Updates from July, 2017 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Kate 22:32 on 2017/07/10 Permalink | Reply  

    A young man stabbed in a fight in a Pointe-aux-Trembles park on Friday has died. TVA makes it the 12th homicide of the year, and says the suspect is only 16. Raw video plays.

     
  • Kate 19:59 on 2017/07/10 Permalink | Reply  

    A Le Devoir writer makes the case for not only slowing traffic, but putting up better and clearer signage to make intersections safer.

     
    • Nicolas Kruchten 22:30 on 2017/07/10 Permalink

      I’ve read the opposite, actually: that removing signage makes things safer! https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2011/09/shared-spaces/116/

    • ant6n 00:17 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      I also have trouble with the claim that one-way streets are safer. I find that hard to believe. Conventional wisdom says that safety is strongly related to speed of traffic. The reasoning behind turning streets like St-Urbain or St-Laurent into one-way streets was to increase the speed of traffic. I’d argue it made those streets less safe.

    • Benoit 09:52 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      I totally agree with ant6n. There is no way that this one-way street https://goo.gl/maps/TUEgD2TJYZA2 is safer for pedestrians than this one https://goo.gl/maps/EeSmQFmxGCU2 . Drivers slow down considerably on two-way streets.

      You can also compare St-Laurent and Mont-Royal, which have similar widths. St-Laurent sometimes feels like a highway, vs Mont-Royal where traffic is usually much slower

    • Blork 10:20 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      @Nicolas Kruchten; that City Lab piece is interesting, but the idea of removing signage and converting to “shared space” is sort of intended for smaller more densely-packed areas I think (such as the core of old European cities). I’m not sure how well it applies to big North American urban boulevard zones.

      On the other hand, when the power goes out and traffic lights stop working, everyone slows down at intersections and everyone seems to be hyperaware of other vehicles/pedestrians etc. It’s wonderful to observe, and I do sometimes wonder if that would be a better solution long-term. It’s counter-intuitive, but that doesn’t make it wrong.

      Here’s an extreme example from India. Huge intersection, with all sorts of vehicles and pedestrians (although you don’t really see many pedestrians attempting a full crossing). No lights, no signs, not even lines on the pavement. But watch how the chaos actually has some order to it. The driving force isn’t “obeying rules” but “avoiding collisions,” and it seems to work.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVUDFizBLxw

  • Kate 19:55 on 2017/07/10 Permalink | Reply  

    More than half the board of the MUHC have quit, saying Gaétan Barrette is making too many difficulties. The Gazette’s Allison Hanes ponders the situation, not excusing mistakes made by the MUHC either.

     
    • Ian 11:58 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      The Liberals have made it pretty clear over the last few decades that they don’t really care about Anglos and just assume they have our vote because of the spectre of separatism. What they forget is that most of the people who were really afraid of that bogeyman left, and the ones still here or more recently arrived are starting to wise up since support for another referendum is fairly close to an all-time low, as evidenced by the last federal election. I sincerely hope Anglos as a whole stop voting Liberal en masse out of habit; most Anglos I know vote for more progressive parties already.

    • carswell 12:40 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      @Ian The problem is that if anglos as a block go for another party, it’s likely to be the Union Nationale CAQ, not the QS. However fine that might be from a scaring-the-PLQ standpoint, it’d be a disaster in just about every other way.

    • Ian 13:00 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      Hard to say, as they are still very unashamedly ethnonationalists.

    • carswell 13:15 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      D’acc about the ethnonationalism. But a recent Mainstreet Research-Postmedia poll shows a doubling of support for the CAQ among non-francophones. And it was taken before the latest MUHC brouhaha and the CAQ’s coming out in support of the hospital’s staff on the budget issue and airing a TV commercial targeting anglos “tired of being taken for granted.” À suivre as they say.

    • Bill Binns 13:34 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      @Ian – I am one of those single issue voters. In the US is was abortion. I simply could not vote for someone who had a stated opposition to abortion. It didn’t really matter what real chance I thought the person had of actually making abortion illegal. Being part of that camp was an automatic out. Pro abortion Trump would get my vote over anti-abortion Obama if it came down to it. In the US, you almost always have the choice between two candidates one of whom will be pro abortion, one anti-abortion. There is very little need to be up on the issues unfortunately.

      The separatist thing is pretty much the same. We can pin a lot of our most serious problems on the Liberals but they remain my only choice for the moment. I am listening very carefully to the CAQ though. For the last couple of years they have been steadily softening their stance on the big question and I think it sits at “no more referendums but more autonomy for Quebec” at the moment which is still a little too “independence light” for me but they are getting there. I could support the CAQ today over anyone except the Liberals.

    • Ian 13:52 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      Not pro abortion, Bill, pro-choice. Subtle yet extremely important difference. Kind of like the difference between ethnonationalism and independence – I will not vote for ethnonationalists, but I will happily vote QS. For now. I have my eye on Nadeau-Dubois based on some of his recent statements. An ethnonationalist will always view Anglos as outsiders, you’ll never be a “real” member of Quebec society through their lens. Even the Liberals occasionally make allusions to the “best-treated minority in the world” trope which is both untrue and basically makes it clear that even if your Anglo forefathers were Irish mercenaries fighting alongside the French in New France, you’ll never really belong here in the way you would if your name was Tremblay instead of O’Neill.

      @carswell – fair enough, those are all good points.

    • Bill Binns 14:21 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      @Ian – “I will not vote for ethnonationalists, but I will happily vote QS.”

      That’s a pretty fine line to ride. Same result from different motivations. QS gaining power and achieving everything they want would be a very happy day for the ethnonationalists and vice-versa.

      @Carswell – I have been trying to get my Anglo friends mad at QS but most have never heard of them. I often have to go back to Amir Khadir and his various shenanigans for people to even know what group I’m talking about. Outside of a few starry eyed students who think they are communist, I don’t think QS exists in Anglo circles.

    • Ian 14:24 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      They won my riding, and Mile-End is still pretty Anglo even with all the recent immigrants from France ;)

    • rue david 22:29 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      Man, what you guys must think, like how Cartesian the mind. True so-called “ethno-nationalists” are rarer in Quebec than in most places on earth. It’s mad how Canadians demand to be included and any sentiment of exclusion they sense is funneled into this fascist language. I’m not a fan of Lisée, but how pc has it become where the transplants from ROC and the montrealers now take normal Quebec reactions to people they don’t really know as racism, whatever.

      Try spending time in Japan, Europe or even just a place like Texas.

      The point is that you may not want to vote for someone saying things like “we need to protect Quebec culture, and the 15% of Anglos from here and Canadians aren’t so important to us on that measure” and calling them this gang ethno-nationalists. No credibility.

    • rue david 22:32 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      Then again, if you’re monolingual like many regulars here, of course you feel like there’s a barrier to your contributions to the culture, and that the quebec people don’t value your pithy observations on how shitty quebec is.

    • Ian 08:01 on 2017/07/12 Permalink

      I’m not monolingual, and while I’m from the ROC I’ve lived here 30 years, have voted in a referendum, vote in every election, pay my taxes, and have 2 children born “native” that go to an officially bilingual school. We will never be “real” Québecois as I have seen, first hand, many times over the years, strictly based on whether our last name is French or not. In fact, I’ve been told that, to my face, by “real” Québecois half my age. I read Québecois francophone books, listen to the music, attend plays, go to the vernissages, et cetera. It won’t make me “French” even though I am fully capable of participating in the culture, and do. I am well aware that the vast majority of the people in this province speak French, that’s not the issue. That the vast majority of people in this province have a shared ethnicity is an other issue, especially when people try to argue it’s an issue of shared culture, and anyone can join. I can’t become ethnically French. Nobody can. You either are, or you aren’t.

      The QS version of independantism is very clearly based on a shared culture and does welcome people of all ethnic backgrounds. That’s why I will vote for them. Any group that promotes independantism by means of dogwhistle politics, on the other hand, I will not vote for. It’s very simple, really.

      Quebec isn’t shitty, I moved here and stayed for a reason. Montreal is my home. It doesn’t mean I’m going to vote for political parties who don’t want me here. First they came for the funny hats, but I didn’t wear a funny hat so I said nothing…

    • rue david 16:46 on 2017/07/12 Permalink

      my thing is that just because quebecois don’t feel that you’re truly one of them, doesn’t mean that quebecois are racist or ethno-nationalist (which is suggesting crypto-fascism). the idea that you would move somewhere and that the people of the place must accept you after a time because you feel it’s your home, and if they don’t then they’re discriminating against you – this is a very common idea that canadian transplants have about quebec, and i think it’s totally invalid. it’s tough for ROC types to wrap their heads around the fact that when they move to quebec, especially in francophone towns/neighborhoods, they’re living something distantly but importantly akin to the experience of immigrants. basically, you’re sort of like a german family or whatever moving to canada, then becoming aggrieved that you don’t feel completely accepted by the society.

      the montreal anglo way has always seemed right to me: they’re doing their thing, we’re doing ours. nobody from ddo or hampstead or wherever would feel aggrieved that someone from chicoutimi didn’t see that they’re all part of the same family. look at the real legit bits (say, a law promoting employment discrimination) but don’t take a “feeling” that you’re exclude and apply it as your baseline for evaluating social policy. that’s disgruntlement.

      and i’ll tell you, the feeling of being an outsider even if you live there for decades would happen to you far worse in most places. try moving to asia, europe, latin america, india, russia, wherever. quebec may not be at the extreme end like canada is, but it’s very close, like, if you’re fluent in french then you’re getting 95% of what the province has to offer.

      also, in quebec, these days, in many cases the last name isn’t as important as the first name. if your name is francois achmed, you’ll have a much better go of it than if your name is achmed francois, believe me. if you have the anglo last name and you choose to name your kids with an anglo first name, it’s on you. it’s all about signalling. of course an employer or whoever would immediately understand that this person is an anglophone.

    • Ian 17:35 on 2017/07/12 Permalink

      Jeez, good thing we gave our kids French surnames so they can pass your shibboleth of racial identity.

      My family were all immigrants to what we now call Canada, it’s true. So were yours, they just kept a closed community. I know multiculturalism is frowned upon by the Quebecois intelligentsia but be real – since people stopped having 10 kids we literally need immigrants. If you make it clear they don’t belong here, they’ll leave, whether it’s anglos or people with funny hats. Multiculturalism is what makes North America work, we’re not “asia, europe, latin america, india, russia, wherever” – you’re basically trying to make an argument that because Quebec does have an identifiable majority ethnicity it’s somehow akin to the old country. Wise up, we’re a colony. We need more colonists. If your notion of culture is predicated solely on the purity of ethnic identity maybe it’s not that great?

      Personally, I have found Quebec’s culture its biggest draw. To be fair one of the books that made me fall in love with Quebec before I came was by Gabrielle Roy and she’s from Manitoba… oh but wait, she was Francophone, that makes her “de chez nous”. That seems pretty glaringly obviously racist to me that Roy was accepted as part of the patrimoine by default on that basis. And yes, I did read bonheur d’occasion in French before I read it in English.

      None of your arguments hold any water, it’s the same old “no, you don’t understand us, YOU’RE the racists” argument right up there with “we’re not racist, we’re just proud of being white”.

    • Ian 18:04 on 2017/07/12 Permalink

      …now that I am finished ranting, I would like to reiterate that I do support an independent Quebec.

      I think that culturally, philosophically, and politically Quebec is different than the rest of Canada enough that it is in our best interests to follow a separate political path.

      The unfortunate tendency toward austerity politics in recent years from the majority parties reinforces my belief that the only option to preserve Quebec’s sociopolitical culture is the progressive left – so, as I mentioned before, I support QS as their version of independantism is very clearly based on a shared culture and does welcome people of all ethnic backgrounds. That’s why I will vote for them. Any group that promotes independantism by means of dogwhistle politics, on the other hand, I will not vote for. It’s very simple, really.

      Start talking to me about how Japan is unwelcoming to foreigners so I should shut up and assimilate, and you lose my vote. Start telling me that a cross in the National Assembly is patrimoine but a kippah is a religious symbol and you lose my vote. Start telling me to give my kids French names so we can fit in and you lose my vote.

      Quebec has a lively artistic, intellectual, progressive culture, which I love, and it’s not just a Francophone-de-chez-nous thing. Don’t try to sell Quebec’s culture to me on the terms of La Meute.

    • jeather 19:26 on 2017/07/12 Permalink

      QS clearly does not want my vote, so they won’t get it. The French-only website is more overt than a dogwhistle, granted.

    • Bill Binns 20:27 on 2017/07/12 Permalink

      @jeather – Hehe. Wait until they come knock on your door. Listen to them in French, respond in English. I got a very satisfying dirty look from the little party that came to my house. I’m curious if my address has been flagged and they won’t bother knocking next year.

    • Mark Côté 23:11 on 2017/07/12 Permalink

      It’s amusing to note that, unless only anglophones are having kids, francophones are starting to prefer tradionally anglo (and Hebrew) names: http://www.rrq.gouv.qc.ca/en/enfants/banque_prenoms/Pages/recherche_par_popularite.aspx?AnRefBp=2016&NbPre=10

  • Kate 12:48 on 2017/07/10 Permalink | Reply  

    Rosemont borough’s Guillaume Lavoie is going to finish out his term but not run again for office this fall, after losing his bid to become Projet chief late last year.

     
  • Kate 07:22 on 2017/07/10 Permalink | Reply  

    TVA reports on what it’s like to try out one of the new camping huts in the Old Port. The project, which was also supposed to include boats, is growing much more slowly than originally planned.

     
  • Kate 07:20 on 2017/07/10 Permalink | Reply  

    The refit of the Olympic stadium mast to be used for offices by more than a thousand Desjardins workers is over budget but it would’ve been strange if it hadn’t.

    Update: CTV looks at the project and reminds us that nobody has ever occupied that tower. So the construction going on is really creating a new building inside the outer shell of the tower. The piece also says the $143M budget has not been exceeded.

     
    • Ephraim 07:46 on 2017/07/10 Permalink

      How about we take part of that money out of the salaries of those who run the OIB. I mean, they are responsible, why not let them understand what it means by paying back part of it. Over budget by 10%… lose 10% of your salary.

    • Bill Binns 11:00 on 2017/07/10 Permalink

      I don’t understand why we still have an OIB. Do other countries maintain these types of groups in perpetuity after the Olympics? I don’t even want to know what this groups budget and balance sheet looks like.

    • Ephraim 11:51 on 2017/07/10 Permalink

    • Kate 19:45 on 2017/07/10 Permalink

      Is the OIB paying for this, or is it Desjardins? I haven’t checked.

      We have an OIB because when Quebec took over management of the Olympic facilities during Drapeau’s debacle, they quite reasonably needed to have a board to keep an eye on how the thing was progressing. And it just stayed in place. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have a board looking after the buildings and their upkeep.

    • Ephraim 08:26 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      @Kate – The answer to your question http://montrealgazette.com/business/desjardins-moving-1000-employees-into-olympic-stadium-tower the government gave the OIB a loan to make the changes.

    • Bill Binns 10:08 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      @Kate ” I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have a board looking after the buildings and their upkeep.”

      It’s been 40 years. I can see having the board before, during and for a short time after the Olympics but forever? What is there left to manage besides the Olympic Stadium? These properties can’t be just transferred to the ownership of the province or the city? I suppose it’s possible nobody would be willing to accept them.

    • Kate 19:33 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      Bill Binns, what would that actually mean? It’s not just a building, it’s a complex of buildings with a complicated set of needs. The city would have to delegate management to somebody anyway, and as it stands, the board already exists and does that job.

  • Kate 07:13 on 2017/07/10 Permalink | Reply  

    TVA has a brief piece, with video, about the work of the peregrine falcons at the airport.

     
    • brett 08:41 on 2017/07/11 Permalink

      peregrine (sp)

c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel