It is through an open letter that the Member of Parliament for Vaudreuil, Marie-Claude Nichols expresses herself on a file that has attracted attention on many occasions in recent years: the bridge of Île-aux-Tourtes. 

Here is the full text of his letter sent to Neomedia: 

Since last week, the government has been trying to justify the abandonment of the 3rd highway link project in the Quebec City region.

A project defended tooth and nail by the Caquist elected officials, which proved to be a powerful electoral tool to win several ridings in the region. There is now talk of a third link project reserved solely for public transit.

Suddenly, the CAQ has an environmental "revelation" that is taking over its ambitions. A green conscience that can be described as elastic, because it only matters when the situation requires it.

In the wake of last week's big announcements, the CAQ also unveiled the route of the new bridge on Île-aux-Tourtes, one of only two roads allowing the population of Vaudreuil-Soulanges to enter or leave their region.

A bridge that will finally cost 2.3 billion dollars and will be entirely financed by the Quebec government. 

However, the CAQ's green conscience did not extend to the Montérégie region, since this major infrastructure, which carries more than 87,000 vehicles every day, will not include any dedicated public transit lanes. Instead, buses will drive on the shoulder of the road during rush hour.

While this bridge will be part of the landscape of our region for at least the next 80 years, the CAQ has not even considered making it a transit-friendly structure. And it is even more deplorable that on the other side of this bridge we will find the future REM.

However, no connection has been planned between the two infrastructures. How could the CAQ not have thought of creating a  link between the REM facilities and the bridge?

It would have been so simple to create a dedicated public transit lane to transport the region's population by bus to the REM. That way, we could have had a real positive contribution on the environment and traffic. 

If citizens have to take their vehicle to get to the REM on the other side of the bridge, I am willing to bet that most of them will decide to continue their journey by solo car to their destination, rather than going to the park-and-ride lots.

The decision to withdraw the requests of the Bureau d'audiences publiques sur l'environnement (BAPE) in order to speed up the process is also worrisome. Of course, I am very supportive of the idea of accelerating the construction of the new of the new bridge, which will reduce the major traffic problems in our region.

In fact, if the CAQ had done this three years ago, we would have avoided the 65% cost increase. But why have structures to protect the environment if we are going to bypass them when it is our business?

The CAQ is not a government that favours environmental protection or GHG reduction. The political party uses this argument when it is convenient.

In fact, the environment is part of François Legault's government's communication strategy, not its real vision for Quebec

Marie-Claude Nichols,

MNA of Vaudreuil