A symposium was held in Rouyn last Thursday on the topic “How to unite the voices of Abitibi-Témiscamingue? All-Abitibi-Témiscamingue (as in “All-Paris”) took part.
Posted at 6:00 am
The goal? Fill the gap left by the abolition of the regional conferences of elected representatives, which still poses numerous problems for the regions today. They’ve been tearing their hair out on the subject since 2015.
The basic problem? The place of civil society in regional governance. Its absence significantly weakens the regions. It’s the kind of issue that doesn’t make the headlines, but is crucial if we want to build strong and dynamic regions that are also able to face today’s challenges: climate change, welcoming immigrants, protecting the territory etc .
To understand the current debates, we need to write a little history.
From 1970 to 2003, regional development was ensured by Regional Development Councils (CRD). The CRDs ensured regional consultation, prepared strategic planning and advised the Minister of Regions on all matters related to the development of the territory. Several dozen organizations sat on its board, and civil society was in the majority.
From 2003 to 2015, the Regional Development Councils were replaced by the Regional Conferences of Elected Officers (CRÉ). The biggest difference between CRÉ and CRD was the seat of elected officials, who now held at least two-thirds of the seats and could exclude civil society entirely.
The CRÉs were abolished in 2015. Responsibility for regional advice has been transferred to the cities and RCMs, as has responsibility for local economic development (but with 40% less funding!). Purely regional expertise has been lost. In 2021, the PLQ chair recognized that the government had “thrown the baby out with the bath water” by abolishing CRÉs. The CRÉs were very, very imperfect, but they filled a real need.
The proof ? As soon as the CRÉs were abolished, the problems began.
First, when it came time to consult the regions, the Quebec government was left without a point of contact. Instead of consulting a single authority, he had to contact the region’s MRCs, civil society, chambers of commerce, etc. And who of them can really claim to speak for the region? A nice excuse to stop advising and do as you please.
For their part, the regions had lost their place of assembly and mobilization to think together about the future and to defend their own interests together.
Apparently, however, the Québec government has continued to regionalize programs (such as the Regions and Rural Fund or the Québec Fund for Social Initiatives) by formally requiring the MRC to work together (!?), yet without funding the exercise.
As a result of this re-regionalisation, all regions now have a “table of prefects” 1. But everywhere, as in Abitibi-Témiscamingue, these bodies are criticized for three main reasons.
First problem: the addition of the local development visions supported by the prefects does not constitute a regional vision. It is fundamental. In order to develop a region, it is necessary to master its ecosystem, ensure that the actions of some do not contradict those of others, understand the region’s interaction with its neighbors, etc.
In addition, RCMs have very little expertise in several crucial areas of regional development: forestry, tourism, social development, watershed management, health, etc. Without this expertise and without the input of civil society, regional funding, for example, can quickly become a camouflage exercise. I repeat: the addition of local development visions does not constitute a regional vision.
Second problem: Counseling is not only a powerful mobilization tool, but also an expertise. Putting people together is not enough. You need to know who to invite, how to build consensus, do all of this transparently, report to partners, track all players, etc. That know-how has also been lost, creating a lot of frustration.
Third problem: some prefects are reluctant to hand over part of their power to civil society. It’s much easier to allocate funds and advise Quebec when there are only five or six of us making decisions. But we are a long way from a solid administration and even further from a solid democracy.
So what to do?
The regions themselves, like Abitibi-Témiscamingue, are in the process of answering this question. The Outaouais have given themselves a regional assembly, some regions complement the prefects’ tables, others create lighter CRÉs, etc.
One day Quebec will have to recognize the bodies that create the regions and share in their funding…all while suppressing its atavistic desire to go wall to wall.
The longer he waits, the more difficult it will be for him, because the regions are already organizing themselves.
1. Big cities are cities/MRCs, so the mayor is a mayor/prefect. For example, in Outaouais there are 4 rural MRCs and one city/MRC, Gatineau, whose mayor is considered the prefect.