The SSMU had to opportunity to attend the first televised debate between the Montreal mayoral candidates this weekend. Organised by McGill University and CBC-Radio Canada, the debate took place on campus, in the prime location that is Redpath Hall.
A little under 200 students and supporters attended the hour and a half long debate that started at 1800h and brought together the four candidates leading in the polls, Richard Bergeron, Denis Coderre, Marcel Côté and lastly, Melanie Joly, whose recent voting trends finally justified her participation in the event. The debate was moderated by Patrice Roy of Radio-Canada and took place entirely in French. Most of the questions had been previously sent in by citizens, who were also invited to come ask them live.
Candidates and main electoral issues
The debate gave candidates the change to address various issues, including governance, integrity and transparency, transport, economic and cultural prosperity, language, inter-governmental relations, etc. Overall, the candidates stayed faithful to their election platforms. Richard Bergeron, professionally trained as an urban planner, pointed out the importance of aiming high for Montreal and leaving a “small-scope” mind frame. He focussed on the improvement of the metropolis, on the problems surrounding the exodus of families and on the importance of electrifying transports. Denis Coderre, a former federal liberal deputy made the importance of good leadership, experience and “gaining people’s trust” the focus of his speech. He reiterated his plan to institute a general inspector and to make Montreal into a “smart city”.
Marcel Côté, co-fouder of the SECOR compagny, wants to reduce the number of elected officials and set up a system of “checks and balances” to prevent corruption. Finally, Mélanie Joly, who is trained as a lawyer, stated that she is inspired by many international cities such as Toronto, New York and Bogota. She suggests nominating a chief of economic development, the acquisition of a particular status for the city of Montreal and echoed Richard Bergeron by insisting on the necessity of changing elected officials involved in corruption, which they both say are very present in the political ranks of Denis Coderre and Marcel Côté.
Many issues are ones that the candidates have all reached a consensus on. For example, they all agreed on the need to increase the number of bike lanes and lanes dedicated to public transport, to make Montreal a modern city and to promote a culture of integrity and transparency. The candidates are all opposed to the current Charter of Values proposed by Quebec, and consider Montreal to be a Francophone city, though the presence of an Anglophone population must be taken into account. As far as universities are concerned, the candidates all recognised the significant role they play in the international image of the city. Bergeron highlighted the Griffintown revitalisation initiative, which stems from a collaboration between McGill and the École de technologie supérieure, while Mélanie Joly reminded the audience of the importance of retaining international students in Montréal after their studies.
In addition to general questions, the candidates were asked about certain more specific concerns. A summary table follows:
| Bergeron | Coderre | Côté | Joly | |
| Municipal fusions | 1 year of public consultation on the issue | Will not change the current neighbourhoods | Unclear | Unclear |
| Right turn at a red light | Against | In favour | Unclear (“not a priority”) | Against |
| Snow-clearing | Repatriation to the central level | No repatriation | No repatriation | Repatriation to the central level |
| Property tax | Status quo | Unclear (“respecting citizens”) | Limit the rise in inflation | Status quo |
| P6 by-law | Against (in favour of presenting the itinerary beforehand) | In favour | ± in favour | Against (in favour of presenting the itinerary beforehand) |
A debate…without actual debate!
Halfway through the election campaign, we expected better from this third debate between the mayoral candidates. In fact, while a debate usually involves an exchange or a discussion that opposes different viewpoints, yesterday felt more like a series of monologues prepared specifically for the camera.
The form of the debate, which allowed for a maximum of 50 seconds (and often less) for candidates to answer questions from citizens made it difficult to get a clear picture of the candidates’ platforms. Rather than a debate that leads to a real confrontation and a systematic questioning of the candidates’ answers, the audience sat in on the same electoral platforms that have been presented since the start of the campaign, in an “oral presentation” format.
Instead of encouraging citizens to decide between true and false and allowing us to learn more about the details of projects, their feasibility, the candidates’ experience and their motivations, we got very general answers, focussing on the parts that the candidates knew best, which often didn’t answer the questions asked. Essentially, we know now who was the most at ease and who is the best speaker, but not who has the most appropriate platform for Montreal and who is best able to improve the city.
Coming up
The next recorded debate will take place once again on the campus of McGill University on October 22nd, and will be in English. It will be presented live on the Radio-Canada and CBC. For more information, follow our blog or visit Radio-Canada’s website.
If you have any questions, don’t hesitate to contact us.
