Pierre Fitzgibbon told the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
If we want to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, we need to reduce the number of cars on our roads.
Faced with this logic 101, some have decided to embark on a political recovery.
I summarize the responses of the weeping willows: Fitzgibbon will “make war on the car” and he will “attack the territories.”
Eric Duheim was the first to raise the thunder: “Do they want to declare war? Let us defend ourselves!”
Liberal MP Frédéric Beauchemin, along the same lines: “Clearly, the minister has not toured the regions of Quebec and found that there is a completely different reality than downtown. [sic] from Montreal.” Instead, Monchef Teraji said he was “pointing the finger at motorists.”
In fact it is always the same rhetoric.
One, we are trying to make the car a symbol. I drive, so I am.
Mr. First note the use of “on” in Duheim.
Who and what is this “one”? Maybe motorists.
Motorists will henceforth form a group with their own interests and values to understand them. But they are often influenced by environmentalists.
Two, the car becomes a tool to widen the divide between Montreal and the rest of Quebec.
In doing so, we bring questions of mobility, economics, and ecology into the emotional realm.
Of course, in the regions, a car is often necessary to get around and work. Who else says that?
However, according to some, the car should always be the only option for transportation outside of major centers. Always, without exception.
Areas like suburbs are also eligible for preference. There is also more going out to get around towns and villages. For example, inter-regional traffic is a disaster in Quebec, to the detriment of the regions.
The one who says it, the one who is, I want to say. It is those who condemn Fitzgibbon’s sympathy for the Territories who show him true sympathy.
“Pop culture practitioner. Award-winning tv junkie. Creator. Devoted food geek. Twitter lover. Beer enthusiast.”
