Actuality¹⁵⁵

The municipal debate organized by the Junior Chamber of Commerce of Montreal on October 16 brought together three candidates for the November 2 election:

• Émilie Brière, candidate for city councilor in the Côte-des-Neiges district (Côte-des-Neiges-Notre-Dame-de-Grâce) for Projet Montréal;
• Julien Hénault-Ratelle, spokesperson for youth and candidate for city council for Ensemble Montréal;
• Shirley Barnea, candidate for city councilor for Jeanne-Mance (Plateau Mont-Royal) for Transition Montréal.

For an hour, discussions moderated by Charline Caro (freelance journalist) and Félix Pedneault (journalist for Le Devoir) provided an opportunity to compare the three parties' views on four major themes: the cost of living, artificial intelligence, the local economy, and citizen participation.

The first topic discussed was purchasing power.

Émilie advocated for a social and inclusive approach aimed at extending student transportation discounts based on income, supporting urban agriculture, and making culture free and accessible in all neighborhoods. Julien, for his part, focused on economic discipline by keeping property tax increases in line with inflation to contain pressure on rents and improving the quality of transportation services. Shirley took a more interventionist stance, proposing social pricing for incomes below $45,000, an expanded network of bus lanes, and the conversion of vacant land into urban agriculture spaces.

But it was on the issue of housing that the debate really heated up. Émilie advocates for off-market development, focusing on cooperatives and student housing in partnership with non-profits such as UTILE. Julien advocates a strategy of mass supply by building more, of all types, to rebalance prices. Shirley, for her part, defends the creation of a public agency, Bâtir Montréal, to directly build social housing financed by the city. While two of the three candidates support the establishment of a rent registry, only Julien wants the project to be carried out with the Quebec government, while Shirley proposes to implement it at the municipal level.

The second topic, artificial intelligence, revealed profound philosophical differences. All agree on signing an ethical charter governing the use of AI, but their approaches differ. Émilie advocates caution, fearing that the rapid integration of this technology will exacerbate existing inequalities and biases. Shirley sees AI as a powerful tool for optimizing city management, whether in terms of traffic or climate adaptation. Julien believes that Montreal must leverage its status as a global research hub to harness AI for municipal management, for example to reduce bureaucracy or improve the coordination of construction projects.

The local economy then took center stage. Everyone agrees that Montreal's economic vitality depends on its local businesses and young entrepreneurs. Émilie proposes directing municipal contracts to local and eco-friendly businesses, while transforming the eastern part of the city into a hub for sustainable development. Julien wants to simplify administrative procedures and quickly compensate merchants affected by construction work. Finally, Shirley proposes more structural solutions such as commercial rent control, zoning reserved for SMEs, and the purchase of premises by the city to rent them at affordable prices.

In terms of employment, Émilie wants to reserve one in three positions in the municipal administration for candidates under the age of 35 and strengthen community internship programs. Julien wants to support sectors with a promising future, such as video games, technology, AI, and ecological transition. Shirley, for her part, proposes the creation of municipal green jobs directly linked to City projects, such as the installation of green roofs or the construction of social housing.

The final part of the debate focused on citizen participation. All candidates agreed that young people need to be better represented in municipal government. Voting on campuses, increasing the number of young candidates, and strengthening the Conseil jeunesse de Montréal (Montreal Youth Council) were identified as key levers for reviving political interest. The three candidates also share the same concern for community organizations, which they consider to be underfunded. They all call for stable, multi-year funding that is indexed to inflation and focused on mission rather than specific projects.

At the end of the debate, one thing is certain: while their visions may differ, they share a desire to build a more inclusive, affordable, and participatory Montreal. Young people were at the center of the discussion. As Charline Caro and Félix Pedneault reminded us in their closing remarks, municipal politics should not be seen as a matter for experts, but as a lever for collective transformation.