There are a few key reasons…

There are a few key reasons why I am greatly opposed to this:

1. This is blatant overreach: The provincial government should have zero say in how the interior of cities are designed. This a decision that the people of Toronto alone should be making. Ford's proposition of this bill only serves to satisfy his vendetta against Toronto created by the way he perceived he and his brother were treated there.

2. The density does not support this: Toronto is the single densest city in the province. The car is the least dense method of transportation out of every single option available. There is no fit for solely car traffic in a dense urban area. If we ever want traffic to improve in Toronto, we need to consider transportation solutions that support the density of the city, like trains, buses, and especially bikes.

3. Unfair to cyclists: Cycling is the second slowest transportation method in terms of top speed next to walking. Cyclists need to be allowed to bike on main roads because every mild increase in distance is significantly larger by bike. If anything, it's cars that should be relegated to side roads because it takes no effort to commute by one. Putting cyclists on side roads is comparable to saying "You're only allowed to park 3 km away from your work at a minimum". Drivers complaining about cyclists on the road are a privileged party viewing equality as oppression.

4. Street layouts for proposed streets: For the streets this bill proposes that bike lanes be removed from have zero side street alternatives that follow the length of the street for a significant distance. As I stated previously, the slight increase in distance for cyclists has a far larger effect than it does for cars and would make cycling near infeasible to most.

5. Environmental impact: The fact of the matter is that you cannot buy your way out of emitting. We try to switch to electric vehicles as a green alternative to commuting but they emit just as much fossil fuels during their production and the running of power generators compared to a gas vehicle during the same average lifetime period. The only way to emit less is to use less, and a bicycle is an incredible way one can emit less during their commute and benefit their health at the same time. If the Ford government cared at all about reducing emissions, they would allow for and incentivize denser developments and incentivize bike usage.

6. Cost: The lanes are already there, it's going to cost roughly double what it cost to put the bike lane in to tear them out. This is absurd, and a clear example of the sunk costs fallacy at play. No matter how much money we throw into this issue, letting more cars on the roads is not going to fix traffic. This also plays into the issue of induced demand, proven real around the world, but naturally, the Ford government is too ignorant to acknowledge its existence when it's too busy lining the pockets of the companies that lobbied for it.