Projet Montréal flip-flop explained

Dear Cym,

I am a Projet Montréal member in your district and I have a question. On May 30th, I got an email letter from Richard Bergeron saying that he DID NOT support Louise Harel's candidacy. Yet an article in yesterday's Gazette stated emphatically and several times that Richard Bergeron DID support her. I did let Projet Montréal know about this directly but I'm not sure if someone will read it right away. I'm sure I can't be the only one who's confused about this. Personally, I don't see any reason the support Louise Harel. As far as I know (and I don't know very much), she doesn't stand for all the things that matter to me, and Richard Bergeron does. I would appreciate if you could clear this up for me please, whether personally or via a group emailing.

[name deleted]

Hi [name deleted],

I'm so glad you wrote. You raised a very good question in your email. The reason for the confusion--Projet Montréal stating first that it does not support Louise Harel for Mayor, and then turning around and trying to make an alliance which would permit her to be mayor--would confuse anyone. The reason for these two seemingly opposing stances is as follows.

First, Projet Montréal stated that it did not think Louise Harel would be a good mayor because of her previous record and because we believe very strongly that our platform, centered on reforms to municipal governance, sweeping changes to the city's transportation network, and reforms to our municipal practices and attitudes to achieve sustainability, would give Montrealers the best quality of life of any of the three parties. We know ours is the best and most comprehensive plan for our city. Hundreds of intelligent and dedicated party activists worked on this platform over many months. By comparison, what does Harel, a lone wolf without any alliances, have to offer in the way of genuine ideas? Nothing, we thought. And that is why the first statement, that Harel would not be a good mayor for this city, was made.

But hard on the heels of that conviction came another hard truth--that Projet Montréal is a young party, without the experience or political savvy of the one-person-political powerhouse that is Louise Harel. Just look at the polls. With no platform and no party, Montrealers would still give Harel their vote. So Project Montréal reconsidered. Did we want to be stubborn, and hold tight to a long shot at getting elected, or did we want to realize the wonderful vision we have for this city by making a deal with this woman? In the end, Richard Bergeron decided to sacrifice his shot at being Mayor of this city (and he would make a wonderful Mayor) to this woman on the condition that she adopt our platform. This way, it was hoped, everyone would get what they wanted--Harel would have the power she obviously craves, and Richard Bergeron and his faithful followers would realize the dream of making Montreal into a world-class, liveable city.

Unfortunately it did not work out. Harel showed her true colors and cut a deal with the leader of the second spot municipal party, Vision Montréal, who, like Harel itself, is strong on political scheming and poor in the ideas department. And maybe that is for the best. There are many months still ahead before the elections. . . . We have a great team, we have great ideas, we have a great leader. And we are not giving up.

Best regards, Cym