http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/westview/story/3254086p-3767921c.html said:
No French, no job?
Official bilingualism can bring careers to a dead stop
Tue Jan 10 2006
By Jim Shilliday
OH, "rights and freedoms," what crimes are being committed in your name?
Many serving and ex-military officers, frustrated by their country's bilingualism policies, may be inclined to vote for Conservatives in the coming federal election -- but they must wonder if that would be the same as voting for Liberals.
For some reason, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not apply to the fallout of enforced bilingualism that is ignored by politicians, the media and Canadians generally.
There are points of view in Canada that go mostly unheard. That's because labels are applied by people in government and the media, such as "franco-phobic," a tag applied to a delegate at last year's Conservative Party convention who tried to raise concerns about bilingualism.
That Conservative gathering in Montreal may have turned out the lights of hope for any ambitious members of the Canadian Armed Forces who don't speak French. The Tories endorsed the Official Languages Act, and now there is no political party in the House of Commons that can take the side of military officers (and thousands of civil servants) whose careers are ruined or diminished because they have been unable to master the French language, or don't wish to. Bilingualism is official policy of the Canadian Forces. A lieutenant-colonel I know, a graduate of Royal Rhodes military college, left the service because of the restrictions of bilingualism policy.
A captain who quit the military outlines the frustration of enforced bilingualism in an article written for COPS (Canadian Oppressed Public Servants) at www: languagefairness.org/Contact_Us.php.
COPS is run by public service volunteers and assisted by Language Fairness National, a volunteer group of taxpayers. It claims 130,000 federal public servants support its fight against language policies.
Some unilingual military officers, instead of commanding fighter squadrons, battalions or warships, are back on civvie street, probably selling insurance. What would Canadians prefer, a great leader or a great linguist taking their soldiers, sailors and airmen into battle?
But doesn't having a bilingual military make sense? Not to the degree we are led to believe. Former prime minister Pierre Trudeau, quite reasonably, appointed francophones to high positions in the civil service and boards, agencies and commissions. French Canadians had to be shown that the national government reflected their needs.
This "well-meaning idealism," has gone well beyond that, wrote MP Scott Reid in Lament for a Notion: The Life and Death of Canada's Bilingual Dream. "... the federal government has adopted a system of hiring and promotions that... systematically discriminates against most anglophones... Such tactics freeze out from the public service the 24 million Canadians -- and especially immigrant groups -- who speak only one official language, either English or French, but not both."
Some anglophone officers are said to have left the Canadian military due to lack of facility in the French language. Many Quebec francophones, because of the need to communicate in a largely English-speaking environment in North America, have a step up when it comes to employment and advancement in the Canadian military and civil service. Spokespersons for all federal departments, agencies, the military and RCMP are predominantly francophones -- just monitor the daily news.
In June of 2003, then defence minister John McCallum announced that the armed forces had fallen far short in promoting bilingualism. Only 45 per cent of those promoted to lieutenant-colonel were bilingual. That would have to rise by five per cent a year.
Justice and equality for francophones in Canada was attained decades ago; francophone participation in Canadian affairs now goes beyond fairness on a proportional population basis. To achieve full bilingualism in the Canadian military, the process appears to work best by getting rid of anglophone officers and replacing them with francophones. Expressions against such injustice are not anti-French. Most Canadians simply appreciate fairness -- and sensible policies. Retired air force pilot Lt.-Col. Lawrie Hawn says: "I can think of a lot of fine young warriors who would have been excellent senior leaders... politically correct things we are asked to do are fine, unless when they are done at the expense of what should be the heart of any professional military person -- that is, a warrior spirit and a will to win in the toughest of situations..."
Many Quebecers have led our young men against the enemy. The province enjoys an admirable tradition of service to Canada's armed forces in the two world wars and all other conflicts.
They have been killed, won decorations, achieved great rank. One warrior from Quebec, Georges Vanier, became our governor general. How did they contribute so much, attain such recognition, when the entire military organization (or the country) was not nearly as bilingual as it is today? And how did so many unilingual anglophone soldiers, sailors and airmen accomplish so much during wars abroad?
Bilingualism is a helpful adjunct, and required in some situations. But the biggest proponents of bilingualism in Canada are politicians whose careers and "legacy" depend on preserving a group identity, not promoting individual achievement. Is this a service to Canadian society? Or does it, instead, drain certain talent from the military, cause morale to plummet, and foster a division between different segments of the population?
Some capable, promising army, navy and air force officers have been unable to use their talents to advance their country's military competence because they were not bilingual -- because federal political parties court Quebec voters.
Retired newspaper editor Jim Shilliday flew fighters for NATO as a member of the Canadian air force.
my english is not very good!! 
