For Bernard Drainville, CAQ candidate in Lévis, calling for studies on the third link in Quebec would serve more to “lead a cabal” against the project “than to enlighten the debate”.
The former radio host improvised captain of the third link on Twitter this week, going there with a series of fallacious arguments to try to defend this indefensible project.
“Ah yes, the famous studies… Why do you need them exactly?” To determine if the bridges are glued? If the bridges deteriorate? If there is a bottleneck at the head of the bridges? If a reserved lane would be better than not at all? asked the candidate.
Not reassuring
It is not reassuring to note that Bernard Drainville, who was a minister in another government, minimizes the importance of studies which are nevertheless prescribed in the directives on major projects of the Treasury Board. Studies that have nothing to do with the questions he asks, and he knows it too well.
Mr. Drainville also devotes himself in turn to an exercise whose intellectual rigor leaves you speechless: he brings the debate on the relevance of the $6.5 billion tunnel to the floor of a supposed Quebec-Montreal war.
Siege in game
The candidate would benefit from an interest in the science and theory of induced traffic.
Adding road links in cities has been shown to increase traffic.
The tunnel is therefore not intended to be a solution to congestion problems, quite the contrary.
The position of the candidate in relation to studies is all the more disconcerting in that he has held the positions of journalist and presenter for a long time. As such, he wanted to be a watchdog of the efficiency and transparency of public services.
It’s crazy how some people come to renounce principles that were dear to them when they pass on the other side of the fence.