Updates from November, 2017 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Kate 12:08 on 2017-11-30 Permalink | Reply  

    Montreal wants a cut of the tax grab coming when cannabis is legalized for sale.

    • Ephraim 16:43 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      This city needs to learn economics… it’s never going to get a penny of that money.

      Now, if you want to make some easy money, ask for a 20% tax on all transient rentals under 30 days for those who are unlicenced (ie not paying commercial property tax). It will either bring money in, or it will end the illegal transient rentals and free up apartments. It’s cheaper than trying to collect it as property tax, doesn’t cost much to administer and it isn’t off the backs of any Montrealer, except those running illegal untaxed businesses and let’s face it, there isn’t that much sympathy for those who are tax cheating anyway. The only people paying it are the tourists, who don’t really vote here.

    • steph 18:11 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      @Ephraim .. The tax cheaters live here and they vote…

    • Ephraim 21:09 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      @steph – Yes, but the vast majority who have to pay more tax because of them…. aren’t going to pity them. It’s 0.5% or less of the population… not enough to make any government care. (If the government wants more, they could simply require T4As be issued by third parties or a new form issued by the banks for all transfers over $1000 per year. Though, the CRA has already requested documents from PayPal for an accounts with over $1000 per year since 2014, if I remember correctly.

  • Kate 12:07 on 2017-11-30 Permalink | Reply  

    A beam from the Turcot has just fallen down and St-Patrick Street is blocked. At least nobody got hurt, going by this brief TVA report, which plays video.

    • JaneyB 20:41 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      Reassuringly (in a way) “Nothing fell,” said Transport Quebec spokesperson in the Gazette. The crane couldn’t support the weight during the dismantling of a highway section so let it down gently. We have a very nuanced relationship to gravity in this city lol.

    • David Speller 21:53 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      Probably what happened was they committed the load to the crane and the operator quickly realized that it was beyond the machine’s ability to manipulate safely so he just set it down where it was. Definitely the smartest option given the circumstances. Blame the engineer who did the weight calculations.

  • Kate 12:03 on 2017-11-30 Permalink | Reply  

    Two paramedics who got the fright of their lives during an incident in the metro will receive more than half a million dollars each from the STM. Neither has been able to do their old ambulance job since the incident.

    • Blork 14:47 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      I find it amazing that paramedics have the gruesome job of untangling and removing bodies who are killed by Metro cars. You’d think that would be the job of some specialized coroner technicians or whatever.

    • Ephraim 16:45 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      From my understanding Blork, most of those who do it, aren’t killed by the Metro cars, they slip under most of the time. There are about 15 per year and 2/3rd survive.

    • Blork 17:02 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      True. But you’d think that “rescue injured person” and “extricate tangled dead body” would be different jobs done by different people.

    • Raymond Lutz 17:44 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      We won’t have those problems with the Hyperloop link, gratefully.

    • Faiz Imam 19:56 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      OMG can we stop it with the Hyperloop nonsense.

      I say that as a fan of the idea and I hope it works out. But the extent to which people think its going to be ready anytime soon and/or it can solve every mobility problem from getting to Vancouver to getting your milk at the corner store is getting tiresome.

      Concerning this matter, HL will never be useful for subway use. the logistics don’t make sense.

      Not to mention, all we need to solve this particular issue is doors on all stops.

      All future stations be it the pink line, REM or anything else, will definitely have those. Problem is retrofitting the existing lines is a challenge. But it’s one that is very much solvable.

      But more importantly, rail tech takes DECADES to go from the page to real world use. Maglevs are still not a widely used thing, despite working since the 70’s.

      Bringing that idea up in the context of todays problems is simply a way to say we shouldn’t deal with them.


    • Kevin 20:39 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      People don’t realize how slow the metro travels. If they did, nobody would jump in front of one.

      The STM should put up signs advertising that 2/3 of people survive with debilitating injuries after jumping onto the tracks.

    • steph 20:41 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      @ Faiz, They can’t install doors on the platforms now because the doors on the Azur cars and old cars don’t line up. Hopefully once they’re all Azur they’ll get it done. They’ve also removed platform arrow guides that let people embarking in to not stand in front of the door because of this “problem”.

    • Blork 20:59 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      Kevin, it’s a matter of where you are on the platform. If you’re standing at the tail end, the Metro is going really fast when it enters the station, so …

    • Ephraim 21:14 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      @Blork – Who you going to call? Likely a problem until there is an official declaration of death.

      In any case, this is all horrible stuff… the driver themselves is also likely in shock, though there was little if anything they could do. It’s really a pretty horrible way to do yourself in, it ruins so many lives.

    • Blork 21:39 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      Ephraim, no doubt the paramedics should be called, but if it’s clear that the victim is dead then you’d think it becomes a coroner issue, and you’d think the coroner has people who specialize in things like this.

      All this is my assumption, based on the article, that the paramedics are charged with extricating a clearly deceased body, which doesn’t seem right. Those guys have enough on their minds, seeing human misery all day every day, for low wages, and I imagine the only thing that keeps them from going bonkers is the idea that they’re helping people. So you’re going to take these guys and send them under a Metro car to remove a body who is clearly beyond help?

      No. It should be a coroner issue by then, in which case they send people who are used to dealing with the deceased, and who only have to do gruesome jobs like this every now and then.

      Maybe it’s already like that, but this article implies it is not.

    • ant6n 22:23 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      Seems like the issue is that there was no STM guy near the paramedics to act as a liaison to the metro operations.

    • Chris 23:07 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      I don’t want to be an obnoxious pedant :), but: Montreal doesn’t have paramedics, we have EMTs. The latter is a lower level of training. They can’t do intubations, IVs, give medication, ECGs, etc. The paramedics in Ontario for example *can* do these things, they have more training and of course cost more to the system.

    • Raymond Lutz 01:54 on 2017-12-01 Permalink

      We can barely open the doors of some metro stations because of the wind, I can’t even imagine what It will take to force open Hyperloop station doors because of the vacuum!

    • Kate 02:36 on 2017-12-01 Permalink

      I’ve seen photos of stations with platform doors and hate it. Instead of the stations feeling open, you feel like you’re crammed into this nasty narrow space. I hope they never do it. Elevators in all the stations will take decades and those are far more important.

      The metro really is slow. Sometimes I can’t believe how long it takes to chug e.g. from Villa‑Maria down to Vendôme.

      Chris: OK, EMTs then. I even knew that, but it wasn’t key to the story and “paramedic” came to mind first.

    • ant6n 11:25 on 2017-12-01 Permalink

      I find the Montreal metro to be rather fast, in comparison to other systems, especially given the high stop density.

    • CE 14:51 on 2017-12-01 Permalink

      Where I now live, the BRT system has sliding doors that open when the bus arrives and they’re terrible. When they break down (which is often) it causes chaos as people shift to the other doors or try to pry open the broken ones. With the amount of dirt and little pebbles that get into the metro during the winter, I can see them getting clogged and breaking down often.

      I think the distance between Villa‑Maria and Vendôme is the second longest on the island which would explain the time it takes (between Vendôme and Place St-Henri is the longest due to Westmount not wanting a station).

    • ant6n 12:52 on 2017-12-02 Permalink

      where’s that? I think weather is a big issue — it will be for the REM.
      But the Montreal Metro is completely closed.

    • CE 15:03 on 2017-12-02 Permalink

      @ant6n in Bogotá on the TransMilenio system. A big reason for the doors is to keep people from running across the road and jumping into the station to avoid the fare but also because the stations sometimes get so full that there’s a risk of everyone spilling out if the doors aren’t closed. Weather isn’t really an issue here.

  • Kate 02:51 on 2017-11-30 Permalink | Reply  

    CBC has a rather fancy multimedia feature on Leonard Cohen and Montreal.

  • Kate 00:49 on 2017-11-30 Permalink | Reply  

    The common Montreal commercial greeting “Bonjour! Hi!” is ruffling feelings in Quebec City. Philippe Couillard says the issue of French at work doesn’t worry him and that squabbling over the greeting is silly. TVA link plays video.

    Some of this is spinning off the recent Adidas store incident, some from Statistics Canada’s revelation that the proportion of exclusively French-speaking workplaces is declining and probably some from a recent report that francisation is not working very well on immigrants.

    • Jack 01:10 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      Bonjour- Hi will drive 7 days of “news” , what does that say about all of us ?

    • MtlWeb39 02:21 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      They should be more concerned about the businesses on Ste Catherine saying Bye-Bye.

    • Kate 02:54 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      Ste-Catherine is doing quite well right now. There was a time it was kind of down, but it’s fine now, although once the city starts digging it up I’m not sure if that will last.

    • Ephraim 12:48 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      Maybe we should all just go back a few hundred years and just say “Tansi” when people come in.

      This is the politics of division. It’s old and tired. It’s of the past. How many of those in their 20s and 30s actually care about this kind of stuff?

    • Kate 13:24 on 2017-11-30 Permalink


    • Ian 13:42 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      Cree 😉

    • Jack 16:19 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      Bonjour-Hi is currently being debated in the National Assembly, speaking English in public is now considered an “ irritant” and should be discouraged.

    • Jack 18:29 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      Ok I’m watching the National Assembly debate on Bonjour-Hi and it is the funniest thing since “Curb your Enthusiasm’s” second season. However isnt today the day that Marcel Forget, the commissioner in charge of corporate integrity audits in Quebec’s anti-corruption unit (UPAC) got canned.His second job was as a stock broker, where he sold penny stocks to fellow cops that tanked.. While his “primary” job function as a Police Captain was to verify if companies doing business with the Quebec government were not manipulating their own stocks and financial records. Quebec is a truly distinct society.

    • Kevin 20:41 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      In a competent democracy politicians would be discussing that.
      Instead the perpetually insecure PQ prefers to discuss the raging threat that is 8% of the population.

    • Ian 20:57 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      More cynical people might suspect them of misdirection.

    • Blork 20:59 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      I’m just amazed that someone is watching a National Assembly debate. #yawn

    • Frank Schlesser 21:41 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      I suppose Santa Claus will not be able to say “Ho Ho Ho !!” in Quebec ..instead he´ll say ” Allô, salut. allô !”

    • Jack 22:53 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      @ Blork I am a glutton for punishment, but today was truly hilarious. Two letters, one greeting….and an entire legislature with 125 members debating whether in the western part of a city with almost a million English speakers….come on that’s Monty Python.

  • Kate 12:08 on 2017-11-29 Permalink | Reply  

    The relatively new transport minister is a nutbar. He’s not satisfied with the idea of a fast bullet train between Quebec and Montreal, but wants some new thing that will ring down the ages with its magnificence. I don’t like the idea of helping pay for this folly. What we need is non-glamorous transit solutions like more buses for Montreal’s east end, not millions or billions spent developing some dead-end technology to show that Québec sait faire.

    • JIm 12:19 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      I do agree with you. It believe is is never wrong to think big, but not as a diversion tactic — but hey, politics, their promises, even unrealistic, better sound great.

    • ant6n 13:26 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      I like this analysis in Radio Canada: La technologie ou les besoins?

    • Raymond Lutz 13:34 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Notre système de démocratie représentative est schizophrène et nos ‘dirigeants’ atteints d’hubris. Ils conçoivent (et nous font payer) des projets irréalistes et grandioses, aussi pertinents et adéquats qu’un distributeur de jus connecté ou une théière WIFI avec lecteur RFID.

    • Ephraim 14:08 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      A monorail is old technology anyway… hyperloop! We could make Quebec City into a suburb.

    • Raymond Lutz 14:11 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      “We could make Quebec City into a suburb” et les membres de La Meute pourraient venir manifester à Montréal tous les weekends!

    • Ephraim 14:20 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Raymond – First time I saw Nazi paraphernalia (Swastikas) for sale was in Quebec city at the mall. Wouldn’t have been tolerated in Montreal for even an hour… it took someone from Montreal to notice it for something to be done.

    • Paul 14:46 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Eph – not true, I saw nazi paraphernalia (including a huge wooden carving, about the size of a headboard) being sold at an auction house in HOMA last spring. A friend who attended the auction said that all items sold to bidders over the phone (too ashamed to show their face).

    • Raymond Lutz 14:57 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Paul et Ephraim, quelles sont les lois locales concernant les symboles Nazis? Je crois savoir qu’en France (Europe?) leur vente, affichage etc… sont carrément interdits, non?

    • Raymond Lutz 15:09 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Of course, this thread is drifting slightly from the original post…. 😎 But I find this subject so fascinating: what symbols (and discourses) do we socially tolerate or ban? What about the confederated flag? The niqab? The Iron Cross? Can we joke about killing people?

    • Tee Owe 15:14 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      The swastika is not originally a Nazi symbol, they appropriated it, from the Hindus I think – I seem to remember a thread about this on here, no? But yes, we’re way off-topic – Kate, feel free to moderate me away

    • Mathieu 15:51 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Just to be accurate here, the minister is pitching for some kind of high speed transit while Via is offering regular speed trains; that’s what he considers not satisfactory. I wouldn’t say I agree with him on that, but that’s not as crazy as if he was opposed to a TGV paid by the federal to build a monorail.

    • Raymond Lutz 16:05 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      The LRC can go at 140 km/h on certain stretches. So all we need to do is install reserved rails that won’t distort with soil movements and temp variations (I know, mucho $$). 140 km/h c’est Mtl-Québec en 1hr52 .

    • mb 16:53 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      140 km/h is not very impressive. That’s the speed of “old” trains in Europe… 1h52, that’s Paris-Lyon (480 km) with the TGV inaugurated in … 1981!

    • Raymond Lutz 16:58 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      mb, je ne tentais pas d’impressionner personne, au contraire… je voulais montrer que les moyens actuels suffisent pleinement. Who needs to ride between Mtl and Quebec at TGV speed? Geez, prenez-vous un livre, un journal, une tablette pour occuper ‘efficacement’ votre temps si précieux.

    • ant6n 18:16 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      “…but that’s not as crazy as if he was opposed to a TGV paid by the federal to build a monorail.”

      It’s actually pretty much like that. They’ve said they don’t what “light rail” (whatever the heck that means). Remember that VIA wants to renew rolling stock which could do 160km/h under diesel and 200km/h under wire. They came up with that idea after pitching HSR for 30 years and getting no support – since TGF has a much better economic return (in terms of cost vs return), they could almost do it themselves.

      The correct (quickest/most economic/least risky) thing to do for the Liberals, if they want a high speed link between Montreal and Quebec would be to jump on TGF and offer to pay for the electrification, and maybe some curve straightenings, and — more importantly — allow TGF to access the Mont-Royal tunnel. Because whatever technology they pick, downtown access is the most important issue.

      Basically VIA had been proposing HSR for 30 years and getting no support, now that they’ve come up with a much more economic proposal that they could do themselves, the government is actively fighting them. Pretty ridiculous.

    • Patrick 18:31 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      The reality QC politicians don’t like to acknowledge is that Quebec City is just too small a city warrant investing in a TGV. Think of its big “international” airport that struggles to get business. Some smart upgrades to the regular VIA service–and in my experience one big problem is how slow it is getting in/out of the cities, the straightaways are easier– would already be a big improvement.

    • ant6n 18:45 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      200km/h is “high-speed-rail”, in the context of updating existing lines. Between Quebec and Montreal, with a stop at Trois-Riviere and possibly a non-central stop in Montreal, you hit diminishing returns after 250km/h anyway – which may give you a running time closer to 90 minutes (a large amount of the time would be spent in the metropolitan areas).

      I can’t believe how many people are eating this bullshit. It’s like the stadium and Mirabel wasn’t enough.

    • Ephraim 20:56 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      To the subject at hand, high speed hyperloop might be needed between Montreal and Toronto, but Quebec city? Maybe what we need to Quebec city is a faster LRC train, but that would involve finally building tracks for VIA rather than renting usage for VIA rail. Not a monorail. That’s a showboat. LRC maxes out at about 150km/h so maybe 1 hour and 45 minutes. TGV is about 300km/h, so just under 1 hour between the two cities. That’s almost commute times. Hyperloop is supposedly around 750km/h, so that would be down to about 20 to 25 minutes. At the difference between 1h and 30m, it’s not significant enough to really worry about. Toronto would be 1 hour and 50 minutes at TGV speeds and 45 minutes at hyperloop speeds. But for TGV speeds, you need a new track with wide turns to allow the speed, but a lot more feasible.

      @Tee Owe The swastika is different than the sun icon. Firstly, because generally the sun icon used in the Indian subcontinent and SE Asia is usually in the other direction, but even when it is in the same direction, it is also square and not on a corner. I was in a temple in Thailand that was covered in them, all square, none on the corner. The problem with this stuff is that while it isn’t illegal, the police can open a dossier on you with a note to watch for hate crimes, which can follow you forever. Remember that this does fall under out hate crimes laws and it can even follow the person selling it in their stores. Sometimes they may not even mean anything by it and still manage to offend people… like Cavalia… dressing everyone as Cossacks… when my great grandfather was murdered by them.

    • ant6n 22:38 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Why do people talk about “Hyperloop” like it’s something that exists?

      Hey, I think we shouldn’t invest in any of these old school transportation things anymore, just use beaming.

    • Kate 01:54 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      Swastikas: To my knowledge it’s illegal to sell Nazi memorabilia or even display the swastika in Germany and possibly other European countries. I don’t believe it’s illegal here, but it’s so frowned upon that a trade in such things can only exist on the down low.

    • Ephraim 12:51 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      The hyperloop is about as much of a dream as this monorail. Heck, we have trouble getting metro cars built on time… if we are going to dream, it should at least be in technicolour.

    • ant6n 15:43 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      This is a super unhelpful framing pretending these are the same. Metro trains are real, hundreds of thousands of cars exist, the azur is real and running in Montreal. ‘Hyperloop’ and ‘mgv’ do not exist at best, are likely distractions, and investment scams at worst.

    • Ephraim 16:51 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      Metro trains exist, so do high speed rail and light rail. Toronto is still waiting on delivery of rolling stock and how far behind is Azur? And Flexity Outlook?

    • Ephraim 16:53 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      Oh and Flexity Freedom? Metrolinx turned to Alstom because Bombardier is so far behind. And we overpaid for Azur.

    • ant6n 17:05 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      I think you’re being deliberately obtuse. All of these things are real things.

      Hyperloop and MGV are not real things.

      It’s really not that difficult. But by mixing them both up as “dreams”, equating them together, gives scam artists who want to negatively influence transportation policy in Quebec unnecessary credibility.

    • Ephraim 21:36 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      So, the Shanghai Maglev train isn’t real? The Japanese are already building their SCMaglev line, slowly (just 10 more years to go until opening).

      Now Hyperloop is entirely hypothetical, but there is some interesting technology to come out of it and thoughts, including the Boring Company, even if they really haven’t started on anything other than tunnels.

      Though, I have to admit that every time I look at a lightbulb I still wonder why we haven’t moved away from the Edison Screw (ES). We don’t need the bulb format since we moved to LED and yet we can’t seem to manage to think beyond the bulb. We could light out world entirely differently today, but we can’t manage to dream beyond a bulb that we no longer need. No vacuum needed anymore, no glass, etc. Nothing wrong with dreaming… had they not dreamed, we would still be in the dark.

    • ant6n 23:45 on 2017-11-30 Permalink

      Shanghai Maglev != “MGV”. The Shanghai Maglev was an experiment — and it failed (now the Chinese have 30km of Maglev, and 22,000km of high speed rail).

      We’ll know whether the Japanese Maglev will pan out, if we’re lucky, by 2027.

      Now you’re mixing up three levels of “dreaming” (existing but delayed on deliveries, experimental, speculative).

      And yes there’s is something wrong with this “dreaming”, when it’s used to deliberately muddy the thinking of our transportation policy that’s supposed to give us better transportation alternatives between Quebec and Montreal, but that’s getting derailed by you pod-people.

    • Ephraim 01:51 on 2017-12-01 Permalink

      The Quebec government is full of this “we will lead the world” nonsense. They did the same thing when they set up the casino, saying that they would run a casino better than anyone else and would be able to export the knowledge.

      The reality, the Quebec casinos aren’t well managed or run. They don’t fulfil their original objectives, since they bring in locals and not tourists. And they don’t attract “whales” at all. Oh and then we hired a Frenchman to open a restaurant instead of using our own famous restaurateurs.

      The reality is that we are pretty damn horrible at this stuff. Bombardier can’t deliver what it promises and Flexity Freedom is so far behind that Alstom got the next order. We dump enormous money into that industry not just by direct subsidy, but the government signed the Azur contract even though it knew that it was severely overpaying. The last metro extension came in WAY over budget. We really don’t do these things well. Maybe it’s time to admit it and just buy the technology from those who do it better.

  • Kate 12:02 on 2017-11-29 Permalink | Reply  

    The story of the doctor missing from his downtown practice gets weirder. It’s impossible to discern from this account whether the man is in real trouble, or having some kind of paranoid breakdown.

  • Kate 11:59 on 2017-11-29 Permalink | Reply  

    Police don’t welcome the idea of a memorial to Fredy Villanueva, which would by its very existence be a reminder of a fatal police error.

    • Ian 15:52 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      The very notion of a monument to a victim of police brutality is not supported by la Fraternité des policiers de Montréal? What a surprise.

    • John B 16:01 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Didn’t Fredy Villanueva jump on the officer’s back? We can argue about whether the police should have been even speaking to the group, but if we’re looking for a police brutality memorial any of 728’s victims would be more sympathetic, and less controversial.

    • david100 18:47 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      No, he didn’t jump on him. What happened was that the cops rolled up on this gang, took their names and told them to move along, Dany Villaneuva, who’s a real criminal, got in their faces dressing them down and showing off, so one of the cops decided to put him in cuffs. Then he went ballistic struggling with the first cop, so both cops started grappling with him. They took him down to the ground, and it was one of the cops that was on his back, not vice versa. The gang members surrounded them, shouting at the cops then, as Dany was punching and kicking the cops as he resisted arrest, Freddy jumped into the fray, apparently trying to pull the shooting cop off his brother. The shooting cop took this as an aggressive act and opened fire. Basically, it was a shit show. My pet theory is that Dany was used to fighting with guards in prison, and didn’t realize that cops are a different animal, and then Freddy decided to jump in because he took Dany’s lead. They must have been drunk/on drugs, going on pure adrenaline, or just totally unaware of how to interact with cops to behave that way, because surely they wouldn’t act that way with the cops back home in Honduras.

      Anyway, the coroner recommended that the cops be trained how to let some stupid crap from these idiot youths go, and that the youths be given some sort of instruction on how to comply with lawful orders by peace officers.

      Personally, I agree with you John that Trudel’s victims would be a lot better for recognition, given how clearly innocent of wrongdoing the people she attacked were. That one would for sure have ended up in a shooting had they kept her on. I think a statue of that guy with the ponytail that she had in a headlock would be great.

    • Kevin 18:52 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      The coroner’s report is very clear.

      The officers walked up to Dany and asked for ID.
      Dany refused, then started screaming and crying.
      The officers went to place him in handcuffs and he struggled.
      Fredy then jumped on Constable Lapointe and put him in a headlock.

      That is when Lapointe fired. Start to finish in about a minute.

  • Kate 11:56 on 2017-11-29 Permalink | Reply  

    The percentage of vacant apartments is falling in Montreal; rents all across Canada are rising much faster than inflation.

  • Kate 03:22 on 2017-11-29 Permalink | Reply  

    A new petroleum terminal planned down the east end will be using a pipeline dating back to 1952 although assessment of the project doesn’t take this aging equipment into account.

    • Roman 04:04 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      What could go wrong?

  • Kate 01:14 on 2017-11-29 Permalink | Reply  

    There was a truck accident in the tunnel at rush hour Tuesday that caused a huge traffic mess all over via the domino effect. TVA says it was infernale: report plays video.

  • Kate 01:12 on 2017-11-29 Permalink | Reply  

    Molson is moving operations to Longueuil, spending half a billion bucks to build a new brewery near St-Hubert airport. TVA spins this that Valérie Plante couldn’t convince Molson to stay in Montreal, but the decision was likely made by the board long before her election. Do we really think a second Coderre term would’ve changed their minds, despite Coderre’s slavish courting of Evenko? TVA link plays video.

    • Bert 01:26 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Molson moving to the south shore was telegraphed this summer in initial announcements of establishing a new production facility. Something like “in the montreal region”.

    • Kate 02:53 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      I’d bet at least half the workers live on the south shore already anyway.

    • Jack 03:01 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      I’d bet way more than half, the Union President was smiling. He’ll be smiling less when new factory automation cuts his workforce in half. I think this provides a great opportunity to take that waterfront back and look at development in Rotterdam, Malmo and Copenhagen and see how they’ve mixed commercial,residential and all public access waterfront. Another thing who still drinks that beer ?

    • Faiz Imam 04:33 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Plante was already talking today about planning a new neighborhood on the site. mixed use, residences and some commercial, all the good words.

      It’s mix between pretty run down and low value industrial, and the exclusive residences towards old Montreal. But if you take into account the waterfront view (slightly compromised by the active port) I’d expect developers salivating about building toward the luxury end of the market.

      Ideal case study to see if plante and project Montreal can materially change any of that.

      That area, along with Maison radio-canada, is a dead-zone if you don’t actually have business there. This could be a wonderful expansion of the city and an opportunity to bring a proper urban fabric back. Repair many of the mistakes of the last century.

    • ant6n 09:39 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Lack of transportation, and the urban barriers due to the highway as well as the radio Canada area are huge concerns. So is protection of heritage industrial buildings.
      Theres a lot that can go wrong, so I’d encourage everybody to closely watch this rather than preemptively congratulate supposed successes.

    • Chris 10:46 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Jack: why still drinks that *piss* you mean. Don’t insult real beer. 🙂

    • CE 13:07 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      That’s why the big breweries are buying up lots of micro-breweries. They just bought Trou du diable a few weeks ago.

    • Ian 16:04 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Six Pints also holds Creemore Springs, Granville Island, Belgian Moon (aka Blue Moon), Brasseur de Montreal (I really liked their Chi beer but it’s hard to find in stores now)…

      But a lot of “craft” beers are owned by big breweries. Ontario’s Sleeman’s bought Quebec’s Unibroue and then Sleeman got bought up by Sapporo some 10 years ago.

      AB InBev is one of the largest – check out all the brands they own: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AB_InBev_brands

  • Kate 01:04 on 2017-11-29 Permalink | Reply  

    A co-op of some kind has come forward and offered to cook up plans for a monorail if Quebec will fork over a quarter billion bucks for research.

    Look, it takes three hours to get to Quebec City. Whether you take a bus or a train, or drive, that’s how long it takes. Does anyone really need to shave an hour or 90 minutes off that time except politicians?

    • Lucas 02:04 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      I really can’t get over wasting this much money to connect Montreal to an economically marginal city.

      First connection priority has to be Toronto – the Montreal – Toronto city pair is where the money, people and future are.

      Montreal is already overburdened by the rest of the province, money should be spent to connect the city to nearby innovative, diverse and wealth-producing areas of North America outside the province.

    • Kevin 02:14 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      3 hours?!
      The first time I went to Quebec City was a couple months before I moved out west. My employer wanted me to drive to our Quebec City depot, pick up something, and bring it to the airport.

      I hightailed it home, grabbed my 35mm camera, and made it to Qc in 2 hours to start being touristy.

      I took two rolls of film as I toured the city and picked up the item during my unofficially long lunch, then made it to Dorval airport in 90 minutes.

      And that time back didn’t seem exceptional. I was going with the flow and there were many people going faster than I was.

    • Clément 02:23 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      FWIW, as a regular commuter between the 2 cities, I’d love to be able to make the trip in 90 minutes.

      However, as a tax payer and a person of sound mind, can we please not waste money on this? Does our cash strapped province really need to the test bench for some untested and unproven monorail (insert Simpsons joke here)?

      VIA Rail already has a seemingly realistic proposal of high-frequency trains on dedicated tracks that would cost a lot less AND serve the full Quebec-Windsor corridor.

      Kevin, it does take 3 hours. 2.5 if you drive slightly above the speed limit and hit 0 traffic. 3 to 3.5 hours by bus. 3 hours by train, unless you’re stuck behind a freight train. There’s no way you can drive from Quebec city to Dorval in 90 minutes. That 271 km according to google maps. 90 minutes would mean driving 180 km/h non-stop, end-to-end. Considering traffic at both ends, you’d need to drive 200 on the highway. that’s certainly not “going with the flow”.

    • GC 04:20 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      I’m with the general consensus here. For purely selfish reasons, I’d like the trip to be shorter because it’s not a terribly interesting one. However, the couple of times a year I do it–did I even do it in 2017?–don’t justify the expense and I’d like to see a study that would justify it for the general public. Toronto-Montreal seems like a higher priority corridor.

    • Kevin 06:28 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      I just checked the address and it’s 260 km from where I was to Trudeau airport’s cargo depot.
      I was driving stupidly fast but I was not the fastest car on the road.
      Plus it was the 90s, so traffic in the city was a lot lighter than it is today.

    • ant6n 09:44 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Conventional rail provides a possible upgrade path to a sub-2 hour connection. That’s what Ontario is doing west of Toronto.

    • Bert 13:12 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      There is a simpler way to shorten the trip time from Montreal to Quebec. Amalgamate Montreal in to everything up to Berthierville and Quebec everything up to Donnacona. That would cut 60-70km out of the trip?

  • Kate 12:01 on 2017-11-28 Permalink | Reply  

    Twenty women are hoping they can mount a class action suit against Gilbert Rozon, whom they all say has at some time sexually harassed or aggressed them.

    • david100 10:32 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Despite what people might think, class action lawsuits are not easy to get certified, and this one against a single person for a pattern of sexual misconduct, it’s going to be a real test of what the courts will wear. A more interesting angle on this than what the attorneys for the different sides would be a real expert, like a law professor or retired judge. Who knows, it might work, even though it seems pretty wild. At the very least, it will probably destroy Rozon’s reputation and drain money away from his companies. Also, putting Julie Snyder in the article and then saying that they don’t know if she’s involved in the class action suit, it strikes me as not so great journalism.

    • Kevin 14:30 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Both the lawsuit and the creation of the new comedy Festival are being done with the express purpose of trying to impoverish Gilbert Rozon. The Comedy Festival didn’t exist until he said he was going to be selling his shares and just for laughs

  • Kate 11:57 on 2017-11-28 Permalink | Reply  

    A group of gun nuts is going the extra mile. Not only will they be holding a rally this Saturday, they’ll be doing it in the park established as a memorial to the victims of Marc Lépine. Classy.

    Update: As the gun nuts must have expected, there’s been a chorus of disapproval.

    Second update: The group has decided not to hold its demonstration in the park, after getting a lot of free publicity. TVA link plays video.

    • Raymond Lutz 15:16 on 2017-11-28 Permalink

      Ouf, en lisant rapidement j’ai lu qu’ils établissaient un memorial _pour_ Marc Lépine! Mais quand même, c’est pas mal dégueulasse… Comment la ville peut-elle émettre un permis pour quelque chose d’aussi odieux? Comment les média mainstream pourraient dénoncer de tels actes sans les booster en leur offrant une belle visibilité? En parler _après_ ? C’est comme s’ils voulaient (les médias) créer un clash entre les gun nuts et les prohibitionnistes. Comme la police de Québec et celle de Charlottesville qui n’ont rien fait (et ont donc favorisé) l’affrontement nazis/antifa.

    • Kevin 16:24 on 2017-11-28 Permalink

      C’est officiel: il y a maintenant deux “silly seasons” pour les nouvelles à Québec. Summertime, and the month before Christmas.

    • Blork 17:59 on 2017-11-28 Permalink

      This is so ridiculous. They’re trying to present themselves as responsible gun owners in favour of gun controls for the mentally unstable, criminals, etc., but allowing for gun ownership for “responsible” people, blah blah blah.

      OK, that’s fine, but the sheer tone-deafness of their choice of location throws any appearance of being reasonable right out the window, and positions them as reactionary gun nuts.


    • John B 19:34 on 2017-11-28 Permalink

      The root argument of the gun-owners group, that every year Poly se Souvient uses the anniversary to push their agenda, and so responsible gun owners have a right to push back is fairly normal.

      However, the location was definitely chosen to provoke, and not all the gun group’s members are on board. For example, this is what one of the gun group members wrote about choosing the memorial park:

      «Des imbécillités du genre, ça ne fait que faire passer le détenteur de permis de possession et d’acquisition d’armes moyen pour un ostie de cave. Je comprends que tout le monde ici déteste les actions de Poly se souvient, mais d’aller faire un meetup/manifestation à cet endroit, à cette date et avec vos revendications, c’est d’envoyer un gros middle finger aux 14 personnes qui sont mortes et à leur famille.»

      He’s right. If they want to protest, fine, but they need leadership that’s going to do it in a way that doesn’t get them immediately written off as a bunch of gun nuts.

    • Clément 21:10 on 2017-11-28 Permalink

      @John B: What agenda is it that Poly se Souvient is pushing?

    • Kevin 21:20 on 2017-11-28 Permalink

      Poly Se Souvient wants strict gun control, including examinations and screenings for permits and renewal of permits, a ban on all military-style weapons, and an increase in checks for illegal weapons. .

    • Clément 21:45 on 2017-11-28 Permalink

      I honestly don’t understand how self-described “responsible gun-owners” can be against strict gun control, examinations and screenings.

      We need permits to drive cars, renovate a kitchen and replace windows, sell food and booze, operate a fork-lift, run a day-care, practice medicine, grow pot, own a dog and a million other things. Why would owning a gun be any different?

    • Chris 23:22 on 2017-11-28 Permalink

      Clément: agree or disagree, it’s still an agenda that they are pushing.

    • Bert 00:27 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Everyone tries to push an agenda. I am pushing an agenda. Look at an earlier post that seems to equate (legal) gun owners with having a mental illness (associated to a slang term).

      I will certainly agree that there is a distinct lack of tact in trying to leech off or hijack the event.

      Currently, you do need a permit to own a firearm and/or purchase ammunition. Walk in to any gun shop and you need to have a valid firearms acquisition permit. Buy online and the same information is required, along with other requirements.

    • John B 01:52 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      Clément: “I honestly don’t understand how self-described “responsible gun-owners” can be against strict gun control, examinations and screenings.”

      It’s just more of a pain for them, more papers to file & potentially screw up, more fees to pay. If, to get your opus card, you had to bring your passport for verification monthly, once a year fill out an “access to transport” form and mail it, with a $72 fee to some office in Quebec city, and, if you want the special service of being able to transfer from a bus to a metro you had to fill out a third form, you’d be grumpy too. This is a ridiculous example, but it boils down to the government making it more inconvenient & expensive to live their current lifestyle, so it makes sense for them to protest.

    • david100 10:46 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      ^ What makes sense is extra controls – as you describe – for permission to purchase and possess weapons that can cause the sort of harm that these can. Analogizing gun ownership to taking the train is the sort of bananas logic that makes people think that your lot is straight mentally ill. “I want to fire guns at things, why can’t I do that when people can go to restaurants or take the train? I’m being oppressed.”

      It’s lucky that the tiny group of people who actually want a more violent society in Quebec don’t have any power to effect their wild agenda. Being reared on American teevee is what it is.

    • John B 15:56 on 2017-11-29 Permalink

      I’m not saying we shouldn’t have extra controls on gun ownership. I’m saying that if you take something, (anything), that people do today, make it a bunch harder and/or more expensive to do it, people are going to be upset, and possibly protest.

      For an even more depressing example, a couple of years ago Quebec tried to lower the blood alcohol content limit when driving to match the rest of Canada. There was a lot of pushback and it was abandoned because Quebec “wasn’t ready” (I’m pretty sure those were the exact words of the transport minister at the time), for this kind of change. At least with guns there’s a good argument that they’re tools needed by people in certain situations, and the people that need them the most are most vulnerable to having them removed by over-regulation, with drunk driving there’s just victims with no upside.

Compose new post
Next post/Next comment
Previous post/Previous comment
Show/Hide comments
Go to top
Go to login
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Translate »