It’s not every day I will agree heartily with a Jean‑François Lisée column, but he’s so right when he talks about the boneheadedness of the federal government and certain businesses mandating a full‑time return to the office against all studies showing that most people thrive on a hybrid arrangement.
“Le but des politiques publiques n’est pas d’adapter la vie aux besoins de la ville et du capital, mais d’adapter la ville et l’économie aux besoins de la vie.” He’s right.
As an “audit” of our bike paths looms, Le Devoir’s Marco Fortier asks whether car traffic is the most dangerous factor in the streets of Montreal, along with some impressive statistics about the hazards created by heavy trucks and the fact that all the cycling fatalities between 2012 and 2024 happened on roads without bike paths.
Will this count for anything against SMF’s need to give parking spaces back to a grateful populace?
I guess in the same way that putting in bike paths is easier than really evaluating traffic flow and doing something to address the excessive numbers of heavy trucks and large delivery vehicle in the city, it is also easier to remove bike paths than to address the excessive numbers of heavy trucks and large delivery vehicle in the city.
I almost hesitate to say it, but maybe we should go back to solving everything with clowns.
I can’t be bothered to look it up, but all you need is a graph showing year on the x axis, and lines on the y axis for: number of people in Montreal, number of cars in Montreal, and number of cyclists in Montreal. That will show you where all your precious parking spaces have gone.
If you can’t be bothered to look it up and are clearly just making up data visualisation inferences based on guesstimates, I question your sources 😉
The number of people has grown, the number of automobiles has grown ever faster, the amount of streetspace is basically unchanged. Motorists find parking harder nowadays because there are more motorists. It’s not rocket science.
No, you’re right – rocket science doesn’t assume that correlation equals causation, or that confirmation bias has any truth value.
Good thing Betteridge’s law doesn’t apply to rhetorical questions.
But hear me out, clowns could really animate the reseau
Also cars are much bigger, which itself increases traffic and reduces (unmarked) parking spots.
As a bicyclist I have always been of the opinion that a street with a bike lane probably has a bike lane because it is dangerous to ride on. That aside, drivers should welcome bike infra – one bixi rack means at least a dozen people not parking cars on the street.
I’m pretty sure if we put some effort into it we could all share urban space fine – but we could defnitely do with way fewer heavy trucks and delivery vehicles with more than 4 wheels in the city.
Video from CBC on Montreal as possible host city for NATO’s defence bank. Even François Legault made a pitch for it this week. It’s interesting to hear a man whose government has avoided doing anything nice for Montreal for years suddenly talking it up – through gritted teeth.
As a sort of parajournalist I’d give any journalist a suggestion: look for where the words and actions do not match. Such as the mayor talking about her intention to help the homeless vs the fact that funding for homeless organizations is taking its time to show up.
The STM did a comedy renaming of some metro stations for Valentine, unfortunately placing the images on Facebook only.
Since the theme was all about solitude and broken hearts, I’m surprised nobody noticed Monk – but of course, that’s English.
Kevin 11:58 on 2026-02-15 Permalink
The only reason for many companies to insist on workers returning to an office is because the value of the real estate has an overly large effect on the company’s earnings and assets.
Chris 12:09 on 2026-02-15 Permalink
Kevin, if you mean that literally, that’s nonsense. There’s almost never just one reason for any human behaviour. I’ll give you one other reason: in-person human interaction is better than videoconferencing. Not saying the real estate theory is never in the mix, but let’s not pretend it’s just that.
Ian 12:39 on 2026-02-15 Permalink
Another angle on that is that a lot of managers exist solely to oversee a team, and if they are not directly overseeing the team, the ROI of the entrie management class is brought into question.
From a worker’s perspective being on-site is advantageous in that it lessens unpaid overtime… and let’s be real, very few companies are paying your internet bill or for your home office setup, unless you are incorporated and working as a consultant you can’t even write it off on taxes.
That said, Kevin’s take is very accurate in that for a lot of companies real estate is a major opex envelope and having it sit empty is diffiulat to justify, especially for a traded company. The trouble with what the fedds are doing is that in the neoliberal climate of constant cost-cutting, in many cases there literally aren’t enough office spaces for the workforce to return to.
Joey 13:57 on 2026-02-15 Permalink
While I’m a big proponent of working from home (I started the first job that allowed me to do that in 2011 and it’s basically become a dealbreaker), I think it’s really lousy for people at the start of their careers – there’s just no virtual equivalent of being around a lot of the people you work with on a daily basis when you’re at the beginning of your professional life. You need to get to know everyone, to absorb whatever you can, to tag along to things that don’t necessarily concern your day to day work, and to learn the ridiculous norms of North American work culture. It’s just too hard to do if a majority of your co-workers are at home.
Kate 16:52 on 2026-02-15 Permalink
Maybe widespread WFH will help break some of those ridiculous norms?
Joey 18:29 on 2026-02-15 Permalink
Well widespread WFH is over and done with, so probably not…
Kevin 19:35 on 2026-02-15 Permalink
Chris
For several years executives have been touting a decline in productivity as the reason to end WFH policies, but when looking at the balance sheets of said companies, the only decline is in real estate evaluations and not in the output of labour.
Commercial Real Estate values dropped off a cliff when the pandemic started, recovered in ’21 and ’22, then plunged again. Since late 23 there has been no growth in CRE. And that is a large problem for companies that are overexposed in this area.
Some executives have said that having employees in office allows unexpected synergies as employees talk and share plans about what they are doing, to which an astute investor should ask: how poorly run is the company that it depends on random encounters for units to work together? Investors should also be asking what kind of mentorship programs are these companies running.
Bert 07:42 on 2026-02-16 Permalink
Ian, I agree with you that the major task that managers have is to monitor their “reports”, traditionally done by walking about the office. Now, with WFH it has become more “let’s book a meeting” and “I see nothing in your time sheet /calendar”. Must maintain the semblance of telling someone to do something.
However, I disagree with your “worker’s perspective” points. Having RTO means having a 1-2 hour commute blocked off, and a mandated 1h+ (lunch and breaks) not-home lock-in, this above and beyond the work day. I know many WFH people enjoy being able to go a grocery run over the lunch hour, or having the time to run other such errands. This all frees up time for family and friends. No more “I have to run to pick up the kids from day-care” and the like. Further, being at arms reach from management can help you avoid those “Office Space” “Uuuummm, yeahhh, I’m going to need you…..”
Kevin, you hit it right on the head about thinking that “water cooler chit-chat” can not be the backbone of a company’s innovation strategy.
Kevin 13:35 on 2026-02-19 Permalink
Posting this for the record: Ontario’s Return to Office for public workers was done knowing that it definitely would not make workers more productive.
https://www.ledroit.com/actualites/actualites-locales/fonction-publique/2026/02/19/exclusif-les-vraies-raisons-du-retour-au-bureau-en-ontario-5BTLMBSMDNC67PFHAPDE33RM74/