This proposal is dumb. It's…

This proposal is dumb.

It's dumb because it's bad for essentially every stakeholder except perhaps the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario, which may score some political points with people who've never actually seen a bike lane. But since that's not the point of public policy, this proposal should really just go away.

Why is it dumb? Well, I'll tell you.

It's bad health policy, for one. Cycling infrastructure encourages cycling (duh), which is a great way to live longer. It also reduces collisions, which is another way to live longer. Considering that healthcare is a provincial responsibility, that seems like it should matter, particularly since there doesn't seem to be much appetite for actually investing in the healthcare system.

It's also bad infrastructure policy. You'll find the best research says that bike lanes often improve traffic, but since I'm not an academic, I can be pithy and sum it up like so: cars cause congestion. If you want less congestion, encourage people to do literally anything other than driving.

It's bad for businesses. The Bloor Annex BIA (historically not a proponent of bike lanes) issuing a statement in support is really all you need to know. After all, they poo-poohed them before they existed, had them installed in front of their stores despite their opposition, found they drove far more business than the car lanes they replaced, and are now sensibly asking to keep them *because they bring in actual paying customers*. It was my understanding the PC government was pro-business, but maybe they've made an exception for small businesses in particular? Or perhaps those owned by "the downtown elite?"

It's bad housing policy, at least for homeowners. I live in downtown Toronto, and I happen to own a ludicrously expensive house (to be clear, this isn't a good thing. Housing should be cheaper). The reason it costs many times as much as an equivalent house in, say, Caledon is because it is downtown. It turns out people pay insane amounts of money to be conveniently located next to cool stuff, and having convenient ways to get to said cool stuff is a major part of that. My house is worth more for having a bike lane on the streets near it, and I'm pissed that the government is reaching into my pocket to rob me of that.

More generally, cycling infrastructure complements and encourages the density the city desperately needs to address our housing shortage. Since that is also a provincial responsibility, going in the other direction on this file is a step backwards on a file that really should be moving forwards.

Finally, it's bad government. Decisions that affect specific cities should be made by the municipal governments of those cities. That is why they exist. The provincial government has neither the mandate nor the expertise to handle this issue competently, and so it should defer to the people who do. Toronto, for example, has an entire office full of people who do cycling infrastructure for a living, and they're very good at it. The closest thing the province has is the MTO, which has never met a problem a new 10-lane highway couldn't solve.

I really could go on, but the above seems like plenty. As for what to do instead? The places that want cycling infrastructure (like Toronto) already have plans that are the product of local democracy. How about we just let them happen without interfering and focus on things that are a) provincial responsibilities and b) need attention. My parents can't find a family doctor and I waste at least an hour a week sitting in congestion on 400-series highways, for example.