STM service in English
Re: “Service in English should be common sense for STM” (Editorial, Jan. 9)
Since 1987, we have vacationed in Montreal for two weeks every year and, some years, longer. When I come, I expect to use French as much as possible. However, I am not fully bilingual. And during the emergencies we have experienced there on the métro and Via Rail, we were only given instructions in French.
In an emergency, deep underground, or in a train carriage, one’s heart is pounding and pulse racing. Has anyone in control of the situation ever realized that a passenger could suffer a heart attack or worse just from the way the emergency situation is being handled? The editorial has hit the nail squarely on the head: It is a matter of common sense. In an emergency, one is thinking in his/her own language.
Regarding lost tourism, we constantly put acquaintances right about Montreal and Quebec: how friendly people are, what an amazing city and province you have, that — even if they don’t speak French — they will be treated well. Our only complaints result from how we have been treated during emergencies.
If I encountered a French-speaking person who needed help here in the southern United States, I would certainly try to help. Doing to others as you would have them do unto you makes sense in any religion or language or ethnic background.
If I were ever in a burning building, I certainly hope no one is researching law before they begin to help with the evacuation. To me, as with your editorial, the whole issue seems to be a no-brainer. We miss Montreal between visits, subscribe to the online paper and encourage friends to visit Montreal. You need more people spreading the good word rather than casting a black-eye on your reputation. Your city is a treasure. I fear many people there do not realize how lucky they are to live there. Jeanne Ridley Knoxville, Tenn.
Re: “STM hasn’t asked lawyers about service in English” (Gazette, Jan. 4)
I think it is time we look at the situation objectively. Once upon a time, the English ruled Quebec and French Canadians, the majority, were obligated to speak English, which created resentment. Now the French have the power and the roles are reversed.
We do not like this, but that does not do any good.
Yes, we must fight to retain the services we can but, at the same time, we must recognize that, when our leaders are unfortunately conveying the message that English is close to being a disease, the French are not compelled to learn it and it does not take a university degree to be a ticket taker.
I look at this as being an opportunity to improve my French, which is already good.
I do not waste my time speaking English. Sometimes, part way through a conversation, I realize I am speaking as a young English Quebecer who astutely has mastered French. Congratulations to those who have. Chris Hunter
Rosemont
Re: “STM is misinterpreting Bill 101, civil rights lawyer says” (Gazette, Jan. 5)
It amazes me that we have to resort to legal haggling over what language a client should be addressed in at a Montreal ticket booth!
Shouldn’t it be clear that common sense courtesy should prevail in every instance? Anything else is simply bad business practice and an indication of how low life social manners have taken over our society. How un-evolved have we become when simple civilized consideration has become a mystery for the courts to decide?
Joyce Crowley
Montreal West