I am firmly opposed to…

I am firmly opposed to Ontario Bill 212 (Reducing Gridlock, Saving You Time Act, 2024). This legislation’s proposal to remove bike lanes as a strategy to alleviate traffic congestion is fundamentally misguided and lacks substantial evidence to support its effectiveness. Rather than easing congestion, this policy is likely to lead to adverse outcomes, compromising both public safety and sustainable urban development.

Toronto’s own history with similar measures demonstrates why this proposal is likely to fail. In 2011, bike lanes were removed from Jarvis Street with the aim of improving traffic flow; however, the city’s own data subsequently revealed increased travel times and slower traffic—precisely the opposite of what was intended. This precedent underscores the ineffectiveness of eliminating bike lanes as a means of reducing gridlock. Instead, it risks pushing more people toward car dependency, exacerbating congestion and increasing the strain on road infrastructure.

Removing bike lanes endangers cyclists and other vulnerable road users. The absence of dedicated lanes for cyclists has been shown to increase accidents, injuries, and fatalities. These preventable incidents result in higher healthcare costs, emergency response expenses, and legal fees—all of which ultimately burden taxpayers. Protecting bike lanes is not only a matter of safety but also an economically sound choice that reduces long-term public health expenditures.

Sustainable urban planning should prioritize multimodal transportation solutions, encouraging walking, cycling, and public transit over car dependency. Bill 212 moves us further from these goals by diminishing the infrastructure for safe, sustainable travel options and it instead promotes a highway. Many cities globally have provided evidence that "adding more lanes" doesn't decrease traffic. Adding another highway is not the answer here. Not only that -- constructing a highway without going through the proper environmental channels is irresponsible and just goes to show that the current Ontario government will cut corners if it serves their personal goals. As global cities increasingly adopt green policies and expand biking infrastructure, Ontario risks lagging behind, both in terms of environmental responsibility and in creating a livable, accessible city for all residents.

Rather than dismantling urban infrastructure, the province should direct resources toward initiatives that offer broad, lasting benefits. By investing in healthcare, education, and efficient public transit systems, Ontario can address core issues affecting residents’ quality of life while also easing congestion more effectively. Such measures would serve the long-term interests of Ontarians far better than the ideas proposed by this Bill that is not aimed at benefiting all Ontarians, only the wealthiest and drivers.

Conclusion: A Step Backward for Ontario

Bill 212 is ultimately a step backward for Ontario’s cities and communities. Sustainable, inclusive urban planning calls for policies that prioritize safety, efficiency, and environmental stewardship. By preserving and expanding bike lanes, and spending money on public transportation that should be up and running already, the government can foster a safer, more accessible cityscape that supports all modes of transport and contributes to a cleaner environment. Rather than catering solely to drivers, Ontario should adopt forward-thinking policies that build a resilient, inclusive future for all its residents.

This Bill is one among many that has caused me to question Mr. Doug Ford's role. I question a capacity for leadership, and there is clearly a lack of ethics and morals coming from Mr. Ford and his government. Should this Bill pass, my vote in the next election will certainly not be going to the Conservatives.