The politics of language and the Quebec premier’s quest to revive hockey

Language is “humanity’s greatest invention” but with it came controversy and the two are never far apart in either lexicon or politics. Their long-standing relationship makes them lovers of some familiarity and today, language is politics and is often a matter of deep anguish. This is the essential collegial familiarity in our understanding of Canadian history and daily events. Long before the Vikings decided northern Newfoundland was not a place with today’s reputation of hospitality or the Basques chasing whales around Red Bay, Labrador, or Cartier sailing the St. Lawrence, Indigenous peoples walked the land with a complexity of languages—many of which are enjoying a welcomed resurgence. The arrivals of others, at first settlers from the lands of Europe, and later, those from the far reaches of the world, added to the existing complexity. Today it is a courageous political leader who attempts to make an observation or statement or, heaven forbid, policy, about our languages. But it is always an easily available shibboleth in our politics and policies. In November, this was inadvertently emphasized when the CEO of the national airline decided to speak, largely in English, to an audience of business leaders in Quebec. Needless to say, the stupidity of doing so was enhanced by his explanation. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stated the speech was “unacceptable” and his deputy was quick to write to the board of Air Canada suggesting knowledge of French be added to the attributes of the CEO. Quebec's premier, François Legault, spoke of being “insulted” and before the day was out a language tutor became a member of the CEO’s executive suite. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau looks and Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland both criticized Air Canada's CEO for speaking to Quebec business leaders in English. The Hill Times photograph by Sam Garcia The Air Canada’s contretemps was not an unusual event in the ongoing efforts to ensure the survival of French as an official language. As with all language issues, AC’s CEO faux pas occasioned restatements of well-trodden forked roads with some seeing the matter as “ludicrous" or an example of “Quebec fragility.” Others with a sense of the history of language involving AC’s service emphasized justification for the outrage. Unfortunately, the tribulations of the Air Canada executive overshadowed an effort by the premier of Quebec to give attention to an even more serious lacunae in Canada’s French-speaking nation. This was one where language and the "heart and soul" combined for those who remembered the National Hockey League of only one team—les Canadiens de Montreal. Ignoring the Air Canada CEO, the premier voiced a disaster even more fundamental to Quebec—the diminishing number of young French-speaking hockey players or hockeyeurs seeding the teams of the National Hockey League. The premier’s preliminary thoughts on such matters were as traditional as poutine at truck stops. Noting hockey was more than a “sport in Quebec;” it was part of Quebec’s “identity,” the premier struck a 14-member investigating committee under the chair of, appropriately, a former goalie, Marc Denis. The committee is to examine why there are fewer successors for the Richards, Geoffrions, Belliveaus, Lafleurs, Plantes, Savards, Dionnes, Lemieuxs, Roys and Bossys among the ranks of the 721 players of the NHL. The committee is to report before next year's playoffs for the Stanley Cup. Maurice "the Rocket" Richard remains an icon of Quebec larger than most. His suspension during the 1955 playoffs remains a seminal event in Quebec history. The consequential rioting was seen by many as the first "unquiet" event in Quebec’s transformation reflecting the view that French-speaking hockey players were unfairly treated in a league dominated by English. In 1995, La Presse in remembering the associated riot, wrote: “Forty years ago began one of the most dramatic episodes in the history of Quebec.” The premier’s concern, while noted by a few beyond Quebec, created little to no interest as to its importance. But surprisingly, the New York Times saw the issue for the importance it was and gave the premier’s concerns a full page of text and pictures with the headline “Quebec Has Fewer NHL Players Than Sweden!” Language is the essence of the culture of Quebec and there is some irony in having an American newspaper detail the importance of hockey in that culture. The associated statistics supporting the Time’s story demonstrated the problem. Today, only seven per cent of the players in the NHL come from Quebec, and, while 43 per cent of all players are Canadian, Quebec players are outnumbered by those from Sweden, even though the populations of both are roughly equal. Even more disturbing, the national home of Quebec hockey, Les Canadiens, did not dress a single player from Quebec in a game last year. It is appropriate our language wars find popular expression with the troubles the premier of Quebec expresses when he does not see Les Hockeyeurs in the numbers needed to maintain an important element of Quebec culture. The premier is right to see if something can be done to alter the power internationally and engage the youth of Quebec. Last year one NHL team started the season with players from the United States, Canada, Switzerland, Finland, Russia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, and Latvia. The quality of hockey and interest in our national sport has, appropriately, moved far beyond preoccupations centered on language. It illustrates, for the premier and others, the lesson that Canute knew when he stood on the shore of the North Sea pretending that he could alter the tides. The tides did not change and while Canute is largely forgotten, he does provide a lesson that sometimes offering to do something impossible is worth the effort. Gar Pardy is retired from the foreign service and comments on issues of public policy from Ottawa. His latest book China in a Changing World is available online and from Books on Beechwood in Ottawa. The Hill Times