Tag Archives: Montreal election

| Montreal, Opinion, Radio, TV

Election coverage tonight: “Election? What election?”

It is time.

It is time.

In federal elections, it’s customary for television networks to suspend normal programming and air an election special with the big national anchors sitting at Parliament Hill or at a special “election desk” in an undisclosed (but elaborately decorated) location.

In provincial elections, much the same thing, but on a more local level. The graphics aren’t as cool, and the sets aren’t as elaborate, but still attention is given to the big event.

In municipal elections today, even though they’re happening in cities across Quebec, the amount of coverage depends entirely on what language you speak.

If you’re a francophone, you’re in luck, because Montreal is the centre of your media universe. Both LCN and RDI will have election specials all evening, and the main networks Radio-Canada and TVA will have results specials later.

If you’re an anglophone well, election coverage is expensive, and there are cheap rerun movies or U.S. programming to run instead. Not a single anglo network (not even the all-news networks) has special coverage planned for the election. You’ll have to wait for the regular local newscast.

Here’s how it breaks down, ordered by the amount of coverage:

  • RDI: Live coverage from 6:30pm to 12:30am (anyone thinking RDI is a national network serving all French Canadians – including those outside Quebec – is clearly delusional)
  • LCN: Live coverage from 7:30pm
  • CBFT/Radio-Canada: Because of the ADISQ gala tonight, election coverage will begin once it’s over at about 10pm. They expect to be done by 11:30
  • CFTM/TVA: Occupation Double is more important than the news. After that, there’s Dominic Arpin’s Vlog. They might get to it at 10:30. A movie is scheduled at 11.
  • CKMI/Global: News Final is at 11:30, giving a total of 30 minutes for election and other local news.
  • CFCF/CTV: The Amazing Race and Desperate Housewives tonight. Regular local newscast is at 11:30, which will have up to 15 minutes of coverage before it gives way to SportsNight. UPDATE: CTV says it won’t have SportsNight tonight in favour of election coverage, and will have updates during primetime commercials.
  • CBMT/CBC: Battle of the Blades and The Nature of Things are on for tonight. There’s no local news on weekends, so the best hope is a mention on The National at 10.
  • CTV News Channel: No special coverage is planned, but it’s live from the newsroom all night, so they’ll probably air significant developments live if they’re of national interest.
  • CBC News Network: No special coverage is planned. A documentary on Barack Obama will be airing when election results start coming in. The National is at 9, which will probably mention the results, at least in brief.
  • CFJP/V: Their only news bulletin is at 5:30pm. No election coverage is scheduled.
  • CIVM/Télé-Québec: No news department means no election coverage whatsoever.
  • VOX: Haha, just kidding.

This information is based on published schedules, so it’s possible there might be special coverage on one of these networks that they havn’t told the TV guide (and on-screen digital schedules) people about. But I wouldn’t hold my breath for the conventional TV stations.

Better options on radio, online

So what’s an anglo to do when you can’t get local news before 11?

  • CBC Radio is a solution. Nancy Wood (host of Daybreak, who hopefully isn’t working tomorrow) and Andrew Chang (host of the TV newscast) will be live in the radio studio tonight from 9pm to 11pm, and they will be streaming live video online. They’re also live-blogging the results.
  • CJAD also has live election coverage this evening.
  • And, of course, if you don’t need the voice of gravitas from a radio or television anchor, don’t forget about the print media. The Gazette will have liveblogging from reporter Jim Mennie, and Cyberpresse is all over this.

Montreal City Hall will be hosting a results party tonight, with everyone welcome as of 7:45pm.

And if you don’t want the media filter, you can get the results straight from the source.

I’m heading to work, where I’ll be in the thick of it tonight putting together election pages for a special section of The Gazette tomorrow, which means I won’t have time to liveblog the results (or coverage thereof). Feel free to share what you see and hear below.

Some polling stations were delayed in opening so they’re being kept open later. Expect results no earlier than 9pm.

| Montreal, Opinion

Candidates to watch tonight (UPDATED)

Well, probably more like “candidates I’ll be watching tonight”. Here are some of the few recognizable names on the ballots. Voting closes at 8 p.m.

UPDATE: Wins/losses below.

Ahuntsic-Cartierville

  • François Purcell (mayor, Union Montreal): Union Montreal won two of four seats in this borough, plus the borough mayor. Of them, only a single candidate stands for re-election because of local scandals. Can a Purcell-led clean slate convince the voters they’ll be any different? LOST to Projet Montréal’s Pierre Gagnier.

Anjou

  • Luis Miranda (incumbent mayor, Union Montreal): Will a city probe into corruption – with Miranda as the star player – cause a fed up electorate to sweep him out of office? He won with 58% of the vote in 2005, but that was at he head of the independent Équipe Anjou party, before it merged with Union Montreal. WON.

Côte des Neiges/Notre Dame de Grâce

  • Michael Applebaum (incumbent mayor, Union Montreal): Everyone seems to dislike him, but they keep voting him back into office. The heavily anglo and allophone borough will stick with his party, right? WON.
  • Brenda Paris (mayor, Vision Montreal): One of Vision’s two token anglophones, Paris (who lives in St. Henri) is best known for sitting on the STM’s board as a representative of its users, even though she’s clearly a politician. She ran for Union Montreal in the Southwest borough in 2005, and lost to Vision’s Line Hamel. LOST to Applebaum.
  • Helen Fotopulos/Gérald Tremblay (city councillor, Côte-des-Neiges district, Union Montreal): Our dear mayor’s colistière, Fotopulos was the borough mayor for the Plateau, but was demoted by Tremblay to make room for Labrecque (who supposedly has more green cred). She isn’t running against any star candidates, but if she loses and he gets edged for the mayor’s seat, Tremblay is out of council entirely. WON.
  • Marvin Rotrand (incumbent city councillor, Snowdon district, Union Montreal): the #2 guy at the STM, Rotrand is a respected politician despite his party (he’s differed with them on some votes). WON.
  • Peter McQueen (city councillor, NDG district, Projet Montréal): The perennial green guy from NDG, McQueen runs in just about every election, and usually gets pretty close for the Green Party, if only because he’s in one of the hippiest places in this part of the country. A municipal election with its low voter turnout might be most likely to get him elected, but will smart greens jump to Hanna? WON.
  • David Hanna (city councillor, NDG district, Vision Montreal): The other token anglo with Vision Montreal, Hanna is a professor and an expert at urban planning. If qualifications were the only consideration, he’d win easily. LOST to McQueen.
  • Jeremy Searle (city councillor, Loyola district, independent): A former city councillor who hasn’t had much luck since 2005, Searle endorsed himself (PDF) in his newspaper column. Can he make a comeback? LOST to Union Montreal’s Susan Clarke.

Lachine

  • Claude Dauphin (incumbent mayor, Union Montreal): The chair of the executive committee, he’s currently Tremblay’s #2 at city hall, and linked to its scandals as much as Tremblay is. Will Lachine voters say they’ve had enough? WON.
  • Lise Poulin (borough councillor, Canal district, Union Montreal): The only non-incumbent running on Union Montreal’s Lachine ticket, Poulin is confined to a wheelchair and her election would bring increased diversity to borough council, if not city council. But without much individual name recognition, she’d need a strong party-line vote to bring her into office. And that’s not likely to happen when your party is Union Montreal. WON.

LaSalle

  • Manon Barbe (incumbent mayor, Union Montreal): Another borough almost entirely controlled by Tremblay’s party, will the domination continue now that it’s so tainted with scandal? WON.
  • Oksana Kaluzny (mayor, Parti Ville LaSalle): The head of one of the borough parties in this election, can she and her candidates be swept into office in a protest vote for local independents? LOST to Barbe.

Île Bizard-Ste. Geneviève

  • Richard Bélanger (incumbent mayor, Union Montreal): Union holds every seat in this borough, and really, what are the chances rich car-driving West Islanders are going to vote for Louise Harel or Richard Bergeron? WON.

Mercier-Hochelaga-Maisonneuve

  • Réal Ménard (mayor, Vision Montreal): A long-time Bloc Québécois MP, Ménard was lured by Harel to join Vision and run for the mayoralty in this heavily francophone riding, bumping incumbent mayor Lyn Thériault to a city councillor spot. Considering how many times he was elected under the BQ riding, there’s very little question he’s going to win tonight. WON.
  • Monique Comtois-Blanchet/Louise Harel (city councillor, Maisonneuve-Longue-Pointe district, Vision Montreal): Harel’s seat if she doesn’t become mayor, I don’t think she’s too worried about it. WON (Louise Harel takes the seat).
  • Louis Cléroux (city councillor, Hochelaga district, Union Montreal): One of the young candidates for Tremblay (in what will probably be a no-hope district for his party), Cléroux is a geek entrepreneur with 1,600 friends on Facebook. Even if they all vote for him, it’s going to be tough. LOST to Vision Montreal’s Laurent Blanchard.

Montreal North

  • Gilles Deguire (mayor, Union Montreal): Union swept this borough in 2005, but only two candidates are running again. Fredy Villanueva, and the societal problems connected with that (including the high crime rate in the area) will be a big factor in this vote. WON.

Outremont

Pierrefonds-Roxboro

  • Monique Worth (incumbent mayor, Union Montreal): Another Union sweep in 2005 (most winning more than 50% of the vote), Worth entered politics to fill the seat of husband Harry Worth after he died. She’s been borough mayor in 2001, and will probably stay that way. WON.
  • Michael Labelle (mayor, Vision Montreal Projet Montréal): Running again after losing to Worth in 2005 as a Vision Montreal candidate, Labelle is now under the banner of the car-hating party in the West Island. Good luck with that. LOST to Worth.
  • Bertrand Ward (city councillor, West district, Union Montreal): He’s been a city councillor for 20 years now. Might as well make it 24. WON.

Plateau Mont-Royal

  • Luc Ferrandez (mayor, Projet Montréal): One of the most visible and outspoken candidates for Projet Montréal, he’s also their best shot at a borough mayor position. Can he pull it off? WON.
  • Michel Labrecque (mayor, Union Montreal): The chair of the STM, Labrecque is among the more respectable members of Tremblay’s party. But will his personal popularity (as much personal popularity as a public transit nerd can have, anyway) be enough to counter the negative perception of his party? LOST to Ferrandez.
  • Alex Norris (city councillor, Mile End district, Projet Montréal): A former journalist (and an anglophone!), he’s racked up individual endorsements from such high-profile Montrealers as Thomas Mulcair and Mike Boone. WON.
  • Nimâ Valérie Machouf/Richard Bergeron (city councillor, Jeanne-Mance district, Projet Montréal): Bergeron’s consolation prize, he takes this seat if she wins and his bid for mayor falls short again. But they have some strong opposition. WON (Bergeron takes the seat).
  • Nathalie Rochefort (city councillor, Jeanne-Mance district, Vision Montreal): One of the MNA-losers-turned-municipal-politicians, Rochefort was elected in a by-election for the Liberals in Mercier, but lost in two subsequent general elections to the PQ’s Daniel Turp. LOST to Machouf/Bergeron.
  • Marc-Boris St-Maurice (city councillor, Jeanne-Mance district, independent): our local pothead and his crazy idea of public urinals. Does he have a chance against Bergeron and, you know, real politicians? LOST to Machouf/Bergeron.

Rivière des Prairies-Pointe-aux-Trembles

This borough, especially in Pointe aux Trembles, was very close in the last election, with the seats about split between Union and Vision. That might mean Harel will pull through this time, but all the seats here are worth watching. (UPDATE: Vision won 2/3 of the city and borough council seats, but Union has the mayoralty.)

Rosemont-La Petite Patrie

  • André Lavallée (incumbent mayor, Union Montreal): A VP of Tremblay’s executive committee, Lavallée is a big political figure. But will that work against him? LOST to Vision Montreal’s François Croteau.
  • Pierre Lampron (city councillor, Vieux-Rosemont district, Vision Montreal): Louise Harel’s new right-hand man (you know, after the unfortunateness with Benoit Labonté), Lampron is supposed to be above even the slightest whisper of corruption. Can Rosemont residents trust that? WON.

Saint Laurent

  • Alan De Sousa (incumbent mayor, Union Montreal): Well liked (even La Presse endorsed him in their non-endorsement editorial, along with Labrecque and Lavallée), he’s the green guy in Tremblay’s executive committee. Not facing stiff competition for mayor, he’ll probably win re-election easily. WON.
  • Bryce Durafourt (city councillor, Côte de Liesse district, independent): I wrote about Durafourt in 2007 when he ran for a school board position. He’s at it again, and he’s the only independent running in the borough (if you include the Louise O’Sullivan candidate as a member of a party). LOST to Union Montreal’s Laval Demers.

Saint-Léonard

  • Michel Bissonnet (incumbent mayor, Union Montreal): Though he was replacing Frank Zampino in a by-election, the former Liberal MNA won with 94% of the vote. He ain’t going anywhere. WON.

Sud-Ouest

This borough has high turnover from the last election, which was also heavily disputed. Union Montreal has only one incumbent, and Vision has none. But can Projet Montréal make a breakthrough here?

  • Line Hamel (mayor, independent): Hamel, the councillor who was dumped by Vision Montreal after her father was charged with fraud. Now she’s running independently for mayor. She’s known, but she also has scandal attached. LOST to Vision Montreal’s Benoit Dorais.
  • Ronald Bossy (city councillor, Saint-Paul-Émard district, independent): Another ejected Vision councillor, Bossy is running by himself. The man he beat last time, Paul-Émile Rioux, has since switched from Union Montreal to Vision Montreal, which just goes to show how revolving-door municipal politics are in Montreal. LOST to Vision Montreal’s Huguette Roy.

Verdun

  • Claude Trudel (incumbent mayor, Union Montreal): The former chair of the STM, Trudel is mayor of a borough that has hippie working-class voters on one side, and yuppie condo dwellers on Nuns’ Island. Any decision he makes is liked by one half of his electorate and hated by the other, which puts him in a volatile position. WON.
  • Ken McLaughlin (borough councillor, Champlain-Île-des-Soeurs district, Projet Montréal): The formerly anonymous author of the Walking Turcot Yards blog, McLaughlin is as green as they come. But he’s running for the district that comprises Nuns’ Island. Not exactly a lock. LOST to Union Montreal’s Andrée Champoux.

Ville-Marie

  • Sammy Forcillo (city councillor, Peter-McGill district, Union Montreal): Moved west from the Sainte Marie district, Uncle Sammy is beloved in the Gay Village, but will he be able to convince enough in the McGill and Concordia ghettos to vote for the party instead of Boulos? WON.
  • Karim Boulos (incumbent city councillor, Peter-McGill district, independent): The Union-Montreal-turned-Vision-Montreal-turned-independent candidate whose wife has been nagging me for weeks to get more exposure on my blog, Boulos won with 54% of the vote in 2005, but that was with the party name attached. He’s visible in the area with campaign posters (something Union and Vision has sworn off), and he’s surprisingly honest about politics on his blog. Will that be enough to hold on to the seat? LOST to Forcillo.
  • Fergus Keyes/Louise O’Sullivan (city councillor, Peter-McGill district, Parti Montréal Ville-Marie): The name of the fourth party leader might draw some votes, but against Boulos and Forcillo, her chances are slim. LOST to Forcillo.
  • Benoit Labon… euh, right, the Vision candidate for Sainte-Marie dropped out on orders from Louise Harel (who Labonté brought into the party in the first place, ironically). Because it happened after the deadline, Vision won’t be running a candidate in that district.
  • Frédéric Rappaz (city councillor, Sainte-Marie district, independent): The author of Entendu à Montréal is running his own campaign, but I doubt he has as much name recognition in the general public as he does in the blogosphere. LOST to Projet Montréal’s Pierre Mainville.
  • Milan Mirich/Michel Bédard (city councillor, Sainte-Marie district, Montreal Pride Party): That other guy running for mayor. LOST to Projet Montréal’s Pierre Mainville.

Villeray-Saint-Michel-Park Extension

  • Anie Samson (incumbent mayor, Vision Montreal): Running for Vision as an incumbent in a heavily francophone (and sovereignist) area, Samson shouldn’t have much trouble getting re-elected. WON.
  • Marcel Tremblay (mayor, Union Montreal): Except Samson is up against the mayor’s brother, a parachuted candidate from NDG, for whatever that’s worth. LOST to Samson.
  • Harry Delva (city councillor, François-Perreault district, Vision Montreal): Heavily involved in the local Haitian community, Delva is best known as the host of Noir de Monde on CJNT television. Union’s Frank Venneri is the incumbent, but his victory in 2005 wasn’t a landslide. LOST to Union Montreal’s Frank Venneri.
  • Elsie Lefebvre (city councillor, Villeray district, Vision Montreal): A one-time MNA for the Parti Québécois in Laurier-Dorion, Lefebvre is young and hard-working, one of the few people I’ve actually witnessed campaigning in this area. She’s up against Union incumbent Sylvain Lachance. WON.
  • Mary Deros (city councillor, Park Extension district, Union Montreal): Deros, who left Vision in 2007 to join Union Montreal, is up against people with a lot of hard-to-pronounce names in this small, heavily-ethnic district (there’s even a challenger who’s part of the Ethnic Party of Montreal). Has she done enough for Park Extension to warrant another term, or will opposition split the vote? WON.
Posters adorn lawns in the heated Hampstead race

Posters adorn lawns in the heated Hampstead race

And in the suburbs

  • Hampstead: Incumbent Bill Steinberg is up against a slate of opposing candidates.
  • Beaconsfield: Incumbent (and former CTV reporter) Bob Benedetti has two challengers, and each council seat has between two and four candidates. He LOST to David Pollock.
  • Longueuil (Jacques Goyette LOST to Caroline St-Hilaire) and Laval (Gilles Vaillancourt WON re-election and swept the council) also have heated races this year.

Races not to watch

  • Baie D’Urfé and Dorval Island: All the candidates were acclaimed, so neither city is voting today.
| Media, Montreal

Louise Harel: the English interviews

When Vision Montreal leader Louise Harel refused last month to participate in a CTV-organized English debate, the decision was widely criticized by anglophone leaders as the PQ séparatiss turning her back on the English-speaking community.

Harel made excuses for her troubles in English, saying she speaks English with her inlaws and she just gets nervous when she’s in front of a camera (or microphone) and worries about making political mistakes with her less-than-perfect language. It’s understandable (she really had nothing to win and a lot to lose by participating in an English debate), but she might have defused the situation a bit better if she just admitted “yeah, I suck at English, but I’m working on it, and in the meantime I’d rather not torture the electorate with my feeble attempts” – at least that would have showed she has a sense of humour.

Besides, she wouldn’t be the first Montreal mayor who couldn’t perform in a Shakespeare play, nor would she be the first sovereignist to run the city’s executive committee.

But instead, partly because of the way her party handled the situation and partly because of media reaction to it, she’s left the anglophone community with the impression that she doesn’t give a rat’s ass about them and she can easily get elected without their support. And so her support among anglophones was mired in the single digits in opinion polls.

Still, she reached out. She could have refused questions in English during news conferences, but she took them. She could have limited her longer interviews in English, but she’s made four of them with local English electronic media, by my count.

The first was a disastrous interview with Anne Lagacé-Dowson on CJAD. Disastrous not in that she said anything politically damaging (besides admitting that she’s a sovereignist), but because it allowed the news media to see how she performed in English and understand just how awful her command of the language is. Others (like me) poked fun at her, concentrating on her many stumbles during the interview rather than the points she made. She had to do it, and she had to get it out of her system. Fortunately she did it early. (I asked CJAD a while ago for permission to post the full audio of the interview, but never heard back. Unfortunately it’s not available online.)

In the past two weeks, Harel has had two sit-down interviews with English television stations and one interview with English radio.

Louise Harel with Jamie Orchard on CKMI's Focus Montreal on Oct. 22

Louise Harel with Jamie Orchard on CKMI's Focus Montreal during the week of Oct. 22

Jamie Orchard was the first, getting Harel into a room at Global’s CKMI Montreal (incidentally, on the only non-fake set at the station), and grilling her on her plan to recentralize power in city hall and her views on negotiations with blue collar workers.

Louise Harel with Todd van der Heyden on Wednesday

Louise Harel with Todd van der Heyden on Wednesday

On Wednesday, CFCF’s Todd van der Heyden sat down with Harel for over 11 minutes during the noon newscast, in which he asked all the anglo questions, and got Harel to admit that she doesn’t consider the English colonialists.

Nancy Wood, CBC Daybreak

Nancy Wood, CBC Daybreak

Finally, on Friday morning, Harel was in the studios of CBC Montreal for a radio interview with Daybreak’s Nancy Wood (link goes to podcast MP3 which contains the full interview). Wood asked her about her sagging poll numbers and whether she’s sure everyone working for her party is on the up-and-up. Other than Harel not knowing what “deceived” means (you’d think of all words, that would be one she’d get to know pretty well recently), it went okay.

Maybe it’s because we all know about Harel’s English already, or because the news is too busy covering corruption and horse-race issues, but these other English interviews got very little notice.

Despite legitimate criticisms from the anglophone community, we should at least give her credit for trying. And it’s nice to see that her English is getting at least a little bit better.

| Media, Montreal

Montreal media endorsement tally

Sure, you could go to the party websites, read their platforms, call up your local candidates and decide for yourself who you’re going to vote for. But why do that when the media is ready to just tell you how to mark your X?

Even in this election campaign, where none of the candidates for mayor has prompted Barack-Obama-like enthusiasm, most seem content with endorsing a candidate anyway, and each of the big three is getting a piece of the pie.

In fact, not even do major media outlets not agree on whom to vote for, they can’t even form consensuses within their own newsrooms. Both La Presse and The Gazette have columnists making endorsements for mayor that differ from the main editorial line.

With the candidates neck and neck and neck a day before the election, and no clue how even strategic voting would work, I’m afraid you’re all on your own here.

Still, here’s how the endorsements break down:

For mayor

Gérald Tremblay

Gérald Tremblay, Union Montreal

  • The Gazette: “The least distressing candidate in an unprepossessing field. … Richard Bergeron is clearly not ready to govern. … Harel’s claim to be a unifier is preposterous.”
  • CTV (Executive Producer Barry Wilson): “At this point, it seems not be a case of who is the best, but who is not the worst choice.”
  • The Suburban: “Montreal’s greater good will be served by a mayor who can communicate in English, the lingua franca, to the outside world … by a mayor who does not make war on cars and does not want to make a pedestrian promenade of our busiest commercial artery.”

Louise Harel

Louise Harel, Vision Montreal

  • Le Devoir (Bernard Descôteaux): “Guérir Montréal du cancer de la corruption est un préalable à toute chose. …  L’expérience est ici l’élément déterminant, et entre Louise Harel et Richard Bergeron, il faut donc choisir la première. … Elle possède le sens politique qui lui permettra de créer les nécessaires consensus au sein du prochain conseil municipal.”
  • L’Aut’journal: “L’administration Tremblay a complètement perdu la maîtrise de ses projets au profit de l’entreprise privée. Le candidat Richard Bergeron présente un excellent programme municipal … Cependant, il faut reconnaître qu’il n’a pas réussi au cours des quatre dernières années à s’entourer d’une équipe aguerrie. … Il est nécessaire de restructurer la fonction publique municipale et revoir la répartition des pouvoirs entre la ville-centre et les arrondissements. Pour y arriver, il faudra une grande dextérité politique et seule Louise Harel a l’expérience, le savoir-faire et les années de service pour y arriver.”
  • Lysiane Gagnon, La Presse: “Je crois que Mme Harel fera tout pour réussir la fin d’une carrière gâchée par une fusion mal faite qui s’est terminée par le fiasco des défusions. Et elle est capable de beaucoup. … La souveraineté? De toute façon, le dossier est presque clos. Son anglais boiteux? Elle apprendra. Ses tentations bureaucratiques de péquiste de gauche? La réalité économique de Montréal, qui repose sur l’entreprise privée, la rattrapera vite.”

Richard Bergeron

Richard Bergeron, Projet Montréal

  • Henry Aubin, The Gazette: “There are two approaches for reaching that judgment. One approach – the more common one – is to look at each candidate’s personal record and qualities. It’s this approach that has led to widespread despair. … The other approach for assessing candidates is through the issues. … Bergeron, then, clearly comes out ahead on all matters except sovereignty.”
  • Pierre Foglia, La Presse (I think): “Je souhaite la très improbable victoire de M. Bergeron, même si on me dit que c’est un tata fini et l’homme d’une idée fixe avec lequel cela risquerait d’aller encore plus mal qu’aujourd’hui à la mairie.”
  • Non-media endorsements: John Gomery, Charles Taylor, Québec solidaire, Chris Karidogiannis and Jimmy Zoubris

None of the above

  • La Presse (chief editorialist André Pratte): “Aucun parti, aucun chef n’a donné l’impression de pouvoir fournir à Montréal le leadership dont elle a désespérément besoin. … Lors des élections municipales de 2001 et de 2005, La Presse a accordé son appui à Gérald Tremblay. Depuis, le maire s’est dévoué à sa ville. … Louise Harel n’a pas su offrir une vision claire pour l’avenir de la métropole. … L’aptitude de Mme Harel à manier le balai est devenue beaucoup plus incertaine à la suite des révélations faites au sujet du comportement de Benoit Labonté, son bras droit jusqu’à il y a quelques jours. … Est-il nécessaire que le maire de Montréal parle anglais? Non… mais presque. … À nos yeux, Louise Harel ne satisfait pas aux exigences du poste. … Certains volets de la personnalité de M. Bergeron sont trop inquiétants pour qu’on lui confie la mairie.”

For council

The Gazette did not endorse any specific candidates for city council, but did suggest looking at individual candidates instead of party names, and encouraged people to look at independent candidates and “borough parties”

La Presse’s André Pratte listed several names from each party in his editorial, which makes up most of the list below.

Union Montreal

  • Alan DeSousa (La Presse)
  • Michel Labrecque (La Presse)
  • André Lavallée (La Presse)

Vision Montreal

  • Élaine Ayotte (La Presse)
  • Harry Delva (La Presse)
  • Pierre Lampron (La Presse)
  • Réal Ménard (La Presse)
  • David Hanna (Jeremy Searle, West End Times)

Projet Montréal

  • Étienne Coutu (La Presse)
  • Carole Dupuis (La Presse)
  • Josée Duplessis (La Presse)
  • Alex Norris (Mike Boone, The Gazette)

Independent

Alex Norris (a former journalist) also got the endorsement of Thomas Mulcair.

Did I miss any? Be sure to let me know before tomorrow.

Fagstein’s endorsement

Of course, you’re all wondering who I’m endorsing in this election. As if the answer isn’t obvious already, I’ll give the official word in this video:

YouTube

Don’t forget to vote.

| Montreal

Now it gets interesting

From Friday's La Presse

From Friday's La Presse

The first opinion polling after the Labonté scandal shows the three parties really neck and neck (and neck). Though Harel comes out on top, the real story is Richard Bergeron, whose party is living the wet dream of being a contender.

According to the poll, the number of undecideds has plummeted from 30% to 10%.

Election day is Sunday, and (as a journalist who will spend the night in the newsroom) it’s gonna be fun.

| Montreal, Opinion

Time to have an adult conversation about municipal corruption

Before a week ago, Benoit Labonté liked the attention.

But then, journalists started to discover things about him.

The timing wasn’t a coincidence. According to anonymous sources that came forward, Labonté’s constant criticism of Mayor Gérald Tremblay and his Union Montreal party as being corrupt was a hypocrisy too outrageous not to be challenged.

When reports by Rue Frontenac’s Fabrice de Pierrebourg (confirmed by Radio-Canada but ignored by TVA) and TVA’s Paul Laroque came out that Labonté asked for and received large cash contributions from city contractors (including the water-meter-infamous Tony Accurso) while he was running for the leadership of Vision Montreal in 2008, Labonté’s first reaction was from the standard politician playbook: deny, deny, deny.

It’s a no-brainer. Either he’s telling the truth that this is a smear campaign against him, or he’s lying. But if he’s lying, then the crime will destroy his political career and nobody will care about the coverup.

When Labonté said he would step down, supposedly to prevent being a distraction to his party, it was pretty obvious to everyone he was guilty. Innocent people don’t resign during an election campaign because of false charges.

But the media had to play along. Without absolute proof of his guilt, they couldn’t report what they were all thinking privately.

When Louise Harel accused Rue Frontenac and others of outright lying, as if these news organizations would all risk their reputations on such a serious accusation without conclusive evidence, nobody could say that was bullshit. When she blamed Union Montreal for making up a story, the media had to assume that was a possibility. (Of course, Union Montreal could very well have had a hand in this story, but they certainly didn’t make it up.)

And so everyone had to act surprised when, a day later, Harel announced she asked Labonté to resign as a candidate for Vision Montreal. (Because the nomination period has ended, Harel could not replace Labonté on the ballot. So the Ste. Marie district of Ville-Marie will have no Vision Montreal city councillor to vote for.)

No apologies

During her press conference, Harel made it a point to “saluer” the work of investigative journalists, supposedly the same ones she had called liars the day before. She offered no apology for attacking their reputations the day before.

Neither did Labonté, who went tell-all in an interview with Radio-Canada television four days later.

I’m sure Rue Frontenac, TVA and Radio-Canada won’t lose any sleep over it. But Harel and Labonté called them liars. They threatened to sue. They attacked the integrity of these organizations. Even though Labonté still denies taking money, it’s clear he attacked them to save his own skin. Don’t they deserve an apology?

They didn’t get one that I could see, even though Labonté did his interview ostensibly to save his reputation.

Only a politician would think he could save his reputation while at the same time admitting he outright lied to people about his integrity.

And yet, journalists are treating his two-hour interview (which Radio-Canada has decided to show excerpts of but not air or put online in its entirety yet) as if he’s come clean and can be trusted. Even though this interview contains such hard-to-believe statements as he lied to protect his party. So all the accusations he’s levelled against Gérald Tremblay suddenly have a new air of trustworthiness to them.

I certainly wouldn’t take Labonté’s accusations against Tremblay at face value, even now that he really has nothing to lose by finally being honest with us. Nor do I take the statements of disgruntled former Vision Montrealers that they warned Harel about Labonté with anything other than a giant grain of salt. But Labonté’s statement (supposedly quoting Tremblay) that this kind of corruption is what municipal politics is all about, that makes a lot of sense.

A poster plastered on the Champ de Mars metro window

A poster plastered on the Champ de Mars metro window

What now?

So now that we know the problem, what do we do? Gérald Tremblay thinks he can clean up city hall, an absurd statement if I’ve ever heard one. Louise Harel still thinks she can sweep up the corruption, even though she was clueless about her right-hand man.

And Richard Bergeron, whose party hasn’t been touched by a corruption scandal yet (notably because he’s the only member of that party who’s ever been elected) sees his numbers slowly climb in the polls.

I don’t think Gérald Tremblay is corrupt. Nor Louise Harel. Nor Richard Bergeron. But if the past few weeks and months have shown us anything, it’s that leaders can’t always account for the actions of members of their parties.

Both Tremblay and Harel were let down by high-ranking politicians. If they can’t trust them, how can they trust all 102 people running as city and borough councillors? Can any of the three parties really vouch for the integrity of that many people?

In Quebec City, the grandstanding is just as theatrical. Pauline Marois is calling for a public inquiry with a kind of urgency that suggests it can’t wait until after the elections. Jean Charest wants to wait for police investigations to end first, and hasn’t committed to anything.

The Everything Inquiry

We need a public inquiry. But it needs to be about more than municipal corruption, and it needs to be about more than Montreal. We need an inquiry into the whole system of municipal politics.

It’s clear from the actions of politicians of late that they simply can’t be trusted. We need to, from now on, work under a system that simply assumes that they are corrupt. Rather than punish people when the truth eventually comes out (because in many cases it doesn’t), we need a system that has roadblocks in place to stop every step of this.

I was under the impression such a system was already in place. There’s a reason that donations to politicians can’t be made by giving that politician money. Instead, all funds must go through the “agent officiel”, who keeps track of it. If such a system isn’t in place for leadership campaigns, or for parties in general outside of election periods, then it needs to be.

According to Vision Montreal’s website, the party has raised $300,000 from 1,180 donors. Union Montreal has raised about $105,000 from 297 donors (though that list hasn’t been updated in two weeks). I don’t know if that’s enough to run an election in a city this size (even if you’re not putting up posters). It’s $1,000-$3,000 per candidate.

Not only do I not know if I can trust that this represents all the money going into party coffers, I can’t trust that all this money really originates from the people named in those lists. And I don’t know who those people are. I don’t have time to call 1,000 people and ask if they have any connections with the construction industry.

This inquiry also needs to look to the other side of the equation. If politicians are getting money off the books, how can they spend this money without arising suspicion? Is the money being laundered somehow? Are they buying things outside the official party structure? If so, measures need to be in place to stop it.

We also need to take a step back and ask ourselves if the party system in general makes sense in municipal politics. We need to ask if political parties should be able to accept donations or if they should be entirely funded by the government (presumably based on how many votes they got the last time). We need to look at the way construction contracts are assigned. We need to ask if the contracting of construction work (rather than doing things in-house) makes sense.

In short, we need to look at everything.

Nine days before the election, it’s too late to start now. But starting Nov. 2, the file needs to be opened. The problem is too systemic for whoever is elected mayor to fix it from the inside, no matter their honourable intentions. And you can bet it’s in a lot more places than Montreal.

Of course, there’s no need to take my word for it. The Gazette’s City Eye blog is developing a top 10 list of things to do to combat corruption, taking suggestions from the audience and talking to experts. #1 on the list is the public inquiry, but other items are worthy of note.

| Montreal, Technology

Projet mobilizes the Internet mob

If you notice that online polls are biased heavily toward Projet Montréal, it’s partially because that party’s supporters are young and Internet-connected, and partially because Projet Montréal is pushing its members through Twitter and Facebook to tip the scales of those polls.

Because, in the grand scheme of things, this is where a political party should be focusing its efforts.

Hey, it worked for Ron Paul and Lyndon Larouche, didn’t it?

| Montreal, Technology

Ile Sans Fil in the park

Both Union Montreal and Vision Montreal have an element on their platforms that some technologically-inclined Montrealers might find interesting: free (or cheap) wireless Internet access in public parks and other public areas.

The idea isn’t new. The city first approached the volunteer group Ile Sans Fil more than two years ago to talk about setting up such a system. Ile Sans Fil provides free wireless Internet through more than 150 access points in the city, most through places like coffee shops who pay ISF a small fee.

The city has even conducted studies and hearings on the subject, and a presentation given in November 2007 resulted in only one comment, in support of the project. In a report, filed at the beginning of 2008 (PDF), the city’s commission on economic development recommended setting up a network with Ile Sans Fil.

For various reasons internal to the city’s operation, this issue has been sitting on a shelf since then. ISF even appealed to the public in August 2008, (perhaps prematurely), though specifying that the group wasn’t in danger if the deal fell through. ISF were expecting a call for tenders earlier this year on a free wifi project, which it would then bid on and be a clear favourite for, but it never came.

Both Tremblay and Harel should be somewhat embarrassed to have this on their platforms. Tremblay because the city hasn’t acted on this yet despite the preliminary work being done, and Harel because it was an idea of the Tremblay administration that her party has now stolen.

| Montreal, Opinion, Web design

Dear “Friends of Louise Harel”

Friends of Louise Harel

Friends of Louise Harel

Good for you with the website rallying anglos to the defence of Louise Harel. Providing a new voice in the election campaign is always welcome. And you’re getting the francophone media to use anglo headlines, which is always a plus.

Here’s the thing: Maybe people would believe you more about the surge of Montrealers from ethnic communities who have come out in support of her if the pictures on your website weren’t stock photos from a U.K.-based stock photo service.

These aren’t Montrealers, nor are they friends of Louise Harel, so why are there pictures of them on your website? Does Harel not have enough real friends that you’ve had to import pictures of fake ones?

UPDATE (Oct. 5): And I see you’re also plagiarizing blog posts. (Original, FOLH version)

| Montreal, Technology

Montreal parties and copyright

The four major parties vying for control of Montreal city hall (yeah, let’s go ahead and include Louise O’Sullivan) all seemed to have embraced the new online trends. They all have Facebook and Twitter (though some use the latter more than others). The two top contenders also have YouTube channels and upload official candidate photos and campaign photos to Flickr.

But, I wondered, do they really have a firm grasp of social media? We’ll set aside the fact that none of the four websites is fully bilingual, and move on to the fine print: how do the four parties handle copyright?

Since these are campaign websites, one would expect they would want to encourage dissemination of their pictures, slogans and press releases as much as possible. But that’s not exactly the case.

  • Union Montreal is the only party to release its content (Union Montreal’s fine print is still French-only) under a Creative Commons license, though it is the most restrictive of such licenses. It does not allow commercial use of the content (which could conceivably mean not publishing candidate photos in commercial media), nor the creation of derivative works (which would prevent activists from creating mashups of those photos). Also, all the party’s photos uploaded to Flickr are still marked “all rights reserved”, which is the default copyright license.
  • Vision Montreal’s fine print (the only one available in English, ironically), is complete boilerplate legalese: “All content, including texts, articles, photos, images and illustrations, belongs to Vision Montréal or the appropriate authors. It is forbidden to modify, copy, distribute, broadcast, transmit, represent, reproduce, publish, concede under license, transfer or sell said content without prior authorization from Vision Montréal or its appropriate authors.”
  • Projet Montréal’s website has no fine print, no indication of a copyright notice, in either language.
  • Parti Montréal Ville-Marie (Louise O’Sullivan’s party) is vague about its copyright license, saying that use and reproduction of its content can be used only for journalistic and activist purposes.

If these parties want bloggers and others to promote them, especially online, they need to be a bit more permissive than that.