Fare dodging, for many urban dwellers, is simply a part of life. Whether it be leaping over a turnstile at the metro entrance or sneaking onto the back of the bus, the practice of evading public transit fees is regarded by many as innocuous and commonplace. Over the past decade, fare dodging in Montreal has become a community affair with a social mission. Facebook group “Contrôle en cours – STM” claims to promote transit accessibility by sharing live alerts that help passengers avoid STM constables while fare dodging. Yet the movement overlooks the importance of supporting public transit through paid ridership to the detriment of low-income passengers. 

Contrôle en Cours was founded in 2017 and has since amassed over ten thousand members. Though the group “cannot change what [public transit] costs,” they have dedicated themselves to ensuring “those who cannot afford [transit] costs risk less when attempting to use it.” The movement is not a reaction to recent Société de transport de Montréal (STM) strikes, as per recent clarification from the group moderator. Contrôle en Cours’s mission is built upon the implicit claim that Montreal transit pricing is problematically inaccessible. In reality, however, over 35 per cent of Montrealers are already eligible for free or reduced-price riding; the remaining 65 per cent of STM riders pay a $3.75 CAD metro fare that is either comparable or cheaper than transit fares in many other major cities. Of course, there are many people for whom even reduced transit fare is too expensive, and it is imperative that the city address this issue through rapid policy change; for example, Projet Montréal candidate Luc Rabouin proposed an STM pricing model that extends reduced transit fare to all residents making less than $30,000 CAD a year. Ultimately, the growing movement of STM fare dodging is centred on the debate over how much riders should pay for public transit, if at all. 

There is a common sentiment within fare-dodging circles that fee evasion is justified by the overarching principle of free (or at least, reduced-cost) public transit. Yet, in other public service contexts, citizen buy-in is both expected and respected. Per the Revenu Québec income tax rates, Quebecers pay 14 per cent to 25 per cent income tax each year, which is redirected to fund critical public services such as healthcare and education. In doing so, citizens support the government services that they then benefit from. There is no reason why public transit should be exempt from this model. The STM is heavily underfunded, and fare-dodging initiatives that reduce revenue will only decrease transit quality for residents. 

Low-income Montrealers are disproportionately impacted by fare dodging. The practice diverts revenue from the STM that could instead be directed towards positive improvements to the public transit system, such as faster service and increased routes. Because low-income residents are more dependent on the STM than wealthy residents, they stand to benefit—or suffer—most when it comes to its budgeting. For many people, the STM is their primary, if not only, mode of transportation. A well-funded, functioning public transit system is crucial for supporting the mobility of Montreal residents who cannot afford cars. Choosing to evade transit fares is a personal decision that has a collective negative impact on financially vulnerable populations who choose not to partake in fare dodging. 

Decreasing STM revenue through fare evasion is counterproductive to the stated goals of fare-dodging groups: Ensuring transit accessibility regardless of economic status. Groups like Contrôle en Cours have noble aims, but employ tactics that decrease rider accessibility. Contrôle en Cours should lobby for universally applied structural accessibility reforms that are more likely to have a long-term positive impact on transit equity in lieu of band-aid measures such as fare evasion. Generally speaking, fare dodgers should direct their resistance away from the STM and towards the Quebec government. Policy solutions such as broadened fare assistance programs and STM-oriented budget reallocation will promote mobility equity without dismantling the transit system on which this aim relies.