Ontario Bill 212 isn’t the…

Ontario Bill 212 isn’t the right approach for tackling gridlock:

1. Lacks Investment in Public Transit: To seriously reduce traffic, we need to make public transit a real alternative to driving. Bill 212 doesn’t prioritize accessible, affordable, or reliable transit. Without strong investment here, we’ll keep seeing more cars on the road because people don’t have other viable options.

2. Bike Lanes Are Essential: A major flaw in Bill 212 is that it fails to recognize the critical role bike lanes play in easing traffic. We need more dedicated bike lanes on major roads to provide safe, reliable options for cyclists. Removing bike lanes—or failing to build more—only forces more people into cars, increasing gridlock and making roads more dangerous for everyone. Building up our bike lane network is a proven way to reduce car dependency, decrease traffic, and make commuting more efficient and sustainable.

3. Supports Environmental Goals: Without dedicated bike lanes and increased transit, Bill 212 risks increasing emissions rather than cutting them. Bike lanes give people a green, affordable option, which supports Ontario’s environmental goals by reducing reliance on cars. A traffic solution that overlooks environmental impact is a missed opportunity for meaningful change.

4. Short-sighted, Quick Fixes Don’t Work: Bill 212 relies on short-term solutions, like more traffic enforcement or road widening, which do little in the long run. These “quick fixes” may ease congestion temporarily but usually just lead to even more cars on the road. Real traffic reduction requires forward-thinking investments in transit, bike lanes, and sustainable transportation options to provide long-term, effective solutions.

Ultimately, Bill 212 misses the mark. We need a balanced, sustainable approach that invests in public transit, strengthens bike lane networks, and builds a foundation for lasting, effective traffic reduction.