|
|
Post by jkr on Aug 2, 2011 12:50:11 GMT -5
I mean the city, not the hockey team.  I know things aren’t rosy in other cities. In Toronto pieces have fallen off the Gardiner Expressway very recently and the city is 750 million dollars in the hole. A stage collapsed last month at an Ottawa music festival. Edmonton has the highest number of murders in the country & the media has started to call the city Deadmonton. And of course there was the riot in Vancouver. But when it comes to infrastructure problems, it seems that Montreal has the lead in this dubious race. The weekend collapse of the Ville Marie tunnel has brought it back into focus. As a former Montrealer I feel embarrassed at the hit the city takes in the media after these events. But the emotion that really comes to the fore is anger. Anger at politicians at all levels that let the infrastructure deteriorate and then play political games with the safety of its citizens. The government seems secretive and paternalistic – we better not tell them how bad it is, they are better off not knowing. (: And than the empty reassurances by Gerald Tremblay & Jean Charest follow. I thought the overpass collapse in 2006 that killed several people would bring a sense of urgency to the problem but it seems I am sorely disappointed. A question for the people that live there - why is there no political will to attack the problem? I see the usual Quebec bashing on the internet – incompetency & corruption being the accusations that come up most often. I haven’t lived in Montreal for many years but I was born there, still visit frequently & have a deep affection for the city. I hate what the politicians are doing to my home town. Can it be fixed? EDIT: just reading comments on CTV & CBC sites. Anti Quebec feeling is alive & well in this country. If this had happened anywhere else in Canada there would probably be a fraction of the comments. It's like people can't wait for something bad to happen, then they can point the finger.  I found 3-4 stories about the small amount of rubble (10lbs) that fell from the Gardiner in June & couldn't find any comments on any of the stories. Right now there are over 100 comments on the CTV site about the Ville Marie story and it seems most of them are the old Quebec/ROC argument. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Aug 2, 2011 19:04:00 GMT -5
I'm not sure how old the Ville Marie tunnel is, but it wouldn't surprise me to find out that it is between 40-50 years old, which was the serviceable life of concrete in the old Canadian Bridge Code. Salt attacks concrete pretty harshly. This is nothing more than a tunnel that now needs to be replaced.
I remember when the bridge in Montreal collapsed a few years ago (Laval?), we had to inspect all our bridges that were similar to it. The bridge essentially was constructed with drop down panels, with a lip that rest on the piers. Well, when the water seeps down through the expansion joints, especially when mixed with winter salt, it attacked that lip ... when the lip cracked, there was no redundancy to prevent the bridge from collapsing. We had one such bridge here in NL .. and we are now constantly monitoring it and it is on the short list of bridges we will be replacing in the next few years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Aug 2, 2011 19:16:20 GMT -5
We were talking about this on the golf course today. My buddy is from Verdun and he's quite concerned.
So am I actually. When heading east or to the eastern townships I'll go through Dorion rather than go through the city. In fact, if I'm heading to a game I'll still go through Dorion.
If I'm heading to Quebec City I'll take hwy 13 west to Laval then hop on the 640, north, until I get to the 40.
I avoid the freeway system in Montreal just about every time I go through there.
Cheers.
Edit: I remember BC saying he had a job inspecting the bridges in Montreal. Would be interesting to hear his take on this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Aug 3, 2011 1:09:24 GMT -5
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong......
Years back, I'm almost sure that there were tolls on major bridges for repairs and there was a stink raised that it was "unfair" to pay tolls. Now taxpayers have to fork over a billion dollars? Why?
Pay what you use.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Aug 3, 2011 7:20:44 GMT -5
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong...... Years back, I'm almost sure that there were tolls on major bridges for repairs and there was a stink raised that it was "unfair" to pay tolls. Now taxpayers have to fork over a billion dollars? Why? Pay what you use. Not sure about the tolls but I'm sure people would pay them if it menat regular upkeep. BTW - There's a similar problem in Toronto: www.thestar.com/news/article/1012513--heads-up-gardiner-concrete-could-keep-on-falling |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Aug 3, 2011 7:23:57 GMT -5
Edit: I remember BC saying he had a job inspecting the bridges in Montreal. Would be interesting to hear his take on this. I did, and was thus in a position to know things I often wished I didn't know. That recent Champlain Bridge report detailing the possibility that the bridge could collapse as it's structural integrity was in question? I first saw a similar report detailing the exact same thing - with the same causes and concerns - over 10 years ago. At the time the report said that the bridge was in urgent need of replacement. The Federal Government came back and asked "how much would it cost, and how long will it take to replace the bridge, if this one collapses?" In other words, let's wait until it falls, and hopefully by that time it will be someone else's problem. I inspected another bridge - a train bridge in Ontario, it's not just a Montreal problem - that we were literally able to pull apart with our bare hands. And I'm not talking about the facade, I'm talking about huge chunks of concrete around the supporting rebar (which was of course visible). "It's okay," they said, "Only one train a week goes over that bridge." Another bridge had a hole in it's piers so big that you could actually park a small pickup truck inside the pier, were you so inclined to do so (and assuming you could get your truck 60 feet under water and still parallel park). Took over three years and numerous "you fix it" lawsuits before that one got sorted out. How we haven't had a major disaster yet is beyond me. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong...... Years back, I'm almost sure that there were tolls on major bridges for repairs and there was a stink raised that it was "unfair" to pay tolls. Now taxpayers have to fork over a billion dollars? Why? Pay what you use. I'm of mixed opinion on this. Pay what you use makes sense, but... what if there are no alternatives? I live to the west of Montreal, and a 20 minute commute by car would take almost two hours by public transport, involving three different buses and a train. Four hours of commuting is a lot, and impossible for people with kids in schools or daycares, or for people who work odd hours. I communicate with engineers in India on a daily basis, meaning that I am sometimes in my office by 6 am - an impossibility were I to take public transport. If I stay at home and call them from there, well by the time those meetings are over the rush hour is finished and there are no more trains for me to take. That's right, trains do not run in non-rush-hour times. So in effect I am forced to pay for something that I cannot avoid, like a tax on air so to speak. But even if you ignore that, or if you say "too bad, you chose to live out there", should I have to pay for incompetence? The aforementioned Champlain Bridge is a billion dollar mistake. Yes, mistake. That type of design should NEVER have been used to build that bridge. What about cost-overruns and time delays? There is an article in today's Gazette that talks about the Dorval Circle - a series of highways and exits leading to Montreal's airport - and how it's planned replacement is now four years behind schedule, and $126 million (and counting) over budget. Should I have to pay for that? When it was announced in 1999, it was supposed to take two years and cost $36 million to build three new overpasses to eliminate the circle.
By 2005, the price tag was announced as $150 million. It went up to $224 million in 2009, officials at the time said, because of inflation and because an access link to an eventual high-speed rail service between downtown and the airport was added to the plan.www.montrealgazette.com/news/todays-paper/Dorval+Circle+cost+soars+work+extended/5196593/story.htmlMy favorite part of that article? Pressed for details to explain why the project, which was launched in 2009 and was supposed to be completed in four years, is now expected to take eight years, Grégoire said Transport Quebec is too busy with the aftermath of Sunday's collapse of part of the Ville Marie Expressway tunnel to provide answers.
The transport department did not make any announcement of the delay and the cost overrun because, Grégoire added, "we inform the media when they ask us."In other words, we will give you the details when you ask for them... unless of course we are busy with something else. In that case you are SOL. This project went from $35 million, to well over $350 million. Ten times the original estimated cost. Why should I pay for somebody else's mistakes? If they tell you that it will cost you $20,000 to buy a new Toyota, but when you show up on the lot they say "the car won't be here for another two years, and it's going to cost you $200,000" would you still buy the car?? There is another bridge near where I live, over the old St. Lawrence Seaway canal, that was "recently" replaced. It's not a big bridge - most highway overpasses are longer - and it was originally scheduled to be replaced in 6 months. Took almost two years. I don't know what the cost-overruns were on that, but I am going to assume they were not insignificant. Should the people of that town pay for the corruption and incompetence that went into building that bridge? Bend over and say "thank you for cutting us off from civilization for 18 months longer than you said you would, here is some more money?" Until they clean up the corruption and mismanagement that exists in the Federal, Provincial, Municipal and construction agencies that manage these bridges and roads I will not willingly give them a dime. Would you give your money to Bernie Madoff now? He is a crook and a fool. So why should I give my money to crooks and fools? |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Aug 3, 2011 10:31:48 GMT -5
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong...... Years back, I'm almost sure that there were tolls on major bridges for repairs and there was a stink raised that it was "unfair" to pay tolls. Now taxpayers have to fork over a billion dollars? Why? Pay what you use. There still are .... The Darmouth Bridge in Halifax is tolled , and so is Confederation Bridge in PEI to name a few. But there is one tidbit that prevents agencies from being able to put a toll anywhere. If a province or a municipality receives federal money for a road, highway, or bridge you are not allowed to put a toll on it. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Aug 3, 2011 10:43:43 GMT -5
Edit: I remember BC saying he had a job inspecting the bridges in Montreal. Would be interesting to hear his take on this. I did, and was thus in a position to know things I often wished I didn't know. That recent Champlain Bridge report detailing the possibility that the bridge could collapse as it's structural integrity was in question? I first saw a similar report detailing the exact same thing - with the same causes and concerns - over 10 years ago. At the time the report said that the bridge was in urgent need of replacement. The Federal Government came back and asked "how much would it cost, and how long will it take to replace the bridge, if this one collapses?" In other words, let's wait until it falls, and hopefully by that time it will be someone else's problem. I inspected another bridge - a train bridge in Ontario, it's not just a Montreal problem - that we were literally able to pull apart with our bare hands. And I'm not talking about the facade, I'm talking about huge chunks of concrete around the supporting rebar (which was of course visible). "It's okay," they said, "Only one train a week goes over that bridge." Another bridge had a hole in it's piers so big that you could actually park a small pickup truck inside the pier, were you so inclined to do so (and assuming you could get your truck 60 feet under water and still parallel park). Took over three years and numerous "you fix it" lawsuits before that one got sorted out. How we haven't had a major disaster yet is beyond me. Got to agree with you there. I use to inspect some bridges here in NL and there was one I actually made the "mistake" in my report of calling it unsafe. The holes in the steel grating deck and the concrete piers would make you think twice about driving over it . Freeedom to information and all that, and you can imagine the little hoopla that can be kicked up .... that was 7 years ago and the bridge is finally scheduled to be replaced this year. The tender call came in way over budget ... so now the powers that be have to decide if it will be replaced this year even. Thankfully I'm now into highway design. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Aug 3, 2011 11:25:11 GMT -5
I'm guess I am naive. I thought politicians actually cared about the safety of their citizens. It looks like they are all too ready to gamble with our safety. CBC did a story on the Champlain bridge last month. Apparently there was a report on the cost of replacement last March that did not get released to the public until July  . The implication was that the Conservatives did not want it to become an election issue. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 3, 2011 12:07:25 GMT -5
Confederation Bridge in PEI that isn't a toll, it's the price people are willing to pay to escape any more of Anne |
|
|
|
Post by duster on Aug 3, 2011 13:32:07 GMT -5
I'm guess I am naive. I thought politicians actually cared about the safety of their citizens. It looks like they are all too ready to gamble with our safety. CBC did a story on the Champlain bridge last month. Apparently there was a report on the cost of replacement last March that did not get released to the public until July . The implication was that the Conservatives did not want it to become an election issue. Perhaps Skilly or someone else could explain the politics behind it, but I don't see how replacing the Champlain bridge would become an election issue for the Conservatives. Did they promise to partially fund the replacement? I'm not entirely convinced that it's the Federal Govt responsibility for this type of infrastructure beyond setting general policy (safety standards etc...) .. The details (i.e. financing, bridge design, transit, social housing, bike lanes etc...) should be done at a provincial level, imo. The repairs to the Lions Gate bridge, the planned or ongoing replacement of the Port Mann and Patullo bridges and the newly built Golden Ears bridge here are 100% financed by the province . Until now, I always thought this was how it was done in other provinces as well. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 3, 2011 14:16:21 GMT -5
not wanting to be a smart alec, I think that it would have become an election issue -- the Bloc would have made it one. they'd have asked if the federal government was going to help with the cost, and when the Conservatives said "no" [that's a billion dollars not in their promised budget] Duceppe would have jumped all over the uncaring feds -- and as we saw, he needed an issue to jump onto.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Aug 3, 2011 14:46:30 GMT -5
I'm guess I am naive. I thought politicians actually cared about the safety of their citizens. It looks like they are all too ready to gamble with our safety. CBC did a story on the Champlain bridge last month. Apparently there was a report on the cost of replacement last March that did not get released to the public until July . The implication was that the Conservatives did not want it to become an election issue. Perhaps Skilly or someone else could explain the politics behind it, but I don't see how replacing the Champlain bridge would become an election issue for the Conservatives. Did they promise to partially fund the replacement? I'm not entirely convinced that it's the Federal Govt responsibility for this type of infrastructure beyond setting general policy (safety standards etc...) .. The details (i.e. financing, bridge design, transit, social housing, bike lanes etc...) should be done at a provincial level, imo. The repairs to the Lions Gate bridge, the planned or ongoing replacement of the Port Mann and Patullo bridges and the newly built Golden Ears bridge here are 100% financed by the province . Until now, I always thought this was how it was done in other provinces as well. I watched the news segment on CBC & I believe (my memory may fail me) that when the report on replacing the bridge was released the federal minister of transport was there. It just led me to believe that the federal gov't would pitch in on such a costly project. For instance, the TTC just got 70 new sets of subway cars at a cost of $1 Billion which was shared by the 3 levels of goveernment. |
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Aug 4, 2011 0:53:50 GMT -5
Until they clean up the corruption and mismanagement that exists in the Federal, Provincial, Municipal and construction agencies that manage these bridges and roads I will not willingly give them a dime. Would you give your money to Bernie Madoff now? He is a crook and a fool. So why should I give my money to crooks and fools? While I sympathize, somebody has to pay for it, regardless of how much it goes over budget. If not the people that use it, then who? Is it more fair to spread those costs evenly over the whole province? |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Aug 4, 2011 2:35:16 GMT -5
YES! I was right. There was a toll on the Champlain Bridge. I started driving at 17 and remember paying tolls when I went to the US. A 25-cent toll was charged to finance the C$35 million cost of the Champlain Bridge. The toll was collected until 1990, when the Jacques Cartier and Champlain Bridges Incorporated (JCCBI), which took over jurisdiction of the bridge a dozen years earlier, removed the toll plaza.If I remember right, there was screaming about how the federal government was "robbing" Quebecers by charging that toll and "profiteering" on the backs of the workers. Okay, now pay for the new bridge. www.montrealroads.com/crossings/champlain/ |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Aug 4, 2011 2:43:31 GMT -5
I'm of mixed opinion on this. Pay what you use makes sense, but... what if there are no alternatives? I live to the west of Montreal, and a 20 minute commute by car would take almost two hours by public transport, involving three different buses and a train. Four hours of commuting is a lot, and impossible for people with kids in schools or daycares, or for people who work odd hours. I communicate with engineers in India on a daily basis, meaning that I am sometimes in my office by 6 am - an impossibility were I to take public transport. If I stay at home and call them from there, well by the time those meetings are over the rush hour is finished and there are no more trains for me to take. That's right, trains do not run in non-rush-hour times. So in effect I am forced to pay for something that I cannot avoid, like a tax on air so to speak. But even if you ignore that, or if you say "too bad, you chose to live out there", should I have to pay for incompetence? The aforementioned Champlain Bridge is a billion dollar mistake. Yes, mistake. That type of design should NEVER have been used to build that bridge. What about cost-overruns and time delays? There is an article in today's Gazette that talks about the Dorval Circle - a series of highways and exits leading to Montreal's airport - and how it's planned replacement is now four years behind schedule, and $126 million (and counting) over budget. Should I have to pay for that? When it was announced in 1999, it was supposed to take two years and cost $36 million to build three new overpasses to eliminate the circle.
By 2005, the price tag was announced as $150 million. It went up to $224 million in 2009, officials at the time said, because of inflation and because an access link to an eventual high-speed rail service between downtown and the airport was added to the plan.www.montrealgazette.com/news/todays-paper/Dorval+Circle+cost+soars+work+extended/5196593/story.htmlMy favorite part of that article? Pressed for details to explain why the project, which was launched in 2009 and was supposed to be completed in four years, is now expected to take eight years, Grégoire said Transport Quebec is too busy with the aftermath of Sunday's collapse of part of the Ville Marie Expressway tunnel to provide answers.
The transport department did not make any announcement of the delay and the cost overrun because, Grégoire added, "we inform the media when they ask us."In other words, we will give you the details when you ask for them... unless of course we are busy with something else. In that case you are SOL. This project went from $35 million, to well over $350 million. Ten times the original estimated cost. Why should I pay for somebody else's mistakes? If they tell you that it will cost you $20,000 to buy a new Toyota, but when you show up on the lot they say "the car won't be here for another two years, and it's going to cost you $200,000" would you still buy the car?? There is another bridge near where I live, over the old St. Lawrence Seaway canal, that was "recently" replaced. It's not a big bridge - most highway overpasses are longer - and it was originally scheduled to be replaced in 6 months. Took almost two years. I don't know what the cost-overruns were on that, but I am going to assume they were not insignificant. Should the people of that town pay for the corruption and incompetence that went into building that bridge? Bend over and say "thank you for cutting us off from civilization for 18 months longer than you said you would, here is some more money?" Until they clean up the corruption and mismanagement that exists in the Federal, Provincial, Municipal and construction agencies that manage these bridges and roads I will not willingly give them a dime. Would you give your money to Bernie Madoff now? He is a crook and a fool. So why should I give my money to crooks and fools? Corruption or no corruption, it should be charged to those who use it. Why should a guy in Prince George BC pay for a bridge in Quebec? And why should the guy in Quebec subsidize a ferry in BC? Better yet, make it a private venture and pay per use. At 159,000 cars a day by $2.00, that bridge will bring in $116 million a year. In 5 years it's paid for and a profit made. Then reduce it to 50 cents for maintenance. Life can be simple. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 4, 2011 5:50:07 GMT -5
A 25-cent toll was charged to finance the C$35 million cost of the Champlain Bridge. The toll was collected until 1990, when the Jacques Cartier and Champlain Bridges Incorporated (JCCBI), which took over jurisdiction of the bridge a dozen years earlier, removed the toll plaza.
I remember my dad throwing the quarter in as we drove by . . . thanks for making me feel young today, Cranky! |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 4, 2011 5:56:45 GMT -5
love your sense of humor today. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Aug 4, 2011 7:23:38 GMT -5
I understand the logic of "pay per use" and in theory I have nothing against it. But at what point do you draw the line?? I hate to sound like one of those Tea Party wingnuts, but Quebecers are the highest taxed people in all of North America (as we know) and yet we seem to have the lowest level of service. The corruption within the construction industry is well known, and it extends to the highest levels of ALL governments. We're not talking about one bridge that went over budget through extenuating circumstances. We're talking about every single construction project within the province. Hyperbole? Perhaps, but I dare you to find a single major construction job, publicly funded, that came in on time and on budget. I cannot think of a single one. And they usually miss BIG. Like the aforementioned Dorval Circle. Double the time, double the cost, and counting. The super-hospital, the Laval metro extension, the 30, every bridge... check out the cost-overruns on these projects. Each one of them cost hundreds of millions more than predicted, and were/are years behind schedule. Do you keep funding incompetence with MORE money??
On August 1st, 2007 a major bridge in the Minneapolis, Minnesota collapsed, killing 13 people. On September 18th, 2008, a little over a year later, it's replacement bridge re-opened. Ahead of schedule. Which was good for the construction company, as they would have been fined $200,000 per day for every day they were behind. The tender called for something in the area of $350 million, they did it for $234 million. And yet a rinky-dink little bridge in Pointe des Cascades takes two years to build?? Eighteen months behind schedule?? If that construction company had of been fined $200,000 for every day they were late it would have cost them $108 million dollars. Instead, you are proposing we reward this incompetence with a toll on the bridge? To replace the Champlain bridge they are talking about $1 BILLION dollars and fifteen years(!) to complete. How much would have cost that Minnesota construction company, if instead of one year to complete the bridge it took them 15?? Why can they do it, but we can't??
At what point do you say "enough is enough, I give you my money, but clearly you are incapable of managing it??" Let's say they open up tolls; what, in the history of this province and it's construction industry, would lead you to believe that the money would actually go towards properly maintaining the infrastructure in a timely and cost-efficient manner? Like I said, we're the highest taxed jurisdiction in North America, and yet apparently that money doesn't do any good.
Yes, I would be a user. If I am paying for it, that would make me a consumer. As a consumer, as would a consumer for any product, I want to know that I am getting what I am paying for. Would tolls do that? Or would they simply be another cash-drain into the bottomless government coffer?
|
|
|
|
Post by Roggy on Aug 4, 2011 8:13:09 GMT -5
Sorry, naive westerner here. If the corruption is so rampant in all levels of Quebec government, can't the people do anything about it?
If things are that bad, and the people know it, how could half the people possibly want to leave confederation and turn their Provincial politicians into their Federal politicians and have no one above them?
Not trying to open any can of worms here, just a random thought I had.
|
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Aug 4, 2011 8:46:36 GMT -5
Sorry, naive westerner here. If the corruption is so rampant in all levels of Quebec government, can't the people do anything about it? If things are that bad, and the people know it, how could half the people possibly want to leave confederation and turn their Provincial politicians into their Federal politicians and have no one above them? Not trying to open any can of worms here, just a random thought I had. The question is... what? Jean Charest and the Liberals have steadfastly refused to call a public inquiry into the corruption in the construction industry. If you google it, you'll see that people have been calling for one for years now, including the police. But he refuses to hold one, undoubtedly because of what will be uncovered. His Liberals are considered to be one of the least liked governments of all time. But what is the alternative? The PQ?? The separatist party? They aren't far behind the Liberals in terms of popularity, which says something given how low Charest is. A HYPOTHETICAL party, a party that doesn't even exist, leads all polls. The people demand an inquiry, the government refuses. You elect a new government, that government also refuses. Like I said, the corruptions runs through ALL levels of government. Premier Jean Charest’s refusal to hold a public inquiry into alleged corruption in the construction industry, the awarding of government contracts and the financing of political parties only adds to suspicions about the industry’s ties to politicians.
Mr. Charest should have clarified the conflict of interest rules a long time ago – as he had originally promised to do in 2003 before being elected Premier. He made the commitment at a time when the integrity of the outgoing Parti Québécois under Bernard Landry was under attack.
Voters at the time were just as suspicious of Mr. Charest, who had close ties with the construction industry. In March o 2000, when he was opposition leader, Mr. Charest accepted a junket to Puerto Vallarta, Mexico to speak to members of the Canadian Construction Association. The group paid his airfare and hotel room for the four-day event while Mr. Charest said he covered the cost for his family, who accompanied him.
But Mr. Charest was unapologetic about the whole affair. As he was in 2008 when it was revealed the party was secretly paying him $75,000 a year from their political donations, a bonus salary he had to forfeit last week with the adoption of new rules governing the conduct of the Members of the National Assembly.
A NEW KIND OF CORRUPTION
Despite the heat his scandal-ridden government has been taking, Mr. Charest has closed the door to holding a public inquiry. And that decision has been a godsend for Mr. Accurso and other construction entrepreneurs. That means they can stay out of the limelight and won’t be required to come forward to explain the political ties they’ve built over the years with those in power.
Instead of a public inquiry, the government has moved to adopt legislation to eliminate the system of disguised political donations. On Thursday, it appointed current access to information commissioner Jacques St-Laurent as the province’s first ethics commissioner as part of a series of measures adopted to tighten the conflict of interest rules.
However, without a public inquiry Quebeckers may never know the full extent of the alleged collusion that evolved over the years involving the construction industry, engineering firms and others with various political parties.
And without that knowledge there’s no telling how long it will be for the network of corruption to re-emerge under different and more imaginative forms in the future. www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/construction-magnates-should-thank-jean-charest/article1832883/ |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Aug 4, 2011 8:47:41 GMT -5
Or how about this? www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2011/01/19/mtl-contruction-criminals.htmlCrime rife in Que. construction industry: unionOrganized crime has infiltrated every level of the construction industry in Quebec, according to the head of the construction wing of the Quebec Federation of Labour.
Yves Mercure said Tuesday that only a public inquiry can solve the problem, and he will not be running for re-election when his term ends next fall.
In an exclusive interview with Radio-Canada, Mercure was unequivocal about crime.
"It exists at all levels," he said in French.
Mercure said organized crime has infiltrated most major construction companies and all construction unions, including his own.
He said union members are routinely ordered by their employers to accept payments in cash in order to launder the proceeds of organized crime.
Mercure also said construction unions have become too close to construction companies.
He said union leaders should not be tagging along on the yachts of entrepreneurs, or visiting their private boxes for hockey games at the Bell Centre. He said union leaders should represent their members, and not the businesses they work for.
He hopes the industry can be cleaned up, he said, but that will be up to future union leaders, and the government of Premier Jean Charest.
He said it's clear that Quebec's police task force on organized crime and corruption will not be enough to solve the problem, and that only a public inquiry can clear the air.
The special police squad investigating allegations of corruption in the construction industry is called Operation Hammer, and its investigators were called in when someone set Mercure's pickup truck on fire last June.
He made light of the incident at the time, saying that at least no one was hurt.
So far, the government of Charest has rejected calls for a public inquiry into allegations of corruption in the construction industry. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Aug 4, 2011 8:49:40 GMT -5
There are lots and lots of examples and articles like these. Which is why I would be extremely wary of tolls. Where is that money going to go? Organized crime? Swiss bank accounts? G-strings in high end gentleman's clubs? (Spiro??)
We pay a lot of money in taxes, and get little in return for it. Where is that money going? Until I know, I do not want to throw more into the kitty.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Aug 4, 2011 10:14:20 GMT -5
Or how about this? www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2011/01/19/mtl-contruction-criminals.htmlCrime rife in Que. construction industry: unionOrganized crime has infiltrated every level of the construction industry in Quebec, according to the head of the construction wing of the Quebec Federation of Labour.
Yves Mercure said Tuesday that only a public inquiry can solve the problem, and he will not be running for re-election when his term ends next fall.
In an exclusive interview with Radio-Canada, Mercure was unequivocal about crime.
"It exists at all levels," he said in French.
Mercure said organized crime has infiltrated most major construction companies and all construction unions, including his own.
He said union members are routinely ordered by their employers to accept payments in cash in order to launder the proceeds of organized crime.
Mercure also said construction unions have become too close to construction companies.
He said union leaders should not be tagging along on the yachts of entrepreneurs, or visiting their private boxes for hockey games at the Bell Centre. He said union leaders should represent their members, and not the businesses they work for.
He hopes the industry can be cleaned up, he said, but that will be up to future union leaders, and the government of Premier Jean Charest.
He said it's clear that Quebec's police task force on organized crime and corruption will not be enough to solve the problem, and that only a public inquiry can clear the air.
The special police squad investigating allegations of corruption in the construction industry is called Operation Hammer, and its investigators were called in when someone set Mercure's pickup truck on fire last June.
He made light of the incident at the time, saying that at least no one was hurt.
So far, the government of Charest has rejected calls for a public inquiry into allegations of corruption in the construction industry.This reminds me of the fiasco surrounding the building of the Olympic Stadium. I had been hearing for years how much organized crime was involved in it's construction and one of the areas for concern was the sub-standard building materials. How many times has the Big Oh suffered from structural damage? Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by clear observer on Aug 4, 2011 10:40:35 GMT -5
Where is that money going to go......G-strings in high end gentleman's clubs? (Spiro??) Problem? |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Aug 4, 2011 11:08:14 GMT -5
Sorry, naive westerner here. If the corruption is so rampant in all levels of Quebec government, can't the people do anything about it? If things are that bad, and the people know it, how could half the people possibly want to leave confederation and turn their Provincial politicians into their Federal politicians and have no one above them? Not trying to open any can of worms here, just a random thought I had. It is the same people with the same agendas that have been there for decades. PQ and Liberals simply switch govt/opposition like a tag team. Same ideas all the time. Only one exception to the rule was Lucien Bouchard and he gave up after realizing that there was no way to actually really govern anything in Quebec. Mario Dumont and his Action Démocratique managed to rise a few years ago with a party definitely to the Right but as he got closer to power, instead of continuing to push the ideas that got him within a few seats of taking the Govt. He choked, moved back towards Center and became just another redundant choice. The population is torn on everything and anything... see the kind of political hanky panky that goes on by tring to actually build an hockey arena in our Capital... Every projects, every decisions end up being an ordeal... So political parties tune into this and simply do...well...nothing. But what is REALLY scary here is how a Communist party of Amir Kahdir, Quebec Solidaire, is actually gaining some speed... I'm a soft separatist but I sure wouldn't vote for separation right now... |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Aug 4, 2011 11:10:07 GMT -5
I understand the logic of "pay per use" and in theory I have nothing against it. But at what point do you draw the line?? I hate to sound like one of those Tea Party wingnuts, but Quebecers are the highest taxed people in all of North America (as we know) and yet we seem to have the lowest level of service. The corruption within the construction industry is well known, and it extends to the highest levels of ALL governments. We're not talking about one bridge that went over budget through extenuating circumstances. We're talking about every single construction project within the province. Hyperbole? Perhaps, but I dare you to find a single major construction job, publicly funded, that came in on time and on budget. I cannot think of a single one. And they usually miss BIG. Like the aforementioned Dorval Circle. Double the time, double the cost, and counting. The super-hospital, the Laval metro extension, the 30, every bridge... check out the cost-overruns on these projects. Each one of them cost hundreds of millions more than predicted, and were/are years behind schedule. Do you keep funding incompetence with MORE money?? The change your restrictive labour laws and let it be a PRIVATE venture. In private ventures, there is no corruption because it's THEIR money. We got a highway built (403) with private money. In Greece, they got an airport built with private money. In Ontario, we got billions in greenwash money. What not Quebec? Or is Quebec special? Life can be simple. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Aug 4, 2011 11:13:03 GMT -5
love your sense of humor today. I'm tired of all the complexity in these issues. Take for example yesterday. We went to five stores to find shorts to beat the heat. Can't find any. So go naked. Cooler and doesn't cost a penny. Life can be simple. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Aug 4, 2011 11:22:49 GMT -5
Or how about this? www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2011/01/19/mtl-contruction-criminals.htmlCrime rife in Que. construction industry: unionOrganized crime has infiltrated every level of the construction industry in Quebec, according to the head of the construction wing of the Quebec Federation of Labour.
Yves Mercure said Tuesday that only a public inquiry can solve the problem, and he will not be running for re-election when his term ends next fall.
In an exclusive interview with Radio-Canada, Mercure was unequivocal about crime.
"It exists at all levels," he said in French.
Mercure said organized crime has infiltrated most major construction companies and all construction unions, including his own.
He said union members are routinely ordered by their employers to accept payments in cash in order to launder the proceeds of organized crime.
Mercure also said construction unions have become too close to construction companies.
He said union leaders should not be tagging along on the yachts of entrepreneurs, or visiting their private boxes for hockey games at the Bell Centre. He said union leaders should represent their members, and not the businesses they work for.
He hopes the industry can be cleaned up, he said, but that will be up to future union leaders, and the government of Premier Jean Charest.
He said it's clear that Quebec's police task force on organized crime and corruption will not be enough to solve the problem, and that only a public inquiry can clear the air.
The special police squad investigating allegations of corruption in the construction industry is called Operation Hammer, and its investigators were called in when someone set Mercure's pickup truck on fire last June.
He made light of the incident at the time, saying that at least no one was hurt.
So far, the government of Charest has rejected calls for a public inquiry into allegations of corruption in the construction industry.This reminds me of the fiasco surrounding the building of the Olympic Stadium. I had been hearing for years how much organized crime was involved in it's construction and one of the areas for concern was the sub-standard building materials. How many times has the Big Oh suffered from structural damage? Cheers. Sept 1991 - slab of concrete fell off the building - luckily no injuries. |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Aug 4, 2011 11:23:55 GMT -5
There are lots and lots of examples and articles like these. Which is why I would be extremely wary of tolls. Where is that money going to go? Organized crime? Swiss bank accounts? G-strings in high end gentleman's clubs? (Spiro??) We pay a lot of money in taxes, and get little in return for it. Where is that money going? Until I know, I do not want to throw more into the kitty. ...and even if the money doesn't go to organized crime, it sure wouldn't mean it would go towards Infrastucture maintenance. We had tolls in Quebec 30 years ago, not only on the Champlain bridge but on every major highways. The tolls were abolished and the revenue they generated were made up for with increases on driver's license and plates. That money of course was, by law, supposed to be invested solely on maintaining our roads. For years the SAAQ made huge profits because the infrastructures were actually not maintained properly and the money was going towards other projects. |
|
I found 3-4 stories about the small amount of rubble (10lbs) that fell from the Gardiner in June & couldn't find any comments on any of the stories. Right now there are over 100 comments on the CTV site about the Ville Marie story and it seems most of them are the old Quebec/ROC argument.
. The implication was that the Conservatives did not want it to become an election issue.
