October 15, 2024 • 10 mins
Ward 9 councillor Kieran McKenzie joins Jon Liedtke on AM800 CKLW to discuss new provincial legislation which would require municipalities to seek provincial approval for new bike lanes that remove vehicle lanes, with the stated purpose to reduce gridlock & ensure bike lanes don't negatively impact vehicle traffic.
This interview aired on AM800 CKLW
This interview aired on AM800 CKLW
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
Hey, we're back John Lecke here on Am eight hundred CKLW.
Hope you're all doing well. It is ten forty seven
news out of Toronto right now Queens Park. The province
is moving to restrict new bike lanes in municipalities. This
is a rather big deal, to be perfectly honest. What
we're looking at right now is new red tape that's
(00:27):
being added by the province. Municipalities would be directed to
demonstrate that the proposed bike lanes won't have a negative
impact on vehicle traffic, says the government. Training me right
now to discuss this is Ward nine councilor Kieran McKenzie. Hey, Kieren,
how you doing.
Speaker 2 (00:48):
I'm doing great, John. How about yourself?
Speaker 1 (00:50):
Doing really well? Thank you? How are you feeling about
this usurping of your authorities that you have as an
elected official here in the city from what the province
is putting truly learning again that municipalities are just creatures
of the province.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
Absolutely atrocious, atrocious piece of legislation. Another atrocious piece of
legislation that's being brought forward by the province. I won't
be surprised when the day comes when they're looking to
tweak it. After they passed this, they often move forward
with legislation and half based ideas, push something through the
legislature because it sounds good on paper, you know, at
(01:28):
some kind of discussion that they might have had in
an informal setting, and then they realized that they made
a big mistake and they have to go back and
fix it. And I think that that's what's going to
happen with this. It's an overreach and it's frankly, it's
an as you point out, it's a usurpation of municipal
authority in an area that the municipalities should have pretty much,
(01:52):
in my views, full autonomy.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
This doesn't sound like an issue that Windsor is dealing
with right now. Honestly, I try to think of a
city that might be dealing with this other than Toronto,
and I'm going to have I have a hard time
putting anything on that list.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
Well, look, I don't care about Toronto to be to
be brutally honest, But what I care about is what
I know is happening in our community. Is it's a
it's a battle. It's a battle every single day for
anyone that wants to recognize is that we need to
improve the transportation network in our community, and particularly the
(02:26):
active transportation network. Now, as you point out, the province,
because of some half baked ideas, has put more red
tape in front of us and made it even harder
than it already is for us to move forward with
completing the just what we've what we've already agreed should
be our active transportation network, but also moving forward, you know,
(02:48):
how we can improve upon what we've already what we've
already planned to do.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
It seems like this could be a potential like a
huge waste of money that we, like we've already spent
here if we get refute used for our current active
master active transport plan, what happens with all the hours
that have been spent by administration putting it together.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
Yeah, yeah, so it's it is a huge waste of time,
money and resources both in Queen's Park. It's a waste
of everybody's time. It's a waste of everybody's time in
the City of Winter who now have to go back
and review the extent to which they need provincial approvals
to do those things, and then doing all of that
work is an additional allownt waste of time, so you
(03:32):
talk about, you know, this is the government that oftentimes
likes to talk about the idea of reducing read tapes,
reminding protests and all of that. And it just because
it looks to me like the Premiere is a little
bit upset with the way, with the fact that this
commute back and forth to work from a Tobacota Queen's
Park isn't isn't or isn't quick in our form that
he's continuing some of the work that he did while
(03:54):
he was on council in terms of actively advocating against
active transportation. And again, this is counselor forward doing things
that you know, you know, fulfilling his wish list as
the premier. It's it's it's I think it's just misguided.
And hopefully I'm not optimistic about what he may or
(04:15):
may choose it may or may not choose to do.
But hopefully they'll think better of this as time goes forward,
or perhaps the opposition can cannot some sense into him
one way or another. But this is this is just
a bad move all the way around.
Speaker 1 (04:27):
I guess we really lucked out by getting those new
bike lanes put in on Victoria Downtown as well as
Polisher when we did, because had we not acted when
we did, it seems like that process could have been
delayed who knows months to years potentially.
Speaker 2 (04:42):
Now, yeah, we'll see how, we'll see how, you know,
quickly this is able to make its way through the
legislative process. But but yeah, I mean again, as you're
pointing out, every recycling project or active transportation infrastructure project
that's on the table now needs to be real view,
there's time and money associated with with that, with that process.
(05:04):
So already the premieu is costing people money for no
good reason. This is a ridiculous, ridiculous policy proposal.
Speaker 1 (05:12):
You know, you find yourself in a really interesting place
here in straddling both, you know, an urban ward but
also a suburban ward. And I wonder how you're able
to do that still receiving you know, the electoral votes
that you do. You're you're still elected. It seems like
there is a path that could be charted that takes
into account both the needs, well the needs of all
(05:34):
road users rather than picking and choosing one over the other.
You seem to be able to navigate that pretty well.
Speaker 2 (05:40):
That's a really good point, John, That so the idea
that you're just gonna, you know, take away capacity for
other modalities, or just look at the look at the
public right away through the lens of just like one
type of user, and that by addressing just those folks,
that you're going to make things better for everybody. You're not.
(06:02):
You're just not. If you really want to address congestion,
you should be doubling down on active transportation, should be
doubling down and supporting municipalities being able to improve their
transit systems. What causes congestion is too many single passenger
or private vehicles on the road. That causes congestion. And
(06:23):
I understand why people make those choices because, at least
in our community, the tuble transit system is subpard and
the active transportation network is also sub part, so they
make the choice to get in their cars. So reducing
our capacities to be able to add active transportation infrastructure
actions in marketing in will have the opposite effect of
what's being intended, which is why this policy is so misguided.
(06:46):
It doesn't solve the problem you're trying to solve, you know.
Speaker 1 (06:50):
And the other problem, of course, we're talking about safety
on the roads, and if we're not going to be
looking at having dedicated by lanes and dedicated active transportation
and lanes. And again we're not talking about protected ones
even at this point, just dedicated ones. Taking away lanes
from it. It's not taking these people off of the road.
These these users still have to use the road. They
(07:11):
can't use sidewalks, although many do illegally, but bikes and
e bikes and scooters and the like will all still
be on our roads.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
There's a public safety question to it as well. John,
So you're you know, kinds of great points and just
to and just to go back to your previous question,
and sorry that I started that a bit. Folks in
you know, it doesn't matter where you live, especially if
it's you know, suburban urban. There's folks in my ward,
whether they live in the more congested areas or if
(07:42):
they're a little further out, they right to bikes. And
in fact, we've just had some we just had some
very challenging debates with respect to lane use and planning
that raised the issue of the lack of active transportation
infrastructure as being a reason to not proceed with one
of the Premier's favorite hobby horses development. So you know,
(08:04):
not only worsening the traffic congestion problem that you're pretending
to solve, but at the same time, you're making it
harder to develop land in the middle of a housing
crisis because you don't have appropriate infrastructure in place to
support those developments in the places that they need to go.
Speaker 1 (08:19):
Last question for you, because, as you said a lot
of times, the Premiere, this government likes to put out
something flashy and then try to fix it or massage
it a bit later on to make it actually work.
It seems like this is obviously a wedge, obviously, but
one that is designed for an upcoming election. At the
same time that we're hearing that they're going to strip
away this ability from cities to go and install bike
(08:40):
lanes on their own, the Premier is also saying, or
the Transportation minister, excuse me, I'll be clear, speed limits
on all four hundred series highways are going to increase
to one hundred and ten kilometers an hour, But as well,
the government is developing a new standard to allow vehicles
to travel at speeds higher than one hundred and twenty
kilometers an hour on new highways. It really seems like
(09:02):
this is a fight that's being set up between the
city at the core and the suburbs, between cars and cyclists.
What do you think about that, Well.
Speaker 2 (09:12):
Look, there's going to be I would hope a significant
amount of research that's undertaken as that those things are
being considered. But like, as far as you know this government,
you know, it's just less than a month ago that
we heard the asinine idea floated that there might be
a tunnel that would be constructed along the entire length
(09:33):
of along for across the parallel tho for one in
the in the GTA, without any without any costing, without
any without any forethought, just uh, just a statement of like, oh,
we think this is going to be this is a
good idea because again, people can't get from one place
because of the vehicular traffic congestion that's being created. I
(09:54):
don't have a lot of faith in this government's ability
to come up with a coherent, cohesive, the logical transportation
plan for the Province of Ontario. That this proposal is
another perfect example of the Premier cominustry or they have
this government demonstrating a fundamental lack of understanding of the
issues and coming forward with something that is unresearched. Perhaps
(10:17):
sounds good and a sound like, but I think is
potentially disastrous for communities across Ontario and it's certainly not
going to be good for the winsor
Speaker 1 (10:25):
Well, just putting aside the whole issue of a bike lane,
I don't like the stripping away of autonomy from our
elected rep
Hey, we're back John Lecke here on Am eight hundred CKLW.
Hope you're all doing well. It is ten forty seven
news out of Toronto right now Queens Park. The province
is moving to restrict new bike lanes in municipalities. This
is a rather big deal, to be perfectly honest. What
we're looking at right now is new red tape that's
(00:27):
being added by the province. Municipalities would be directed to
demonstrate that the proposed bike lanes won't have a negative
impact on vehicle traffic, says the government. Training me right
now to discuss this is Ward nine councilor Kieran McKenzie. Hey, Kieren,
how you doing.
Speaker 2 (00:48):
I'm doing great, John. How about yourself?
Speaker 1 (00:50):
Doing really well? Thank you? How are you feeling about
this usurping of your authorities that you have as an
elected official here in the city from what the province
is putting truly learning again that municipalities are just creatures
of the province.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
Absolutely atrocious, atrocious piece of legislation. Another atrocious piece of
legislation that's being brought forward by the province. I won't
be surprised when the day comes when they're looking to
tweak it. After they passed this, they often move forward
with legislation and half based ideas, push something through the
legislature because it sounds good on paper, you know, at
(01:28):
some kind of discussion that they might have had in
an informal setting, and then they realized that they made
a big mistake and they have to go back and
fix it. And I think that that's what's going to
happen with this. It's an overreach and it's frankly, it's
an as you point out, it's a usurpation of municipal
authority in an area that the municipalities should have pretty much,
(01:52):
in my views, full autonomy.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
This doesn't sound like an issue that Windsor is dealing
with right now. Honestly, I try to think of a
city that might be dealing with this other than Toronto,
and I'm going to have I have a hard time
putting anything on that list.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
Well, look, I don't care about Toronto to be to
be brutally honest, But what I care about is what
I know is happening in our community. Is it's a
it's a battle. It's a battle every single day for
anyone that wants to recognize is that we need to
improve the transportation network in our community, and particularly the
(02:26):
active transportation network. Now, as you point out, the province,
because of some half baked ideas, has put more red
tape in front of us and made it even harder
than it already is for us to move forward with
completing the just what we've what we've already agreed should
be our active transportation network, but also moving forward, you know,
(02:48):
how we can improve upon what we've already what we've
already planned to do.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
It seems like this could be a potential like a
huge waste of money that we, like we've already spent
here if we get refute used for our current active
master active transport plan, what happens with all the hours
that have been spent by administration putting it together.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
Yeah, yeah, so it's it is a huge waste of time,
money and resources both in Queen's Park. It's a waste
of everybody's time. It's a waste of everybody's time in
the City of Winter who now have to go back
and review the extent to which they need provincial approvals
to do those things, and then doing all of that
work is an additional allownt waste of time, so you
(03:32):
talk about, you know, this is the government that oftentimes
likes to talk about the idea of reducing read tapes,
reminding protests and all of that. And it just because
it looks to me like the Premiere is a little
bit upset with the way, with the fact that this
commute back and forth to work from a Tobacota Queen's
Park isn't isn't or isn't quick in our form that
he's continuing some of the work that he did while
(03:54):
he was on council in terms of actively advocating against
active transportation. And again, this is counselor forward doing things
that you know, you know, fulfilling his wish list as
the premier. It's it's it's I think it's just misguided.
And hopefully I'm not optimistic about what he may or
(04:15):
may choose it may or may not choose to do.
But hopefully they'll think better of this as time goes forward,
or perhaps the opposition can cannot some sense into him
one way or another. But this is this is just
a bad move all the way around.
Speaker 1 (04:27):
I guess we really lucked out by getting those new
bike lanes put in on Victoria Downtown as well as
Polisher when we did, because had we not acted when
we did, it seems like that process could have been
delayed who knows months to years potentially.
Speaker 2 (04:42):
Now, yeah, we'll see how, we'll see how, you know,
quickly this is able to make its way through the
legislative process. But but yeah, I mean again, as you're
pointing out, every recycling project or active transportation infrastructure project
that's on the table now needs to be real view,
there's time and money associated with with that, with that process.
(05:04):
So already the premieu is costing people money for no
good reason. This is a ridiculous, ridiculous policy proposal.
Speaker 1 (05:12):
You know, you find yourself in a really interesting place
here in straddling both, you know, an urban ward but
also a suburban ward. And I wonder how you're able
to do that still receiving you know, the electoral votes
that you do. You're you're still elected. It seems like
there is a path that could be charted that takes
into account both the needs, well the needs of all
(05:34):
road users rather than picking and choosing one over the other.
You seem to be able to navigate that pretty well.
Speaker 2 (05:40):
That's a really good point, John, That so the idea
that you're just gonna, you know, take away capacity for
other modalities, or just look at the look at the
public right away through the lens of just like one
type of user, and that by addressing just those folks,
that you're going to make things better for everybody. You're not.
(06:02):
You're just not. If you really want to address congestion,
you should be doubling down on active transportation, should be
doubling down and supporting municipalities being able to improve their
transit systems. What causes congestion is too many single passenger
or private vehicles on the road. That causes congestion. And
(06:23):
I understand why people make those choices because, at least
in our community, the tuble transit system is subpard and
the active transportation network is also sub part, so they
make the choice to get in their cars. So reducing
our capacities to be able to add active transportation infrastructure
actions in marketing in will have the opposite effect of
what's being intended, which is why this policy is so misguided.
(06:46):
It doesn't solve the problem you're trying to solve, you know.
Speaker 1 (06:50):
And the other problem, of course, we're talking about safety
on the roads, and if we're not going to be
looking at having dedicated by lanes and dedicated active transportation
and lanes. And again we're not talking about protected ones
even at this point, just dedicated ones. Taking away lanes
from it. It's not taking these people off of the road.
These these users still have to use the road. They
(07:11):
can't use sidewalks, although many do illegally, but bikes and
e bikes and scooters and the like will all still
be on our roads.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
There's a public safety question to it as well. John,
So you're you know, kinds of great points and just
to and just to go back to your previous question,
and sorry that I started that a bit. Folks in
you know, it doesn't matter where you live, especially if
it's you know, suburban urban. There's folks in my ward,
whether they live in the more congested areas or if
(07:42):
they're a little further out, they right to bikes. And
in fact, we've just had some we just had some
very challenging debates with respect to lane use and planning
that raised the issue of the lack of active transportation
infrastructure as being a reason to not proceed with one
of the Premier's favorite hobby horses development. So you know,
(08:04):
not only worsening the traffic congestion problem that you're pretending
to solve, but at the same time, you're making it
harder to develop land in the middle of a housing
crisis because you don't have appropriate infrastructure in place to
support those developments in the places that they need to go.
Speaker 1 (08:19):
Last question for you, because, as you said a lot
of times, the Premiere, this government likes to put out
something flashy and then try to fix it or massage
it a bit later on to make it actually work.
It seems like this is obviously a wedge, obviously, but
one that is designed for an upcoming election. At the
same time that we're hearing that they're going to strip
away this ability from cities to go and install bike
(08:40):
lanes on their own, the Premier is also saying, or
the Transportation minister, excuse me, I'll be clear, speed limits
on all four hundred series highways are going to increase
to one hundred and ten kilometers an hour, But as well,
the government is developing a new standard to allow vehicles
to travel at speeds higher than one hundred and twenty
kilometers an hour on new highways. It really seems like
(09:02):
this is a fight that's being set up between the
city at the core and the suburbs, between cars and cyclists.
What do you think about that, Well.
Speaker 2 (09:12):
Look, there's going to be I would hope a significant
amount of research that's undertaken as that those things are
being considered. But like, as far as you know this government,
you know, it's just less than a month ago that
we heard the asinine idea floated that there might be
a tunnel that would be constructed along the entire length
(09:33):
of along for across the parallel tho for one in
the in the GTA, without any without any costing, without
any without any forethought, just uh, just a statement of like, oh,
we think this is going to be this is a
good idea because again, people can't get from one place
because of the vehicular traffic congestion that's being created. I
(09:54):
don't have a lot of faith in this government's ability
to come up with a coherent, cohesive, the logical transportation
plan for the Province of Ontario. That this proposal is
another perfect example of the Premier cominustry or they have
this government demonstrating a fundamental lack of understanding of the
issues and coming forward with something that is unresearched. Perhaps
(10:17):
sounds good and a sound like, but I think is
potentially disastrous for communities across Ontario and it's certainly not
going to be good for the winsor
Speaker 1 (10:25):
Well, just putting aside the whole issue of a bike lane,
I don't like the stripping away of autonomy from our
elected rep
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!