Quebec Is Governed from Quebec City, but It Presents Itself to the World from Montreal

It is no coincidence that the Gérin-Lajoie Doctrine, which has established for sixty years that Quebec speaks on its own behalf internationally in its areas of jurisdiction, was formulated in April 1965 at the Windsor Hotel, before representatives from some fifty countries comprising the consular corps… of Montreal.

Nor is it a coincidence that the most momentous event in Quebec’s diplomatic history, General de Gaulle’s “Vive le Québec libre” in July 1967, was delivered from the balcony… of Montreal City Hall.

Québec is governed from Québec City. It presents itself to the world from Montréal.

Cosmopolitanism, size, economic strength, corporate headquarters, research universities, innovation ecosystems, cultural and sports institutions: Montréal is, by default as well as by vocation, Québec’s gateway to the world.

Since the Government of Quebec has neither its headquarters nor reception facilities there, a stop at City Hall remains a necessary step for many.

The consular and institutional network there is dense. Nearly 70 international organizations are based in Montreal, including six UN offices, making it the third-largest city in the Americas in this regard, after New York and Washington.

Three key areas have taken root here: civil aviation, with the International Civil Aviation Organization; biodiversity, with the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity; and the Francophonie, driven by a concentration of organizations that make the city one of the world’s leading hubs in this field. The UNESCO Institute for Statistics is also headquartered here.

While Montreal welcomes the world, it also reaches out to it. It is a metropolis of active paradiplomacy.

The numbers speak for themselves. Each year, the Office of International Relations leads a dozen missions abroad, in addition to some 40 missions organized by partners in the Montréal ecosystem, foremost among them Montréal International, the Chamber of Commerce of Greater Montréal, and Tourisme Montréal. On top of that, the city hosts approximately 50 international events with official protocol.

This presence translates into concrete leadership roles: the C40’s Vice-Chair for North America, the appointment of former Mayor Valérie Plante to the UN Secretary-General’s Advisory Group on Local Governments, and a seat on the Executive Board of the International Association of Francophone Mayors. The city’s influence extends far beyond the municipal level.

The fact remains, however, that Montreal’s trajectory as an international hub is not a given. Few cities in the world combine such a unique set of characteristics: a Francophone presence in North America, a multilateral focus, institutional density, and effective bilingualism. This is a distinctive feature that deserves to be fully embraced. To strengthen Montreal’s position among the world’s leading cities, two conditions must be met.

The first is to bring greater strategic focus to these efforts—more intentionality.

The diagnosis is well known to those in the field: the City’s international activities remain largely reactive.

Each year, the Office of International Relations handles more than 700 invitations and organizes more than 80 local and 50 international protocol receptions. This response mechanism, while legitimate, takes up most of the time of a small team, at the expense of monitoring trends, tracking outcomes, and long-term planning.

The 39 international networks in which the City participates illustrate the same phenomenon on a larger scale: a broad, sometimes long-standing presence that would benefit from being concentrated around the networks where Montréal truly holds influence.

A more deliberate approach to urban diplomacy should be guided by a few simple principles: build on political availability and strategic priorities rather than simply responding to a constant flow of invitations; prioritize geographic regions where Québec already has diplomatic assets; evaluate the performance of international networks based on tangible outcomes; and focus resources where impact can be clearly demonstrated.

The second priority is to better define how Montréal presents itself to the world.

Montréal's international "pitch" lacks clarity. Depending on the audience, the emphasis shifts between artificial intelligence, the Francophonie, culture, life sciences, northern expertise, participatory democracy, or cosmopolitanism. There is not even agreement on how many universities the city is home to, four, seven, or eleven, depending on who is speaking.

Each of these narratives is valid. But without a clear strategic focus—and with inconsistencies extending even to the city's own assets, the message becomes diffuse and ultimately loses its impact.

The metropolitan regions we most often look to - Barcelona, Stockholm, Lyon, and Vienna -share one important characteristic: they have each chosen a clear narrative and consistently reinforce it through their international missions, publications, and public communications.

As one of North America's leading university cities, a UN city, the world's second-largest French-speaking metropolis, and a major cultural crossroads, Montréal must weave these strengths into a coherent value proposition, one that is easily understood abroad and compelling to governments, investors, and funding partners alike.

Beyond these two priorities, it may also be time to extend the logic of the Gérin-Lajoie Doctrine to the metropolitan level. Established in 1965, the doctrine asserted that what falls under Québec's jurisdiction at home also falls under Québec's jurisdiction abroad. A contemporary Montréal doctrine could similarly affirm that the metropolis should engage internationally wherever it exercises its own responsibilities: mobility, urban management, including construction efficiency, housing, and social inclusion, beginning with efforts to address homelessness.

Each of these areas presents significant challenges, and many of the solutions already exist elsewhere. Stockholm's experience with decarbonized mobility, Vienna's approach to urban densification, Bilbao's industrial transformation, Toronto's integration of newcomers, and Helsinki's strategies for preventing homelessness all offer valuable lessons. Looking outward, comparing experiences, and adapting successful practices should become a discipline rather than an exception. Every international mission, every official visit, and every delegation received should also be assessed through this lens: What have we learned that can be brought home, adapted, and implemented here?

Finally, there is the Québec government itself. It must fully recognize Montréal's actual weight within Québec's diplomatic landscape and reflect that reality in its most visible decisions. The Premier's Montréal office, currently housed in aging premises on McGill College Avenue, deserves a headquarters worthy not only of its function, but of the global ambition we hold for Québec.

On that note, I would offer one proposal: acquire Montréal's Old Courthouse. This deteriorating heritage building, located in Old Montréal just steps from City Hall, presents a unique opportunity. The gesture would be twofold: restoring a landmark building while symbolically demonstrating, through its very location, that the Québec government intends to work hand in hand with its metropolis.

Behind the bricks lies a broader conviction.

The Gérin-Lajoie Doctrine still offers the best illustration of it today: the international influence of a people is not built solely from its capital city. It is also built where that people meets the world. For Québec, from the Windsor Hotel to City Hall, that place has always been Montréal.