QA: tramway plans unmentioned in campaign
François Cardinal notes that ideas for tramways have been unmentioned by anyone during the campaign although he notes that Pauline Marois is open to the development of a tram for Quebec City, but not for Montreal.
(See, this is why I can’t vote PQ. Of course the PQ tendency is to spend money on Quebec City, seeing it as an eventual national capital on the world stage, a showpiece city with all mod cons, while embarrassing, polyglot, messy Montreal can go eat a bag of dicks.)
Ian 09:16 on 2012/08/23 Permalink
It’s part of the standing QS platform that they support tram development – in Quebec City. http://www.quebecsolidaire.net/jean-talon/articles/debour-pour-le-transport-electrique/
Joey 09:20 on 2012/08/23 Permalink
The belief that tram > lots more buses is, sadly, necessary to be a member of the media commentariat.
cheese 09:27 on 2012/08/23 Permalink
@Kate, wow I love the line “go eat a bag of dicks”, so funny! But also so true, Montreal is in a hard position, neglected by the Feds because it is in Quebec and neglected by the Quebec provincial government because it is not french enough. Yet Montreal is still a great city, just imagine how awesome it would be if the upper levels of government actually tried to make it better as well. One can dare to dream.
Isn’t about half of the population of Quebec in the (greater) Montreal area? I recall Montreal to ahve about 3.6 million according to official stats. Maybe someone should form the Montreal provincial political party to counter the current paysage parties we have now. Could even get some decent number of seats and get Montreal issues worked on.
Chris 09:32 on 2012/08/23 Permalink
cheese, I don’t think the Feds have “neglected” Montreal, as municipalities are a provincial jurisdiction.
jeather 09:35 on 2012/08/23 Permalink
I don’t remember the exact stats, but Greater Montreal overall has more people per MNA than the province as a whole, so even a party that got every riding in Greater Montreal wouldn’t be able to hit majority, even if it had more than half the population (I think it has about half, but not significantly more).
Joel 09:35 on 2012/08/23 Permalink
Kate: that’s not completely fair. Historically, the PQ has been much more interested in Montreal than the Liberals or the ADQ. Remember: they are the ones who established the “Ministère de la métropole” in the 1990s (undone by the Liberals), they are the ones who proposed the merger (in part to solve the problem of fiscal imbalance between the city and its suburbs) and they are also the ones who agreed to finance the covering of the highway in the Quartier international. You may or may not like the merger, but you can’t simply go around saying the PQ has ignored Montreal: it is simply not true.
Poutine Pundit 09:51 on 2012/08/23 Permalink
First of all, the PQ platform promises more for the development of public transportation in Montreal than what is offered by the other main parties, namely the extension of the blue line, which will cost more than the Quebec City tram. The program also talks more about the electrification of public transportation throughout Quebec, which certainly bodes well for a tram.
Secondly, Quebec City is growing at a faster rate than Montreal and needs all the public transportation help it can get to create a viable alternative to cars, which Montreal already has with its metro & train de banlieue infrastructure. The buses are overcrowded, slow, and hot – I can’t wait to move back to Montreal!
Thirdly, Quebec City’s mayor has the tram as his priority whereas Tremblay seems to have put it on the back burner. The PQ is merely responding to priorities expressed by the municipal administrations.
Bill Binns 10:14 on 2012/08/23 Permalink
I find the experience of riding on a tram far more enjoyable than riding on the bus although I’m not sure why. Is there some practical reason why trams are better than buses?
Jack 11:23 on 2012/08/23 Permalink
@ Poutine and Joel, I totally agree with you, the PQ compared to the Libs and CAQ are far better for many of the things I believe in for Montreal. Except for a few crucial elements that make Montreal what it has always been.
First, the PQ promotes the interests and fears of one component( French-origin) of our society, exclusively. The targeting of immigrant and religious groups within a context of selective “laicite” is to put it mildly, loathsome.The PQ’s campaign focusing on identity issues and “dog whistle politics” centred around “nous”, is so far from any progressive political ideology in the world it is laughable. Creating fear topes around anglicization and islamists is a way to further other Montreal.
In Marois own words,” “Let’s stop being afraid. … Afraid to seem intolerant. … Afraid to speak of memory, of history, of people, of identity, of culture.” Whose identity ?Whose culture?
Who is supposed to be afraid? Why should we be afraid to be intolerant? WTF
When a leader of a political part says this in a city like Montreal,”Let’s not give in to those who want to impose values on us that aren’t our own.” We know what she is saying and who she is talking to. When Bill 101 is to be toughened , again Montreal, allophones and anglophones are targeted.
In the last election the PQ won 7 seats out of 34 in Montreal and Laval, this time it will be probably less and the PQ could care less , because cohesion and fear mongering amongst french-origin Quebeckers is electorally productive. So in my view thats why no self respecting progressive can vote PQ l. In 1982, I proudly voted PQ and was not against Law 101, I thought it was necessary. I still believe that, but what the PQ has become is simply a fashionably progressive Union Nationale, even some of Marois sentences sound like they were written for Duplessis.
paul 11:38 on 2012/08/23 Permalink
If THAT is the the only reason keeping you from voting PQ, you aren’t looking hard enough ;-)
A Montreal provincial party is a great idea! It would be Montreal’s equivalent to the Bloq at the Federal level. At least we would have someone to fight for language/immigration issues from another viewpoint.
As far as public transit is concerned, an extension of the blue line would be great for Eastern Montreal. The PQ has supported it but have yet to identify where any funding would come from; until they can legitimately develop a financing plan – it is all smoke.
IMO Trams get way too much page space in Montreal; the cost/benefit study has been done by numerous groups. In a City without existing infrastructure it does not make sense to implement a tram line unless it is in an undeveloped area. It will have difficulty linking in with the existing transportation infrastructure and can move significantly less people/hour than a rapid bus system.
Obviously the aesthetics of a tram are much nicer than a bus, but if our goal is efficiency (both cost and in people moved) than it is not the answer.
ant6n 12:22 on 2012/08/23 Permalink
@Bill
Trams provide higher ride quality because
being capital intensive, and but having a lower cost per rider (if there are enough of them), trams can afford to provide more space to each rider
being on continuously wielded tracks, the ride is much smoother than on potholed roads
being on tracks, the acceleration and jerk is much less, meaning a smoother ride
being electric, they may be quieter, and less smelly and whatnot
Some features generally attributed to trams can be implemented with buses as well, it’s just that often they are not
high frequency and easy networks can be implemented with buses (that’s what the 10 minute buses attempt to do)
level boarding is associated with trams, but it could be implemented for buses
all-door boarding, using a POP (proof of payment) scheme can be implemented for buses
priority measures like exclusive lanes and priority signalling at intersections is associated with trams, but can be implemented for buses as well (it already exists during rush hours in Montreal)
I think the right answer is to further develop the 10-minute network as the city’s secondary transit network to have as many features that we associated with trams, and then replace the highest passenger corridors with trams (i.e. start with pie-ix, parc, CDN) to ease crowding, provide a higher quality ride, and reduce the operational costs.
Ian 12:26 on 2012/08/23 Permalink
Please no, Louisbourg only just finished a 2 year rebuild of du Parc this summer. :D
Faiz Imam 16:31 on 2012/08/23 Permalink
ant6n, coudn’t have said it better myself.
If I was optimistic I would hope they the current plans on Parc include setting the foundation for a future tram line, but honestly, that’s laughable.
I was a bit disappointed in the Pie-ix line not being LRT from the get go, but the BRT is setting up all of the proper infrastructure other than the rail lines and so should not be a big deal to upgrade in the future.
It’ll be great for Montreal Nord as well as all of the east of Montreal to have a high capacity N-S line intersecting both the green and blue lines.
Poutine Pundit 20:50 on 2012/08/23 Permalink
@Jack
I agree with you that some of the stuff in the PQ platform is objectionable, particularly these stupid “laicité” policies inspired by France. However, most of the PQ’s identity-related proposals will have very little impact on our daily lives unless you speak no French at all. When I weigh the pros and cons, the fact that 1 or 2 Sikhs will be denied public service jobs because of some stupid PQ charter matters less than the fact that the political alternatives (Libs, CAQ) will lead us down a slippery slope towards higher student fees, fewer public services, no investment in transport, and neoliberal policies that will affect millions of Quebecers.
Unless you live in Gouin, Mercier, or Nicolet-Yamaska, the PQ remains the safest bet for progressive-minded Quebecers.
David Tighe 03:53 on 2012/08/24 Permalink
Bill Binns,
Modern trams are silent, smooth, have many seats, and can be fast in a well designed system. Buses are slow, jerky, noisy and one usually has to stand. There is no comparison really. A bus system cannot attract people from cars. Trams can and do.
Jack 07:04 on 2012/08/24 Permalink
@Poutine Pundit thanks for your response, I really believe that overtly discriminatory social policy says more about the society one lives in, then school fees. You write that “the fact that 1 or 2 Sikhs will be denied public service jobs ” as something to balance. It is something I will not accept, and as collectivity it is the most dangerous of all slippery slopes.