BIXI's French Only Airport Ads

If ever there's a place where we can expect bilingualism, it's at Montreal's Trudeau International Airport.

Even the Quebec government accedes to that principle and advertises it's services in both official languages.

Arriving from Washington yesterday, I spent some time in the arrival hall, snaking through the long line awaiting my turn to go through.

The new arrival hall has many television monitors placed up high on poles that are used to show advertising that generates revenue for airport. As you can imagine, the ads are closely related to travel and visitors. Car rental agencies, restaurants, Tourism Quebec, etc. etc.

All the ads run bilingually, all except BIXI.

I watched the ads rotate a couple of times to confirm that what I saw was right- and yes, BIXI advertises in French only.

As you know, the majority of tourists who come to Montreal speak English as a first or second language and the idea of advertising in French
only makes little senses.





It seems that all of BIXI's outdoor advertising is exclusively in French as well. I noticed this billboard as I drove away from the airport.

The value and efficacy of this French-only program leaves much to be desired, Bixi is not exactly a world-wide recognized product like Coca-Cola. Placing an ad that says "Bixi- est Montreal" may be classy, but as a device to promote their product, it is money down the drain.

I imagine that 99% of tourists, both English, French or whatever would have no clue as to what the billboard meant.
Ignoring the fact that the majority of tourist don't read French is arrogant and stupid.

Trudeau Airport's New U.S. Terminal Disaster

It was with a measure of trepidation that my wife and I ventured out to Trudeau Airport for a flight to Washington DC last Thursday. I had read the news that a new terminal for flights destined to the USA was to be inaugurated on Wednesday, the day before our scheduled departure and fearing that it might suffer from teething problems, we left extra early.

I was not to be disappointed.

Arriving at 7:30AM for a 9:20AM flight, we assumed that we'd be in the clear. Alas, it was not to be.

I punched in our reservation code into the ATM-like machine that prints out boarding passes and was met with a long series of questions.

"Where are you staying?" asked the machine.

"Maroi" - "Marriet" "Marriot Htel" - "Marriot Hotel." Yes, finally!

Typing on these keyboards is never an easy task. Next time, I'll skip this supposed time-saving maneuver and let the agent ask the questions!

With boarding passes in hand, we joined the surprisingly long line to process our bags.
This new automated terminal doesn't look so automated. Half an hour later, the Air Canada agent who scans our boarding passes, tells us politely that the baggage system is down. Arghh!

Notwithstanding, we are told to pick up our bags and proceed to the next queue, the one where our luggage is to be passed through a scanner and then sent on a mini-elevator ride to the basement for loading onto the airplane.
We proceed posthaste, but the agent's warning proves quite true, the line is not moving. Ah, technology!

After ten minutes of shuffling our feet, an airport employee points to a sign that says "OVERSIZE LUGGAGE." He winks and I the cotton to the message rather quickly. We drift out of the queue and make our way to the oversized baggage room as unobtrusively as possible. There's absolutely no lineup and the scanner is humming. The bored and uninterested employee that is manning the front end of the machine takes no notice that our bags are not particularly oversized.
Hooray for higher intelligence!
She scans our boarding passes and then puts the bags through the machine. Another agent removes them on the other side and sends them onward, downstairs. Before we egress, another agent scans our boarding passes...that's the fourth time!

Pleased with our good fortune, we join the next queue and happily, it is of reasonable length. After about ten minutes we accede to the security station where we are both to be personally scanned. What fun!
But before entering the hall, our tickets, of course, are scanned again, it's getting annoying!

"Take off your shoes , please!" shouts an agent as we approach.
"Whaa?'

This the first time I have ever been in a Canadian airport where everyone, as a matter of course, is required to remove their shoes.

It seems that this new terminal is run by American rules.

Come to think of it, the majority of the security and baggage agents are speaking Spanish amongst themselves. Perhaps this is the 'Twilight Zone' and we have already been magically transported to America! Strange thoughts occupy an idle and bored mind.

We get scanned, quickly pick up on footwear and attempt to make good our getaway, only to be thwarted by another agent who informs us that my wife has been randomly selected for a further security check. RATS!

She is steered over to the side and given as thorough a frisk as can be done in public. The agent searches every inch of her belongings, opening and closing every zipper including her wallet.. Bah!!!

"You won't find many terrorists that way, my friend! Middle-aged couples travelling together are on the lowest rung of the profile" I think to myself, careful to keep the thought private, lest I run afoul of authorities for mentioning the dreaded "T" word.

We make our way onto the US Customs hall, foolishly believing that all this foolishness is behind us, but as we pass through the portal, we are thrown for quite another shock.



The hall is filled to over-capacity. "Shit!"

I do a rough head count and realize that there are about 300-400 people ahead of us with only ten agents to process all of us. Worse still, the line is not moving, the agents are twiddling their thumbs.

"What's going on?" I ask someone ahead of us in the line.
"Dunno. System is down or something. Nobody is telling us anything."

I look at my watch and the sickening realization that we aren't going to make our flight comes over me. Frustration and anger can best describe my state of mind.

'We're are stuck in the lineup, like cows on a death march in a slaughterhouse," I ruminate. "There is no way out of the queue, no "Oversize Baggage" escape route here!"

We wait, we wait and we wait. Nobody tells us anything. People with Blackberries are saying that some flights are being delayed for half an hour.

There are no overhead electronic signs, no airline or airport agents to question, only Montreal city cops who look mildly amused at our predicament.

The line, starts to move, the agents begin processing passengers. "Hooray!"
Unfortunately, it takes another hour for us to get through. It's now 10.25 and our plane was scheduled to depart at 9:20. AHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

We shuffle off to the gate to embrace our fate, dishearteningly, but upon arrival are astonished to see that our airplane has not left, it is still parked, awaiting latecomers!
It occurs to me that the airport authority has no doubt frozen the US departures in an attempt to alleviate the ongoing fiasco and perhaps salvage their reputation.
In my entire career of flying, I've never seen a airplane wait for over an hour for latecomers.

Our tickets are scanned for the sixth or seventh time and we show our passports to the gate agent, who mercifully represents the very last barrier to freedom.
We gleefully skip down the ramp towards the airplane door.

"STOP!!!!" shouts another security agent hovering in the gangway.

"You've been selected for a random security search!"

"WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!! WTFFFF!!!! .....Are you insane!!!!"

Once again a physical frisk and once again the agent opens everything we have, every zipper, every bag.
Time ticks onward.

Three hours to board a plane for an hour and a half trip. Aargh!...

Thank you, Trudeau Airport for allowing Homeland Security to dictate security procedures in our airport.
Our new terminal is now as indistinguishable as any of the nightmare facilities in the USA. Bah!!!
I have a question. Why the hell did we need a new terminal?

The old one worked just fine, as any regular flier to the USA can attest.
The truth is that air traffic between Canada and the USA is going down, not up.

Don't tell us that you're planning for a future full of millions of new passengers. We've heard that before... it's called M-I-R-A-B-E-L. Spare us, please!!!!

The Trudeau Airport authority is out of control and on a spending spree that makes little sense.

Excessive landing fees for airlines and additional fees, tacked onto passenger tickets, are needed to pay for all this foolishness. Delux airport installations and ridiculous and over the top security controls are as stupid as they are unnecessarily expensive.

The new US terminal represents a giant step backward. Enjoy!

Hydro-Quebec's Code of Conduct

Quebec's minister in charge of Hydro-Quebec, Nathalie Normandeau finally commented on the the donation affair over at Hydro-Quebec.
Conveniently on vacation, she waited out public reaction to see where the chips would fall and then when the media and the public gave up on the story, she defended Mr. Vandal saying that it wasn't a conflict of interest because he didn't gain anything personally.

According to her and André Pratte, the editorialist in La Presse, unless the money ends up in your pocket it isn't a conflict.
By that logic you could send money to your sister, your mother, your uncle's company and you'd be in the clear!

It's utter nonsense. Had the donation gone through to the school, Mr. Vandal would have gotten a direct benefit, perhaps not monetary but a very direct benefit none the less. As he was the one who clearly brought in the donation, he would have received the credit and recognition. Doesn't that count? For rich and powerful people, recognition is as important as money.

Does Mr. Vandal really believe that he didn't fiddle the system to his advantage?
We don't know his side of the story because he continues to duck the press, a sure sign of a guilty conscience. I imagine that if he did face the press, this is what he'd say;

"I respectfully decline to answer the question based on my fifth admendment rights the fact that my position is indefensible."

Perhaps Mr. Vandal and all those defending him should read the Hydro-Quebec 'Code of Conduct.' It's got quite a bit to say on the subject of conflict and by the way, look who wrote the preface!;

Page 2
...The company’s reputation is a precious asset, and customers have very high expectations in terms of honesty and transparency...

...This Code of Conduct is designed to help us determine the attitude we should adopt in the performance of our duties. As employees of Hydro-Québec, we must all familiarize ourselves with the Code and apply the ethical principles it is based on. Let us apply it to everything we do and to each decision we make, in keeping with our shared values.

-Thierry Vandal
President and Chief Executive Officer

Page 3
...We must be honest and responsible. In a public utility, the conduct of each employee has to be irreproachable and beyond suspicion...

....Good faith alone will not necessarily protect us from an error whose consequences could be detrimental for us and for Hydro-Québec . The appearance of conflict of interest, for example, may create doubt or uncertainty on the part of the public and tarnish the company’s image...

...The Code of Conduct cannot cover all the situations that are likely to arise, and leaves it to each of us to demonstrate good judgment .

Page 5
...As Hydro-Québec employees, we must behave irreproachably in managing the property entrusted to us . The principles of ethics go beyond applying corporate guidelines, and call upon the company’s internal culture and a natural sense of justice. In the absence of rules or in situations not covered by company guidelines, Hydro-Québec expects us to adhere to the general rules of sound management . Transparency must characterize our every action.

...When are we in a conflict of interest?
A conflict of interest exists when we are placed in a situation where we risk favoring our own interests or those of a third party rather than Hydro-Québec’s. We must avoid placing ourselves in a situation where our personal interests or those of our spouse, a family member or a business partner could be in actual or apparent conflict with Hydro-Québec’s interests . Such conflicts could lead us to favor our own interests in certain situations, whereas those of Hydro-Québec should always prevail.

Page 7
We must not place ourselves in a situation of actual or apparent conflict of interest, regardless of the honesty of our intentions...

“Conflict of interest” does not refer only to financial transactions or economic benefits. It may take various other forms as well: influencing a decision related to the hiring process, for example, or giving preferential treatment to individuals or corporate entities. Accordingly, we must avoid having external interests, activities or influences that could compromise our independence in any decision we make or any other initiative within the company .


When is there an apparent conflict of interest?
There is an apparent conflict of interest when, even in the absence of an actual conflict, a situation creates the impression that a conflict of interest could exist .
For example, if a relatively well informed person might conclude that your performance of a task or duty has been or could be influenced by your own interests or those of your spouse, a family member, a friend or a business partner, you are in an apparent conflict of interest.

You can read all about Hydro-Quebec policies here.

In relation to the code of ethics Mr. Vandal's actions can best be described in one word....FAIL!

Quebec News of the Weird- Volume 03

"Do As I Say, Not as I Do!"
The SAQ, Quebec government-owned liquor selling monopoly has come under fire for being hypocritical.
Six months ago they removed all one time use bags from their stores, in favour of reusables, which they sell in an effort to be enviornmentally friendly (and make a profit).
However they haven't cut back on the practice of advertising in Quebec's famous 'Publi-Sac', an advertising medium whereby paper advertisements are distributed directly to homes in a plastic bag. A spokesperson for the SAQ didn't see the contradiction in the policy that sees the distribution of up to 14 flyers a year, nor in the fact that the SAQ offers no recycling program in relation to bottles or corks.

Daredevil Fundambulist wows. A French tightrope walker Ramon Kelvink Jr. walked across a tightrope strung up between two landmarks in Quebec City. He successfully completed the walk in fifteen minutes, 50 meters above the ground and without the benefit of a safety net, to the great relief to the crowd watching below.
What's weird about this? Quebec is the province where in May a woman was given a $420 ticket for not holding an escalator handrail in a subway station in Montreal. How the heck did he get a permit to pull off this stunt?

Montreal gets 'new' district. "Little Italy and Chinatown are getting a new sibling 'LE PETIT MAGHREB" is the new appellation of a few blocks of Jean Talon located between Saint-Michel and Pie-IX blvds.
Just in case you don't know what exactly 'Maghreb' refers to, it is what the French-speaking Arab community that hails from North Africa, in the old French colonies of Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia are commonly known as. Let's hope that Louise Harel, the mayoralty candidate who is opposed to creating 'ethnic boroughs' isn't too upset. The community was given $40K to refurbish the area. Maybe they'll put up an identifying symbol, like the gate in Chinatown.

Perhaps a minaret?

Montreal forced to rehire-hire worker who forged doctors notes. The city fired a blue-collar worker who was repeatedly absent and who furnished doctors notes excusing her absence which she had forged. The employee who had sixteen years on the job appealed the firing to a tribunal which reduced her punishment to a 21 day suspension

Man Arrested because Officer is a TMNT fan. Michael Ruckenstein and his wife were at Trudeau airport in Montreal to catch a flight to Australia. Despite being a septuagenarian, he is an avid martial arts practitioner and carried in his luggage two tridents used in the practice of the sport. The daggers have no edge and are harmless, he has travelled with them on countless occasions, having already verified with the airline and custom agents that they were perfectly fine to travel with. After his luggage passed through the X-ray machine, he was summoned and arrested by Montreal Police. Despite his explanations, he was held up at the airport until custom agents arrived and confirmed that the 'weapons' were harmless, an hour later. The Rukensteins missed their flight, but more importantly had their names 'flagged' and now are exposed to secondary searches each time they fly.
The couple sued the Montreal Police and in court the arresting officer admitted that he didn't exactly know what the 'weapons' were, but recognized them as dangerous, from watching 'Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles." The Ruckensteins were awarded $7,500.

Public Accountability Not an Important Issue in Quebec

Today's editorial in La Presse, by André Pratte defending Thierry Vandal and Hydro Quebec for the $250,000 donation to a private Montreal high school, is indicative of the very different standard of public accountability that this province operates under.
If Quebec's leading editorialist can excuse a public servant for funneling taxpayer money to his alma mater, an institution where he serves as the chairman of the board of directors, is it any wonder that abuses abound?

"Un faux pas n'efface pas des années de travail au service du Québec."
("A mistake doesn't erase the years of service to Quebec")

Nobody can deny that Quebec marches to a different political and social beat, but our propensity to forgive public servants the most egregious of gaffes and outright abuses of power is a characteristic that not only reflects badly on us all, but hurts our collective pocketbook.

It isn't fair to blame the politicians, the civil servants or the mandarins of our government corporations, for not taking responsibility for their misdeeds. The reason we don't have public accountability is, quite simply, because the public doesn't demand it.

Years ago, I rented an apartment for the winter in Florida. One evening a spry gray-haired senior, knocked on my door and asked if I'd be joining the tax protest down at city hall. I explained that as a renter, it didn't much concern me, to which she replied;

"Then you're an idiot. Don't you know that taxes are part of your rent. If you don't protest then you're agreeing to the increase. That's fine if that's your position, but if you don't agree, it's your duty as a citizen to protest!"

Wow! She told me!

I have to admit she was right. It made me think of how apathetic and removed Quebeckers are from the public decisions that affect our lives.
Faced with conduct like that of Mr. Vandal, instead of sustained outrage and pressure that leads to action, we collectively shrug our shoulders and lean on the old slogan of losers- "What can you do?"

Most western democratic societies live by the important principle that has evolved from the Parliamentary system of government that makes senior officials responsible not only for their own conduct, but that of their employees. Any serious breech of conduct, one that causes embarrassment for the government is met with a immediate resignation or firing.

With responsibility goes accountability, but not in Quebec.

In Ontario, a scandal recently erupted amid revelations that the provincial agency 'Ehealth' awarded lucrative contracts to consultants without competitive tenders. The agency boss, Sarah Kramer resigned abruptly in June along with former chair Alan Hudson.

Last week an Israeli general was forced from the army for loaning a military car to his wife and lying about it to a superior, this after a thirty year career.

Maxime Lapierre, Quebec federal member of Parliament was forced to resign from cabinet for the unpardonable sin of accidentally leaving a confidential document at his girlfriend's house.

Too harsh? Unfair?

It is sometimes sad to have a long and successful career come to an end over a seemingly trivial affair, but it does serve an important purpose as a warning to others that only the highest level of ethical behavior is acceptable when entrusted with the public purse.

Quebec has sadly abandoned, or in fact never embraced the principle of true accountability.

Miscreants are allowed to remain in position after grudging apologies or outright stonewalling as demonstrated by Mr. Vandal.

Instead of being fired on the spot, abusers of the public purse are allowed to finish their mandates rather than face the sack or worse still, as in the case of Jean-Guy Chaput who's lavish expenses as head of SODEC (Quebec film agency) included a $1300 a night hotel at the Cannes film festival, get paid for doing nothing. He was told that because of his unacceptable spending spree, his services were no longer required, but instead of being fired, was paid over $100,000 to do nothing while finishing out his term.

One of the very few instances whereby a resignation was triggered by a scandal was that of the chairman of the board of the SAQ, Raymond Boucher, Quebec's liquor monopoly which was exposed in a price fixing scandal that artificially raised the cost of alcohol to Quebec consumers. Quebeckers were so offended that they did manage to force his resignation. It was the exception that proved the rule.
That being said, it remains a mystery as to how those involved on both side of the conspiracy, (SAQ executives and the producers) avoided criminal prosecution. To date none of the producers have been held accountable or even named. None have been required to refund the ill-gotten gains.

Why no class action suit to recover money, if not from the SAQ, then from the producers involved?

Sociologists can argue why Quebeckers are so docile, but the fact remains that we get the performance from our public servants that we demand.

Let them steal - and they will steal.
Let them pad expenses - and they will pad expenses.
Let them abuse their position - and they will abuse their position.

On the other hand if we demand better, we will get better, it's strictly up to us.

By the way one other point in Mr. Pratte's editorial begs comment;

"Cela dit, il est abusif de parler ici d'un conflit d'intérêts; M. Vandal n'avait absolument rien à gagner, personnellement, de cette subvention."

("That said, it's abusive to talk of a conflict of interest, Mr. Vandal had nothing to gain personally from this donation.")

What? He didn't gain personally? Nonsense!
Just because the money didn't end up in his pocket doesn't mean that he didn't benefit. Surely bringing in such an substantial donation would garner him honor and respect, an important consideration for a man in his position. If Mr. Vandal sent the money to his sister instead of the school, it would also be alright, according to Mr. Pratte, as 'he didn't benefit personally.' Bah!

Mr Vandal is one more example of those who's sense of entitlement offends our sense of justice. He is unrepentant and arrogant, refusing to face the media and hiding behind a statement that says the public utility considers the case closed.

He is the poster boy of a cynical, arrogant and elitist cadre of public officials who populate the higher echelons of Quebec public service and it's agencies.

When the story first broke,the opposition clamoured for Mr. Vandal's resignation.

How did the government react?
Stall. The silence is deafening, as the Premier waits to see how public opinion plays out.
If things get too hot, Mr Vandal will walk the plank, otherwise he will ride out the storm.

Quebeckers have no one to blame but themselves for the Thierry Vandals, the Henri-Paul Rousseaus and the Raymond Bouchers who scoff at our lazy stupidity.