I have read the contents of…

I have read the contents of Bill 212 as well as the related debate proceedings so far. As an Ontarian, I am dismayed at the poor governance exhibited here.

First, this bill is a mess in contents and scope. Is this bill about streamlining highway construction? Or increasing bureaucracy for city planning? There’s a lack of cohesion and strategy here that reveals weak policy. There’s plans to overstep municipal street planning. There’s a proposed elimination of checks and balances in the development of Highway 413. There’s intented forced removal of already constructed urban projects in the city of Toronto. There are major negative implications here on citizen safety and civic trust in our provincial transportation planning.

Second, I’ll speak to the issue of cycling infrastructure. There is a level of unwarranted focus on cyclists in this bill that feels targeted with how small the scale of cycling lanes is in this province. The strategic removal of heavily used lanes on main streets in Toronto can only be viewed as politically motivated by MPPs who commute to Queen’s Park by car. This would be a gross misuse of legislative processes for personal convenience.

In the debates, the members in favour of the bill bring forward only the perceived inconveniences experienced by a handful of their constituents as evidence for forced cycling infrastructure removal. This isn’t where MPPs should be focusing their attention, on the whims of a disgruntled few with time to make calls and send emails. They should focus on the safety and mobility freedoms of ALL their constituents, including youth who cycle to school, couriers who deliver by bike, and others who rely on bike lanes every day for safe commutes and recreation.

Those against permanent separated cycling infrastructure seem to view cyclists as some intangible “other” distinct from the rest of their community. No one advocates for the narrowing or removal of sidewalks in favour of additional lanes of car traffic. No one shrugs and says “you walk on the streets at your own risk” to pedestrians who have concerns where sidewalks are missing or unsafe. We see news every week about cyclists who are injured and killed in mixed traffic and unsafe intersections in this province, and still this lack of care persists. Why the neglect for the public safety of cyclists? To anti-bike lane advocates: cyclists are not phantoms that materialize out of nowhere to inconvenience you. These are your neighbours, your friends, your colleagues, and your children going about their daily lives that you hold so much frustration and anger for. To MPPs in favour of Bill 212: these are your constituents you disregard, whose public safety you are accountable for.

Assuming the intentions of the bill in good faith - what would it take to improve traffic in Ontario’s cities? Traffic IS CARS. There is no other way to spin this. A focus on adding car lanes and highways can only increase the volume of traffic concentrated in cities, and increasing cyclists and transit users can only decrease the amount of cars on the road. The members in opposition to the bill bring up a wealth of other opportunities for transportation improvement across the province in the debates. Let’s redirect traffic to the existing underused Highway 407. Incentivize employers to bring back pandemic-era work from home policies. Get people out of single occupancy cars and onto transit. Use those overextended provincial powers to finish the ongoing Metrolinx projects and increase capacity and frequency for regional commuter transit options.

There are better options than Bill 212, which presents no solutions for Ontario, only a politically-motivated onslaught against cyclists as a distraction for the government’s shady intentions for highway development and mismanagement of provincial transit projects. Where’s the forward-thinking? The evidence-based policy making? We expect better from our Minister of Transportation, our MPPs and our Premier.