s_lone, the official languages of Canada are both French and English.
Canadians in all provinces, save Québec, are free to be educated in either of our official languages; French immersion schools are everywhere, and offer an exceptional French-language experience. In Québec, on the other hand, not only is it an expectation that everyone be educated exclusively in French, but there are actually rules in place to prevent students from being exposed to English. Québec has, on multiple occasions, invoked s. 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to explicitly ignore the language rights of English-speaking Quebeckers.
That is clearly unacceptable.
though I don't agree with all of Bill 101, to be fair to Quebec, we need to take into account the relative global importance of the two languages. Taking that into account, naturally given a choice in a bilingual city like Montreal, the vast majority of immigrant parents and even some pure laine parent would send their child to an English-medium school, which would in turn strengthen English globally.
Then we get into the question of legal equality vs. real equality. Essentially, Quebec is trying to achieve real equality by counterbalancing the global free market strength of English with pro-francophone legislation in Quebec. It's not just a legal and constitutional issue as you seem to believe, but a wider social issue.
Again, I'm not saying I agree with Bill 101, but the current Official Languages Act is no better in its absolute failure to recognize the international dimension of language policy, pretending that somehow the global status of languages within Canada, be they French, English, or any of the First Nations and Inuit languages, has no impact on the language within Canada's borders. We cannot legislate this equality any more than we can legislate the sun to rise at a certain time of the day. Though it occurs beyond Canada's borders, the impact within Canada is very real.
Essentially, if the conflict is between legal equality and real equality (i.e. if they have legal equality, then the dominant global language has real superiority and will engage in 'glottophagie' as we say in French; and if we intend to achieve real equality then the weaker language must have legal precedent, though in that case the First Nations and Inuit languages ought to get priority over even French), then the only solution I could see would be through the adoption of an official national auxiliary language (i.e. a common second-language to all).
That would be a radical step, though by no means unique in the world. Indonesia is one country that has adopted such a policy, whereby Bahasa Indonesia is essentially a planned language based on all the country's languages, designed to be easy to learn, spoken by few as a mother tongue yet by nearly all as a common second language.
This would be the only way that I could see to solve the conflict between legal and real equality, as it would essentially introduce a 'buffer language' between the greater and lesser languages, thus putting them on a real equal footing while ensuring legal equality too.
Any other solution is bound to pit the notions of 'legal equality' and 'real equality' against each other, thus never solving the problem as clearly the speakers of the lesser languages will never accept legal equality since that would amount to linguistic suicide over time.
I'd be curious, 5P: How would you propose reconciling legal equality and real equality between Canada's languages?
Also, 5P, if you're interested in sociolinguistic issues beyond the legal aspects only, I'd recommend the Rapport Grin, presented to the French Government in 2005, which goes well beyond the legal aspects of interlinguistic relations and looks at the economic, social, political, and other aspects too. Though its primary focus is on the EU, it is still far ahead of anything I've read dealing with the Canadian context.
And 5P, if you cannot read French, then you could also read English-Only Europe: Challenging Language Policy, by Robert Phillipson:
English-Only Europe?: Challenging Language Policy: Amazon.ca: Robe Phillipson: Books
Again, it deals mainly with the European context, but it does go into some detail with regards to the issue of legal vs. real equality and how they must be reconciled if we are to move forward with any policy all can accept. Just to clarify, I do not agree with everything he says in that book, but he still gives ideas to think about none the less, and he doesn't limit himself to the question of legal equality only. Unlike the OLA, he does acknowledge the reality that without real equality, legal equality will never be accepted by the speakers of weaker languages.
s_lone, the official languages of Canada are both French and English.
Canadians in all provinces, save Québec, are free to be educated in either of our official languages; French immersion schools are everywhere, and offer an exceptional French-language experience.
This is false. Yes we are free to send our children to school in French outside of Quebec, but it's not always convenient. I know this for a fact since I had gone to a French-medium school in Victoria, BC. Since it was the only French-medim school in town, those of us who lived farther away had to accept either a long daily commute which English-medium students did not have to endure, or switch to a nearby English-medium school.
So, no, such schools are not 'everywhere'.
And if this was the case in a provincial capital, you can imagine it would be even less convenient in a smaller town.