where French is a foreign language.

I wonder what the result would be for an honest survey that included government employees as well. I sincerely doubt that the “two to one” ratio would stand that test. As a matter of fact I would be willing to place a sizable bet that the two to one ratio would not even come close to the final result.

I have heard that approximately 50% of employed people in N.B. work for the government and we all know that “bilingual imperative” is usually required.

That in itself is not too bad until you consider the seriously biased language test that the English bilingual applicant is required to flawlessly pass. Yet the French bilingual qualifiers in some cases cannot read nor write French and speak a seriously flawed English.

Here is a quote from an article I read a few days ago. “My daughter is fully bilingual and speaks French without an accent, as she has an aptitude for languages. She is also highly educated and has an impeccable work ethic. But, for government jobs that she is more than qualified for, they hire less qualified, less educated francophones who are unilingual and speak little or no English! That is what I call bigotry, racism, injustice and corruption! Anglophones in this province are horribly oppressed and discriminated against! All we want is equality.”

One would think the office of the Language Commissioner would investigate bias of this nature. Might it be the office of the French Language Commissioner?

Duality and Forced bilingualism have successfully buried this “have not” province in debt.

Is there any hope left?


Ted R.


President's comment:  Ted, unless and until the English-speaking majority is prepared to do something about it, there is no hope.  In a democracy the vote is the only way to solve this problem - do what the French do - get together, get organized and vote for ANY politician who has the courage to speak for the majority.  But the majority must speak first!!!


Please bear in mind, “Bilingual” means “French”.  Our French Immersion graduates ( in the New Brunswick Anglophone System) do not have "good enough French language" skills.  As in "any" survey, the questions will determine the outcome of the study. It is really simple to slant the questions to achieve exactly what you want. Also, one would like to know, who was the client in this survey, The Official Languages Commissioner? The person who pays the bill is the client so if you want to conduct another survey, "ever" you had better keep your client happy. One would have to be a moron, in either or both languages to believe the outcome of this  study. Cost $50,000. A drop in the bucket for Official Languages. WOW, even the CBC picked this up.

I would have to see the study, the questions and read the contract, which should be available through Access to Information. Unless of course that Official Languages Commissioner would provide us a copy for our information and review. If this is such a great thing, open it up to the public and give everyone a chance to speak out.




And this from our favourite blogger


The various opinions expressed on this website are not necessarily shared by everyone whose photo is displayed.

This website has been visited 280450 times.