Although I don't favour any…

Although I don't favour any part of the bill, the portion of the bill allowing the Province to review future installations is at least palatable - but only if the review process is truly a review. In ordinary business and governmental practice, reviews are generally carried out by individuals or panels of individuals who have more expertise than the group that made the initial decision. There is nothing that gives me any confidence whatsoever that this will be the case of reviews carried out under the proposed legislation. As an example, prior to installing the bike lanes on Bloor, University and Yonge streets, the city conducted full environmental assessments, carried out studies and analyzed data with contributions from subject matter experts. There is no indication that the Ford-led government undertook any of these steps prior to its decision that the bike lanes should be removed. It has instead relied on uninformed opinion, populist sentiment and imprecise data with little to no relevance.
The Ford-led government is once again stepping outside of its jurisdiction and infringing on a municipality's right to govern itself. The electorate have the right to be governed by the bodies they chose to represent them in jurisdictional matters. Instead, the Ford-led government has chosen to infringe on that right and overturn a sound, informed decision with an uninformed one, for which its central arguments are baseless and without merit.
The city incurred significant costs in carrying out studies that insured it was making the right decision prior to installing the bike lanes and then incurred further costs in labor and materials to construct the lanes. The money that has been spent is not recoverable. Once the Ford-led government removes those lanes that money will have been wasted. The Ford-led government will then waste an equal amount of money to remove the progress that was made. This bill is ill-conceived and the worst example of what is not supposed to be able to happen in a country that prides itself on the oversight built into its systems to prevent this very type of whimsical policy decision-making from happening. When the removal of bike lanes fails to reduce gridlock in any meaningful way, my hope is that those that currently support the bill may turn their attention to the cost and the manner in which it was carried out. Keep in mind the streets and highways that have the worst gridlock also have no bike lanes. The way to reduce gridlock is to create networks where people can safely, conveniently and enjoyably get around without a car. Money should be spent improving those networks, rather than removing them.