I strongly disagree with the…

I strongly disagree with the proposed bill for the following reasons:

Money matters: taxpayer money should be respected. A bike lane built at great cost should be allowed to show that it grows ridership and reduces congestion before spending another large chunk of money to remove it.

Democracy matters: local decisions should be respected, not overridden, without proper consultation or a vote.

Safety matters: pedestrians and cyclists have just as much right to safely get to their destination as car drivers (this includes workers such as delivery cyclists for uber eats etc.). Cycle lanes greatly help safety, by ensuring cyclists are separated from cars, and pedestrians from both cars and cyclists.

Efficiency matters: pedestrians and cyclists have just as much right to efficiently get to their destination as car drivers; there is no reason they need to take longer routes. In downtown Toronto, cycling is by far the fastest method of transport and the only one in which arrival time is predictable. That this attracts people is obvious from the success of BikeShare. Outer regions of Toronto, which are rapidly getting denser, should have the same opportunities to travel efficiently and safely.

Enforcement matters: bad behaviour that causes accidents and congestion should be stopped. No blocking of intersections, no speeding, no double parking or parking in bike lanes or on sidewalks. More cameras, more police presence, stiffer fines, including loss of driver's license are warranted.

Information matters: just as people expect to operated by doctors, not by quacks, people should be able to expect to be governed by people who study what works, rather than go by their "guts". For instance, in my neighbourhood of downtown Toronto, businesses initially were very wary of cycle lanes, but became strong supporters as it turned out they bring (far) more clients than car lanes, now warning you that removing the bike lanes will make many go bankrupt. The lesson is to study first before making decisions. And let businesses in outer regions of Toronto prosper similarly.

Health matters: people should be encouraged to be active and safe, not sit in cars, becoming obese and getting diabetes and heart disease, while producing pollution that causes asthma and premature deaths in others, especially among those unfortunate enough to live next to the busiest roads.

Now bringing up the bill, perhaps the government is simply happy to be responsible for all the above negative effects -- including for a couple of deaths from avoidable accidents -- for the sake of getting votes from people who hope for faster traffic. Unfortunately, from experiments from all around the world (my personal experience is from The Netherlands, where this all played out 50 years ago; in some respects (fortunately only some) Ontario is really a remarkably ignorant backwater), it is clear that is just a hope: congestion will remain just as bad, as cyclist turn back to using cars, and as more and more people arrive, who will have no choice but to use a car because they have no safe alternative, yet the roads cannot be made wider to accommodate them.

In summary, please stop this bill in its tracks and avoid making Toronto yet more congested.