May 13, 1999 

Punch, the now-departed satirical revue started in 1841, printed a much-quoted cartoon that pictured a young curate sitting at the Bishop's breakfast table (this is an old cartoon, folks). The curate, on being asked by the Bishop whether he liked his hard-boiled egg and afraid to say it was bad, blurts out, "parts of it are excellent!".

While I would not be afraid to say the Bédard report was all bad; in point of fact, I must say parts of it are excellent. But much is totally indigestible.

The subtitle of Punch magazine was The London Charivari. The word charivari comes to us from French and refers to the banging of pots and pans to express disapproval of someone. (After the tin pan, allez!)

Well, all up and down the whole province last week, one could hear a dissonant medley of dissidence, as mayors assaulted their battery of pots and pans in protest. General consensus: Bédard laid an egg.

Be not too hard, though. His group's report, pretentiously titled "Pact 2000", proposes municipal reforms in three areas: taxation, structures, and labour costs. The fiscal and labour stuff was, for the most part, well-reasoned. But they made a total hash of the structural recommendations, especially with their suggestions of widespread amalgamations and the creation of a new level of government. By the way, the title of this group was the commission on local finances and taxation. You, observant reader, will no doubt notice no reference to political structures.

Some of their fiscal recommendations: cities should have the power to tax based on floor or land area (see my column of March 12, 1992) and to levy different tax rates on land and on buildings; we should return to an annual valuation roll; the unwelcome tax should be drastically pared; school taxes should be cut; cities should have 20% of the sales tax on hotels, restaurants, and entertainment - these are just a few of their excellent ideas. Unfortunately, they get a raspberry for their suggestion that the $375 million of downloading be made permanent and their whacky premise that real estate taxes are not high enough in Quebec.

They also came up with fiscal measures to combat urban sprawl, which is by far the biggest problem facing the Greater Montreal Region. These fiscal measures, I might add, would help the city of Montreal, and, indeed, obviate the putative need for mergers.

The report favours fees for new development that would pay for indirect costs, such as off-site infrastructure (sewers, libraries, schools). It also recommends tax base sharing: as a city's tax base grows disproportionately with the rest of the region, it has to share some of its new-found wealth.

But why on earth did they come up with the nostrum of mergers? It's as if you can look on cities with years of tradition as so much playdough to be patted together into whatever fantastical forms one feels are appropriate.

Oh, for a Punch to satirize such expansive and expensive pipe-dreams.

The best the amalgamationists come up with (other than the "too many cities" non-argument) is that it would rid Montreal of all those suburban parasites. Oh, yes. And it would also create a uniform tax rate. A uniformly high tax rate, I might add. Since when is the mere fact of uniformity a virtue?

Lysiane Gagnon, writing in La Presse last week, went on about "the suburban enclaves, the pockets of privilege that dig into the natural territory of Montreal." Then she wrung her hands about that fact that "even with amalgamation, Montreal will still be much smaller than the megacity in Toronto." Talk about urbis envy. And do you know what? The CN tower is much taller than anything we have here. So?

Are we the parasites that Lysiane Gagnon suggests we are? Not at all. Take the MUC. We Island suburban cities pay $484 per capita (Westmount: $1020) to finance the MUC. Montreal citizens pay only $444 per capita. Overall, the Island suburban cities pay nearly one-half of the cost of running the MUC, even though Montreal benefits from the lion's share of its services: 58% of its bus service, 62% of its police services, 68% of its sewage service. A whopping 84% of metro stations are found in Montreal.

Since one-third (Westmount: 40%) of Island suburban revenues go to pay for the MUC, we're already partially merged. Let's draw the line right there.

Acting Council Menu page

• Menu of Trent's Stories
  
  
• Febuary 25, 1999 OUR ACTING COUNCIL
  
• Febuary 4, 1999 VICTORIA HALL: A DOWAGER REJUVENATED
  
• January 14, 1999 O CHRISTMAS PALM
  
• November 26 BOURQUE REDUX
  
• November 12 MASS TRANSIT: GLORIA MUNDI?
  
• September 3, 1998 SOUND BEGETS FURY
  
• 2 Oct TAXATION BY MISREPRESENTATION
  
• 12 OCT on $500,000,000 TAX GRAB Tax grab turns into burlesque
  
• 16 OCT A MEETING WITH BOUCHARD