Recent Updates Page 2 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Kate 09:26 on 2017/04/24 Permalink | Reply  

    An ice cream parlour was firebombed overnight in Little Italy.

     
    • DavidH 11:52 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      Their location on des Pins also caught fire a little over a month ago.

    • Kate 12:21 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      Somebody likes Baked Alaska.

  • Kate 01:37 on 2017/04/24 Permalink | Reply  

    A Plateau dépanneur owner scoops up half a million dollars as his share in having sold the winning $55-million ticket in the weekend’s Lotto Max drawing.

     
    • Ian 08:07 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      That’s a nice chunk of change for a dep owner. I have always wondered, if you buy a winning ticket, is the merchant bonus awarded to the store you bough it from, or from where you redeem it?

    • dwgs 08:10 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      The bonus goes to the seller, it’s an incentive to get them to sell the product.

    • Ian 09:55 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      As I suspected, that makes sense.

    • GC 10:40 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      Also, don’t the tickets for significant wins need to be redeemed directly with Loto-Québec? There wouldn’t ever be much comission for a redeeming store on the small tickets.

    • Kate 11:02 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      I don’t know what the cutoff amount is, but I don’t imagine most deps would be able to give you more than a couple of hundred dollars from the till. Someone I know won about $4K and definitely had to go to Loto-Quebec to get a cheque.

      Also, although the actual win is not taxable, I’m pretty sure they want to know who’s won any significant amount.

    • curious 12:53 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      Yes, Loto-Québec likes to publish the names of big winners, and it also notifies the tax people so they don’t become suspicious when a big winner’s income skyrockets.

    • J 13:43 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      @Ian One Loto PR guy explained that the dep owners are actually resellers. They kinda buy a chunk of tickets and return the unsold ones. This is why a few weeks ago one winning ticket “bought” but not payed by an employee went to the dep. owner. He took all the money.

    • Viviane 15:37 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      GC, amounts of more than $600 must be redeemed directly with Loto-Quebec.

    • GC 23:54 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      Thanks, Viviane. That’s interesting, J. I would have thought there were few unsold tickets since there is basically someone buying a ticket every time I walk into a dep. I suppose some kinds are more popular than others, though.

  • Kate 00:44 on 2017/04/24 Permalink | Reply  

    So many French citizens turned out to vote in Montreal this weekend that there are demands for additional polling places for the May 6 runoff vote that will decide between Marine Le Pen and Emmanuel Macron. Some photos of the waiting crowd of French voters.

     
    • Bill Binns 08:54 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      My wife was furious. 2 hours 45 minutes not including the 20 minutes it took her to find the end of the line. They apparently had a much shorter and faster line for people who had kids with them which pissed her off even more and caused some drama in the line. The French are not good at standing in lines in general. All of those people were working hard to suppress their natural urge to just proceed to the front of the line and explain that they were in a hurry.

    • JaneyB 12:14 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      Hol-y mol-y! That’s quite a turn-out and it’ll be bigger for the final vote…

    • mare 12:55 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      When the lines get too long they’ll get so annoyed they all vote Le Pen out of spite. (I hope not.)

  • Kate 00:31 on 2017/04/24 Permalink | Reply  

    Two seniors were badly burned in a residential fire in Outremont early Sunday. Raw video from TVA.

     
  • Kate 10:58 on 2017/04/23 Permalink | Reply  

    A Chinese firm has suddenly turned up in San Francisco with a Bixi-style bikeshare system. If some American outfit like Uber had done this it would be praised for its disruptive genius, but since this is the Chinese, everyone’s on guard, including Montreal, lest it mess with the existing systems.

    It’s not made clear here how Bluegogo gets permission to place bike stations. Displacing parking spots was one of the elements that took the most persuasion here originally from Bixi, and the city would most likely be unwilling to free more parking spots for additional bikeshares.

     
    • Montreal-UK 11:32 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      From the BBC; A new bike sharing scheme has been launched in Cambridge, widely claimed to be the UK’s cycling capital.
      The three-week pilot is being run by the Chinese company Ofo.
      It is placing 20 yellow bikes in various locations in the city that can be hired through a smart app.
      It currently operates in 46 cities in three countries but this is the company’s first European scheme.

    • Bixifan 12:02 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      That’s the thing, Bluegogo doesn’t use any stations, the bikes are tracked by GPS causing big bikes pill up in public spaces like parks.

    • Kate 12:03 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      Thanks for the clarification, Bixifan.

    • DavidH 13:33 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      There are five different compagnies whose self-locking bikes are cluttering the sidewalks of Shanghai right now. Competition is fierce. I expect if there were that many bikes here cities would regulate and bikes would start getting impounded

    • ste.ph 16:20 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      Using GPS is a smart system. Bixi bikes aren’t GPS tracked?

    • DavidH 17:06 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      ste.ph, Good question! If they are, the data isn’t used for billing or made available to the public (yet).

    • Uatu 18:02 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      Found a vid on YouTube about it. a cheap system, but leaves a huge mess

      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kdsb2wwn-7g

    • DeWolf 13:39 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      I was in Shenzhen recently, my first visit after these new bike share systems were introduced, and the difference is amazing. There’s a lot more people biking around (good!) but as others have pointed out, the clutter is insane. There are dozens of bikes parked haphazardly on every street.

  • Kate 10:48 on 2017/04/23 Permalink | Reply  

    Three thousand new trees were planted at the Longue-Pointe military base Saturday to mark Earth Day. A march in support of science was also held, and some voluntary cleanup corvées tidied things up after winter. TVA link plays video.

     
  • Kate 10:39 on 2017/04/23 Permalink | Reply  

    This CTV item on Québec solidaire’s leadership campaign made me do a take, because it says former spokesperson Andrés Fontecilla said he would maintain his seat in the National Assembly but step aside as spokesperson. Fontecilla has never been elected, although he has run several times in Laurier-Dorion. He was defeated in 2012 and 2014 by none other than Gerry Sklavounos.

    QS is unusual in that the party always has two spokespeople, one to be male and the other female (although with the growing trend for “non-binary” people that may have to change), with one meant to be a sitting MNA and the other not.

     
    • Kevin 12:07 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      That’s a piss-poor translation. It will be changed

  • Kate 10:24 on 2017/04/23 Permalink | Reply  

    Lac St-Pierre, buried under the Turcot, has created problems when trying to build a stable concrete highway over the top of it.

    When you think about it, maybe not the smartest thing to do.

     
    • ste.ph 10:36 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      The trick is to build bridges over lakes, like the original turcot, 100 feet in the air!

    • JaneyB 11:08 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      It’s like we have a kind of gift for engineering problems here. We’re actually building the most physically stressed structure in the province on one of the least stable locations for it. How is that possible. To cry or to laugh at this mad genius?!

    • Ian 09:57 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      Almost as genius as building a superhospital in one of the most traffic dense (read smog infested) regions of the entire city.

    • Bert 17:39 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      JaneyB, I don’ think that we are the only ones with engineering problems. We don’t have tornadoes, major flood plains, hurricanes, earthquakes, ice storms, swamps, wild-fires, etc. I have long wondered what is the least environmentally risky region to live in, say in either deaths per or dollars damage per. I think we might be counting our lucky stars!

      Ian, apparently they have a good ventilation system.

    • Kate 20:02 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      Bert, we do have ice storms.

  • Kate 02:48 on 2017/04/23 Permalink | Reply  

    Denis Coderre is bringing out his fetish for uniforms again, but this time the idea is to force taxi drivers to paint their cars white with a coloured top, like the Téo. This is ridiculous.

     
    • ste.ph 10:24 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      I quite like the idea. And different brands can use a unique color each.

    • Kate 10:25 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      So what happens to drivers who expected to be able to take their dome light off and use their own cars privately sometimes when not working?

    • ste.ph 10:32 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      Maybe Coderre’s secretly out to get the taxi drivers.

    • ProposMontreal 10:52 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      1. Will not apply to A11 taxis (independant drivers like @Kate asked) and 2. Most will used wraps instead of paint, still costly, but not permanent.

      I’ve always been behind a unique color design for Montreal’s taxi like you see in so many other cities. I think it’s a nice feature.

    • Kate 11:02 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      Odd. The uniform colour thing doesn’t appeal to me at all. I don’t get Coderre’s fascination with forcing people, and now cars, working diversely – for different companies, or maybe independently – to put on uniforms or designs intended to make them look like a single service. I don’t see how that improves the city and I think it’s at least partly meant to make individual workers know who’s boss. Not a feeling I’ve ever enjoyed, so maybe that informs my response, but I don’t see what the benefits could be.

      If Alexandre Taillefer has a colour scheme for his Teo service, good for him. It’s a business, the cars were all bought at the same time and decorated the same way. It’s his brand. I honestly don’t think Coderre quite grasps what branding is or what it’s for.

    • jeather 12:35 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      I see why it would be nice to more easily identify taxis on the street, but this is as always with Coderre a solution searching for a problem.

    • Bill Binns 09:05 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      Montreal is the only city I have ever been to that does not have a livery for their taxis. It’s possible that other cities don’t force it on the operators but I always thought it was weird that Montreal taxis look like random used car lot cast-offs. I’d like to see a standard color scheme and maybe a few standard models of vehicles.

    • Ian 10:00 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      Toronto doesn’t – the livery is per company and some don’t have standardised livery, just rooftop signs. That aside, there’s something very 1950s about all this trending uniformity. As long as we’re doing 1950’s stuff let’s bring back unionization, affordable housing, and the middle class.

    • DeWolf 13:44 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      @Bill Binns, I think cities with mandated liveries may actually be in the minority. Many European cities are like Montreal, with ordinary cars distinguishable only by their dome light. Cities like Vancouver and Toronto have different liveries for each company. Same for Tokyo, Bangkok, etc.

      Personally, I wouldn’t mind a standardized livery. It makes it easier to spot a taxi from afar and it gives the city a distinct visual character (like Hong Kong with its red taxis or New York with its yellow cabs).

  • Kate 02:45 on 2017/04/23 Permalink | Reply  

    The Centre d’histoire piece this weekend looks back briefly at the construction of Expo 67 while Gilles Proulx ponders how that year was a turning point for Quebec.

     
  • Kate 02:30 on 2017/04/23 Permalink | Reply  

    Le Devoir has a dossier this weekend on what the city’s museums are doing for the 375th: a look at the McCord Museum’s disseminated exhibit to be seen in various parks this summer, the Maison St-Gabriel and the women who founded the city, which segues into the question who exactly were the founders, a look at the Museum of Fine Arts’ Bourgie pavilion, and at the contemporary art museum’s Expo 67 thing. There’s more, go look.

     
  • Kate 01:18 on 2017/04/23 Permalink | Reply  

    The Canadiens’ season is over.

     
    • ste.ph 10:30 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      Summer can finally start!

  • Kate 11:16 on 2017/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    Such is real estate inflation: by running a hysterical piece about how the Montreal market is about to heat up, the Gazette contributes to the heating.

     
    • mare 12:50 on 2017/04/22 Permalink

      Villeray

      Median price for a single family detached: $337,500 (all figures from centris.ca)

      Where are all those mythical single family detached houses in Villeray, and even in the downtown area they speak of earlier? Almost every house is a plex in Villeray and there are a few cottages and shoeboxes, but they are still attached to at least one neighbour. Only in neighbourhoods further away from the downtown core you’d find a reasonable stock of detachment homes, where you might want to keep that car because public transport is not that great. (That mythical car that costs $800 per month is another weird thing that keeps propping up; if you drive a car that expensive, you probably can also afford a mortgage.)

    • Kate 12:54 on 2017/04/22 Permalink

      mare, remember where that Japanese festival is held, on Rousselot? If you go south there, you’ll see a ton of small detached houses. They have a postwar feel, like houses put on small lots for soldiers, although I don’t know for sure if this is their history – there are streets like this in western Verdun and parts of Ahuntsic too. So while such houses aren’t the rule in Villeray they can be found.

    • mare 17:06 on 2017/04/22 Permalink

      Ha, depending on where Villeray ends and St. Michel starts there’s only one detached single family home for sale in Villeray. For $339,000 on 8235, rue Cartier. One! I guess all Gazette readers jumped on the occasion, and all the others have been sold today.

    • mare 17:07 on 2017/04/22 Permalink

      Spoke too soon, it’s actually attached on one side.

    • MtlWeb39 19:05 on 2017/04/22 Permalink

      Actually stopped two separate times to look if the report was one of those ‘sponsored’ versions, and was sure I would see Remax or another.

    • Exoglot 19:30 on 2017/04/22 Permalink

      Too lazy to verify this, but weren’t Montreal developers getting kind of nervous about their ability to sell all the shoeboxes currently going up in Griffintown and near the Bell Centre? Assuming that they were.. and maybe wanted some moral support.. well, they just got it.

    • rue david 01:15 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      The “shoeboxes” are homes that people live in. The evil developers build those because there is a demand for housing in Montreal and people will pay to live in the city. If the developers do not build in Griffintown or wherever, then the demand funnels into the existing home market, and Montreal gets a Vancouver situation where supply doesn’t meet demand.

      There is no mystery or conspiracy.

      Building keeps prices lower than not building. The idea that it’s lower or immoral to live in a triplex (if you’re from the surburbs) or a high rise (of you’re from Montreal) is crazy and leads to perverse results, ie. higher prices for your beloved way of life.

      This should be taught in primary school, but for some reason, people believe that not building lowers prices. Maybe MAYBE if you do it for so long that demand drops, but that’s not the way it happens in most places.

    • Kate 01:48 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      rue david, exoglot, mare meant shoeboxes in a specific sense: in Villeray and Rosemont and a few other spots, you’ll see one-storey houses, often in rows where most of the other houses are plexes. Here are two nice examples side by side on St-Gérard in Villeray. These are sometimes called shoebox houses.

      Some plexes start out this way and are later built into a second or third storey. That’s happening to this house on Streetview, which used to be a shoebox.

      I’ve read that some of the shoeboxes in Rosemont were largely constructed from materials pilfered from the Angus yards over the years.

    • rue david 02:33 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      yeah, my cousin lived on chateaubriand in one of those one story woodframe deals, i know what you mean, but mare and exoglot are more saying that it’s a hangwringing tragedy that the cost of detached (or even attached) single family homes is increasing. which is true, but at the same time, they’re implicitly arguing that montreal could solve this problem by becoming or remaining less dense. when in reality, aside from urban sprawl, the only thing that will keep the affordable single family home lifestyle alive is if demand for housing is funneled into high density living, if people are concentrated in the city so that mare and exoglot can live in their low density suburbs. and people here need to realize that, when they rail against “developers.”

      it’s simple math, that, again and again, people seem to just reject because they don’t understand that it’s not the past like when we grew up and demand is now higher for housing. if net 5,000 people move to the city every year, then the city needs net 5,000 new residences, otherwise, rents go up, because new residents compete with people moving around for existing spaces.

      that’s it. montreal has been pretty good about this for a while, but some neighborhoods (plateau) are basically zero growth, and this attitude is starting to spread, because people are taking an anti-vax lobotomized attitude to development.

    • Kate 02:39 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      rue david, I think you’re being judgy here. I don’t know Exoglot but I do know mare, and he does not live in a low-density suburb. And I think he was just talking about the story, not catastrophizing it.

      Myself, I will never own property, but I don’t want to live in a highrise, ever. So shoot me.

    • rue david 02:51 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      it’s not limited to someone living up in saint michel or shevchenko boulevard, take a higher density neighborhood like the by law zero growth plateau, where home prices have nearly doubled in just five years and have trebled since 2000. it’s an absolute scandal that people in the neighborhoods that make up the greater plateau (which has included at one point almost every montrealer i know) has these ideas that, say, a 10 story building like they have in the concordia ghetto was a huge mistake from a different era. that we had it right with this walk-up workforce housing.

      it’s nuts. imo, the 10 story buildings on saint laurent, say at prince arthur, ontario or mount royal, that’s something we should see throughout the plateau. and definitely we should see it throughout the city.

      there’s this idea among the sorts of people who i think read your blog, which is that developers build these tall buildings and that somehow pushes people out. but the evidence runs another way, that is, that building more units releases pressure and makes it cheaper to live. the only people who lose out with higher buildings and more density are the people who own property and don’t want to see property values stable/lower, and the crowd that complains about more traffic, harder parking, lost views, and a different “element” changing the neighborhood.

    • Kate 10:28 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      more traffic, harder parking, lost views

      You blow these off as if meaningless, but they’re not.

      Putting up rows of ten-storey buildings in areas where the triplex has been the dominant residential form for a century would inevitably change the vibe of whole neighbourhoods. Not everyone who’s accustomed to having their own bit of garden and to be able to walk in and out of their own front door wants to change to an elevator building and a door with a peephole and maybe a tiny balcony that’s too windy to be useful.

      It would be preferable to homelessness, but I don’t think this would be a welcome change for many.

    • Ephraim 12:20 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      Kate, take a look at Singapore. They have managed much more green space by moving skyward. You have a percentage of greenspace required as you build up. We have a tendency to build t the sidewalk when in reality, we should be putting in more green space and trees and building higher. With less buildings, you have more viewing space.

    • Kevin 12:38 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      Most of the high rises I lived in were pretty great. The two best had the top floor designed as common spaces: one as a library, the other with a gym, solarium suitable for 200+ people, and a quiet room that you could reserve as an extra living room.

      Upper floor balconies work best when they’re partially protected from the elements, such that they’re more of a room with open windows instead of something hanging off the side of the building.

    • Kate 12:40 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      Do people really use and enjoy little parklet green spaces around the feet of highrises? Psychologically, is it the same as having your own bit of back yard?

      I’m not posing this assuming the answer is no. Better for the human race if the answer is yes.

    • Exoglot 13:17 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      Rue david, I actually agree with you. I think you assumed that I am giving it a strongly negative connotation and I wasn’t. I was just saying that this type of PR helps a specific kind of developer, that’s all.

      P.S. But personally, I am much more partial to mid-rises than ginormous slabs and towers.
      P.P.S. I am using the word “shoebox” to mean a “small apartment”

    • Exoglot 14:23 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      Kate, there were studies measuring people’s level of comfort, social life, and “happiness” as a function of the size of their buildings. Generally, people living in huge apartment buildings tend to be more miserable than those living in smaller ones. They also feel much lonelier. Perhaps, as Kevin says, shared amenities help, but only to a degree.

      However, for me personally (without any prejudice for those who feel differently and without taking away the importance of a backyard), the other end of the spectrum is no better. I have to be honest: the sight of endless blocks of boring duplexes and triplexes (i.e. most of Montreal) depresses me to no end. If the choice is between that and impersonal high-rises, I am reluctantly siding with the high-rises. At least they give the streets a sense of enclosure and make pedestrians feel cozy.

      But, to repeat my earlier point, the Haussmannian 5-or-6-story building (practically absent from Canadian streets) strikes me as “just right” in terms of contact with others and a sense of belonging in the context of city living. Even though both the backyard and the shared amenities are usually absent under such an arrangement. There can be a huge variety in architectural forms, but most importantly, with many such buildings in close proximity, there’ll be enough people to support a variety of commerce on the ground floor level.

    • Thomas H 16:08 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      @rue david, you raise good points, but there are two factors that complicate your supply/demand line of reasoning:

      (1) You argue that more development expands supply and drives down rents, but this is not entirely true as buildings tend to depreciate in value over time. This means that building owners can purchase older buildings for less money (in all but the most fashionable neighbourhoods) than they would for a comparably sized new building, and accordingly, charge higher rents. On the commercial side of real estate, this is why newer buildings tend to lease to chain restaurants and shops who are willing to pay a premium to have less facility issues versus small businesses who need to save money wherever possible. Jane Jacobs (who I am personally not even much of a fan of) expounds on this point eloquently for an entire chapter of her seminal “Life and Death of American Cities”.

      (2) Density is deceiving. Very large high rises are often less dense than you would expect due to building space being lost to utilities necessary for larger buildings (elevator shafts, stairways, parking garages, etc.), and this is especially true of buildings with large pedestals or green spaces as discussed above. Mid-rise density by comparison devotes nearly all of its floor space to dwelling area. This partially explains why Los Angeles (and not New York) is the densest metropolitan area in the US or Canada, despite having relatively few high rises. Our perception that LA is sprawling is more due to its auto-dependency for a city of its size rather than its actual density.

    • ste.ph 16:27 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      The increase in property value is inevitable. Allowing high-rises simply concentrates the added value to the rich investors that can build them.

    • rue david 13:42 on 2017/04/24 Permalink

      thomas:

      on (1), unmet demand will push prices up everywhere. my point isn’t that a new building will cost the same as an old one, rather that aggregate rents stay level when you supply is allowed to meet demand. what i’m talking about here is zoning. currently, montreal has been “lucky” that so much of the core was leveled between 1950-1995, because there’s a lot of room for new construction, and we’re not running up against the limits imposed by zoning. in the most desirable neighborhoods, however, we’re running way past it. the plateau, where the cost of a triplex has almost doubled in just 10 years, has a hard 3 story limit, a west island-style lot coverage ratio, and large mandatory setbacks. whether it’s 10 or 5 story midrise, legalizing these buildings to meet the demand for housing on the plateau will alleviate some of cost pressures and, of course, housing costs will decline.

      on (2), it’s true that there are different cost profiles associate with different building types, and that “density” may be more efficiently delivered in mid-rise buildings. let’s legalize it!

  • Kate 11:08 on 2017/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    With Trinity Memorial having been sold to a real estate developer, the NDG Food Depot needs a new home.

     
  • Kate 10:16 on 2017/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    Via Facebook, a tweet from none other than PKP showing lineups in Outremont Saturday of French citizens waiting to vote. More than 58,000 people in the Montreal area are registered to vote in those elections. It’s a tight race between several possibilities with the future of the European Community possibly hanging in the balance.

    Update: La Presse reports on the long wait to vote in Outremont.

     
    • rue david 12:32 on 2017/04/22 Permalink

      Please don’t tell me PKP has French citizenship. Is it just a thing among a certain class just to get French citizenship?

      (If so, how? Will you take me?)

    • Kate 12:39 on 2017/04/22 Permalink

      I doubt it, rue david. I think it’s just that PKP lives in Outremont and this is what he saw.

      I suppose someone like PKP could buy citizenship pretty much anywhere he likes but I don’t imagine he could get natural French citizenship through his ancestry, which (at a quick google) is solidly Québécois for many generations.

      If you have even one grandparent born in a European country this can sometimes be parlayed into citizenship. But you need documentation, and you do need that Euro-grandparent. I don’t think PKP has one.

    • Patrick 12:51 on 2017/04/22 Permalink

      What interests me is that France not only allows citizens living abroad to vote (with no residency restrictions?) but even has them elect representatives in its legislature. This is not true of Canada (or Quebec). Of course, this is in part because of the difference between a presidential and parliamentary system, where you vote only for a local MP, not directly for the PM.

    • DeWolf 12:55 on 2017/04/22 Permalink

      @Patrick, that’s true, but as you noted, overseas French have their own representatives in the legislature. Canada could easily do that same. I fear the only reason is racism because many of the 3 million overseas Canadians are return migrants living in places like Hong Kong and Lebanon, and we all saw how much political hay the Conservatives were able to make over the 2006 Lebanese airlift. Unfortunately, this means Canada is pushing away many of its citizens who could otherwise be engaged in the political process.

    • Kate 12:57 on 2017/04/22 Permalink

      Italy also has a couple of government seats for citizens living abroad, while Canada has been shutting down the option for expats to continue voting, even when they’re still citizens. I think this has something to do with Italy and France seeing themselves as countries people come from, while Canada is still fixated on being a country people come to.

    • thomas 13:47 on 2017/04/22 Permalink

      @DeWolf The vast majority of Canadians living abroad, probably half when you include undocumented workers, reside in USA. Lebanon as a destination ranks behind both UK and France. Hard to see racism as the motivation.

    • DeWolf 20:52 on 2017/04/22 Permalink

      Yeah, exactly, that’s the point – Lebanon doesn’t have that many Canadian citizens, yet when Canada performed its duty and evacuated them from a conflict zone, there was an uproar because they weren’t seen as “real” Canadians. That something so insignifiant provoked such a response tells me there’s some underlying prejudice at play.

    • JaneyB 11:02 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      In recent years, our governments have been courting the world’s wealthy by giving them passports as a return for investment/escape from political turmoil. Many Cdns do not like this. The prejudice is mostly about that mutual opportunism. Most people feel an emotional connection to their country; people who have several passports are felt to have a more mixed loyalty (hence the reason politicians are pressured to have only one). This quality is stronger still if they get our passport but stay in their first country. I don’t think that’s racism, especially if we then have to spend our resources to go get them from their preferred home, in a time of crisis. The US is different because there’s so much travel and commerce between our countries that they are more like the ‘big crazy province’ than a fully separate entity.

    • Kevin 12:30 on 2017/04/23 Permalink

      There will be an uproar over everything. It doesn’t mean it is justified.
      In fact, huge numbers of people forget they were ever outraged by something anywhere from minutes to months later. That’s just life in the social media era.

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