As someone living in EU, there is a practical limit to this. Languages NEEDS should be satisfied: For example, a translator should be provided to someone not speaking common languages (for the area) trying to get medical care.

But language WANTS might not be economically viable. For example in Scandinavia, Sami people (estimated population <100k) demanded all government interaction (documents, services, etc) to be translated in all their dialects (there are 11+ dialects, which are different in writing). Amount of work to be done to support that request would be astonishing.

Ironically the same true for French. There are 20+ very different dialects, is Quebec ready to work in all of them on government level? Or are we talking about le français standard?

So there is some practical limits to this, and so far EU is handling it's ok-ish. EU-wide systems are available in all official languages of all members, and minority languages are embraced when practical.

Where are you coming up with 20 different dialects of French? Are you talking about the various French-based creole languages, which are totally separate languages (e.g., someone from France has essentially no hope of understanding a native Hatian Creole speaker). If that's what you mean it's a bit silly to call them "dialects" instead of "separate languages" because Haitian Creole and French are as different as English and French.

Or are you talking about the various regional languages/dialects/"patois" in France? If so, sure, many could be called "dialects of French" but they aren't spoken at all outside of France so it isn't really relevant to Quebec.

I'm referring to a fact that before economical needs created unified time / measurement system / language, each region had their own language-dialect. For example Gallo-Romance languages and so on [0].

- [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_France

Yes, you're right. And those dialects still exist; I know people (born before WWII in semi-rural areas) whose first language was something so different from the standard that it'd have been very difficult for someone from Paris to understand.

But as far as I know, none of them are spoken in Quebec...

Would you demand that businesses or government agencies communicate with you in English in Spain or China?

If so, sure, you have a consistent position at least. If not, why is Quebec different?

We are a bilingual country. The rest of Canada bends over backwards to offer services in French which are seldom utilized. I would not ask for English in Spain or China because it isn't an official language there.

We have a national law that all students--anywhere in the country--can receive instruction in either English or French--but this has been consistently undermined in Quebec. They have made it so arduous to qualify for English school* that nearly all English speakers will not qualify.

That is just one example of the double standard. If you want the country to be bilingual, then it has to work both ways.

* The rule is something like "Both of your parents must be native Quebec and both must have attended English school in Quebec for their entire childhood. Any deviation from this and you cannot qualify to English school". So anyone who immigrates from the rest of Canada, or has one French/one English parent is disqualified.

> The rest of Canada bends over backwards to offer services in French which are seldom utilized.

Citation needed. Federal government offers services in French almost everywhere, as it offers services in English even in areas where almost no one speaks it.

But provincial services? There's just nothing. Ontario struggles to keep higher education and health services in French, and this is the province with the highest number of French speakers outside Quebec. There is a party in New Brunswick explicitly against providing services in French and they got 13% of the vote in the last election (reminder, New Brunswick is the only province to be officially bilingual).

So I am highly skeptical of your stance about the rest of Canada "bending over backward" to offer services in French...

The Manitoba legislature building offers guided tours in English and French at alternating times. Of course the French tour is probably empty >90% of the time, but it still has to be offered in equal frequency. It wouldn't be fair to offer the English tour every 30 minutes, but only do the French tour twice per day.

So it's not just an issue of access, but equal access. That's why I called it 'bending over backwards'. It feels like a lot of politically-correct posturing that ignores the reality that there are very few French speakers in Winnipeg.

Despite all of this, the French services probably still suck. It's likely that they are equal on paper, but not in reality.

That's Manitoba's CHOICE, it's not federally required.

Most provinces do not make that choice, the further west you go.

It's basically slow cultural cleninsing. The English schools will basically be gone in 30 years. (Even though many are 50/50 English/French for class work.)

Meanwhile no one wants to go to a French language CEGEP (years 11-13) because they need to learn English, and people in Ontario fight to get their kids into bilingual immersion schools.

I'm in California. We bend over backwards to make sure that our citizens and visitors language needs are supported.

For instance, Ca voter registration in tagalog.

https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-resources/voting-cal...

Spain or China are not parts of Canada, where the official languages are French and English

Spain is part of the EU, where English is one of the official languages. But English is not an official language of Spain.

Quebec is part of Canada, where English is one of the official languages. But English is not an official language of Quebec.

Sure, so one should also be able to solely speak French everywhere in this BILINGUAL country? Give me a break.