I strongly oppose Bill 212…

I strongly oppose Bill 212 and urge the province to withdraw the proposed amendments.

The bill undermines the principles of local governance and decentralized decision-making, which are foundational to a healthy democracy and the effective management of cities. This legislation imposes top-down control, removing decision-making power from local governments and communities, and prioritizing motor vehicle traffic over public safety, economic well-being, and environmental sustainability.

1. Local Business Impacts

Local businesses thrive when their communities are accessible. Bike lanes bring customers and employees to businesses along key corridors, such as Yonge and Bloor, where bike access is critical. Bill 212 would reduce bike access, which in turn harms local economies by limiting consumer and employee mobility. For example:

Businesses on Yonge Street would lose, on average, half of their potential customers arriving by bike.
Businesses on Bloor West would lose, on average, 56% of their potential bike customers.
This bill disregards the importance of local decision-making in fostering a thriving local economy. By restricting access for over 600,000 people who rely on bikes to reach essential services and destinations, the province would make it harder for people to support businesses and access jobs, healthcare, schools, and entertainment. The long-term economic consequences of this bill on small businesses and neighborhoods would be severe, limiting their growth and vitality.

2. Undermining Local Decision-Making

Bill 212 centralizes control over infrastructure decisions, taking power away from municipalities and imposing unnecessary bureaucracy. This contradicts the core conservative principle of decentralization, which holds that decisions should be made as close to the people as possible. Local governments, guided by their unique knowledge of community needs and priorities, are better equipped to determine what infrastructure best serves their citizens.

The financial burden of removing bike lanes on major streets like Bloor, University, and Yonge is estimated at $48 million, a direct cost to provincial taxpayers. Rather than empowering municipalities to make informed decisions, the bill forces cities to reverse investments in sustainable transportation that have already been made, creating unnecessary costs and logistical challenges.

3. Safety of Vulnerable Road Users

The bill’s failure to prioritize safety for cyclists represents a clear disregard for the responsibility that local governments have in protecting their citizens. Municipalities, like Toronto, are best positioned to address the unique needs of their communities, including ensuring safe and accessible transportation options for all. By stripping cities of their ability to manage bike lanes, Bill 212 effectively ignores the importance of local context, where bike infrastructure plays a vital role in promoting road safety and public health.

Evidence from local health experts, including 120 physicians and researchers, shows the crucial role of bike lanes in reducing accidents and promoting active transportation. Removing these lanes not only puts cyclists at risk but also undermines the very local strategies that aim to improve safety for all road users.

4. Impacts to Farmland and Natural Habitats

Bill 212 also includes provisions to fast-track Highway 413, which would directly impact Ontario’s Greenbelt and undermine local environmental protections. This approach disregards the decentralized decision-making process that has enabled communities to protect their natural resources and limit urban sprawl. The construction of Highway 413 would harm vital ecosystems, destroy agricultural land, and increase carbon emissions, further complicating efforts to address climate change and maintain a sustainable environment for future generations.

Instead of prioritizing highways over transit and active transportation infrastructure, the province should work collaboratively with municipalities to develop solutions that reduce congestion, protect the environment, and promote sustainable growth.

Conclusion

Bill 212 represents a troubling shift away from local decision-making and decentralized governance. Rather than stripping municipalities of their ability to make informed decisions based on local needs, the province should empower them to implement transportation, environmental, and economic policies that reflect the values and priorities of their communities. Local governments, not provincial mandates, are best suited to address the diverse needs of Ontario’s cities and ensure safe, sustainable, and thriving communities.