Article content

Re: “Sorry, you’re too old to be a historic anglophone” (Allison Hanes, Aug. 21)

Allison Hanes quotes from correspondence sent to 77-year-old Montreal resident Gary Bernstein by the Bureau de l’admissibilité à l’enseignement en anglais: “We would like to draw your attention to the fact that … there will be no restriction on the provision of health and social services in English for members of the English-speaking community.”

Article content

Sounds nice — even though it is not from the government department that issued the directive on the use of English in health-care settings — but the sting is in the tail: “No restriction … for members of the English-speaking community.”

Who is a member of that community? Anyone who ordinarily speaks English? Do you yourself define your membership in the English-speaking community? I fear not. That’s what the directive is all about; the government defines who is an English speaker.

That’s why there are all those mentions of the eligibility certificate in the directive. You are not a recognized anglo just because you say you are; you’re a recognized anglo only if the government says you are. And of course you can’t get government-issued proof of anglo-ness if you finished school without that certificate.

Kay Palkhivala, Pointe-Claire

What’s a historic anglophone to do?

So let me get this straight: I am a 73-year-old historic anglo who cannot get an eligibility certificate to be spoken to in my mother tongue at a hospital because my English education happened before the language laws were introduced? I vaguely recall having to prove my Englishness to obtain the right for my children to be educated in English. Might their eligibility certificates then prove my credentials as a historic anglo? I suggest that every person of any linguistic stripe who finds this all insane agree on a day when we will stage a lie-in on René-Lévesque Blvd. in front of the Hydro-Québec building.

Article content

Sharon Sparling, Westmount

A frugal lifestyle can be sustaining

Re: “Montrealer who makes her own cosmetics is the face of ‘underconsumption core’” (The Gazette, Aug. 20)

I see there is still hope for our planet. Being frugal is not a new trend for people in my age group, but it’s refreshing to see the younger generation adopting this lifestyle change.

When I left the nest, I learned to be frugal in order to meet my needs. I repurposed furniture from the curb, bought only used clothing — avoiding retail at all costs — and shopped at friperies. In my late 60s, I still live this way.

I disagree with the opinion of management school lecturer Omar Fares, who suggests in the article that if we don’t really buy and we live frugally, we barely meet our needs. I enjoy fine food made at home, good wines, a stocked fridge and pantry, and sun-filled vacations annually. My garbage is minimal, while my recycling and compost bins are packed to the brim. I feel grateful that my life is not based on consumerism and that I am doing my small part for our planet.

Joyce Stempkowsky, N.D.G.

Article content

Article content