From: 4224_5201@uwovax.uwo.ca (John LaRocque)
Subject: ANGLO WHINERS and so-called persecution
Organization: University of Western Ont, London
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 04:12:54 GMT

     The edited article below is reprinted from the TORONTO STAR, Nov 17, 1992,
and is written by the best English language reporter in Quebec today, Robert
Mackenzie. I feel it speaks for itself (some portions emphasized by this
reader). WARNING: This is a fairly long article, but worth reading!


             "OPPRESSED" ANGLOS WHINE TOO LOUDLY

     When I arived in Montreal as in immigrant 36 years ago, being an anglo-
phone was a ticket to a job. In a situation pinpointed a few years later by
the Laurendeau-Dunton (Bi and Bi) Commision, Quebec's francophone majority
were down at the bottom of the ladder just ahed of Italian immigrants and 
native Indians.

     So heavy was the pall of prejudice that I can even remember one (uni-
lingual anglohpone) personnel director of a major corporation asking 
suspiciously why I seemed to think that being bilingual was an advantage. The
evidence of this kind of colonial attitude pervaded everyday life - far beyond
the usual examples of French-speakinig Quebecers having to speak English to 
be served in department stores.

     A sad example sticks in my mind from my first job as a door-to-door
salesman. A fellow worker - let's call him Tremblay - kept insisting he
was English-speaking although his heavy French accent made it clear this wasn't
true. The boss was English-speaking - we'll call him Smith. One day after we
became friends, Tremblay confied to me: "I'll get ahead in this company because
Smith knows I'm English."

     All of this comes back to mind with the minor furor being kicked up over
some statistics which suggest that Quebec's French-speaking majority may -
and the "may" is important - be at last gaining the uper hand. The statistic
that has made headlines is drawn from the 1992 edition of a publication called
Indicators of Quebec's linguistic situation put out by le Conseil de la langue
francaise. The figure that caught the attention of the media - after going
unnoticed in an earlier study done for the Conseil by economist Francois
Vaillancourt - was that by, by 1985, MALE BILIGUAL ANGLOPHONES were earning
9.4% LESS than BILINGUAL FRANCOPHONE MALES of an equivalent educational
level. The earning less than their unilingual francophone counterparts -
96.5% of the latter's earnings.

     "The econonomic shoe is on the other foot," wrote MONTREAL GAZETTE
columnist Don MacPherson, noting that Quebecers of British descent in the 
1960's had an income 35% higher than francophones. "And the other behind is 
getting  kicked," he concluded. "GIVE ANGLOS A FAIR SHAKE," THE GAZETTE
pleaded in its lead editorial yesterday. "The statistics are clear: Anglo-
phones are now the disadvantaged group."

     The trouble is that the staticstics are not all that clear and there are
lots of OTHER STATISTICS in the same 1992 compendium that leave you wondering
about the ENDLESS WHINING AND GRIPING of Quebec's English-speaking minority.
On the page before the one picket out for attention in the Language Indicators
manul, there's a table showing the over-all picture for the earnings of
Quebecers of various backgrounds.

     With unilingual francophones - the majority - as the benchmark at 100%,
the annual earnings of bilingual francophones in 1985 were at 135.5%, just
ahead of blingual anglophones, at 131.7%. BUT UNILINGUAL ANGLOPHONES WERE
AT 123.4%. That's right. According to the Conseil, A UNILINGUAL ANGLOPHONE
WAS EARNING 23.4% MORE THAN A UNILINGUAL FRANCOPHONE in Quebec in 1985.

     Now there's figure you diden't see comented on by the USUAL ANGLO WHINERS
such as ALLIANCE QUEBEC, the FEDERALLY-FUNDED English Rights lobby, which
latched onto the OTHER PUBLICIZED STATISTIC as depicting "a very ominious,
negative-looking situtation." (:-<)

     This isn't to say that either statistic is terribly significant. What's
significant is that Quebec's English-Speaking comminuity devotes FAR TOO MUCH
of its energy desseminating an EXAGGERATED AND DISTORTED PICTURE OF ITSELF AS
AN OPPRESSED MINORITY. Yet the VERY SAME publication from which the latest
supposed outrage was plucked contains a LORE of information that throws a 
VERY DIFFERENT LIGHT on the SUPPOSED PERSECUTION of the ANGLO.

    Here's just one example. How often have you read, since Quebec's Loi 
101 was enacted late in 1977, about "language police" DRAGGING DEFENCELESS
English-speaking merchants BEFORE THE COURTS? First, of course, NO SUCH THING
as a "language police" exists. And as the Language Indicators manual confirms,
the civilian inspectors who do the job of enforcing Loi 101 either haven't
been very active or they've been singularly ineffective.

     In the 14 years from 1978, when the law took force, to 1991, the
statistical review says that 388 cases ver went to court - and 123 language 
offenders were conviced, an average of less than NINE A YEAR. That didn't
make a headline either.






-- 

John P. LaRocque
vader@uwo.ca
University of Western Ontario
London, Ontario


"Urk..urk..."
"Apologies accepted, Captian Nida", Darth Vader
Newsgroups: can.politics