Ville-Marie meltdown

>> Political drama follows a wave of
defections in Mayor Gérald Tremblay’s party

by PATRICK LEJTENYI

Politically speaking, the last few weeks have been dynamite downtown. On Monday, Sept. 17, borough mayor Benoît Labonté and fellow borough councillor Karim Boulos, hitherto members of Montreal Mayor Gérald Tremblay’s Montreal Island Citizens Union, made a splash by quitting the party. (St-Michel MICU councillor Soraya Martinez also bolted the same day.) Labonté also left the city’s powerful executive committee.

Following mutual recriminations—Labonté saying the mayor lacks leadership, the mayor charging back by blaming sour grapes over Tremblay’s decision to take full responsibility for downtown matters after the McGill metro’s roof cracked last month—the borough did manage to adopt next year’s budget unanimously. Then, on Tuesday, Oct. 2, Labonté, Boulos and Pierre Mainville, of the rival Vision Montreal party, voted to remove Ville-Marie councillor and Tremblay loyalist Catherine Sévigny from her borough responsibilities, including the high-profile urban planning committee. While Sévigny has kept her seat at the council, only she and Sammy Forcillo remain as MICU councillors for Ville-Marie, shifting the balance of power, interestingly, to Vision Montreal, with Mainville playing kingmaker.

As can be imagined, members of Labonté’s former party aren’t thrilled with his decision. There was widespread criticism at the time of his departure among MICU ranks, as well as puzzlement and hurt feelings. “When I heard that Labonté and Boulos were going to become independent, I was disappointed,” says Sévigny, who entered politics in 2005, at the same time as the two defectors. “The same day, they asked me if I’d join, but I was still in shock. But I felt personally that I owed my loyalty to Mr. Tremblay.” She officially refused the next day.

She says she knew her former colleagues would then make her life tough. After she refused, she says the two would not talk to her and took away her secretary and office.

Labonté says the biggest problem with Tremblay was a passion for consensus, a near impossibility in a political system split between two competing parties. “The sad truth, the one we don’t want to admit to ourselves, is that Montreal is losing ground compared to other big metropolises in North America,” he tells the Mirror. “The mayor is too happy to pursue half measures. He has this obsessive search for the biggest consensus possible, which leads to the lowest common denominator.”

In his resignation statement, Labonté says Tremblay convinced him to join his team because the incumbent mayor had big plans to make Montreal a world-class city culturally and economically, and one that would be developmentally sustainable. But waffling vis-à-vis the Quebec government over local development, falling behind goals set out in 2002, lack of movement on the creation of an entertainment district and major works like the mega-hospitals eventually eroded his confidence in Tremblay’s ability to lead, he says. But when the mayor suddenly assumed direct control over downtown after the McGill metro fiasco in late August, it might have been the final straw for his borough counterpart.

By stripping a key Tremblay ally of her power, it looks as though Labonté is striking back, and hard. However, Labonté says removing the comfortable trappings of modest borough power is the way things are done. “All the presidents of the urban planning committees, in each of the 19 boroughs in the city, are all from the majority party,” he says. “And it’s a more important post in Ville-Marie than anywhere else.” Labonté says Boulos, as adjunct borough mayor, will take over the post.

Sévigny suspects that Labonté may be harbouring some political ambitions of his own. “In my opinion, he wants to run for mayor” in 2009, she says, although she admits she has “no idea” if he actually will. Labonté denies this, saying it’s too soon for him to consider his political future, beyond finishing the mandate he is currently serving.

At Vision Montreal, they’ll be welcoming as many defectors as they can, with open arms. Mainville, for his part, is certainly happy to no longer be one voice against four. “At least my voice will be heard more,” he says. “I’ll be better informed, I’ll be on committees—things will be more interesting for me.”