While the members of the National Assembly are currently studying Bill 16, which amends the Act respecting land use planning and development, we would like to bring to the public’s attention that the reform currently in the pipeline risks marking a significant setback in terms of citizen participation.
This reform should be an opportunity for the legal framework to be in tune with the enormous challenges that characterize the development of the territory and the communities that live there. However, in its current state, Bill 16 does not measure up to what Quebec is able to do to facilitate the participation and taking charge of their own development by local and regional players. , citizens included.
First, the bill proposes to repeal the provisions concerning public participation policies. Then it adds exceptions to the referendum approval process. Finally, it makes written consultation the new norm for municipalities instead of public meetings.
Provisions that disappear
We deplore the sections of Bill 16 which repeal both the reference framework for public participation in land use planning and the Regulation respecting public participation (which allows municipalities to opt out of referendum approval under certain conditions) .
Note that this regulation was adopted in 2017 following the recommendations of a working group. It has had a very positive effect on the recognition of public participation: the number of municipalities with a public participation policy has increased from a few to several dozen, while very few have chosen to evade approval referendary. Nevertheless, since 2017, we have seen a notable improvement in the way public participation is understood and, above all, carried out at the territorial level.
The repeal of the provisions concerning public participation risks opening the way to more improvisation, but above all does not allow us to envisage that the projects submitted benefit from the improvements that come from a variety of perspectives and knowledge.
We therefore propose to introduce the obligation for municipalities or RCMs to adopt and maintain in force a policy of public participation capable of preserving the objectives of active participation upstream of decisions, of setting deadlines adapted to the circumstances and of guidelines of feedback. And this, while giving them the flexibility to adapt their practices to their realities and means.
New exceptions to referendum approval
This is all the more necessary since Bill 16 introduces new exemptions to the referendum approval process, and at the same time justifies the repeal of the public participation framework.
In the current context, the referendum exemption for collective equipment, for example, seems necessary in order to avoid opposition that many have not hesitated to qualify as “not in my backyard”. However, in doing so, Bill 16 misses the point: how to encourage and frame constructive public participation likely to positively influence public decisions? This question remains unavoidable, because even with the best intentions, a project can miss its target.
Above all, this should not prevent the establishment of a project on referendum approval in town planning, to explore an in-depth reform rather than proceed piecemeal by introducing a series of exceptions. This is also what the Ordre des urbanistes du Québec offers.
Because if the legislator decides to withdraw the right of the population to oppose by way of referendum, it would be necessary in return to give him at least the possibility of formulating his comments and of being heard by the intermediary of formal mechanisms and to privilege that this contribution is made upstream of the projects.
Written consultation, a new panacea?
Bill 16 introduces written consultation as the preferred mode of participation by default, with a minimum duration of two weeks, according to terms published in a local newspaper.
These minimum requirements are insufficient and likely to reduce participation. This mode of consultation evacuates the possibility of debating and thus of feeding and enriching the reflection. In addition, many of our fellow citizens have problems related to literacy or are simply not connected to the Internet, by choice or spite.
Added to this is the absence of a more substantial frame of reference, as proposed by the principles of public participation that we want to repeal in the new version of the Act respecting land use planning and development. We are afraid of observing an imbalance in the relationship of power and a weakening of the bond of trust between the population and the local governments.
In a context of democratic participation battered by misinformation, the polarization of opinions, growing distrust of public institutions and the slow but steady decline in the rate of participation in municipal elections, let us not miss the opportunity to better legislate to encourage and improve the contribution of citizens to the vitality of the territories and our democracy.
In 2023, we do not have the collective means to send citizen participation to the siding.
*Also signed this letter:
Pierre Baril, former president of the Bureau d’audiences publiques en environnement (BAPE)
Laurence Bherer, professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Montreal
Luc Doray, former secretary general of the Office de consultation publique de Montréal (OCPM)
Laurent Gauthier, for the board of directors of ESSA, a group of social and solidarity economy companies in land use planning and design
Louise Harel, Minister for Metropolitan France and Municipal Affairs from 1998-2002
Maude Marquis-Bissonnette, assistant professor at the National School of Public Administration (ÉNAP) in municipal management
David-Martin Milot, professor at the University of Sherbrooke and medical specialist in public health and preventive medicine
Florence Paulhiac Scherrer, full professor at ESG UQAM and holder of the International Chair on the Uses and Practices of the Smart City
Louise Roy, former president of the Office de consultation publique de Montréal (OCPM)
Louis Simard, professor at the School of Political Studies at the University of Ottawa