Bill 101 had some key provisions that affected day to day communications of many people in Quebec. The emphasis on the French language was determined to attain some hard goals, some of which were essentially met. Though these hard goals were met bill 101 has many qualitative implications
The pathway to Bill 101 is one that started in the 60’s. During this time there was a cultural division in labour, accommodations for elites which were highly Anglophone, selling of resources to English and no governmental intervention. In response to this there was a lot of intervention from government. First of was the understanding that the French language needed to be improved in terms of quality to get a standardized one. Once the quality of education …show more content…
This bill made French the sole official language and created an incentive system for this language to be used. If companies hired 50% or more Francophones they would get tax breaks. The more Francophones you hired the larger the tax break. This path was much more coercive because it forced children to learn French, only if you could demonstrate at 5 years old that English was your native tongue you could go to an English school. The public rejection of bill 63 and its premises and the acceptance of bill 22 are the predecessors of bill 101.
The premise of bill 101 is that there was a clash of collective rights and individual rights. There were many arguments against having French language in Quebec obligatory. There were questions raised about which language do you have the right to use; English or French? Does a distinct society have the right to grow their language? However, above all there was an understanding that, “if language is the core of collective culture, then francophone Québécois culture could not endure within a bilingual …show more content…
Bill 101’s success may have killed the idea of independence. Many of the measureable societal issues such as income equality between Francophones and Anglophones had disappeared. The neo-nationalists wanted political action on the concerns of: the subordination of French Canadians in Quebec’s economy, the tendency of immigrants to choose English as the language of daily use in homes, workplaces, and schools; and the little need for Anglophone Quebec to learn French. All of these concerns were addressed and the grounds for independence were no longer as transparent. Furthermore, the idea of an inclusive Québécois identity diminished due to the fact that many Allophones do not want to immigrate into Quebec anymore as doing so would marginalize their children’s chance of success in Canada as a whole. Prior to Bill 101 most Allophones would not choose to put their children in a French-speaking school. Whether these subjective loses outweigh the objective successes are individually interpretable but Bill 101 has changed the linguistic identity of
The pathway to Bill 101 is one that started in the 60’s. During this time there was a cultural division in labour, accommodations for elites which were highly Anglophone, selling of resources to English and no governmental intervention. In response to this there was a lot of intervention from government. First of was the understanding that the French language needed to be improved in terms of quality to get a standardized one. Once the quality of education …show more content…
This bill made French the sole official language and created an incentive system for this language to be used. If companies hired 50% or more Francophones they would get tax breaks. The more Francophones you hired the larger the tax break. This path was much more coercive because it forced children to learn French, only if you could demonstrate at 5 years old that English was your native tongue you could go to an English school. The public rejection of bill 63 and its premises and the acceptance of bill 22 are the predecessors of bill 101.
The premise of bill 101 is that there was a clash of collective rights and individual rights. There were many arguments against having French language in Quebec obligatory. There were questions raised about which language do you have the right to use; English or French? Does a distinct society have the right to grow their language? However, above all there was an understanding that, “if language is the core of collective culture, then francophone Québécois culture could not endure within a bilingual …show more content…
Bill 101’s success may have killed the idea of independence. Many of the measureable societal issues such as income equality between Francophones and Anglophones had disappeared. The neo-nationalists wanted political action on the concerns of: the subordination of French Canadians in Quebec’s economy, the tendency of immigrants to choose English as the language of daily use in homes, workplaces, and schools; and the little need for Anglophone Quebec to learn French. All of these concerns were addressed and the grounds for independence were no longer as transparent. Furthermore, the idea of an inclusive Québécois identity diminished due to the fact that many Allophones do not want to immigrate into Quebec anymore as doing so would marginalize their children’s chance of success in Canada as a whole. Prior to Bill 101 most Allophones would not choose to put their children in a French-speaking school. Whether these subjective loses outweigh the objective successes are individually interpretable but Bill 101 has changed the linguistic identity of