What is the vision that governs public transport infrastructure projects in Quebec? In this matter, the extent of disorder and incoherence is infinite. The latest decision by François Legault’s government to rely on CDPQ Infra to think about the best structuring project for Quebec rather than endorsing the solid tram project presented by the mayor of Quebec, Bruno Marchand, is a pure aberration.
It is no longer the common good or ecological ambition that dictates the political decisions to be made regarding public transport. As we saw in the Kafkaesque file of 3e link between Quebec and Lévis — dead, buried, resurrected, under the disorderly baton of the Coalition Avenir Québec — this government seems to go where political opportunism takes it. It will also be remembered with bitterness: in the file of 3e link, it was the crushing defeat of the CAQ in the riding of Jean-Talon which revived the highway link project, previously abandoned in favor of a tunnel idea solely intended for public transport. Prime Minister François Legault now says he wants to rely on the population to possibly return to the original project.
What do science and mobility policies say? It doesn’t matter, the government seems to think, sticking to the voice of the electorate. And so the same bad film is playing out in the Quebec tramway issue. After a meeting that looked like a polite conversation, the government informed Mayor Bruno Marchand, proud standard-bearer of the tramway project, that it was thanks, but no thanks. Hundreds of millions of dollars later, after extensive work already carried out in the underground and municipal networks, Quebec and the Minister of Transport and Sustainable Mobility, Geneviève Guilbault, say they want to reassess the mobility needs of the capital. Back to square one ? We think we’re dreaming!
We know that the support of the population of Quebec for this tram project called rout is declining, but we are thinking of consulting them again. If we want to help Quebecers slowly break away from their dependence on solo driving, we will have to provide them with alternative solutions. The tram project, which is already more than ten years in the making and which was supported by convincing studies, seemed to contain the ingredients of a promising vision; it aimed to respond to the challenges of increasing mobility caused by an effervescent double composed of an increase in the active population and vigorous economic growth.
Finally, what can we say about Quebec’s choice to entrust CDPQ Infra, which is in charge of a brand new but hiccuping REM, with the mandate to re-study everything to come up with the best structuring project for Quebec? We think we’re dreaming (bis)! The Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, with all due respect, has not yet demonstrated the reliability of its expertise in this key sector of urban development. Let us simply think of the fact that intervention protocols had not been put in place to react when the safety of passengers is at stake. The six additional months of hesitation that Quebec has just imposed on the future of public transportation in Quebec is useless. They only confirm an increasingly embarrassing lack of vision.