The proposed bill would be a…

The proposed bill would be a disaster for Ontario's climate, mode-share, and road safety goals and should not pass. Hostility to bicycle infrastructure is not only a wild overreach of the province into municipal matters but a direct contravention of Ontario's and Canada's pledge to facilitate non-car modes of transit, AND it condemns the entire province to ever-increasing motorist gridlock by worsening the experience of anyone who would dare try to get somewhere without driving.

Cyclists are, as yet, a relatively low number of road users, and cyclists are disproportionately vulnerable to hostile interactions with motor vehicles. This increases dramatically when bicycle lanes, especially the sorts of high-quality lanes directly targeted for prevention or removal by this bill, are not available and cyclists are forced to mingle with motorists in the same lanes. Not only that, but the lower top speed of cyclists means that, in many cases, forcing cyclists to share the same lanes as motorists slows motorists, too, all while putting cyclists in danger. Ontario's cycling networks are young, piecemeal, and not yet the draw that they can and should be BECAUSE they are young and piecemeal, and even so, cycling has rapidly increased in popularity in the past few years. Separating cyclists from motorists and pedestrians alike, by providing high-quality bike lanes in an interconnected network that should aspire to be on par with the existing road network for motorists, makes the experience of being out in public better for cyclists, motorists, and pedestrians alike. Mandating that the province regard any bike lane as an impediment to motorists and judging them entirely on that metric is backward, anti-science (all the best urban science indicates that cycling facilities make traffic FASTER, not SLOWER, for ALL road users), and a direct attempt to pit motorists against cyclists for political gain. It is telling that the bill contains no consideration whatsoever for the safety, speed, or convenience of cyclists while mandating that the province interfere with any bike lane it can imagine would even slightly inconvenience a motorist.

Furthermore, the claim that cyclists are bad for business is simply false. Time and time again, the results show themselves: there is more space for business when places are built for cyclists than when they count on motorists. Berths for bicycles take far, FAR less space than parked cars and stopping for a quick shopping trip or restaurant outing is a much simpler matter for cyclists than motorists. For the same reason that pedestrianizing streets has overwhelmingly positive impacts on nearby businesses, cycling infrastructure is a boon, not a danger, to the economics of nearby businesses.

This bill is destructive, spiteful politics at its worst and it MUST fail for the good of the province. A long, beautiful future for all road users depends on that failure.