Thread: Belgian elections

Originally Posted by Hellfigger

Mister Vandelanotte (SPa)

The reason is because Belgium is an federal country. The same principal like the USA and Germany in election areas. The only problem in Belgium with the electionsystem is BHV, split it and this problem is solved.

I am not talking about regional elections but federal ones. Its idiocy beyond comprehension that you can't vote for the parties (at least the bigger ones that matter) in the entire country. And yes, you can do so in federal states, at least those deserving that name.

Originally Posted by Slartibartfas

Nonetheless I would really appreciate it if you could tell me how dialects are affected by this Toubin law. To be more specific, how it effects both spoken and written French dialect in commercial use. Is it outlawed or are there exceptions or did I get something wrong? As far as I got t there exist exception for the original speech in movies, but I did not get the details there as well.

I did some research and what I have found is quite interresting (also in contrast to the debate in Belgium).

First, I think it's worth reading the Toubon Law in extenso. Here is a link to the text:
Loi Toubon

As said, the law mandates the use of French in a number of circumnstances: contract, work place, official documents, meetings, and advertising.

However, it includes a number of important limitations to this obligation.

Art. 21 for example is expressly devoted to regional languages.
Art. 21. -
Les dispositions de la présente loi s'appliquent sans préjudice de la législation et de la réglementation relatives aux langues régionales de France et ne s'opposent pas à leur usage.

In short, the present law is without prejudice of any other law or regulation relative to regional languages and does not oppose their usage.

Since 2008, regional languages are anchored in the French constitution.
This does not provide them with an official status, but with a high degree of protection, to say the least.
Article 75-1 de la Constitution de la Cinquième République française - Wikipédia

It is since 1950 that a law allows for the teaching at school of a couple of them. There are quite a few regional languages in France:
Langues régionales ou minoritaires de France - Wikipédia

This may explain why the film on the Ch'ti has quotes in Ch'ti.

OR this advertising of the ruralwear brand "Commando sudiste" (They sell T-shirts and caps with regional symbols from the south of France and Corsica.)

Watch until the end! Attention, the woman speaks Occitan and it's sub-titled in French.
Commando Sudiste, marque de vêtements ruralwear

This answers your question too:

Originally Posted by Slartibartfas

To give you an example. There exist for example in Austria songs in dialect. The lyrics are often sold within textbooks or in other forms as are the records. Is it possible to do the same in France? Am I allowed to publsh lets say a rhime in dialect or a French dialect based book?

The answer is yes. I feel almost like saying "of course".
Next time you are in Paris, go to the FNAC: there is a department devoted to regional musics. I bought a beautiful CD of Corsican music a few years ago.
There will be publishers of regional literature as well.

Back to the Toubon Law anything is possible in a foreign language as long as there is a translation or if there is a necessity to speak in the original langage. This is why all conferences in France will be provided with simultaneous translation.

Therefore, although I quoted in French and I hope that the USPOL language policy goes along the lines of the Loi Toubon who allows for foreign languages when necessary as long as there is an appropriate translation

The English Wikipedia article on French language policy mentions that in 2006 a French subsidiary of a US company was fined €500,000 plus an ongoing fine of €20,000 per day for providing software and related technical documentation to its employees in the English language only.

As far as I am concerned, I am not shocked by such a decion. I think it protects the people working there.

Oh ... And I found the trailer of the film "Bienvenue chez les Ch'tis" with English sub-titles.
Dailymotion - Trailer (English Sub) Bienvenue chez les ch'tis - une vidéo Film & TV

PS. Ch'ti is a dialect of the North

Originally Posted by WoI

Yes, that's what the infamous BHV (Brussel-Halle-Vilvoorde) is about.
Step 1 : Make "Flanders" officially monolingual.
Step 2 : Observe that the French speaking people in that region still speak French (the gutzpah !!)
Step 3 : Disallow that those people can vote for who they want to vote for (present Flemish nationalistic demand).
Step 4 : I don't even want to know.

1. Flanders already is officially monolingual...
3. The Dewever proposal for the split of BHV contained a right of vote in Brussels for Francophones.
+ The language law doesn't prohibit Francophones from being elected in Flanders. The public meetings and communication have to happen in Dutch though.

4. Maybe it's also about solving a breach on the constitution concerning equal rights.

A Flemish person can't vote for Flemish politicians in Walloon-Brabant, so why should Walloons be allowed to vote for Walloon politicians in Flemish-Brabant?

There's only one reason for that: annexing our territory, just like happened with Brussels and the area around it. Language is used as a tool to grab Flemish territory. First Brussels, then the municipialities with Francophone language facilities and also the area around Brussels (BHV).

I have no problems with them speaking French, but that doesn't give them a freecard to annex municipialitities. And that's off course why the Flemish are so sensitive about Francophone language rights. They know what comes next.

And just look at Belgium. All electoral districts are organized provincial. EXCEPT BHV.

provinces



election districts



If you follow the spirit of the constitution, there's no other solution than organizing the election districts of BHV also on the provincial level. Period.

Any other solution would be discriminating.

Originally Posted by Thanatos

1. Flanders already is officially monolingual...

Only because it as artificially made so. That obviously is already a discrimination against people who speak other languages, French or other.

Originally Posted by Thanatos

3. The Dewever proposal for the split of BHV contained a right of vote in Brussels for Francophones.
+ The language law doesn't prohibit Francophones from being elected in Flanders. The public meetings and communication have to happen in Dutch though.

Same here.

Originally Posted by Thanatos

4. Maybe it's also about solving a breach on the constitution concerning equal rights.

A Flemish person can't vote for Flemish politicians in Walloon-Brabant, so why should Walloons be allowed to vote for Walloon politicians in Flemish-Brabant?

You're stepping over a much more fundamental problem : Why can't I vote for say Veronica Cremasco if I wanted to ? I'm Flemish and my choices are limited. What are you going to do about that discrimination ? Come on, Flemish nationalist, work for your constituents and solve my problem

Originally Posted by Thanatos

There's only one reason for that: annexing our territory, just like happened with Brussels and the area around it. Language is used as a tool to grab Flemish territory. First Brussels, then the municipialities with Francophone language facilities and also the area around Brussels (BHV).

"used as a tool"? So somewhere French speaking people secretively decide to move en masse to Flanders in order to 'occupy territory'. This is getting confusing. I thought it was the Muslims that did that.

Originally Posted by Thanatos

I have no problems with them speaking French, but that doesn't give them a freecard to annex municipialitities. And that's off course why the Flemish are so sensitive about Francophone language rights. They know what comes next.

If you're so stupid to decide territoriality on such trivial matters as language the only way to be consistent is to move the boundaries when the reality of that changes. Forcing people to speak language X, Y or Z because of institutionalism is fascist.

Originally Posted by Thanatos

And just look at Belgium. All electoral districts are organized provincial. EXCEPT BHV.

provinces



election districts



If you follow the spirit of the constitution, there's no other solution than organizing the election districts of BHV also on the provincial level. Period.

Any other solution would be discriminating.

Much simpler solution : National election districts.

Regarding the local languages. Thats good to hear that there are exemptions. But what defines a local language? I have the feeling we are talking here of more than just dialects. These are almost languages on their own, are they? (Yeah they are not officially recognized as such but you know what mean, do you?) For example Tyrolian hardly passes for a local language but is rather a true dialect with features of its own (in grammar and vocabulary) but still solidly German, other than for example Catalan which is used in partially in the very south of France if I am not mistaken.

Originally Posted by Sucre

The English Wikipedia article on French language policy mentions that in 2006 a French subsidiary of a US company was fined €500,000 plus an ongoing fine of €20,000 per day for providing software and related technical documentation to its employees in the English language only.

As far as I am concerned, I am not shocked by such a decion. I think it protects the people working there.

So, is it also illegal and punishable if a large company has parts of its internal communication in untranslated English?

Come one, if you want to apply for a job you have to be qualified for it. Qualifications include language qualifications. I have seen Austrian job ads of companies in Austria which only excepted people who are fluent in Spanish because they are branches of Latin American multis. I would be surprised if that criterion isn't there for a reason. If you don't have this qualification or don't like that demand, no one is forcing you to apply for that job.

If this the case I would expect that it is a real competitive disadvantage. It turns from the question worthy to the tragic in research. A lot of areas of research takes place in English. Period. If you are forced to additionally translate it into French, you do not only have to invent tons of vocabulary (how the hell should any state institute have an idea of your needs in such a specialized academic field?) but spend considerable working time on translation jobs to produce French documents no one is interested in because your cooperating institutes will go for the English papers like everyone else.

Is there an exemption for research in the Toubin law as well maybe?

Originally Posted by Sucre

Oh ... And I found the trailer of the film "Bienvenue chez les Ch'tis" with English sub-titles.
Dailymotion - Trailer (English Sub) Bienvenue chez les ch'tis - une vidéo Film & TV

PS. Ch'ti is a dialect of the North

Great movie. Except that the dialect spoken in Sint-Winoksbergen (Bergues) is Flemish and not ch'ti (Picard).

No, really, It's a good film. Saw it in the cinema two years ago on recommendation of a (real) ch'ti.

Originally Posted by Slartibartfas

Regarding the local languages. Thats good to hear that there are exemptions.

The rule (constitutionally guaranteed) is still that there is total freedom of language. But there are no legal rules without a few exemptions.

In Flanders, the language law concerns this 4 points:
-courts (still can get a tolk)
-public organisations must use Dutch for communication with civilians (f.e. municipialities, road signs, also communication between government and civilians).
-education: communication between teacher and children must be in Dutch (but english courses at university and colleges are not prohibited)
-communication between employer and employee must be in Dutch. This doesn't imply that an employee is legally required to speak Dutch/French or whatever.

That's it.

No language laws on company- to-consumer communication, no language laws on company-to-company communication..
No language laws on media (nothing is dubbed, everything is subtitled...), except maybe a quotum for Dutch music on radio in the future (stupid idea imo). Not sure about that one.

And off course we don't have language laws for communication between civilians...

If you want to have the Belgian nationality, you have to prove the intention that you want to learn Dutch or French.

I really don't think this is over the top, as the municipialities with lots of Francophones mostly have "facilities", in those municipialities, almost all of the language restrictions are eliminated (those municipialities have Francophone education, bilingual communication between gov and civilian etc).

On the other hand, the facilities for Dutchphones in Wallonia and Brussels are not respected: there is not even Dutchphone education for 3-12 year olds in those municipialities, often no bilingual communication etc.

Originally Posted by Slartibartfas

Regarding the local languages. Thats good to hear that there are exemptions. But what defines a local language? I have the feeling we are talking here of more than just dialects. These are almost languages on their own, are they? (Yeah they are not officially recognized as such but you know what mean, do you?) For example Tyrolian hardly passes for a local language but is rather a true dialect with features of its own (in grammar and vocabulary) but still solidly German, other than for example Catalan which is used in partially in the very south of France if I am not mistaken.

Are you asking in a generally speaking way or in a legal way?

In a legal way, I would't be able to answer. I don' t even know if there is any "legal" definition of a local language and, more importantly, if there has ever been any necessity to check the definition legally.

Using my common sense, I would say that if it applies to a local language spoken by a 1 million people, why not apply it to a very local "patoi" spoken by 100 people ?

French has become the dominant language in France because it was/ is the only language allowed at school (since 1882) and in public life. It was/ is also the only written language with a full blown literature. There is, however, no animosity in France, and there has never been any active politics, against local languages as in some countries (like Turkey for example against the Kurds...)

Originally Posted by Slartibartfas

So, is it also illegal and punishable if a large company has parts of its internal communication in untranslated English?

Come one, if you want to apply for a job you have to be qualified for it. Qualifications include language qualifications. I have seen Austrian job ads of companies in Austria which only excepted people who are fluent in Spanish because they are branches of Latin American multis. I would be surprised if that criterion isn't there for a reason. If you don't have this qualification or don't like that demand, no one is forcing you to apply for that job.

If this the case I would expect that it is a real competitive disadvantage. It turns from the question worthy to the tragic in research. A lot of areas of research takes place in English. Period. If you are forced to additionally translate it into French, you do not only have to invent tons of vocabulary (how the hell should any state institute have an idea of your needs in such a specialized academic field?) but spend considerable working time on translation jobs to produce French documents no one is interested in because your cooperating institutes will go for the English papers like everyone else.

Is there an exemption for research in the Toubin law as well maybe?

First, i's ToubON law, right .

Second, I don't think that everybody in a multi-national company needs to speak English. If you are a software programmer, sure. But if you are the sub-secretary making the coffee and ... using this software for your boss?

If the company was fined, it is because it was sued. Don't you think it was sued by somebody who felt prejudiced by the law, i.e the secretary rather than the software programmer ..?

The law has been written to protect the French language not to hinder people in their work or shut France from the rest of the word.

There is no exception for research, as there needs to be no exception. If an article is written or has to be written in English, well, let it be, period. The law is not about forbidding people to speak another language if necessary, it is about using French if another language is not necessary.

Living in Germany, I wish the Germans had such laws protecting their citizens.

A friend of mine, who wanted to work in a language school in Berlin was proposed to sign a work contract in ... English. OK, it was a language school, fair enough. However, she wanted to teach French ! I can understand that as a subsidiary of an English language school, they were saving money this way. On the back of their employees. Is she supposed as a French teacher to German students to know English as part of her qualification ? Certainly not. The German subsidiary was abusing of the dominant position of the English language. She was quite distressed when she told me the story. I translated the contract for her.

Sorry, this is unfair. People should have access to the important documents ruling their life in their language.

Originally Posted by WoI

"used as a tool"? So somewhere French speaking people secretively decide to move en masse to Flanders in order to 'occupy territory'. This is getting confusing. I thought it was the Muslims that did that.

H, hi Very good.

Originally Posted by Sucre

Are you asking in a generally speaking way or in a legal way?

In a legal way, I would't be able to answer. I don' t even know if there is any "legal" definition of a local language and, more importantly, if there has ever been any necessity to check the definition legally.

Using my common sense, I would say that if it applies to a local language spoken by a 1 million people, why not apply it to a very local "patoi" spoken by 100 people ?

Its less a matter of how many people speak it but more of how different it is and how much it has a language character by itself. So in a way you end up with a situation where regional unique deviations of standard French are no allowed to use in specific situations while for true local languages like Ch'ti exemptions apply. Where to draw the line? For me this is a fascinating question.

French has become the dominant language in France because it was/ is the only language allowed at school (since 1882) and in public life. It was/ is also the only written language with a full blown literature. There is, however, no animosity in France, and there has never been any active politics, against local languages as in some countries (like Turkey for example against the Kurds...)

You know the funny thing? The Lycée in Vienna actually teaches in French... I think thats great. According to what I have read from you so far here you should think differently.

Second, I don't think that everybody in a multi-national company needs to speak English. If you are a software programmer, sure. But if you are the sub-secretary making the coffee and ... using this software for your boss?

I'd say most of them actually do. Yes, the cleaning woman might not but pretty much everyone else should have at least basic English skills nowadays in such companies, "sub-secretaries" certainly would have to. To be honest it also appears to me that this is also to a large extend the case nowadays, at least in Austria.

If the company was fined, it is because it was sued. Don't you think it was sued by somebody who felt prejudiced by the law, i.e the secretary rather than the software programmer ..?

So what you are saying is that its fine. Because if they treat their staff kindly they can at least hope that they are not getting sued and if they manage to piss someone off for whatever reason, well than they deserve to be sued anyway. I happen to disagree. Multinational companies have the choices of either standing with one foot in plain illegality, to keep everything always fully translated into French at considerable costs or to move to French speaking Switzerland where people are more open minded and less restrictive. Of course thats not good for French competitiveness in global markets.

There is no exception for research, as there needs to be no exception. If an article is written or has to be written in English, well, let it be, period. The law is not about forbidding people to speak another language if necessary, it is about using French if another language is not necessary.

And if my boss does not prolong my working contract, I'll give him a hint that he better should or be ready to face legal action for language reasons. Cool.

Living in Germany, I wish the Germans had such laws protecting their citizens.

See and I am glad it has not. On the other side, if they should do, worse things could happen as it would make Austria more attractive for international companies.

A friend of mine, who wanted to work in a language school in Berlin was proposed to sign a work contract in ... English. OK, it was a language school, fair enough. However, she wanted to teach French ! I can understand that as a subsidiary of an English language school, they were saving money this way. On the back of their employees. Is she supposed as a French teacher to German students to know English as part of her qualification ? Certainly not.

If you are working for an English language school? Yes, I suppose you should be able of speaking English for various reasons. Also as French teacher. She is truly provoking problems to arise if she is not able to communicate with the headquarters even if there are administration levels in between. That the contract was in English only is a special case. I am not sure how its handled in Austria but I can understand if you want a German translation for it. I would be surprised if a company would not understand that. But as I've said treaties are a special case. It would be also interesting under which law sphere it would have been established. But then I am nor law expert. I am decently confident that anyone could fool me as easily in German as in English when it comes to contracts.

The German subsidiary was abusing of the dominant position of the English language. She was quite distressed when she told me the story. I translated the contract for her.

Sorry, this is unfair. People should have access to the important documents ruling their life in their language.

I can understand her to a certain point but first of all as I have said, you can't set a same treaties and legal texts with all the other stuff and secondly that no one forces you to do a job with a company which working philosophy you dislike. If you work for a language school and don't know its primary language of operation chances are high you don't look for the right job. I don't know what would happen if you'd apply for the Lycée in Vienna without being fluent in French. They'd probably think you are kidding. Not matter if you were to teach English or German only at their school or not and I would understand them.

Originally Posted by WoI

You're stepping over a much more fundamental problem : Why can't I vote for say Veronica Cremasco if I wanted to ? I'm Flemish and my choices are limited. What are you going to do about that discrimination ? Come on, Flemish nationalist, work for your constituents and solve my problem

1. That's no legal discrimination... Don't talk about concepts you don't understand...

I'm sorry for disturbing your naive fantasy with facts, but there's not a single federal country in the world with a federal election district except Iraq.

Federal election districts are typical for unitarian countries, not for federal countries and certainly not typical for (con)federal countries which are falling apart.

Second, the parity in the Belgium federal government and senate are not complementary with a federal election district. A federal election district implies proportionality per definition.

The return to a unitarian Belgium is an illusion, a remembrance to long past times... Belgium once started unitarian and see how that worked out.

You are simply confusing cause and consequence again. Nationalism is not the root of evil, it is reactionary.

2. Why bother asking a Flemish nationalist? The principle of territoriality based on language was installed at demand of the Francophone socialists in 1929 to protect the Francophone language, since it became clear that the total frenchification of Flanders wasn't realistic anymore.

Does that fact fit in your 'Flemish racist nationalists are discriminating Wallonia' scheme?

(Go to the constitutional court. I'm sure they'll have a good laugh when you present your legal fictions:rolleyes: )

Originally Posted by WoI

"used as a tool"? So somewhere French speaking people secretively decide to move en masse to Flanders in order to 'occupy territory'. This is getting confusing. I thought it was the Muslims that did that.

1. I didn't say it was an organised conspiracy. Francophones move to Flanders because of the socio-economic reality.

But it remains a fact that the Francophones demand Flemish municipialities added to Francophone territory whenever they have a considerable minority there.
How do you think Brussels became an autonomous region in the first place?

So the moving isn't organised, but the wish to annex Flemish territory is. Just look at the election program of various Francophone parties.

Your pathetic insinuations don't change that reality.

2. I never claimed that about Muslims, nor do I have have knowledge of Muslims who want to annex Flemish municipialities, do you?

I love it how you keep trying labeling me with racism. I probably have more 'coloured' and French friends then you... (and some of them even vote for NVA, can you grasp that 'contradiction'?).

Flemish nationalism is not about race, it's about a failing system which can't cope with the differences between Francophone and Flemish political culture...

Originally Posted by WoI

If you're so stupid to decide territoriality on such trivial matters as language the only way to be consistent is to move the boundaries when the reality of that changes. Forcing people to speak language X, Y or Z because of institutionalism is fascist.

Language...
and history
and ideology
and off course the given fact that Flemish and Walloons are two different people, which is known since a few hundred years but you apparently still don't understand..

Originally Posted by WoI

Much simpler solution : National election districts.

How would that wipe out the difference in ideology between north and south. Wallonia is embedded in the French legal culture, why Flanders follows the Anglo-Saxon and Dutch legal culture.

Originally Posted by Sucre

There is, however, no animosity in France, and there has never been any active politics, against local languages as in some countries (like Turkey for example against the Kurds...)

I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but France is, together with Flanders, Greece and Turkey, notorious for not signing/ratifying treaties which prescribe the recognition of minority groups and local languages.

European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages
Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities

If France ratified the first, it would have to recognize 75 languages, of which 8 in metropolitan France....