Updates from July, 2025 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Kate 18:15 on 2025-07-29 Permalink | Reply  

    Pierre Foglia, star columnist at La Presse for many years, has died. He was 84.

    Radio-Canada has his life story, and on Wednesday La Presse is going all out to remember and mourn his voluntary passing after a long illness. As Isabelle Hachey writes, “Pierre Foglia était le meilleur. Le maître incontesté de la chronique au Québec, au Canada et au-delà des frontières connues.”

    Foglia’s column about the death of his father in 1993 was reposted to X. Worth reading.

    I can’t link to everything La Presse is posting – there’s much more. Everyone at the paper has something to say.

     

    • DeWolf 10:12 on 2025-07-30 Permalink

      Apparently he applied for visas to both Australia and Canada and only came here because he met his future partner on vacation in Mexico. Imagine if he’d become a beloved Australian columnist instead… hard to fathom.

    • Kate 11:49 on 2025-07-30 Permalink

      Parallel reality fodder for sure.

    • Orr 18:32 on 2025-07-30 Permalink

      Pierre Foglia loved his bicycle, bicycling, and knew what a good bicycle ride was all about.

    • Kate 09:30 on 2025-07-31 Permalink

      I gather he wrote one book, about the Tour de France, but never produced any others, saying his avocation was to be strictly a columnist. And there’s never been a collection of his columns published. You can only read him if you dig into the La Presse archive on the BAnQ site.

  • Kate 17:25 on 2025-07-29 Permalink | Reply  

    The city received more than 13,000 comments about the proposed noise bylaw.

     

    • Kate 15:38 on 2025-07-29 Permalink | Reply  

      Social and mainstream media are all over it, so here it is: Justin Trudeau and Katy Perry had dinner together in a posh eatery in the Plateau. There you go.

      I don’t know why people sound surprised. His father dated Barbra Streisand.

       

    • Kate 09:03 on 2025-07-29 Permalink | Reply  

      Rich people sometimes chip in to get private security for their cushy neighbourhoods. Item notes that even the city has used security firms to patrol areas like the Village at times.

       

      • Joey 10:54 on 2025-07-29 Permalink

        This reminds me of a conversation I overheard near the top of the oratory shortly after the ice storm a couple of years ago; I learned then that basically all the residents of Upper Westmount had gone out and purchased generators so they wouldn’t have to deal with short-term power failures like the rest of us. This is the kind of thing that, best case scenario, erodes social cohesion. Worst-case scenario these private security become de facto police.

      • Kate 11:20 on 2025-07-29 Permalink

        Westmount has always had a private security force that patrols in addition to the SPVM, I think.

      • Nicholas 11:50 on 2025-07-29 Permalink

        I don’t know if it’s fair to call their Public Security unit “private security”. They’re city workers who respond to various lower level complaints, which is actually what I hear as a model people want: have a noise complaint, or a car breaks down in the middle of the street, or a contractor doesn’t have a permit? These people with no guns will respond. A good portion of what they do is parking enforcement, which Montreal has too, but they also do this other stuff, which Montreal also has but with various different roles doing those jobs, rather than these people with multiple hats. And this means police can focus on the higher risk stuff rather than the nuisance. Maybe Montreal should adopt this model (good luck with the Brotherhood negotiations!).

      • Ian 12:02 on 2025-07-29 Permalink

        Outremont and TMR have somethng similar, too.

      • Joey 12:22 on 2025-07-29 Permalink

        At least those guys are accountable to the relevant city, not a handful of residents.

      • Kate 12:44 on 2025-07-29 Permalink

        True. I didn’t intend to suggest that what Westmount et al. have is wrong.

        But it does draw a line, doesn’t it? Between people who summon security to protect themselves, as in the wealthier towns and boroughs, and those who have security summoned on them, as in the Village.

      • bob 16:23 on 2025-07-29 Permalink

        Village crimes are right there in front of you. Westmount crimes happen in corner offices and offshore accounts.

        Hampstead also has their own security – remember? https://therover.ca/hampstead-fired-whistleblower-who-made-corruption-claims/

        “Public security” is an ok model, but anyone put into a uniform and a utility belt needs to be watched.

      • Chris 08:08 on 2025-07-30 Permalink

        If we went through with the whole ‘defund the police’ idea, you can bet that the rich would hire themselves plenty of their own police, and the poor would be left to rot.

      • Tim S. 09:39 on 2025-07-30 Permalink

        When I lived in Westmount, I was probably fairly low on the income scale (though believe it or not, there is social housing there, tucked away by the train tracks), and I relied on Public Security a lot. People buy multi-million dollar homes and hire cowboy contractors who disrupt entire neighbourhoods? Public Security will help you out. Your kids can’t use the playground because a bunch of personal trainers have taken it over as an outdoor gym for their clients? Call public security. Someone’s parked a giant SUV in a crosswalk? Public Security. My point is, as long as there’s a basic commitment to enforcing the actual laws, PUBLIC security of this kind can actually even the playing field between classes, and it’s actually a model I wish the Montreal boroughs would adopt. Private is a different ballgame.

      • Kevin 16:21 on 2025-07-30 Permalink

        On a recent trip I saw cops wearing their mission on their vests: brigade anti-incivilité.

        And if their job really is to make things peaceful and help people get along, great.
        At least they encouraged the rowdy drunks to hush up and stop harassing passersby instead of cracking heads.

      • Nicholas 16:52 on 2025-07-30 Permalink

        I’m not saying public security is a perfect model — there’s a reason you mostly don’t see homeless people in Westmount (as described frequently in the local paper, they’re escorted to the city limits by the public security). But Tim is completely right: if you have a nuisance complaint, a PSO will come out and deal with it, while police rarely will anywhere (and it feels weird to call them over this). They’re often there before police or paramedics for bigger things. And they’re an all-purpose number to call for anything less than an emergency, and you get a human right away. For Montreal 311 you select your borough, go through a phone tree, and then maybe someone gets dispatched today. Some of the Montreal services are actually quick to respond, but I remember a Montreal by-law officer showing up to my place to respond to a complaint that was filed by a previous tenant at least 2 years prior, and a year later I got mail notice of a decision from the TAL for the tenants before the previous ones. It would be great if other governments were as service-oriented as Westmount is.

    • Kate 08:55 on 2025-07-29 Permalink | Reply  

      More than 150 firefighters have been working all night to put out a fire on Ste‑Catherine at Towers. Nobody names the business at street level, but it seems to be Hot Star Large Fried Chicken (where the Rotisserie Italienne was located for many years). People were living upstairs and they all got out.

      Radio-Canada says the wooden building dates from around 1900 and the cause of the fire is not yet known.

       

      • jeather 09:58 on 2025-07-29 Permalink

        Apparently I had no idea what that street was called. I had Hot Star Large Fried Chicken a few times and I enjoyed it, too.

        The Radio-Canada article also says there were Airbnbs in the place.

      • Kate 10:52 on 2025-07-29 Permalink

        Yes. I looked up ownership of the building, but it’s a numbered company. You know whose name I was expecting to see…

        …In a weird way, I’d be happier knowing that it was Airbnbs only, so people will only have lost a small amount of possessions rather than all their stuff and their home. But this later TVA report suggests there were some permanent residents and some short‑term. It also says the building dated from 1885.

      • Ian 12:05 on 2025-07-29 Permalink

        Only tangentially related but I was up the mountain about a half hour ago and saw what looked like a huge fire on the south shore, looked to be just the other side of Chateauguay – maybe a wildfire?

      • Kate 12:46 on 2025-07-29 Permalink

        I’ve looked through the most recent news bits from the Montérégie and no mention of a fire over there. Will come back to this if I see anything.

      • Ian 13:15 on 2025-07-29 Permalink

        Emailed you some pics

      • Kate 14:58 on 2025-07-29 Permalink

        As of 3, I don’t see any reports.

    c
    Compose new post
    j
    Next post/Next comment
    k
    Previous post/Previous comment
    r
    Reply
    e
    Edit
    o
    Show/Hide comments
    t
    Go to top
    l
    Go to login
    h
    Show/Hide help
    shift + esc
    Cancel