Candidates debate, in the Mile-End
So Mile-End had its own little candidates debate the other night (Oct. 26th) at Sport Benfica (St-Urbain and Bernard). All of the major parties were present, with their mayoral candidates for the borough as well as their candidates for borough and city councillors.
Those present (by party, in alphabetical order):
Projet Montréal
Luc Ferrandez (Mayoral candidate for borough)
Alex Norris (candidate for city councillor)
Richard Ryan (candidate for borough councillor)
Union Montréal
Michel Labrecque (Mayoral candidate for borough)
Robert Pilon (candidate for city councillor)
Eleni Fakotakis-Kolaitis (candidate for borough councillor)
Vision Montréal
Guillaume Vaillancourt (Mayoral candidate for borough)
Pierre Marquis (candidate for city councillor)
Michel Pauzé (candidate for borough councillor)
We attempted to record the entire evening, but due to technical difficulties it didn’t work out (sorry!). Regardless, I thought I would post some general thoughts in the meantime. These are just my personal opinions about the candidates and their responses. I am sure others would have a different take.
1.
It seemed to me that Projet Montréal had the strongest team on the stage. Alex Norris seemed a little nervous at the start, but it seemed to me he knew what he was talking about, and he knows Mile-End. Richard Ryan is always good at communicating his thoughts (which I know from his facilitation of the café citoyens last year), and he knows Mile-End as well as anybody you’ll meet. My biggest question has always been Luc Ferrandez, but I found that he has slowed his speaking a little, and reined in his energy somewhat (maybe he’s exhausted from a long campaign!)…all of which made his responses easier for me to follow. All the candidates with Projet Montréal seem capable, honest and well-informed.
Guillaume Vaillancourt (Vision Montréal) is really quite good at responding to questions. His answers are succinct, he is consistent, he speaks clearly, and he communicates well. But the team he had with him did not inspire confidence (for me). Michel Pauzé only spoke twice the whole evening, and Pierre Marquis was a tad bit too eccentric for me (although Vaillancourt referred to him as a social-housing ‘expert’ so perhaps he just presented himself poorly). So, for me the only person to really successful get himself across with Vision Montréal is Guillaume Vaillancourt.
Then there is Union Montréal, the current ruling party. Michel Labrecque came across as the most polished politician (of the evening), but once again he tends to come across as quite condescending. His CV is clearly impressive, and I am sure he inspires confidence for those looking for a reliable, ‘grown-up’ sort of politician. For those hoping to elect a politician who understands the importance of working with citizens, and actually values their knowledge, you’ll unfortunately have to look elsewhere. Robert Pilon seemed capable and straightforward. He did a good job. But, Eleni Fakotakis-Kolaitis is clearly not the best person for the job.
That’s for the team score. And I know some people don’t care about the “teams”; they are thinking only about each candidate individually. I can understand doing that, but I do think it is interesting to look at the sorts of people a party attracts and chooses to put forward as candidates. On this measure, I would have to say Projet Montréal put together the best over all team, when compared with the others.
2.
Probably one of the biggest questions the citizens committee — and the working groups, or subcommittees — had going into the night was a desire to know which party was the most open to working collaboratively with citizens.
Michel Labrecque stated clearly that a Union Montréal government will function as they have always functioned. That is, the city and the borough have their roles and expertise, and while citizens would be consulted they certainly won’t be working with the professionals. He hinted that the complexities were beyond us, and that as for the Champ des possibles the file would be handed over to the public servants who would come up with a different design, and we would be consulted sometime down the road. In other words, Union Montréal is not interested in running a participatory, open borough government.
Projet Montréal provided a response that indicated they wanted to work with citizens to run the next borough government, but they didn’t give any clear indication of how. I don’t doubt their sincerity (having spoken to the candidates on a number of occasions), but a little bit of detail would have been nice.
Vision Montréal answered the question of how to work with the citizens the best: they said simply and consistently that they would create a structure (in the form of monthly meetings, for example) where the citizens, the public servants and the politicians would come together to try and reach consensus. This is more or less what most of the citizen groups are looking for, so I think Vaillancourt did well in his responses.
3.
There were a good amount of people present (a little over a hundred?), but it could have been better. I think what Mile-End needs at this point is a “space” where all citizens can come together to learn, debate, discuss and continually improve their community…and otherwise just enjoy the company of their neighbours. I hope the Citizen Committee will take this task on, but if they don’t someone else should. And, whoever does so will need to be a little more open and flexible in how they treat the use of English at these sorts of get-togethers.
4.
I think the municipal elections, and the races in our district, are too close to call. Or rather, I should say there are so many confounding variables that picking a winner is a daunting task.
Having followed the whole crazy affair since before the election season even began, it has become pretty clear to me that they only party I can vote for is Projet Montréal.
They are the only party that really put together a platform that seemed the least bit rigorous, and more than that, the only platform that indicates they “get” what is happening in terms of global transformations in cities, economies, and knowledge-based societies.
They don’t have all the answers, and they’ll need to get up to speed on how to manage a municipal government — but given the people they have assembled for our district I am sure they’ll figure it out. And, I am sure they’ll look to the citizenry to help them refine their answers to many of the more complex issues.
As I mentioned above, Guillaume Vaillancourt’s responses impressed me, but his party doesn’t and after the debate I can safely say his team in Mile-End does not impress me either.
Michel Labrecque is clearly competent, but I can’t vote for a person who so clearly needs to keep the power behind closed doors. In the age of digital participation, powered by inspiring examples of openness and transparency from around the globe, I find it more than disappointing to see that he intends to run the borough with such an outdated mode of governance, if elected. I say “more than disappointing” because I find it difficult to reconcile the fact that we are one of Canada’s most innovative, artistic and cultural centers and yet the best he can come up with is such an old-time approach to politics and governance. Makes me question his capacity to respond to the needs of the Plateau, to be honest.
That being said, there is so much to do in our neighbourhood. So much potential, and so many inspiring neighbours to work with, so many great ideas to put into action right here…that I can honestly say that no matter who wins, we’ll be there afterwards, pushing for the change that we’d like to see happen here.
We’ll work with whoever is at city hall. We’ll work with anyone who wants to improve the quality of life in Mile-End, no matter their language of choice, their background, their culture or their religion.
I think that goes hand in hand with the age of digital participation, in fact … this sense that if we want change, we’ll need to do it ourselves. And that’s okay, because we have the tools, we have the networks, and we have the capacity to figure out ways to convince even the most stubborn to come over to our side!
It’d be nice to have some politicians in power who knew what they were doing for once…and who were on our side from the outset…
But if we can’t have that, we’ll still find a way.
So be prepared you politicians, because once you win we’re gonna come a knockin’…
markefrank
