This text is part of the special publication Public consultations
Unique in its genre when it was created 20 years ago, the Office de consultation publique de Montréal (OCPM) has in a way made itself over the years. However, it collaborates with other municipalities, geographically close or more distant, which draw on its experience to build their own system of citizen participation.
The creation of the Office de participation publique de Longueuil (OPPL) is the result of a campaign promise by the mayoress of the city for nearly a year, Catherine Fournier. “Many Quebec municipalities, or citizens, would like to set up an organization inspired by the OCPM, but Longueuil is the only one to have done so,” says Julie Caron-Malenfant, appointed president of the OPPL in May. last. To ensure the sustainability of its office, the town hall of Longueuil chose to model its legal basis on that of the OCPM by enshrining it in the city’s charter.
The president of the OPPL naturally relies on the experience of her “big sister” in Montreal. “This is the first model I turned to to work on our procedural rules”, explains the one who wishes to in Longueuil processes that are just as reassuring, marked out and predictable as in Montreal, but which would be adapted to the broader mandate entrusted to the OPPL.
“The City has chosen to create an office of public participation — and not consultation —. This allows us to explore the range of participatory mechanisms that exist today”, she underlines. Citizens’ panels, for example, such as those set up by the French President, Emmanuel Macron, as part of the Citizen’s Climate Convention. In Longueuil, a panel of 15 citizens produced an opinion on Montréal Saint-Hubert airport, located on its territory, which will be published by the Office on 1er next November.
“A first choice contact”
Julie Caron-Malenfant exchanges regularly with the OCPM to carry out her arbitrations. “I benefit from their advice, their experience and their view of the options which do not fall within their scope, but which may be available to us. He is a first choice contact for me in the creation of this new entity,” she confides.
The staff of the OPPL (currently three full-time and one part-time) should increase by 2023 to 6 full-time people and 6 commissioners ad hoc — a smaller structure than the OCPM, but of a comparable model. As the latter was not built in a day, Julie Caron-Malenfant intends to take the time to lay a solid foundation for the OPPL. “Our main challenge will be to demonstrate over the next few years that public participation can be constructive and productive, and benefit the entire community of Longueuil,” she said.
Inspired French people
“We have been talking with the OCPM for more than ten years,” says Pierre Houssais, director of forecasting and public dialogue at the Métropole du Grand Lyon, in France. The two public consultation institutions have distinct histories, which explain their differences. “An independent office born out of a period of crisis of confidence, the OCPM presents itself as a kind of neutral third party. On our side, we were an intercommunality (now a local authority) with a democratic stake, which seeks to collect the opinions of its citizens on its projects”, explains the director. When he took up his post in 2010, the metropolis of Lyon was the first French inter-municipality to set up a charter for citizen consultation.
From these two stories were born two different practices. “The OCPM’s impartiality is very interesting,” says Pierre Houssais. Its role in guaranteeing the quality of the dialogue inspires us. As a local authority, we are at the service of projects [que nous cherchons à améliorer] and the general interest. ” But influenced by this impartiality of Montreal, the Metropolis of Lyon is increasingly involving the National Commission for Public Debate in consultations on major projects. “It can be compared to the OCPM in its role as third party guarantor of dialog,” he says.
A solid anchor
Other differences enrich exchanges between French and Quebec counterparts, in particular the mediation function of the OCPM. “We are less involved in this search for consensus and reciprocal commitments, because our consultations relate to projects on which we are project owners. But we can amend them on what seems negotiable to us,” says Pierre Houssais. In addition, the OCPM puts fairly advanced development projects up for debate, while the Lyon metropolitan area seeks to gather the opinion of its citizens further upstream, to prevent weaknesses in the projects.
“Unlike the OCPM, we do not intervene, or very little, in public inquiries and other highly regulatory consultations. Our process is therefore less formalized”, explains the one who observes with interest the rigor respected by the Quebec office (announcing all the stages in advance, faithfully transcribing all the interviews, etc.). “This can ultimately sterilize the debate compared to our less marked consultations, which are sometimes very conflicting and theatrical! But this formalism, which has the advantage of reminding citizens of the OCPM’s position, is nonetheless inspiring,” says the Frenchman. His team has also developed digital tools which, without being formal reports, make it possible to post opinions and vote on them.
Pierre Houssais has closely followed the Office’s innovations over the years, both in terms of form (tools) and substance (consultation topics). He salutes this ability to evolve while remaining faithful to its fundamentals: “In our era of distrust of institutions and the predominance of social networks, such a guaranteeing institution having a solid anchorage with this great formal requirement, it is precious! »
This special content was produced by the Special Publications team of the To have to, pertaining to marketing. The drafting of To have to did not take part.