Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[Acajack]

According to the census, about a third of Canadians identify as having ethnic origins in the British Isles, and "Canadian" ethnic origin is around 16%. Probably a decent chunk of these "Canadian" ancestry people have British Isles origins, so my guess is that around 40% of Canada's population is still of British origin. Still the largest group by a wide margin, and more numerous than the French origin group which is probably around 27% in my estimation. (Not the same as francophones, since a large number of French origin Canadians outside Quebec are not francophones.)

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Acajack

According to the census, about a third of Canadians identify as having ethnic origins in the British Isles, and "Canadian" ethnic origin is around 16%. Probably a decent chunk of these "Canadian" ancestry people have British Isles origins, so my guess is that around 40% of Canada's population is still of British origin. Still the largest group by a wide margin, and more numerous than the French origin group which is probably around 27% in my estimation. (Not the same as francophones, since a large number of French origin Canadians outside Quebec are not francophones.)

In the long run that 40% probably won't drop. Heck, it might even rise, as many of the newer immigrants from Africa, Asia, etc. intermarry with Canadians of British origin.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

In the long run that 40% probably won't drop. Heck, it might even rise, as many of the newer immigrants from Africa, Asia, etc. intermarry with Canadians of British origin.

Personally I'd still expect it to drop, though it would be correct to assume that it will still remain a large demographic force in Canada for a long time.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Kilgore Trout

To your second point, Spanish cities are full of pedestrianized streets and areas that highly restrict motor vehicles. Yes, they also have large boulevards, but when I think of Madrid or Barcelona or Valencia I certainly don't think of especially car-centric cities.

I don't know any Spanish city where you cannot drive to the very heart of the Medieval city center with a car. Feel free to name one on the map!

There are pedestrian streets, but usually narrow Medieval alleys, and you'll always find a drivable street very nearby.

Spanish authorities, even in Barcelona, do not have as an objective to make life impossible for car drivers and kick cars out of cities, as the crazy zealots in Paris, Lyon, or Bordeaux have been attempting these past few years.

Originally Posted by Kilgore Trout

And finally I don't see what exactly is rural about a teeming pedestrian street filled wall-to-wall with people and activity.

Uh, that's not exactly the experience we've had in Paris! All these major avenues closed to car traffic have become empty deserts, like Rue de Rivoli, which used to be one of the busiest streets in Paris, and which now eerily feels like a dead city after WW3, with just crazy cyclists respecting no one using that street now.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Kilgore Trout

Incidentally the question of which language police communications are in has always fascinated me. There's very little information about this online. What language do they use in Barcelona and Brussels?

In Brussels the police force is bilingual and uses both languages, but obviously French predominates, which irks the 5% Dutch speakers (same situation in Brussels hospitals).

In Barcelona the Catalan police force uses Catalan, whereas the Spanish police force uses Spanish I believe (but of course Catalan natives in the Spanish police force may communicate between themselves in Catalan). Everybody understands Spanish anyway (whereas in Brussels not all policemen understand Dutch).

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Anecdote: I spent several days in Barcelona in the winter of 2007. It was 20 degrees at the time and sunny, so very pleasant. I was impressed by the careful infrastucture and overall integrity of the bike lane system, but I'm not telling a lie when I say that literally the only cyclist my wife and I saw there during our stay was the one who screamed at us in Catalan to get the eff out of the way because we'd stupidly stopped in the middle of a bike lane to look up at a building or something.

I found it rather mystifying. My guess was that the combination of rampant theft (of everything), the lack of space to bring and store bikes inside (those elevators and staircases are tiny) and the excellent public transit made cycling to work less appealing or practical. Don't know if things have changed since then, though.

I haven't seen many cyclists the last times I was in Barcelona. As for public transport, it doesn't look so good from a Parisian perspective. Their metro is a bit subpar. Many people drive in Barcelona. They have excellent road infrastructure, with even a beltway (freeway) that borders the Medieval city center and is underground (I always use it when I visit the Medieval city center of Barcelona, as you can exist the freeway and bam you're already in the Gothic part of the city). They have enormous underground car parks all around the Gothic quarter, but rather expensive, much more expensive than in the rest of Spain. It's very convenient if you don't mind spending 15 € for a few hours though.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

As for Brussels, I'm almost certain they use French and virtually French only. Brussels is almost a mirror image of Ottawa: with Flemish (in Brussels) being in the place of French (in Ottawa). Everything in terms of signage and in theory is bilingual but in practice the city's public life goes on only in one language. French in Brussels and English in Ottawa.

Dutch is much more present in Brussels than French in Ottawa. Not in the street (it's about the same as Ottawa street-wise), but in officialdom and public authorities Dutch has FAR more presence in Brussels than French in Ottawa. All administrative services are bilingual, the police force and hospitals are bilingual, the courts are bilingual, the Flemish nationalist parties are very punctilious about making sure Brussels remains bilingual. Also don't forget that the Flemish government set up its headquarters in Brussels. It's as if the government of Quebec and Assemblée nationale of Québec were relocated to Ottawa to claim Ottawa as "Québécois". The Flemings did that in the 1970s. The local government of Brussels (Brussels Region) also has to have a fixed % of Dutch speaking MPs in their regional parliament, as mandated by the constitution. The government of the Brussels Capital Region (which isn't larger than the island of Montréal) is also half Francophone and half Flemish, as per the constitution (half of the ministers forming the government of Brussels Capital Region must come from Flemish parties), even though the Flemings make up only 5% of the population. This is criticized by the Francophones, but the Flemish parties will never accept to change that ratio.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Dutch is much more present in Brussels than French in Ottawa. Not in the street (it's about the same as Ottawa street-wise), but in officialdom and public authorities Dutch has FAR more presence in Brussels than French in Ottawa. All administrative services are bilingual, the police force and hospitals are bilingual, the courts are bilingual, the Flemish nationalist parties are very punctilious about making sure Brussels remains bilingual. Also don't forget that the Flemish government set up its headquarters in Brussels. It's as if the government of Quebec and Assemblée nationale of Québec were relocated to Ottawa to claim Ottawa as "Québécois". The Flemings did that in the 1970s. The local government of Brussels (Brussels Region) also has to have a fixed % of Dutch speaking MPs in their regional parliament, as mandated by the constitution. The government of the Brussels Capital Region (which isn't larger than the island of Montréal) is also half Francophone and half Flemish, as per the constitution (half of the ministers forming the government of Brussels Capital Region must come from Flemish parties), even though the Flemings make up only 5% of the population. This is criticized by the Francophones, but the Flemish parties will never accept to change that ratio.

You've named some ways that Brussels is more bilingual than Ottawa, but in terms of a façade (and even the basic initial entry point service) Ottawa is quite bilingual.

Every single municipal sign in Ottawa is bilingual and often even down to the smallest ones like "Switch - Interrupteur" and stuff like that. If you go to city hall or municipal pools and libraries everything is bilingual as well and the staff that will greet definitely speak both English and French. This is also true of police stations and the municipal court system though not so much if you have to deal with an individual police officer on the street. The public transport system is also bilingual in all signage and announcements. Often a bit ridiculous because all stop names are said out twice to be "bilingual", even if the name is said the same in English and French. Though again it's imperfect with in-person service: if you want to get info or buy tickets in a station the staff will be bilingual, but speaking to drivers the majority only speak English.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Acajack

You've named some ways that Brussels is more bilingual than Ottawa, but in terms of a façade (and even the basic initial entry point service) Ottawa is quite bilingual.

Every single municipal sign in Ottawa is bilingual and often even down to the smallest ones like "Switch - Interrupteur" and stuff like that. If you go to city hall or municipal pools and libraries everything is bilingual as well and the staff that will greet definitely speak both English and French. This is also true of police stations and the municipal court system though not so much if you have to deal with an individual police officer on the street. The public transport system is also bilingual in all signage and announcements. Often a bit ridiculous because all stop names are said out twice to be "bilingual", even if the name is said the same in English and French. Though again it's imperfect with in-person service: if you want to get info or buy tickets in a station the staff will be bilingual, but speaking to drivers the majority only speak English.

Yes and importantly Ottawa is not a federal city. It is in a unilngual English province with municipal government entirely dependant on the whims of the province. We could easily elect a hostile to bilingualism government (s) who could do away with most of the above with the Feds largely powerless.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Yes and importantly Ottawa is not a federal city. It is in a unilngual English province with municipal government entirely dependant on the whims of the province.

That has always been the odd thing about Canada. Especially considering the particular linguistic conflict within Canada, you'd think the Francophones would make a point for Ottawa to be a bilingual federal territory not part of an Anglophone province. I suppose it is how it is because those in Québec most supportive of the French language and a distinct personality for Québec are not really invested in Canada, and in fact prefer to be a separate country, so where the capital of Canada is located doesn't matter all that much to them.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

That has always been the odd thing about Canada. Especially considering the particular linguistic conflict within Canada, you'd think the Francophones would make a point for Ottawa to be a bilingual federal territory not part of an Anglophone province. I suppose it is how it is because those in Québec most supportive of the French language and a distinct personality for Québec are not really invested in Canada, and in fact prefer to be a separate country, so where the capital of Canada is located doesn't matter all that much to them.

Your second point is exactly it. I know the legend is Ottawa was partially chosen as capital as it's on the border though not sure how true that was. I don't know why Lower Canada didn't push for a federal territory as captial.Maybe the idea was considered American at the time. Carving out Ottawa and Gatineau seems to make sense. Gets rid of some federalist voters for Quebec and Liberal voters in Ontario so maybe Ford and Plamondon can make the deal.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

That has always been the odd thing about Canada. Especially considering the particular linguistic conflict within Canada, you'd think the Francophones would make a point for Ottawa to be a bilingual federal territory not part of an Anglophone province. I suppose it is how it is because those in Québec most supportive of the French language and a distinct personality for Québec are not really invested in Canada, and in fact prefer to be a separate country, so where the capital of Canada is located doesn't matter all that much to them.

The idea to establish a federal capital area was quietly shelved when the Province of Quebec indicated that it would not countenance carving Hull and environs (now Gatineau) out of the province into an amalgamated federal capital area. Moreover, if Gatineau had not been part of Quebec, the 1995 referendum may have gone the other way.

Proposals have been made to separate the National Capital Region and establish it as a distinct capital district, similar to the District of Columbia or the Australian Capital Territory. These gained attention during periods when the Parti Québécois held power in Quebec, particularly due to the federalist inclination of the Hull/Gatineau area. However, any potential federal support waned after the 1995 Quebec referendum, where the predominantly federalist vote in Hull/Gatineau significantly influenced the outcome. Recent efforts for a separate capital district haven't gained momentum, with no active movement as of 2024.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

The idea to establish a federal capital area was quietly shelved when the Province of Quebec indicated that it would not countenance carving Hull and environs (now Gatineau) out of the province into an amalgamated federal capital area. Moreover, if Gatineau had not been part of Quebec, the 1995 referendum may have gone the other way.

Proposals have been made to separate the National Capital Region and establish it as a distinct capital district, similar to the District of Columbia or the Australian Capital Territory. These gained attention during periods when the Parti Québécois held power in Quebec, particularly due to the federalist inclination of the Hull/Gatineau area. However, any potential federal support waned after the 1995 Quebec referendum, where the predominantly federalist vote in Hull/Gatineau significantly influenced the outcome. Recent efforts for a separate capital district haven't gained momentum, with no active movement as of 2024.

Interesting and makes sens. Did you ask Chat GPT to explain why we don't have a Federal Territory?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Interesting and makes sens. Did you ask Chat GPT to explain why we don't have a Federal Territory?

My guess is that a guy like Molson probably knows all of this off-hand!

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

The idea to establish a federal capital area was quietly shelved when the Province of Quebec indicated that it would not countenance carving Hull and environs (now Gatineau) out of the province into an amalgamated federal capital area.

Lousy excuse. Virginia refused to cede the territory it was supposed to cede (Arlington and environs) to form the District of Columbia, yet that didn't stop the union from creating the District of Columbia out of just the Maryland part of it. Surely the federal government of Canada could have done the same if they had wanted to, i.e. just create a federal district out of Ontario territory only.

I think the more likely explanation is, the federal government being dominated by the Anglophones, they have no problem with the federal capital being located in an Anglophone province. Those who would have had the most interest in a federal district distinct from an Anglophone province, i.e. the Québécois, were either too weak within the federation (before 1960) to ask for anything, or not really interested in Canada anymore (after 1960) to ask for it.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Your second point is exactly it. I know the legend is Ottawa was partially chosen as capital as it's on the border though not sure how true that was. I don't know why Lower Canada didn't push for a federal territory as captial.Maybe the idea was considered American at the time. Carving out Ottawa and Gatineau seems to make sense. Gets rid of some federalist voters for Quebec and Liberal voters in Ontario so maybe Ford and Plamondon can make the deal.

While Lower Canada (today's Quebec) was primarily francophone in 1857 when Ottawa was chosen as the capital, at the time its Outaouais region north of the Ottawa River actually had an anglophone majority. Though it was fading fast as lots of francophones were moving in. (The Eastern Townships also had an anglophone majority at the time.)

[1overcosc]

I think there was a period in the 1960s/1970s (during the Pearson/Trudeau I era when the whole "bicultural" thing was at its peak relevance) when the idea of a capital district might have had some popularity. There was a big spike in federal government involvement in Ottawa's urban development in that period (which was basically non-existent before then).

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I think there was a period in the 1960s/1970s (during the Pearson/Trudeau I era when the whole "bicultural" thing was at its peak relevance) when the idea of a capital district might have had some popularity. There was a big spike in federal government involvement in Ottawa's urban development in that period (which was basically non-existent before then).

I think you are correct that this was probably the best window of opportunity.

Since then both sides (sic) of the issue have reasons for it not to happen.

From the Canadian federalist side it's convenient to have Gatineau's federalist votes in Quebec, as others have referenced in the context of 1995.

From the Québécois nationalist side agreeing to Gatineau joining a federal territory would be allowing the idea that Quebec's territorial integrity can be questioned. Quebec doesn't want this because it can open up questions about other areas such as western parts of Montreal island.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

While Lower Canada (today's Quebec) was primarily francophone in 1857 when Ottawa was chosen as the capital, at the time its Outaouais region north of the Ottawa River actually had an anglophone majority. Though it was fading fast as lots of francophones were moving in. (The Eastern Townships also had an anglophone majority at the time.)

I think the other reason is the federation when it was created was never meant to be "fair" to the Francophones. So no reason to have a separate federal territory (a concept alien to the British Empire anyway at the time).

And by the time the federal government really started to accommodate the Francophones and become fairer, i.e. the 1960s, like I've said large sections of the Québécois population were not really interested in Canada anymore, which is why neither Lévesque nor Parizeau, Legault, etc. pushed for a federal district.

It's more curious why the PLQ post 1960s didn't push for a federal district. If you're a PQ supporter you'll say perhaps that's because they are just subservient to Anglo-Canada, and if you're a PLQ supporter you'll say perhaps that's because they have enough already on their plate with Québécois souverainisme, so no need to start another fight by requesting a federal district.

[1overcosc]

Funny enough, there's a lot of anglophones in Ottawa who would probably like the idea of a federal district. There's a strong sense that the Ontario government is too Toronto-centric and doesn't pay enough attention to Ottawa's needs.