Skip to content

Quebec tramway project: The Quebec government must explain itself

Published by Louis Bellemare on 2023-04-03

There is still uncertainty and a lack of information about the tramway project in Quebec City. The cost is unknown and must be reassessed. This reassessment is needed because only one bid was obtained during the calls for tenders to choose the tramway manufacturer. Furthermore, the mayor of Quebec City is proposing a proximity tax to help finance the project. This significantly impact the tax bills of many citizens.

Despite this, governments intend to move forward even if a significant percentage of the population does not want this project. A recent poll (January 2023) conducted by SOM-Le Soleil indicates that the project only garnered 44% support. In contrast, 49% were against it. [1]

BAPE recommendations

In 2020, the report of the Bureau d’Audience Publique sur l’Environnement (BAPE) was released. It did not recommend the implementation in its presented form. It found the study from the City of Quebec lacking. The study aimed to support the tramway as the main transportation choice. However, the report deemed it “unconvincing”. It also considered that the project did not meet the sustainable mobility needs of the Communauté métropolitaine de Québec. It also expressed concern about the scale of the amounts committed and the impact of the project on the environment. [2] 

Since that time, there have been no substantial changes to the project. These changes are needed to address the BAPE’s concerns. To date, the Government of Quebec, a stakeholder in the funding, has never explained reasons for not following up on these recommendations. It also hasn’t imposed its social acceptability as a condition. Indeed, Decree 655-2022 of April 6, 2022 of the Government of Quebec gives its approval without imposing such a condition.

Social acceptability at the heart of the debate

Furthermore, a group of citizens (Quebec Merits Better) requests in court that the government suspend the work. Judge Clément Samson indicates that the courts can’t intervene in the event of a breach of electoral commitments. Council of Ministers has the political discretion to adopt such a decision. No law imposes a referendum. No law or regulation would require social acceptance of a project.

Yet citizens were right to challenge the project. Social acceptance is not explicit in the legal texts. Although, there is an implicit obligation to obtain citizen’s support for a project considering the following points:

  1. The Sustainable Development Act (chapter D-8.1.1) states that the participation and commitment of citizens and the groups that represent them are necessary to define a concerted vision of development and ensure its environmental, social and economic sustainability. However , apart from the mayor himself, few citizens have mobilized to defend this project. Especially since polls indicate that a majority of citizens are against it [3] .
  • There is case law regarding social acceptance (e.g. Strateco) [4] . Judge Denis Jacques of the Superior Court of Quebec defended the government’s decision to refuse to adopt an environmental authorization certificate for lack of the social acceptance.  Although the term “social acceptance” does not appear expressly in the law, the examination of section 152 of the Environment Quality Act (c. Q-2) clearly shows the importance for the Minister to consider such a factor. The concept of socail acceptance would encompass the principles provided for in the Act. (Superior Court of Quebec 2017, 93) The judge also notes that several projects have already been rejected due to the absence of social acceptance.
  • Several BAPE recommendations (wind farm, shale gas, mining projects, bypass of the Lac Mégantic railway line) are based on the need to apply social acceptance principles.

If governments move forward without the consent of the people

If governments decide to go ahead with this project, the consequences will be significant:

  • The costs are not yet known. However, the amounts that will be incurred could be double what was initially planned. Consequently, this will lead to significant increases in tax bills.
  • The project will impact the environment (e.g. expropriations, road redevelopments, felling of trees and other changes to the living environment, nuisance during the construction period, etc.)

For these reasons, it would be preferable to initiate a consultation process or a referendum as requested by the Québec mérite mieux group. This should occur when the missing information is better known. Specifically, the costs of the project and its financing methods, its scope, and its impacts on living environments should be clarified. Justice Samson’s decision does not prohibit this.

Furthermore, the Quebec government should explain its decision not to support the BAPE recommendations.

Louis Bellemare


[1] Support for the tramway still in the minority, SURVEY | Support for the tramway still in the minority | La Capitale | News | Le Soleil – Québec

[2] BAPE does not recommend the Quebec tramway project BAPE does not recommend the Quebec tramway project | Radio-Canada.ca

[3] Support for the tramway still in the minority SURVEY |

[4] Decision of the Court of Appeal 09-9554-178-13janv20.pdf (cngov.ca)

Published inEnglishNon classé

Be First to Comment

Laisser un commentaire