Quebec Transport Ministry + MV owners

[Robin Craig]

Can anyone, perhaps Stuart Fedak, explain to us what is going on in Quebec with vehicle owners and a move to remove the vehicle registrations and take them off the road permanently?

I find this very disturbing.

Opening the floor for discussion.

[Harry Moon]

a member had trouble the last 2 years getting a Ferret from Ontario registered.

[Terry Witiuk]

Stuart. Are you able to post a link to the SAAQ website where we can read details about the changes? A fellow in Quebec has sent an email to me where he states "owners must immediately change the registration of their vehicle to a class C, which involves, amongst other things, major restrictions on road usage privileges. Restrictions such as being limited to roads of 70 km/h or less; have a government safety vehicle inspection done; and not be equipped with a turret or other weapon anchor system."

This should be of concern to all MV owners in Canada...not just Quebec.

[Robin Craig]

This whole subject just makes my blood boil frankly.

I feel our veterans who gave their lives on beaches and battlefields around the world would turn in their graves to hear of such goings on after they laid down their lives in the name of freedom.

I foresee some very ugly sound bites in the future. These are dark days.

[Tony Smith]

Are your road laws National?

For example, if an Iltis licenced in Ontario travels to Quebec, would it be permitted on roads over 70Km/h? And would a Quebec Iltis be limited to by-roads elsewhere in the country while locals have no restrictions?

[David Dunlop]

I wonder what they are going to do when they stumble across their first ex military commercial 5/4-ton or CJ7?

David

[rob love]

Vehicles like the 5/4 ton and the CJ7 both had the Transport Canada CMVSS maple leaf stickers on the door pillers. Those were fine for road use. Besides, how would the SAAQ even know the vehicles are ex-military, since both those vehicles have direct civilian equivalents.



I can't remember if the LSVW also had a similar decal on them. If so, then I would suggest that would be the basis of keeping those on the road (for as long as an LSVW will stay on the road that is).

[rob love]

military vehicles, provided:

• they have the same configuration as road vehicles intended for use on public roads
• they are not equipped with a turret or weapon mount
• they have undergone a mechanical inspection

https://saaq.gouv.qc.ca/en/vehicle-r...cted-area-use/

[David Dunlop]

Tony.

Each Province at one time had its own ‘Department of Highways’. They not only designed, built and maintained the highways/roads within each Province, but they were also at the core of creating and enforcing regulations regarding what equipment was deemed safe/necessary on the various motor vehicles under its jurisdiction, what actions were deemed appropriate for the safe operation of various vehicles (Rules of the Road, enforced by various police agencies) and Driver Training/Testing. Most all of this would fall under a Provincial Highway Traffic Act.

Outside of that sphere of influence, you found the insurance companies that insured the motor vehicles that the Department of Highways deemed appropriate to be on the road.

Here in Manitoba, all that started to slowly change in the early 1970’s. Prior to that, private insurance companies were the only means of obtaining vehicle insurance. Premiums varied greatly and if you were prone to accidents, your premiums could go up rapidly. In addition, claims for accidents could take a while to settle sometimes because the insurance companies for both parties would have to study the accident to determine who was at fault, based on the rules of the road established by the Department of Highways. Whoever was at fault had to cover all repairs and their premiums would go up accordingly.

In the early 1970’s, a newly elected government in Manitoba decided to ban all private auto insurance and replace it with a brand new government owned public insurance company called MPIC (Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation). This new company was mandated to offer rock bottom premiums and to introduce ‘No Fault Insurance’. This latter move was a disaster that is still with us. It did not take long for people to realize there were no longer any real consequences for being an idiot on the road and getting into an accident. You could get your car fixed right away and get right back out there.

In the last 10 years or so, the provincial government, in an effort to save money, have now transferred Driver Training and Licencing to MPIC and MPIC is slowly pushing for more and more say in the regulations of what equipment should be in/on vehicles in the Province in order for them to be insured. It has become a very dangerous monopoly. What is happening in Quebec right now could very easily pop up here at any time.

David

[David Dunlop]

Hi Rob.

I was thinking along the lines of somebody driving a fully restored to military configuration 5/4-ton, or CJ7, who gets stopped for a road check because of the looks of the vehicle. They call it in for verification and nobody is aware of these vehicles and red flares go up until the powers that be can investigate and sort it out. We all know what these vehicles are, but Boo McFlune at the SAAQ probably won’t.

David

[Lynn Eades]

Are you guys living under a dictatorship, like us?

[Tony Smith]

Originally Posted by David Dunlop

Tony.

Each Province at one time had its own ‘Department of Highways’....

In the last 10 years or so, ....

David

Yes, but if a vehicle is legal and compliant in it's home province, is it automatically allowed on the road elsewhere in the country? If it has conditions applied to it's use, does it need to continue to meet those conditions when elsewhere in the country if those conditions don't exist in other provinces? Or does a traveller have to be aware of every local rule and ordnance relating to vehicle standards as they move around.

[Tony Smith]

Originally Posted by Stuart Fedak

The SAAQ which is the government Motor Vehicle Insurance program for Quebec has new direction of the Minister to change the motor vehicle regulations.

At the start of August, military vehicle owners started receiving letters from SAAQ. The rational in the letters did not make any sense. Basically the SAAQ claimed that the manufactures of military vehicles were contacted, and the manufacturers stated that the vehicles were for off road only. This is not correct.

There was no public consultation on this process, which was signed off by the Minister in charge of SAAQ.

They were contacted by my good friend Bernard, and the Bombardier Museum, as the archive for all the Canadian Bombardier Records, indicated they had not been contacted by SAAQ.

I have been trying to figure out what the end game is, of the SAAQ and the minister. I will hold onto my thoughts until I have more data.

You could apply to the Minister, François Bonnardel, and to the SAAQ with an Act respecting access request for copies of any correspondence with the manufacturers that relates to their suitability for on-road use, if it exists. https://www.educaloi.qc.ca/en/capsul...-public-bodies

But to be fair, reading the list of vehicles affected, this is not solely aimed at Military Vehicles: https://saaq.gouv.qc.ca/en/vehicle-r...cted-area-use/ It also applies to ANY vehicle manufactured more than 25 years ago! Cars, buses, trucks, the lot, with the exception of motorcycles. I wonder if letters have gone out to owners of those vehicles too?

[David Dunlop]

Hello again, Tony.

Stuart has clarified the autonomous status of the Provincial Control of highways and motor vehicles quite well. I would just add that, for the sake of smooth traffic flow across the nation as a whole, enforcement of local regulations on out of province vehicles is normally very limited.

Just as an example. Currently here in Manitoba, a front licence plate is mandatory on all motor vehicles. Next door in Saskatchewan, a front plate is not required. That non compliance for visitors is ignored in Manitoba. If, however, somebody moves from Saskatchewan to Manitoba, they are allowed a fixed period of time in which they can still operate their vehicle under Saskatchewan registration. After that, they must submit the vehicle to inspection to meet Manitoba standards for registration.

Off the top of my head, I can only think of military half track vehicles that cannot be licensed for the road here in Manitoba (not withstanding heavy armour) by civilians. The legislation governing this is nearly 100 years old and relates specifically to old farm machinery that used to have heavy lugs on steel wheels or tracks that would chew up the early roads. It makes no sense at all being applied to modern, rubber half track tracks, but that is the piece of legislation that is hauled out and waved in your face if you attempt to put a half track on the road today in Manitoba.

David

[Terry Witiuk]

I've read the info on the SAAQ website about vehicles that require C licence plates and it says that any vehicle 30 years or older is required to have these plates whether preserved or conserved. This would include classic cars as well. Has this always been the case and mandatory in Quebec or is this whole C licence plate a new thing? If this isn't new, does anyone know how long it's been in place? Also, if not new, was there any efforts to stop this when first introduced. Aside from the LSVWs that are being sold off by the CF and possibly some newer Humvees that have made their way into Canada, I would think that most of the military vehicles owned by MV enthusiasts in Quebec have passed the 30 year mark and fell into this category years ago. The stipulation of not being allowed to have a turret or weapon mount is possibly more concerning. This would take some vehicles off the road entirely. I wonder what is SAAQ's official definition of a turret or weapon mount?

[M38CDNBill]

Hi,

Although this ministerial order only affects recent military vehicles (Bombardier Iltis until the recent Humvees through the VSLR and other larger vehicles), Willys jeeps and other vehicles of the WWII, Korean and Vietnam wars are not affected by this ministerial order. However, we are following this issue closely because we believe that it's only a matter of time for them to be affected as well.

I agree with you, this ministerial order is an aberration all the more since we hear through the branches that this order of the SAAQ will be followed by another one which says that in 2024, all the antique military vehicles will have to to be removed from circulation. What is true in all this? I don't know but one thing is certain, it will certainly have impacts in the rest of Canada in +/- short time.

As for the C-plate, the idea is not incongruous in itself. Willys/Ford jeeps (MB, GPW, M38CDN, M38A1s), Dodge 3/4 tons, CMPs, GMC M135 and MUTT M151A1/A2 don't cruise at an average speed over 70 km/hr. Where this order is a nonsense, it's that there are no roads at 70 km/hr anywhere in Quebec so sometimes we have to take shortly a road at 90 km/hr to go from one place to another. As for highways, it's very dangerous to take them anyway.

Cheers

[rob love]

I drive a military vehicle daily to work on the highway, either the HMMWV or the M38A1CDN3. I will also tow my 105 with the old deuce a couple times a year. All are capable of cruising at 55, and I have not felt like I have been an impediment to the other vehicles, although they do prefer to go 10-20kms over the 90km speed limit. If a rule like this were to come to Manitoba, I would be landlocked....the highway is the only road leaving my place.



I note on the SAAQ website, it says the word "can" as opposed to must or shall for the first paragraph re what can be registered with C plates. Is there an advantage to C plates? Are they exempt from safeties, or do they get a reduced rate? Or is it merely a collective to remove vehicles that are not as fast as todays vehicles form the roadways.



I note the regulations state "no turret or weapons mounts. " Would having the GPMG mount on a M38A1 preclude you from having to get a C plate?.



Hopefully this nonsense does not make it out to Manitoba. Things are a little more laid back here. We also have MAAC (Manitoba Association of Auto Collectors) who are very involved in discussions with autopac re keeping the vintage vehicles on the road.

[Robin Craig]

I have had some looking around and discussion with others and would like to offer the following to the debate from what others have said to me

The SAAQ is looking at military vehicles by named type, non standard VIN's and mostly, was there ever a civil counterpart IMPORTED to Canada ( i.e does it have a Transport Canada Civil import classification )

For example, only three civil Iltis were imported to Canada, but, these are listed as VW type 183's and have a standard VW VIN, the rest are easy to find, as the have a DND number. The VW type 183s are exempt from this new rule.

If it has no civil road going counterpart, like a half track, Ferret etc, no C plate will be issued. If it has a weapons mount ...again, no C plate, its being pulled off the road

Imported Unimogs also get swept up easily as few early non-military types were imported, and Transport Canada has never authored commercial import as a truck...only in the classification of tractors

Same goes for anything that has no civil counterpart by Year of Manufacture, so you might get away with a an MB if it was a 46 ( first year of CJ-2) or an M-38A1 ( CJ-5) but only if the VIN doesn't trigger the SAAQ data base...an earlier MB will get a C plate, but, not if it has a pedestal mount for example, and its possible, as there was no civil variant before '46, that they are off the road, but the feeling is that they will be C plated

There is an appeal process , but that might be lengthy

To the guy in BC with the Ferret...BC has a an Act within the ICBC and Road users legislation that covers any vehicle that is Armoured. Basically, no armour is allowed unless engaged in transportation of valuables by a licensed company ( Brinks et al )

This legislation is on the books to prevent gangs from armouring their cars against gunfire, are issues in BC.

There is an appeal process for a case by case exemption, but he has to write to the minister of Transport BC with an explanation to why he needs it

Quebec does not use English Common Law ....the inverse is true under Quebec Civil Law, if its not prescribed, Quebec’s view is that its not legal ( therefore, new legislation is easy to create and enforce)

It is not so much the regulators it is mostly a lack of understanding of the vehicles themselves.

To what level SAAQ regulatory staff have much training or skill in separating classes and vehicle types is debateable, so the more general they can be, the easier it is to pass a regulation. This legislation could be changed by a group making a petition for adjustment, but , it would have to be a Quebec group showing why their MV's should be treated like any other vehicle

As it stands until this a former DND Iltis had to be modified to meet Quebec road safety standards before a licence was issues ( mostly lighting ).

In closing, in most cases in most provinces and territories, registering a vehicle for use on the road is a privilege not a right, nor is having a drivers licence. This is highlighting that, and reminds me that we should value what we have. I feel sad for those in Quebec who have to endure this.

[Harry Moon]

And of course any correspondence with Quebec authorities, written, email or otherwise must be in French....

[Harry Moon]

Who Does Not Require a Permit for an Armoured Vehicle?

Under the Armoured Vehicle and After-Market Compartment Control Regulation, you can operate an armoured vehicle without a permit while performing your job if you are a:

Police officer
Armoured car guard
Government employee operating an armoured vehicle as part of your job
Diplomat
Licensed vehicle salesperson or registered motor dealer
Certified mechanic with a repairer’s license
You also do not need a permit to operate an antique-plated armoured vehicle or a military vehicle covered by the Defense Production Act.

[M38CDNBill]

Hi,

In France, the HMVs owners lived the same problem between 2002 and 2006 with the Sarkozy Law. Here is a short article about this law that was challenged with success by the authorities of the French Federation of vintage vehicles (FFVE) and the MVCG France.

https://www.ffve.org/dossier_vehicules_militaires

Cheers

[M38CDNBill]

Again me,

In this article published yesterday in the Journal de Montreal, Minister Bonardel states that it was the manufacturers of these vehicles who warned the government. "It was the suppliers themselves who wrote to us to tell us how dangerous it could be if there was an accident" he insisted.

https://www.journaldemontreal.com/20...aide-bonnardel

If that is true, then we can assume that the government authorities of the other provinces of the country were also notified by these manufacturers/suppliers. For colleagues from other provinces, do you think that your government authorities have also received such letters?

[Grant Bowker]

Originally Posted by M38CDNBill

"It was the suppliers themselves who wrote to us to tell us how dangerous it could be if there was an accident"

Is it too cynical to suspect the corporations are mainly concerned with the danger to their financial well-being rather than any possible danger to the operators of the vehicles or members of the public?

[M38CDNBill]

Originally Posted by Grant Bowker

Is it too cynical to suspect the corporations are mainly concerned with the danger to their financial well-being rather than any possible danger to the operators of the vehicles or members of the public?

Good question Grant. In the same way, I raised a question last week about the new Mihandra jeeps that some sellers in Quebec have been selling since recently. Inspired by the old CJ5 jeeps, with performance very similar to our WWII jeeps, these vehicles can only be registered for off-road. Is there any reason to believe that these new vehicles could influence the SAAQ authorities on this issue to want to impose a C-plate on historic military vehicles?

https://www.journaldemontreal.com/20...endu-au-canada

https://auto.ndtv.com/news/u-s-to-pr...plaint-1915425

[rob love]

Does Quebec have an access to information law? Could one not request copies of any relevant information, including the letters, that gave cause to enact these policies?

[M38CDNBill]

Originally Posted by rob love

Does Quebec have an access to information law? Could one not request copies of any relevant information, including the letters, that gave cause to enact these policies?

As I know until now, no-one could get the letters written to the SAAQ, not even more than it gives the names of these suppliers, and the government authorities gives no more reasons other than those of this ministerial decree. Most likely that the cause will have to be brought in court for the government reveals its sources.

[Patrick B]

Hi everyone.
Im the guy in BC having problems registering my 1961 ferret.
The main problem i am having is the fact ICBC and CVSE are refusing to acknowledge that the ferret is a antique motor vehicle, exempt from the current safety regulations in place in BC.
I purchased DOT rated tyres, passed a safety inspection, and then tried to register it.
ICBC will not let me transfer it into my name or even take the transfer taxs involved in the sale.
ICBC contacted a CVSE representative, and based on pictures, and google images, CVSE decided it was not possible for it to pass a safety inspection because it doesnt have all the safety features necessary for today's standards.
CVSE went to the safety inspection facility and threatened to fine the mechanic and pull the operation license from the company if they did not surrender my inspection paperwork.
I did not want to cause drama for the inspection company so i returned my paperwork to the company and then they surrendered it to CVSE.
Because ICBC and CVSE are refusing to acknowledge that it is a antique vintage motor vehicle it may also not be exempt from the Armoured Vehicle and After-Market Compartment Control Act in place in BC.
It has been very frustrating that ICBC and CVSE will not follow the laws in BC based on their personal dislike of the appearance of this vehicle.
Despite ill informed rumours, i have never driven my ferret in BC, and i am quite annoyed how it hasn't done anything more then idle in my driveway.

[Robin Craig]

Patrick,

Great write up. I would like to help you, and have some suggestions, can you please contact me by email please.

[Patrick B]

Thanks Robin. PM sent.

[Tony Smith]

Originally Posted by rob love

Does Quebec have an access to information law? Could one not request copies of any relevant information, including the letters, that gave cause to enact these policies?

See my link in post#15.