Bibliographie complète

In December 1968, Quebec’s provincial government passed two laws introducing universal suffrage in all municipalities on its territory. Residents who are twenty-one or older, provided they were Canadian citizens domiciled in the city for at least a year, were now allowed to vote in the municipal elections. This was also the case for non-residents who owned or rented an apartment block, business, or office in the city. Initially, the City of Montreal refused to abide by the provisions of these laws. It maintained a version of the municipal right to vote on its territory which limited its exercise to certain owners or taxpaying tenants. What was the City's motivation for refusing to follow the provincial government's lead and adopt this reform? My thesis aims to uncover the reasons why the municipality embraced such a choice, which was met at the time with discontent by several activist groups in Montreal. Why limit the exercise of such a fundamental right? To answer this question, I examined the minutes of parliamentary debates, newspaper articles and legislative texts, as well as various historiographical sources. My thesis therefore considers that the City of Montreal supports a form of urban citizenship during the period studied that is meritorious and exclusivist in nature. It opposes the Quebec government’s proposed form of citizenship, which is universal and inclusive but retains certain meritorious characteristics. Furthermore, my thesis argues that Montreal activist groups of the time, grouped within the political party « Front d’action politique », supported a form of urban citizenship that ensured real political equality for Montreal residents, and confronted the political authorities on their definition of citizenship in Montreal.

Accepted: 2023-11-23T17:15:38Z