The real reason why Transport Quebec is continuing to stonewall attempts by The Gazette to inform readers as to just exactly what is wrong with the Mercier Bridge has become glaringly obvious
In mid-June, half of the vital bridge was shut down due to safety concerns. Three days later the other half was abruptly closed during morning rush-hour traffic after a monster pothole opened up. This past weekend the bridge was closed once again, from Friday night to noon on Saturday.
Since that initial closure, Gazette transportation reporter Andy Riga has been engaged in a futile quest to obtain various technical reports on the bridge from Transport Quebec that might explain precisely what ails the structure. However, his access-to-information requests have repeatedly been rebuffed for what seem like highly spurious reasons.
The request for a December 2010 general inspection report on the Mercier along with a June 2011 report regarding the bridge's gusset plates, which was cited when the bridge was initially half closed, were denied on grounds that revealing the information might skew the bidding for repair contracts. This seems curious since anyone bidding for such a contract would logically have to be informed about just what there is that needs repairing.
Later, provincial Transport Minister Sam Hamad came up with an even lamer reason. He said the reports are too complicated for people who are not professional engineers to properly understand. This might be so, but this newspaper and other media outlets could readily get parts of any report too complex for a lay intelligence explained by qualified engineers, who are available in abundance.
More recently, a request was filed for a summary of the maintenance work done on the bridge by Transport Quebec between 2006 and 2011. This time the justification for rejection was that it would be too time-consuming to provide the information, even though the government had up to 30 days to do so. It would be laughable were it not so outrageous.
As it is, different parts of the Mercier Bridge fall under the jurisdiction of different levels of government. Half the span - the part that crosses the St. Lawrence Seaway - is the federal government's responsibility, while the other half is the province's. No prizes for guessing which part of the bridge is in better shape.
The Gazette has learned that gussets on the federal side are safe while those on the provincial side are in such decrepit shape that their condition necessitated an emergency closure. Same with the bridge's guardrails; on the federal side they're safe while those on the provincial are so dangerous that concrete barriers had to be installed next to them and police enlisted to stand 24-hour-a-day guard to keep heavy trucks off the span.
Why is this? Well, Ottawa has regularly been renewing gusset plates and reinforcing the guardrails on its stretch, while Quebec has delayed such work and let its side of the bridge decay.
No wonder Transport Quebec is assiduously trying to keep a lid on information concerning its maintenance - or lack thereof - to the point of insulting the public's intelligence. It is because full disclosure would fully confirm that provincial authorities have been shamefully negligent in their responsibility for maintaining the structure, to the point of jeopardizing public safety.