A ruling by Quebec’s administrative tribunal has allowed two private colleges, both called Collège Supérieur, to reopen for the time being so students can complete their programs.
It’s never been made clear why Quebec withdrew the permits, so the background to this story remains a mystery.
The Quebec health ministry is urging us to buy local produce because of cyclosporiasis, but this Gazette piece soft‑pedals any accusations toward the U.S., saying our cases don’t come from the U.S., and it then tries to spread blame to Mexico.
We’re all at it. Carney is ending the so-called Netflix tax that forced American entertainment media to devote a portion of their takings in Canada to Canadian content. The Journal says Charles Milliard is supporting appeasement of Trump’s tariffs. It’s like we’re in the lion’s jaws and hoping that an offer of kitty treats will make it let us go.
Well, that’s a way to differentiate himself from the other possible premiers, in this, the most anti-Trump province.
The federal government is putting in 2 billion for a new Montreal plant to build 45 new locomotives for Via Rail.
Stadler makes some great trains. Too bad those aren’t the ones we’re buying.
Wrong model?
First off, diesel battery hybrids are the worst of both worlds: you need a diesel engine and a big heavy battery. And you have to find somewhere to charge it (though since these trains often sit around for hours doing nothing, not a best practice, it might not be too burdensome). The more common dual mode, diesel and catenary (wires), allows you to run on electricity under the wire and switch to diesel for the unwired segments. They’re also not good. AMT/ARTM/Exo bought some of those right before we scrapped the only wired mainline in Canada, and no one wants them so they’re scrapped. The third type is wire and battery, which is convenient when most of your route is wired, and you can recharge the battery there and then use it for the short other segments, such as a few km at the end or where there’s an old bridge with too low clearance for wires.
The second part is that we should be getting multiple units not locomotives. Multiple units are like the old Two Mountains line electric trains, or the metro, such that each (or each other) car is powered with an engine below the floor or above the ceiling, while a locomotive is a big vehicle at the front that pulls unpowered cars. The MUs are much more efficient and better at accelerating, whether they are diesel powered or electric. Acceleration is really important on curvy, slow, badly maintained routes like the ones Via travels on. Basically the only advantage of locomotives are sometimes at the highest of high speeds (these trains are not for the new high speed rail, so that doesn’t apply) or for being able to use different coaches the same day (or if you already bought coaches recently, which we absolutely haven’t; some of these coaches are so old it’s laughable they haven’t been replaced, so given there are already bids out for them to be replaced they should just buy MUs). The main reason to use locomotives would be if you had a bunch of sleeper trains converging together from a few places and then splitting up to a few places, and you wanted to shuffle the coaches around every night without people having to switch trains. But for the Jonquière Senneterre split it’s just a single split and it’s easier with an MU as you don’t need a second locomotive in the middle; it’s like the Blue Line metro, you’d have the front three cars go one place and the back three to another and they can detach in under 5 minutes and be off.
Given that we absolutely aren’t going to get wires on any of the long distance routes outside the Corridor in our lifetimes, we should be buying diesel multiple units (DMU). The batteries are just green washing. I don’t know for sure but I would bet that the increased efficiency of a DMU will mean fewer emissions than these diesel electric battery hybrid trains even though part of their trip there are no emissions. And since a DMU would do the trips in less time more people would take the train, which would also reduce driving; it wouldn’t surprise me that this heavier battery diesel hybrid runs more slowly than the trains today.
The key thing to look for in these announcements is what are people talking about. The press releases and articles mostly focus on how final assembly (but not most of the work) will be done in Canada (it’ll mostly be in Spain), and that it will produce 1,200 jobs, and trains will be made in Canada for the first time in 25 years. They also add it will reduce fuel consumption and emissions, and increase performance and reliability. Note that nowhere does it say that this purchase will allow Via to run more service on current lines or add service on new lines or make service quicker. Nowhere are the specs for even which type of train will be bought, let alone the speed and acceleration and weight or proposed travel times. Just like when it was announced the STM will buy electric buses, no one talked about running better service, because that wasn’t the goal (and since we still don’t have a place to safely charge them in our brand new leaking garage, they in fact offer worse service). At least with digital health records or SAAQClic people can do things more efficiently, and the REM at least claimed to offer more frequent service than the line it replaced (even if it practice it fails to offer any service somewhat regularly). The benefits here are jobs, nationalism/protectionism and (arguably) the environment; rail service is not talked about because no one involved in the decision making cares about it, and so this purchase won’t improve it. Maybe when these locomotives reach their end of life in the 2050s we can buy the right stuff in the 2060s for delivery in the 2070s.
Elderly tenants were evicted from a Park Ex building four years ago, told the building needed repairs. Now it’s slated for demolition.
A plan is afoot to raze the row of buildings on Peel below Ste‑Catherine and put up a highrise that exceeds the zoning limit of 19 floors and will throw a shadow over Dorchester Square.
Bye-bye McLean’s and Peel Pub.
I think it’s a bit more nuanced than that. The current “de plein droit” zoning allows for a 19-storey slab that would cast even more shade over the square.
A project here has been a long time coming which is why McLean’s already opened a new location further north on Peel a couple of years ago.
And it doesn’t seem like it will happen anytime soon…
// Giovanni Tartaglino tempère les attentes quant à la possibilité de voir le gratte-ciel lever de terre sous peu. « C’est un petit peu au point mort », dit-il en expliquant la situation par le ralentissement du marché du condo à Montréal. //
Oh no, where will we ever find an Irish bar and a La Belle Province and an overpriced dep in downtown Montreal? Are some things not sacred anymore?
It’s not those entities specifically. A lot of smaller places are disappearing before the pickaxe of the condo juggernaut. My visual memory of the city is constantly being deleted and I don’t like that. I’ve never so much as set foot inside McLean’s or the Peel Pub.
Vanishing Montreal does a good job of documenting changes like this
Metaphor in action: the airport has had to shut down U.S. customs operations because of a bad smell in the area. People planning to fly there today are advised to check the status of their flights.
As of Wednesday afternoon, operations have resumed.
Two American men were found guilty in Dominica this week of the murders of Daniel Langlois and his partner Dominique Marchand.
Later, the defence said they would appeal the verdict.
A few more details about the trial here:
This must come as a huge relief to their friends and families and to the people of Dominica as their legal system is hardly up to snuff. What a tremendous waste.
The water main down Atwater that needed emergency repairs still needs five weeks of work so we’re still asked to refrain from wasting tap water.
Or so Metro says in that link, but Radio‑Canada reports the city is being a little more vague about both the time frame and the cost of the work.
Great example of construction that is super inconvenient for buses, because they have to go right next to there and cars are always backed up. But lots of people can just drive on a different street.
The sailing ship Amerigo Vespucci has arrived in the Old Port and will be here till August 3.
The Old Port area is currently full of handsome Italian sailors in ceremonial uniform if that interests anyone. The boat itself is very beautiful. I didn’t get a chance to check it out for long but I saw a lot of people up on the upper portion of the cruise ship terminal taking a look. I imagine you can get a good view from up there.
I saw one sailor, close to the basilica. The ship itself was cool to see from the Quay.
The contaminated construction site in Point St‑Charles was intended for a daycare.
While other media do pieces of varying interest looking back at the 1976 Games – Radio‑Canada profiling a Russian wrestler who now lives in Montreal, for example, as part of its ongoing series of offshoots of the Games – the Gazette trots out Jack Todd for another gripe about the stadium. Allison Hanes as well. What’s the editorial policy there?
Taylor C. Noakes has a piece on the destruction of Corridart on the Canada’s History site. That’s as much part of the epic of the 1976 Games as any athletic endeavour.
He also has a piece on Maisonneuve about the Olympic legacy in the city.
Thanks for posting, Kate!
The Big O is a textbook example* not just of failure, but of Quebec’s continued refusal to learn how to plan and build something on time and on budget.
This province always chooses to build something bold and unique instead of going with something that has already had the bugs eliminated.
*Assuming [How Big Things Get Done]( https://dangardner.ca/publication/how-big-things-get-done) is used in a classroom somewhere.
@Kevin – I’m not convinced
While choosing an architect who was used to working in France (and who continued to manage the construction site from his Paris office) wasn’t a smart idea, there were, as I explain in the article, many other factors that contributed to cost overruns and delays that couldn’t have been anticipated.
Namely: the inflationnary effect of the 1973-74 oil crisis, strike actions by construction workers (who were at the time being investigated publicly by the Cliche Commission), and the IOC deciding (after the Munich Massacre) that Drapeau’s plan for a deecentralized athletes village (which would have become social housing after the games) was no longer viable.
As to whether the stadium was bold and unique, yes certainly – especially by local standards. Unheard of? No. Taillibert wasn’t a rookie, he was well-known and established.
The tower is arguably the most distinct feature, but it wasn’t completed for the Games, and as such its cost is separate.
The thing I think we should be paying attention to – especially after 50 years – is that we have a massive stadium that’s bought and paid for, that the government (which owns it outright) is committed to, and which may soon be hosting large-capacity crowds for CFL and MLS games.
If that happens, what have we to complain about? We’ll have beaten the major leagues on stadiums. Every other city has had its arm twisted into building new stadiums for every team, seemingly every 20-30 years. Montreal/Quebec said no.
With every passing year the Big O makes more and more financial sense, its costs paling in comparison to other stadiums, its architecture that much more striking (and emblematic).
To say nothing of the fact that the entire Olympic park site is in and of itself a major attraction, quite unloike practically every other Olympic host city.
There are many good reasons to be critical of Drapeau, even on the Olympics, but I think history may ultimately vindicate him on this one, especially if we ever pitch another Olympics (something we’re uniquely well-suited to do, at a comparatively low cost).
There’s just a portion of the population that came of age in the 1970s that watched Montreal go through some hard times, and for which the Olympics, separatism, constitutional issues, and Montreal’s economic decline relative to Toronto got all mixed up together into a psychology of defeat and failure. We need to move past that and see our city for what it is.
@Taylor for a fraction of what we are spending *now* on the stadium, we could’ve had a downtown, purpose-built stadium that would have kept our Major League Baseball team from leaving – and lots of cash left over. Instead we’ll spend in excess of $1 billion to host a handful of soccer and football games per year (or, I suppose, quite a few soccer games featuring ~16K fans in a giant empty stadium in winter, thanks to the MLS schedule change, all so multibillionaire Joey Saputo gets to keep his major league team).
So far Quebec has spent nearly $3 billion on the stadium; how it can be considered anything other than, as Kevin described, “a textbook example not just of failure, but of Quebec’s continued refusal to learn how to plan and build something on time and on budget” is beyond me. We are spending hundreds of millions of dollars *this year* on the stadium – how is that “bought and paid for”?
I’m glad we haven’t devoted a slab of downtown to a stadium for a baseball team that the city failed to support first time around. But I know that’s an unpopular view.
@joey
Think of it as a house. You still own your house even if you have to pay for a sump pump or a new roof.
Those costs don’t change the fact that you own the building, and the Big O is owned by the taxpayers of Quebec. We have paid for it, we all pay for the ongoing maintenance any large building requires.
If you own a house and you don’t spend any money maintaining it, it will fall apart around you, and ultimately be worthless.
Consider as well that it’s a 50 year old stadium, the current round of renovations will permit decades more use, including the potential of more MLS and CFL games with larger crowds, as well as large concerts. All of this increases the revenue generated by the stadium, which is reinvested back into it and the rest of the Olympic Park complex. That complex is a major tourist attraction and provides countless public functions, all of which enrich our lives and add to the city’s cultural offering (pool, athletics ctr, Olympic training facilities, Biodome, Planetarium etc etc etc)
You may not use any of this, but that doesn’t matter, because millions of other people do, each and every year. The stadium generates dependable revenue, the park complex regularly draws over a million people per annum. This puts Montreal in a league of its own compared with other Olympic host cities and their Olympic infrastructure.
That $3 bil CAD figure is spread out over 50 years, and guarantees maybe another 20. The avg North American sports stadium costs between $1.5 and $2.5 billion USD, and lasts 20-30 years. By those measures, ours is increasingly looking like a bargain.
But wait, there’s more!
Most of those stadiums are purpose-built and have much lower capacities. We have an exceptionally large stadium that can do many things, something the new renovation will guarantee moving forward. We’ve also gotten a lot of great use out of it already – from the Olympics to 27 years of MLB baseball, to Grey Cup games and major concerts.
And with the current renovations, the Big O is well suited to potentially go another 30 years of doing all of that all over again.
But whereas most North American sports stadiums are located away from city centres, and surrounded by an ocean of parking spaces, ours is in the middle of a major collection of tourist attractions, connected directly to the Metro, and surrounded by some of the most densely populated neighbourhoods in the city.
There’s a certain irony to those pining for the Labatt Stadium of the 1990s, in that the area it was slated to go had almost no residential population whatsoever. South of Rene-Levesque, after 5pm, between Guy and University, in the mid-1990s? And that was supposed to be superior to the Big O?
I think we dodged a bullet. That would have been the real white elephant.
Now – was the Big O’s construction poorly managed? Absolutely. Is it a crime to spend a billion dollars fixing its roof and not spend at least as much on social/affordable housing? Yes again. Is it a shame the Expos left? Sure, no question.
But none of this makes a case for deferring maintenance and improvements that have the potential of increasing revenue generated for decades to come. We own it, its ours, we all pay for it. The alternatively is either tearing it down or letting it fall apart, which is neither practical nor realistic, but would absolutely be a colossal waste of money.
@ Kate – it was supported for 35 years, I think that’s pretty good given how many major league teams fold after just a few.
I interviewed an economist a few years ago about this. He said the avg person has a fixed annual budget for entertainment, and Montrealers have plenty of options competing for their attention. Now granted, there are 4 million people in the metro region, so we can host many events and expect most will be relatively well attended, and we more or less accomplish this already, but still. Not everything is going to work forever. There were also demographic changes too.
I think the smart investment is in the sports that are still accessible. In my lifetime the Habs went from a working class team (with working class prices), to the Yankees of Hockey (with prices to match). There are enough wealthy people here to sustain that, but only just, and a prolonged stretch of bad seasons may see firesales and 2-for-1 nights if the Molsons aren’t careful.
Consider the rise of interest in the QMJHL or the PWHL as an inexpensive alternative. I think the CFL and MLS fall into the same category. We want accessible pro or semi-pro sports that people can actually bring their families to, since that has the greatest potential for follow on economic activitity.
I think we should just accept that the Expos existed for 35 years, that tastes changed, and that there are new teams who are potentially willing to pay to use the Big O. Baseball fans shouldn’t stand in the way of progress.
Richard Martineau drew the short straw Tuesday at QMI to generate a Montreal, we hates it column.
“%20rel=” at the end of the link causes a 404 for me; removing it fixes it.
(In a way, they even have a “Montreal, we hates it” 404 page.)
Also, I will say that while I think our neighbourhood smells like garbage right now, we had a guest from East Asia last weekend, and he commented on how much cleaner Montreal is compared to other North American cities he’s visited, especially their downtowns.
Thank you, R T
Quebec has given its nod to the reconstruction of the St‑Pierre interchange, where autoroutes 138 and 20 cross and thousands of motorists pass through every day. A rebuild isn’t impending, but when it happens, will cause chaos.
I wonder if this will go west all the way under 1st Ave and to the bus/HOV lanes to the west. Less bus car interaction is good, but none is so much better than less.
Also I love how they say elevated highways will help reconnect Ville Saint Pierre with the surrounding neighbourhoods. Kate, do you feel the Met helped reconnect Villeray with Ahuntsic?
What is the budget to replace this thing with a nearly identical thing?
There’s been no mention yet of budget.
Nicholas, my memories don’t reach back to the time before the Met was built, but if you walk along Crémazie you can see the scar it has made across the city.
Let’s hope the new design will make it easier for bikes and pedestrians to head north south without taking their life in their hands, or having to wait at numerous noisy ugly intersections to access lachine canal.
The new design will surely include a fancy extra green bike path (that will later mysteriously, without statement, just disappear).
Just like steph, I fully expect to see lots of trees and other green objects in the official renderings of the project.
I see another Turcot dalle-parc in the crystal ball.
What a wasteland the expanse of hybrid grass insect free “greenspace” they placed in between the asphalt and concrete of the new Turcotte. No signs of life whatsoever. Back in the day, any grassland would be bobbing with bibites and butterflies, birds and toads. I guess St Pierre can expect the same. How bout some conifer mini forests? And a direct north south linear park passing through the shady way.
@su
Are you referring to the little duck pond?
@kevin
No, I was referring to all that unfriendly savannah area in the middle of all the highways. I never saw the duck pond. I hope the ducks get some nice shady weeping willows for cooling shade protection
Considering that a generation ago that savannah area would have been another expanse of concrete I’ll take the grass strip and be happy about it. Also, as part of the reconstruction they created the linear park at the base of the falaise St. Jacques which is very well done and chock full of a variety of plants, providing habitat for all manner of bugs, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and mammals.
What is the duck pond you refer to? I haven’t seen anything but the retention basin surrounded by off ramps.
Le Devoir accompanied the Office de consultation publique de Montréal as it did some vox pops downtown, and it’s no surprise that a fair number responded they were tired of the ongoing construction sites – 25 municipal digs downtown between now and December, plus transport ministry sites, sites run by utilities, as well as building construction work.
Although the story brings no surprises, two elements occur to me that aren’t mentioned.
Marco Fortier says the people most inconvenienced are drivers, delivery people and merchants, while cyclists and metro users are more “zen”. But I’d note that anyone who relies on a bus to get around can often find that their stop has disappeared or been moved blocks away from its usual corner, or, aboard the bus, they’re suddenly on an inconvenient detour they didn’t expect.
The other thing is this: is this downtown phenomenon not partly a consequence of Ville‑Marie not having its own mayor to look after its interests?
You’re absolutely right that bus users are the most inconvenienced: buses can’t use small streets and so may have to make large detours. And if there are multiple blockages you may have to zig zag back and forth to stay near the route so riders can get to it, while cars can go anywhere that’s open, even if the detour is 3 km.
As for Ville Marie I think it just has older infrastructure and is busier. Other neighbourhoods also have construction, but it affects fewer people.
But Ville-Marie’s mayor is *the actual mayor*, so shouldn’t it’s interests be the best looked after? Maybe we need more mayors.
Being the actual mayor has to be a full‑time job. Ville‑Marie’s council is partly elected, partly nominated by the city mayor. It’s a kludge after that stupid spat between Gérald Tremblay and Benoit Labonté, but it leaves the most central borough of the city without proper leadership or democratic representation.
The government has placed legal mortgages on 20 properties belonging to a professional poker player who was fined for operating them without permits, but didn’t pay up. Now the question is, who will flinch first, Karim Olivier Kamal or Revenu Québec?
I’m learning all kinds of words here. What they seemed to have put on the property is a lien, a claim on a property due to an unpaid debt, which everyone seems to translate as privilège. But it turns out liens are used in the common law and the term lien/privilège was abolished in Quebec in 1994. Now they use droit de rétention, priorité, créance prioritaire, charge réelle. You can also use hypothèque, a mortgage, or hypothèque légale, but those seem to be voluntary situations: either you borrow money so this is your collateral (which the article uses, placées en garantie) or you owe money so instead of a lien on everything you voluntarily put up property for a hypothèque légale while you fight the debt so that other property is not encumbered. Please don’t ask me to tell you the legal differences between all these terms, I am not so trained.
I also learned en mortaise. This is used in the initial caption to note that the guy is en mortaise in their graphic, namely that he’s in an inset of the photo of one of the houses. Mortaise means mortise, a cut out of a building or some such (you might cut out part of a wall to put in a window or wiring), or any cut out you make to insert something else, such as in a piece of wood to insert a transverse piece with glue, like a slot or groove. I could not find anywhere defining this term related to graphics or maps, nor could I find an appropriate French translation of inset. But thanks, JdeM, for letting me know the named is the human in the inset and not a building!
I’m curious to know if there are translations I’m missing for this, or the appropriate word for lien given they use two different terms that aren’t the term Quebec’s official dictionary recommends. Either way, all interesting, and also glad they’re going after someone.
I knew en mortaise because I’ve done page layout depuis belle lurette but the terminology of law and property is unfamiliar to me in either language as well.
I think the mortice probably comes down from the times when a page layout was an actual slab of lead.
@Nicholas Probably more info than you want, but there are four types of “hypothèque légale” in Quebec:
https://pierreroy.com/2024/06/hypotheque-legale-quebec-faillite-proposition/
The article linked to by Kate is about the second mentioned: “L’hypothèque légale de l’État”
More general info from Educaloi:
https://educaloi.qc.ca/en/capsules/hypothecs/
The translation for “hypothèque légale” in the Civil Code of Quebec is LEGAL HYPOTHECS
Chapter III
LEGAL HYPOTHECS
Art. 2724
https://www.legisquebec.gouv.qc.ca/fr/document/lc/CCQ-1991/20200110?langCont=en#se:2724
I think it amounts to the common understanding of a lien. The term here is a “hypothèque lègale”, when your property is held because you owe the someone (like the government) money. The creditor can dispose of the property pretty much as they wish to recover the debt (use it, lease it out, sell it, etc.). And it counts for most kinds of property, not only real estate.
Pro tip for anyone who wins a case against a landlord. I and my partner won one such case and the landlord was a dick. So we went to the court house and the lady at the wicket said “you can seize the landlord’s property until they pay”. We said “like, the building?”. She said “a bank account is also property.” And we said “we don’t know their bank accounts.” She said “they cash your rent cheques, yes? What’s the deposit account printed on the back of the returned cheques?” So we seized the account where all that landlord’s rent cheques were cashed. And a bailiff showed up the next day with some papers to sign and a cheque. It felt good to have the machinery of the state working for us for once.
H. John: thanks, as always, for the legal facts.
H. John 22:13 on 2026-07-29 Permalink
Kate wrote “so students can complete their programs.” That’s a possibility; but not a given.
The TAQ did not permanently overturn the Ministry’s decision. It merely suspended its effects, using an interlocutory order, to protect nearly 900 international students from losing their academic and immigration status while the case is prepared.
The decision allows the Collège Supérieur de Montréal and the Collège Supérieur de Sherbrooke to resume teaching immediately while the formal dispute over the Ministry of Education’s permit non-renewal plays out.
I say it’s not a given because the Tribunal could very well rule in the government’s favour as soon as they hear the case (say in September). Whether or not the students have finished their courses, the schools will be closed.
It really does go part way to explaining the “mystery”. The Ministry of Education stated it would not comment explicitly on the matter specifically because the legal proceedings are active and ongoing.
The fact that as Kate wrote “the background to this story remains a mystery” is just another example of really poor reporting. None of the articles I read (before Tuesday’s La Presse) mentioned that the government was being sued. And since there’s already been an interlocutory hearing and decision , the lawsuit wasn’t filed this week.
If the government loses the final, definitive hearing at the TAQ and the tribunal permanently forces the Ministry to renew the college permits, the government is highly likely to seek judicial review in the Superior Court of Quebec.
Kate 10:01 on 2026-07-30 Permalink
Thank you, H. John.
Previous stories had emphasized how some of the students were very close to completing their courses, so I assumed the surcease was to enable them to do so. I jumped to conclusions on that – thanks for correcting me.
jeather 10:19 on 2026-07-30 Permalink
It really depends what argument the judge makes — they have in the past not gone to the Superior Court to fight to close schools after a loss. But 90 days does give students who are close to graduating time to finish their programs and ones who aren’t time to transfer everything.
Even if they win in the final hearing and are allowed to reopen this will be difficult to recover from.
H. John 13:23 on 2026-07-30 Permalink
@jeather You wrote “they have in the past not gone to the Superior Court to fight to close schools after a loss.” Could you give an example?
jeather 14:19 on 2026-07-30 Permalink
Not in public, sorry. If Kate is willing I can send an article to her to send do you.
Kate 14:38 on 2026-07-30 Permalink
Certainly. You have my email.