On November 25th, 2024, the Ontario Provincial Bill 212 became law. The bill imposed new requirements on municipalities, mandating them to seek provincial approval for new cycling infrastructure that affects traffic and allowing the province to review related decisions from the past five years. Critically, it also gives the province the power to remove bike lanes from cities such as Toronto, the latest development in an ongoing trend of Premier Doug Ford interfering in municipal politics. The protected bike lanes set for removal in Toronto are on Bloor Street, Yonge Street, and University Avenue. Ontario Premier Doug Ford and Minister of Transportation Prabmeet Sarkaria claim this is being done to improve traffic congestion on Toronto’s busiest streets and prevent future bike lanes from being constructed, to improve car traffic flow. Their solution is for cyclists to take side streets, which are supposedly safer overall. However, these decisions have sparked outrage. While provinces possess constitutional authority over municipalities, conventionally they do not interfere in municipal affairs, making this bill controversial.
The Price of Safety
The first criticism often lobbied against Ford and his administration by advocate groups and city council members is the large price tag associated with this legislation. The city of Toronto estimates that removing the bike lanes listed will cost $48 million, in comparison to the $27 million it cost to build them. Ford has since come out claiming such an estimate is “hogwash.” Transportation Minister Sarkaria echoes this, saying the calculation “just doesn’t add up,” when faced with complaints that the province is misusing its finances. Sarkaria claims that the project will improve traffic flow to such an extent that it will save the city of Toronto $11 billion annually. Yet there has been no evidence presented to support that number, as well as no alternative cost proposed by the Ford administration. Critics argue instead that the Premier is biased by anecdotal evidence, since his daily commute is down Bloor Street.
A Culture War
Perhaps the most important fact to consider when analyzing Ford’s new policy is there is no evidence to suggest that removing bike lanes improves traffic. In fact, research shows the opposite, that adding bike lanes leads to less traffic since it gives people viable and safe alternatives to driving. David Shellnutt, a lawyer representing injured cyclists, says “If this was really about congestion, if it was about costs and about keeping people safe and about keeping people healthy, then all the evidence is there to support bike lanes. But because there’s no real evidence, we can see it’s just politics – and it plays really well for the premier.” Ford has been known to cater to those in the suburbs, the majority of which travel by car, meaning this legislation increases his popularity with a potential election on the horizon. Professor at Western University Martin Horak explains that the Ford family rose to power “fighting the war on the car.” The war on cars refers to a movement perpetuated by car owners who feel as though their method of transportation is being threatened by alternatives to driving. By fighting against this, they opposed policies such as bike lanes and feel they are taking back the streets for cars. Ford and his conservatives do not typically perform well in city centers and draw much of their support from the suburbs, meaning the fierce backlash likely won’t hurt them in the next election.
There will be severe consequences to this latest move in the culture war between cars and cyclists. In 2024 alone, 6 cyclists were killed in Toronto, 5 in areas without protected bike lanes and the 6th when the bike lane was blocked. Over the last decade, 70% of all collisions occurred on roads without safety features. Toronto Mayor Olivia Chow firmly asserts that the proposal will “be costly and make the roads less safe for cyclists.” Despite the Premier’s counterargument, that cyclists should cycle on side streets, there have been no plans drawn up for potential alternative routes. Additionally, the government made sure to include an amendment to the law preventing any lawsuits from being filed against them as a direct or indirect result of this legislation. Ontario NDP leader Marit Stiles argues this is an admission of guilt, that the government’s actions will lead to further injury and death.
Break from Convention Ford’s decision to go forward with these changes joins a string of provincial legislation which cracks down on cities. Alongside Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta’s provincial governments passed laws which directly controlled zoning in Vancouver and political parties in Calgary and Edmonton, respectively. This has caused concerns of a departure from political convention. Legally these laws present no issues, since provinces have full legal power over cities, yet convention dictates that provinces stay out of municipal affairs. Horak describes these decisions as “[provincial governments] trying to use municipalities to solve their political problems.” Provinces have felt displeased by the federal government’s recent trend of bypassing provincial governments to give money directly to cities, leading them to assert their authority over cities. While Ford cites economic and safety reasons for the bill, the removal of bike lanes in Toronto and restrictions across Ontario can be viewed as driven by personal politics, rather than broader economic concerns. By pandering to suburbanites and focusing on the rhetoric of the war on cars, this bill potentially increases Ford’s political standing.
Edited by Catriona Hayes Morris
The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and they do not reflect the position of the McGill Journal of Political Science or the Political Science Students’ Association.
Featured image by Anna Zakharova through Unsplash