For Bernard Drenville, a CAQ candidate in Levis, calling for studies of the third link in Quebec would lead to “gang leadership” against the project “rather than enlightening the debate”.
The former radio host wore the third link captain on Twitter this week, going there with a series of faulty arguments in an effort to defend this untenable project.
“Ah yes, the famous studies.. why exactly do you need it?” To determine if bridges are adhesive? If bridges deteriorate? If there is a bottleneck on top of bridges? If a reserved path would be better than not at all? asked the candidate.
unsure
It is not reassuring to note that Bernard Drenville, who was a minister in another government, downplays the studies which were nevertheless set out in the directives for major projects of the Treasury Board. Studies that have nothing to do with the questions he asks, which he knows very well.
And Mr. Drinville, in turn, devotes himself to an exercise whose intellectual rigor will render speechless: he brings up the debate about the significance of the $6.5 billion tunnel to a supposed Quebec-Montreal war floor.
a matter of principles
The candidate will benefit from an interest in the science and theory of induced traffic.
The addition of road links in cities has been shown to increase traffic.
So the tunnel is not meant to be a solution to congestion problems, quite the opposite.
The candidate’s position with regard to studies is even more worrisome in that he has held the position of journalist and presenter for a long time. As such, he wanted to be an observer of the efficiency and transparency of public services.
It’s crazy how some people abandon principles they held dear when they pass the other side of the fence.
