Jean Charest is blandishing Montreal wit…
Jean Charest is blandishing Montreal with half a billion imaginary dollars, mostly intended toward modernizing (?) our metro stations, although he stops short of promising us the blue line extension to Anjou.
In the Radio-Canada piece there’s also a list of things Charest would help pay for toward the 375th anniversary celebrations in 2017. Two of them stick out:
• Construction d’un nouveau pavillon de verre au Jardin botanique
• Agrandissement de l’Insectarium
Authorities appear to regard the botanical gardens as an empty space ripe for development. In recent years we’ve seen new aménagements built, ranging from the “tree house” building to the First Nations pavilion to a large seed bank building behind the greenhouses. Each of these things has some worthy justification but each one eats up more of the finite green space.
At the same time, the cost of visiting the gardens has skyrocketed. It’s $17.75 for an adult to go in there now, at least double what it was when I used to bike over from the Plateau five years ago.
There should seriously be a moratorium on paving even another square foot of those gardens, and some thought should go into whether it’s beneficial to peg the admission fee too high for many people to consider a visit.
Tux 13:50 on 2012/08/16 Permalink
We should resurrect the BRT service and extend it. Oh how I wish with all my heart for BRT service to/from the west island. I live in NDG, it shouldn’t take me over an hour to get to Pointe-Claire.
Anto 13:55 on 2012/08/16 Permalink
Just as a sidenote, the gardens are free (read, there’s nobody at the door) if you get in before 9 AM or after 6 PM (except for the special events in the evening, I guess).
Stefan 14:37 on 2012/08/16 Permalink
I always went into the botanical garden through the hole under the fence from the parking lot, which is large enough. $17.75 is absolutely crazy. This great green space should be provided for free (let them charge for the insectarium). And you can’t even picknick on the grass.
david m 16:35 on 2012/08/16 Permalink
is that hole still there? honestly, some people need to take another look at the cost there and decide whether the level of subsidy to the institution might decrease with a lower price point for admission. aside from the odd tour group, when i’ve been there, botanical has been totally empty.
as for charest (and the election), i just can’t get over how tone deaf solidaire is. they’re running a provincial campaign instead of running as montreal’s party, which they are and which is the only place they have a hope of winning seats. seriously, forget this bullshit about the oqlf and that, and get to trams, trees, bikes, zoning, direct democracy, whatever. i mean, seriously, when the pq is taking the montreal set to school on montreal politics, it’s just embarrassing. and not to be weird, but i do blame françoise and the people around her, they’re just out to lunch.
Kate 18:28 on 2012/08/16 Permalink
I wouldn’t consider the botanical gardens a hole. They’re one of the biggest in the world although, it has to be admitted, not a patch on Kew.
Solidaire’s new plan to double the size of the OQLF today has put me off my intention to vote for the local guy, who seems like a decent fellow. I am almost at a loss now:
À QUAND UN PARTI NPD QUÉBÉCOIS HOSTIE?
Kid A 18:52 on 2012/08/16 Permalink
Kate, you may be interested in this:
http://o.canada.com/2012/08/14/ndp-not-ruling-out-possible-creation-of-quebec-wing/
jeather 19:16 on 2012/08/16 Permalink
I’ve given up and will throw my vote to the guaranteed not to win Green party. As leftish parties go, they’re the only ones that haven’t (yet) actively gone anti-anglo or anti-Montreal (in part because they haven’t really said anything at all). I don’t want rightish, so there’s not much left.
dwgs 19:19 on 2012/08/16 Permalink
Kate, I believe the hole that david m. refers to is the one that stefan uses to avoid the entry fee. A literal hole rather than a figurative one.
Kate 20:07 on 2012/08/16 Permalink
oh ah. tee hee.
Ian 20:10 on 2012/08/16 Permalink
Any promises form QS are just hot air, they’ll be lucky to get three seats. I’ll still vote for them, OQLF nonsense notwithstanding as they will rattle some lefty sabres in the Assembly and that’s all I really expect or want from them.
Jack 20:20 on 2012/08/16 Permalink
With Ian
Ian 20:57 on 2012/08/16 Permalink
I do appreciate the heads-up though, I went to their Book of Faces page and razzed them some. It’s a pretty punk move for a party that was very seriously making the pretense of inclusive sovereignty.
Bill Binns 21:35 on 2012/08/16 Permalink
Even with all these parties to choose from you still end up with a very American situation – “vote for the guy you hate the least”. I, unfortunately cannot yet vote but I am on the verge of convincing my wife to vote PLQ with CAQ as a fallback position. I was a big fan of this guy Duchesneau before he declared. It would be interesting to see what an honest man would do in that position and wether he would be able to remain honest.
Ian 21:42 on 2012/08/16 Permalink
As one of my friends pointed out on the Book of Faces, choosing a politician to support is much like choosing the STD that’s just right for you.
Jo Walton 07:47 on 2012/08/17 Permalink
The Amis du Jardin Botanique card is $50 for a year, which is much better value than $17.75 a visit, even if you only go once a season. It also means you can go get wafted straight through with no lineup, and it gives you one free visit to the Biodome. Well worth it.
ant6n 08:10 on 2012/08/17 Permalink
Maybe QS are trying to get PQ voters, which may make sense if you look at their polling numbers. I collected from threehundredeight.com all ridings where they have 10% or more, and sorted them according to support for QS (note that these estimates are very approximate):
PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS
13, 30, 05, 50: Mercier
12, 36, 07, 43: Gouin
18, 47, 09, 22: St-Marie-St-Jacques
32, 34, 09, 20: Laurier-Dorion
13, 51, 14, 18: Hochelaga-Maisonneuve
43, 27, 07, 18: Outremont
55, 15, 07, 13: NDG
39, 36, 08, 12: Hull
20, 51, 13, 12: Rosemont
33, 41, 11, 11: Taschereau
35, 39, 13, 10: St-Henri-St-Anne
You can see that in the 4/5 ridings with the most support, they are running against the PQ. So any PQ voter they’d sway to QS would mean two spots ahead relative to the PQ.
On the other hand, whatever they’re doing right now won’t create another Orange Wave.
cheese 08:50 on 2012/08/17 Permalink
I LOVE this comment from @Kate: “À QUAND UN PARTI NPD QUÉBÉCOIS HOSTIE?”
A number of people seem to be asking this very question, including me (though mine is less fluent fench). I also have to agree on the state of the parties. Here is what I’m thinking:
PLQ – Charest blew it, arrogant, corrupt, no way. Also his plans for Montreal are not forward thinking or practical. Good thing they have almost no chance of being implemented.
PQ – probably the worst option in my estimation. Completely ignoring Montreal, Pauline is awful and also seems to be corrupt by proxy (her husband). She flip-flopped on the student strikes and seem to focus all energy on the lowest common denominator. Their statements about asking for more Federal money are lame, and when the answer is “no” will be used to push for separation. I read that they have already stated this explicitly, how eye-rollingly weak.
CAQ – I had some hope for these guys, though right wing they almost wrap around and become left wing (libertarian-ish) in some ways. But the zenophibia and anti-immigration are hard to overlook. They seem even worse in this regard than the PQ. I don’t like their banlieu focused plans for Montreal either. It was a boon for their reputation that Jacques Duchesneau decided to join but not sure how that will play out for them in reality, it may tarnish his shine more than it helps the CAQ.
QS – Amir Khan seems like a smart and honest guy with an agenda. That’s good for a politician (and rare). I don’t share all of his agenda but some is good. Too bad about the OQLF thing and I’m not a sovereignist though I certainly see some good idealogical reasons why people are. QS seems like the least terrible option partially because they have almost no chance of winning more than a few seats. Khan will likley win here in Mercier.
In places like England the representative for a riding must actually live there, as in have a functioning residence there. When they are elected to parliment of course they are often in London but they must keep that (or another) residence. How can we expect someone that does not even live in a particular area to represent its best interests? How often will they visit? How can they asses the needs and priorities?
Depending on any encouraging things QS have to say prior to the election I may spoil my ballot if there is no green party option here.
Ian 09:17 on 2012/08/17 Permalink
While I largely agree with your analysis, it’s not “Khan” but “Khadir”.
Ian 14:45 on 2012/08/17 Permalink
The NDP will run in the next provincial election:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/elections/ndp-will-run-quebec-party-in-next-provincial-election-mulcair/article4486345/
cheese 16:20 on 2012/08/17 Permalink
@Ian, oops, I’m not getting enough sleep lately it seems. Not sure where I got Khan from exactly… cheers.
Josh 16:39 on 2012/08/17 Permalink
Kate, Paul Wells just made a point on Twitter: A good number of the NDP’s Quebec caucus hold QS membership cards. What point would there be in starting a provincial NDP to just siphon away some of that support?
Ian 16:58 on 2012/08/17 Permalink
That would be surprising for 2 reasons – the QS are separatists while the NDP are federalists, and one of the conditions of NDP membership is that you are not currently the member of any other party.
Ian 17:00 on 2012/08/17 Permalink
Article 2, section 1 http://xfer.ndp.ca/2011/2011-constitution/2011-11-CONSTITUTION-ENG.pdf