What's going on with Bill 212?
Remind me, what’s Bill 212 again?
Bill 212 is the provincial legislation passed by the government of Ontario in November 2024 that amended the Highway Traffic Act to block municipalities (including Toronto) from installing new bike lanes where motor vehicle lanes would have to be reduced and possibly remove existing bike lanes. A late amendment to the legislation from the Minister of Transportation specifically directs the removal of all 19 km of the existing bike lanes on Yonge, Bloor and University.
It would also indemnify the province and any contractors from lawsuits when (not if) people are seriously injured and killed as a result of those removals.
You can read our previous FAQ here.
Cycle Toronto and our co-applicants, Eva Stanger-Ross and Narada Kiondo, launched a legal challenge against the legislation in December 2024. Represented by lawyers for Paliare Roland and Ecojustice, our case argues that ripping out bike lanes will put people’s lives at risk and Bill 212 unjustifiably infringes the Charter-protected right to life and security of the person.
It’s almost July. Why hasn’t the province acted on their plan yet?
In response to our legal challenge the province quietly conceded they would not attempt any removals prior to spring 2025.
And to help ensure no removals would proceed prior to the case being heard, we applied for an injunction to stop them. That injunction was denied by the courts in March 2025 on the basis that the balance of convenience favoured the government. It still represented a considerable moral victory as documents released in court, including analysis by the engineering firm CIMA+, reveal that the province has known all along that their anti-bike lane legislation is arbitrary and not in the public interest.
No visible removals were attempted in the preceding weeks, and the full case was heard on April 16, 2025. Because this time the judge had the full argument from both parties, we were granted an interlocutory injunction which prevents the province from any removals until a decision is rendered.
When will there be a decision in that case?
The judge acknowledged it is a serious and complicated constitutional issue, and a decision could take months. As of today, June 28, 2025, there has been no decision and the injunction remains in place.
So the bike lanes are still here. For now.
Why is there an injunction now when there wasn’t before?
Short version, there was a full record of evidence at the April hearing.
And with that full record, the judge agreed there was compelling evidence that Bill 212 would not advance the province’s stated objective to reduce traffic. As the province failed to make a counter argument that removals were urgent, granting an injunction until that decision is rendered does provide a real public benefit in preventing harm.
Isn’t the province appealing the injunction?
After a self-described rant from the premier that questioned judiciary independence, the province indicated their intent to appeal the injunction. Because the interlocutory injunction was granted until the judge renders their decision, however, the province cannot appeal directly. Instead they have to apply for a leave to appeal which involves asking a panel of judges for permission to appeal. If the province is successful, then they could file their appeal at which point our lawyers would be able to respond.
It is just as likely we receive a decision on the legal challenge itself ahead of any ruling about any appeal.
What’s happening with Stantec?
On the eve of their snap election this winter and with the legal challenge still pending, the government of Ontario announced it “retained an engineering company to complete design work, as it prepares to reinstate vehicle lanes on Bloor Street West, Yonge Street and University Avenue”. It was revealed that company was the Canadian engineering firm Stantec Consulting Ltd.
Over 2,500 people joined Cycle Toronto’s Shame on you, Stantec campaign urging the firm to rip up that contract.
Rumours quickly began circulating that the company was regretting the decision. After a protest organised by Fridays for Future in March 2025, Stantec publicly confirmed that their work now only involved designs for only 1.5 kms of removals, and that the firm would no longer be involved.
What section(s) of Bloor, Yonge, and/or University that 1.5 kms involve are still not public.
No other company has yet been publicly connected with any new or ongoing design work for the remaining 17.5 km.
What did the recent provincial budget have to do with the bike lane removals?
While no specific money was earmarked for this undertaking (recall the city estimated that the removal of nearly 19 km of bike lanes could cost nearly $50M), the provincial budget further amended some of the bike lane removal language of Bill 212 (now Part XII.1 of the Highway Traffic Act). Most notably the removals now specifically include the continuation of University Avenue north of College Street along Queen’s Park Crescent and Avenue Road.
I’ve seen in the news stories about a compromise between the city and the province. What does that mean?
All of these bike lanes were approved by Toronto City Council. In the case of the Bloor West bike lanes in Etobicoke, have been approved by City Council in four separate votes under two Mayors.
While Mayor Chow and City Council passed a strong resolution opposing the jurisdictional overreach of Bill 212 back in November 2025 (complete with a half-joking pledge if the removals go through to put up signs reading “This road congestion and traffic delay is the result of Premier Ford's Bill 212”), the city has limited options as it’s been tested in court that cities are a creature of the province.
While we’re encouraged to hear the mayor’s steadfast commitment to keeping the bike lanes (and some less strident language of late from the minister and premier), reconfiguring the bike lanes to restore travel lanes will not achieve the stated goal of addressing traffic congestion.
Cycle Toronto remains committed to our legal challenge which, if successful, we believe would prevent any provincially-mandated removals or reconfigurations.
