How to spend 7 billion without arguments

If Eric Duheim has a better economic argument than you, it is time to question yourself.

Released at 6:00 p.m.

The Conservative leader is second to none in reputation as a Democrat and populist, and in his view is the Quebec area.

But he too – he! – The CAQ government’s arguments for developing a two-pipe “third connection” tunnel boring machine are insane. Like some experts, he wants a new, less expensive bridge.

I.e..

I hear them howling against the prevailing west wind from here: we know, in Montreal, etcetera.

Friends of Quebec and the region around it, I urge you not to fall into the trap of misguided regional competition, as Transport Minister Franசois Bonardel wants.

He actually gave a new figure to the media, which is completely unprecedented: the number of bridges per one million people.

Is this not an objective measure of equality between regions? The number of hospital beds per citizen is well calculated. Why not bridge ratio? You had to think about it!

Montreal has 8.7 bridges per million people, while Quebec has only 2.44.

You will tell me: Montreal is an island, it is natural to be better set on bridges. Others point to the shocking lack of Rouyn-Noranda bridges.

But seriously: is this the argument of Franசois Bonardell? Is it a file presented to the general public of the nation to justify such a colossal creation?

Let’s talk about traffic. Let’s talk about city planning. Let’s talk about the environment. Let’s talk about regional development.

But for now I just want to remember one thing: this government is preparing to embezzle $ 7 billion from the state without any serious economic or scientific argument.

Vehicle traffic has increased everywhere in Quebec as well. The current bridges are complete compared to forecasts from 40 years ago. Even in Montreal, we felt this.

From there, many questions arise: Is this really a specific problem? That is: is traffic in Quebec in such a bad condition that it justifies the creation of another “link”? If so, are two tunnels of 8.3 km each on unfamiliar foundations really the right solution? What will be the consequences of these new constructions? Are there other options?

Photo by Patrice Loroch, Sun.

Quebec Mayor Bruno Mercant and Lewis Mayor Gilles Lehoulier presented a new version of the third merger plan on Thursday.

According to Lewis Mayor Gilles Lehoulier, his fight with Quebec has stalled many projects, with no urban expansion to be expected. Zero. Why? Because the tunnel will connect the two existing highways. Isn’t that logical? We will only speed up traffic between congested roads.

However, this is the definition of urban expansion: if you build more road infrastructure to generate traffic, you are encouraging transportation to more remote areas because the cost of transportation will be lower. This is math. The suburbs will expand into a larger belt.

This is a potential “social” choice, mind you. Is said!

But do not say that it is neutral, does not change anything, or even better, “increases the attraction of public transport.” Mr. Bonnardell was right. Without laughing. We have reached two double track tunnels, we do not know how public transport fits, but for some unknown reason, it makes public transport more attractive …

That is really the only thing here: what is the rational basis for public policy? Is there a minimum scientific basis for the decisions of our governments? Are we really talking about the criteria for bridges per million people?

Quebec Mayor Bruno Mercantile says it very clearly and simply: What is data? What is the basis for justifying such a plan?

In his presentation on Thursday, Minister Franசois Ponnardel cited the evolution of travel between 1997 and 2017. And forecasts for the next 15 years.

It is weak, very weak. Although it is said to take into account the evolution of telework, a comment two years ago did not appear.

We all understand that the government has a proper constitutional path: the central government should provide 40% of the funding. François Legault could not “believe” that it would be denied. Source: The Vancouver Tunnel will be co-funded by the Federal Government. This is a pre-1959 tunnel, so we forget to mention that it is being repaired, not new infrastructure. In fact, it is very clear that Ottawa will not put any money into this.

As we do the descent of this “third connection”, we realize that if it had long been a dream in Lewis, it became a political issue when some radio stations in Quebec decided to turn it into a fight. Candidates for the CAQ adhered to it. It has become a regional promise. We first announced this world-wide tunnel without even first inspecting it. When they realized it was pointless, they came up with this new version. Because the project can not die.

In short, the solution was announced before a serious analysis of the problem.

Like the good mayor of Quebec we are still waiting, and many in the area dare not say so. What are we waiting for?

Facts. Numbers. Science.

Does it seem to me that being scientifically sown by Eric Duhim should not be fun?