Ontario’s public service employees are back in the office this month, a change from a pandemic-era policy that offered flexible workday structures. That could have big impacts on commuters, especially around Toronto. And where do the Ford government’s highway plans fit in? What about emissions from all these extra cars on the roads? I spoke with The Narwhal’s Ontario reporter Fatima Syed about what it all means for our latest explainer video.

Want to make sure you don’t miss our latest work? Subscribe to our channel on YouTube and follow us on TikTok.

Thanks for watching!

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

For 15 years and counting, my commute from Mississauga to Toronto has been mired by everything imaginable — construction, cancelled buses, traffic jams, frozen tracks and train delays with no explanation at all. It’s likely about to get worse, or at least more crowded. 

There are more than 60,000 public servants working in the Ontario government. Starting next week, they’ll head back to the office five days a week, even as provincial politicians take an extended break from the legislature until March. 

The province issued that directive last August, changing the pandemic-era policy that first ordered everyone to work from home, then continued to allow for flexible work schedules. The directive was a far cry from Premier Ford’s thinking only five years ago, when he said working from home was “the way of the future.” 

On social media, people who said they were public servants were upset at the change. 

“Hope every single driver knows that I am clogging up traffic unnecessarily because of Ford,” said one person on Reddit. 

“I am reminded I am now paid not to be at my most productive. But instead, it is now also my job to use more gas, contribute to ridiculously congested traffic and emit more pollution,” said another on the same platform. 

The greatest concentration of provincial government offices is in Toronto, including the legislature. But not all government workers live in the city, so bringing them all back five days a week is going to strain southern Ontario’s already stressed and overpacked roads and transit system — and its air.

Transportation is already the single greatest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in Ontario, a province where the quality and quantity of transit leaves much to be desired. As provincial workers join the employees of big banks and other companies that have ordered everyone back downtown, there will inevitably be more people in cars, increasing traffic pollution. 

It already happened in Ottawa when federal workers returned to the office for just three days a week in 2024. A Carleton University study, conducted on 1,500 federal bureaucrats, found remote workers produced a quarter less emissions than those who went into the office. The researchers found the difference was even more drastic in Quebec, where remote workers with the federal government produced 64 per cent less emissions. 

The report’s conclusion was that working from home — even just part of the time — does cut emissions, as well as easing congestion. 

The Ford government wants to expand highways and roads, but more lanes simply means more cars on the road — a concept known as induced demand. Photo: Carlos Osorio / The Narwhal

This would all look a lot different if our transportation infrastructure could handle tens of thousands more people. But it can’t, and little has changed in that regard over the Ford government’s seven and a half years in power, for either drivers or transit users. 

The long-promised Highway 413, which would cut through the Greenbelt and connect the suburbs north and west of Toronto, and the Bradford Bypass farther north, have yet to be built, even though the government has passed legislation after legislation to enable construction. 

And even if they were built, they almost certainly wouldn’t ease traffic congestion — even the province’s own modelling says so. 

Research shows more highways don’t fix traffic congestion. So why is Ontario still building them?

More lanes simply means more cars on the road — a concept known as induced demand that is best illustrated by the fact that when the Ford government lifted provincial tolls off sections of the usually quiet Highway 407 last June, those stretches soon became busy. Meanwhile, there’s still no shortage of traffic on the 401.

But lifting those tolls was moving in the opposite direction of a proven solution for crowded streets: charging drivers through tolls and congestion pricing has worked in New York, reducing traffic congestion by 11 per cent since 2024. Instead, Ontario has killed several tolls and outlawed congestion pricing in its most recent budget. 

Even though the Ford government says it’s investing in “the largest transit expansion in North America,” buses, subways and light-rail transit continue to be overpacked and limited for people commuting across the Greater Toronto Area. Photo: Carlos Osorio / The Narwhal

Transit-wise, if you’ve taken a GO train or TTC streetcar at rush hour you know there’s often no room for even one more person to make their way back to the office in January. 

The government says it’s investing in “the largest transit expansion in North America” and the “largest subway expansion in Canadian history.” Cool, but how long is it going to take? 

Toronto and its neighbouring communities remain trapped in decades-long construction mazes for light-rail transit and subways whose end dates are aspirational at best, as is their effectiveness. The city’s newest line since 2002 is Finch West, a $3.7-billion, 10.3 kilometre light-rail transitway that runners can outpace, as several people have demonstrated. 

If nothing else, maybe Ontario’s lagging transit upgrades and lack of real solutions for congestion will make walking to work the commute of choice — even if it means marathon distances. Otherwise, and more likely, we’ll continue down this road, which may involve paying another $120 billion in health costs associated with air pollution across the country, particularly in the most densely populated regions like the Greater Toronto Area. And more air pollution means more global warming and more extreme weather events like flooding and wildfires. 

But that shouldn’t be the cost of going to work — nor should the void of human interaction from working at home be a better solution.

Here’s to hoping the ever-elusive Goldilocks option of better transit and less traffic is on the table one day, for public servants and the rest of us.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

With Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government still tight-lipped about the exact projects on its nation-building wishlist, a newly released internal document from the early days of his leadership adds to the speculation.

Proposals to double the size of a Vancouver port, build Highway 413 in Ontario and develop or expand mines in Yukon and Nunavut were among the list of 17 “major projects” compiled by the Carney government in March.

The list is included in federal briefing notes prepared by Fisheries and Oceans Canada for its deputy minister, and was obtained by The Narwhal under access to information law. Amongst the projects identified for “permitting and regulatory efficiency” are six related to ports and harbours, five involving mining, three that deal with electricity generation and three concerning highways. In October, Carney said developing ports and exporting minerals are key parts of his economic plan.

One of the projects on the list, the expansion of the Port of Montreal, was named by Carney in September to be considered for fast-tracking under the One Canadian Economy Act, meaning it can skip certain environmental and other requirements. In the same announcement, the prime minister listed critical minerals in the Ring of Fire in northern Ontario, and offshore wind power projects in the Atlantic — two other proposals that appeared on the list from March — as potential fast-tracked projects.

Port of Montreal expansion plans put endangered fish found only in Quebec at risk

The rest have not yet been selected for fast-tracking, although some are already high-profile, controversial developments. Roberts Bank Terminal 2, a plan to double the size of the Port of Vancouver, has attracted opposition due to its location in a sensitive estuary. Highway 413, a new highway in the Toronto area to be built through the protected Greenbelt, was at one point scrutinized by a federal agency over its potential harm to species at risk. And last year a court found the Yukon and Ottawa governments did not properly consult Indigenous nations over the Kudz Ze Kayah mining project, proposed on the traditional territory of the Kaska First Nations. All three appeared on the March list.

The briefing notes were prepared for a meeting that had been scheduled for March 26, about two weeks after Carney was sworn in. They laid out the proposals in a section titled “Update on Major Projects.” Government officials were expected to review them and “identify roadblocks.” The Narwhal has not confirmed the meeting itself took place.

The briefing note’s title, “Permitting and Regulatory Efficiency — Major Projects including Clean Growth” resembles the name of a Trudeau-era Cabinet directive issued in 2024 meant to speed up federal decision-making and get projects “built faster.” That effort was related to the Trudeau government’s Clean Growth Office. Under Carney, this office has now been absorbed into the new Major Projects Office.

The Major Projects Office is handling “national interest” projects and is part of the administrative arm of the prime minister and Cabinet, the Privy Council Office. In a response received after publication time, a spokesperson for the Privy Council Office told The Narwhal the list “was not prepared specifically” under the Trudeau-era cabinet directive on clean growth, and said there are “a number of projects at various stages of consideration for potential referral to the [Major Projects Office]. These projects are currently being assessed. To avoid influencing potential decisions and to respect sensitive ongoing discussions, the Government of Canada will refrain from publicly commenting on the status of assessment of these projects. Announcements will be made in due course.”

The Trudeau government’s “clean growth” plan spoke about meeting demand for clean energy. Carney’s approach also emphasizes clean energy, but adds “conventional energy,” meaning fossil fuels, as another priority. In September, he picked the expansion of a natural gas facility in B.C. as a “national interest” project, and said a plan to extend the life of the oilsands by capturing and storing the carbon pollution generated by large oil companies could be another one.

A $16B plan to bury oilsands carbon pollution — and the rural Albertans raising the alarm

According to a separate internal government list of projects revealed by The Globe and Mail, the government has been considering a number of other oil and gas industry proposals to be fast-tracked, including a new oil pipeline. The head of the Major Projects Office, former Trans Mountain oil pipeline CEO Dawn Farrell, has said she’s assessing more unnamed proposals that may be part of the next tranche of priority projects the government will reveal in November.

Here’s a look at the list of proposals federal public servants identified in March.

This list of 17 “major projects” was compiled by federal government officials and included in internal deputy minister briefing notes from March. Graphic: Shawn Parkinson / The Narwhal

1. Kudz Ze Kayah

Proponent: BMC MineralsLocation: South of Ross River, YukonDescription: Open pit and underground zinc, silver, copper, gold and lead mine, in the traditional territory of the Kaska First Nations. In December 2024, the Yukon Court of Appeal found the Yukon and federal governments did not consult properly with the nation over the project. The court ordered the governments to carry out more consultations.

2. Eskay Creek

Proponent: Skeena Gold and SilverLocation: Northwest B.C.Description: Open pit gold mine. The company says it’s expecting to obtain the permits it needs for construction by the end of the year and for the mine to start producing in 2027.

3. Roberts Bank Terminal 2

Proponent: Vancouver Fraser Port AuthorityLocation: Metro VancouverDescription: New marine container terminal that would be built in the Fraser River estuary. The port authority says more capacity is needed but First Nations, conservation groups and others have opposed the development in part because the estuary is key habitat for orcas and salmon.

4. Ring of Fire

Proponent: Wyloo Metals / variousLocation: Northern OntarioDescription: Approximately 8,000 square kilometres of land on Treaty 9 territory that is suspected of holding vast critical mineral deposits. The region is remote and lacking year-round road access, with several roads currently proposed. On Oct. 29, the Ontario government announced it had signed a deal with Webequie First Nation to “speed up” road construction. Ontario Premier Doug Ford said construction would begin next June as long as the federal government dropped a regional environmental assessment of the area first. But a day earlier, Neskantaga First Nation submitted a request to Environment and Climate Change Minister Julie Dabrusin for a federal assessment of a prominent nickel mine project in the Ring of Fire called Eagle’s Nest, by Australian mining company Wyloo Metals.

5. Mary River mine expansion

Proponent: Baffinland Iron MinesLocation: North Baffin Island, NunavutDescription: Expansion of Canada’s northernmost mine. Baffinland has proposed building a railway from the iron ore mine site to the coast as part of the expansion. Local hunters have asked for the project to be reassessed. Baffinland spokesperson Peter Akman told The Narwhal the project “aligns directly with Canada’s clean growth and Indigenous participation goals” and would “create hundreds of additional Inuit jobs, and expand royalties and training opportunities for northern communities.” He said adding rail would reduce emissions and other impacts.

6. Bruce C project

Proponent: Bruce PowerLocation: Near Kincardine, Ont.Description: New nuclear generating station within an existing plant. Bruce Power is considering several nuclear reactor technologies for the project, which is undergoing a federal impact assessment.

7. Highway 413

Proponent: Government of OntarioLocation: Greater Toronto AreaDescription: New highway proposed north and west of Toronto that would cut through the Greenbelt and endangered species habitat. The provincial government says it’s needed to help with congestion, but the highway is facing stiff opposition from locals and conservationists.

8. Rose Lithium-Tantalum mining project

Proponent: Critical Elements Lithium CorporationLocation: North of Nemaska, Que.Description: Open pit lithium and tantalum mine in the traditional territory of the Crees of northern Quebec, with a waste and tailings area and ore processing facility.

9. Port of Montreal expansion

Proponent: Port of MontrealLocation: Northeast of the Island of MontrealDescription: Project to expand the port’s capacity. The federal government has picked this project in the “national interest,” saying it’s key to “meet growing demand and diversify trade routes” in eastern Canada. Some local residents and experts argue the plan is harmful to the environment and public health.

10. Mactaquac Life Achievement project

Proponent: New Brunswick Power Corp.Location: Central New BrunswickDescription: Refurbishment to extend lifespan of New Brunswick’s largest hydro dam. In June, the province granted the New Brunswick Power Corp. permission to proceed with the project after a two-year environmental assessment. New Brunswick Power spokesperson Elizabeth Fraser told The Narwhal the organization “continues to look at opportunities to work with both the provincial and federal governments for funding opportunities” to help support the project.

11. Highway 101 twinning

Proponent: Province of Nova ScotiaLocation: Near Windsor, N.S.Description: Twinning a stretch of highway that has been stalled over a section that spans the Avon River. Some residents want to see a solution that allows for fish passage at the Avon River causeway.

12. Chignecto Isthmus resiliency project

Proponent: Provinces of New Brunswick and Nova ScotiaLocation: New Brunswick and Nova Scotia borderDescription: A new dyke system for a strip of land threatened by rising sea levels that is home to the only road and rail connection between the two provinces.

13. Wood Islands dredging

Proponent: Transport CanadaLocation: South shore of Prince Edward IslandDescription: Dredging to deepen the Wood Islands Harbour. Low tides have meant ferries have cancelled sailings and fishing vessels have had issues with the shallow water. Transport Canada said in October dredging is well on its way and expects to finish this year.

14: Dartmouth Cove infill

Proponent: 4197847 Nova Scotia Ltd.Location: HalifaxDescription: Proposal to infill part of Dartmouth Cove to provide more waterfront access and create land for development. In October, Halifax City Council voted to restrict the infill project following complaints about its potential to harm wildlife and block public access to the waterfront. Transport Canada recently approved an amended version of the plan.

15. Boat Harbour Remediation project

Proponent: Build Nova ScotiaLocation: Near Pictou, N.S.Description: Remediation of a harbour next to Pictou Landing First Nation, and expansion of an on-site waste facility to hold the hazardous industrial waste that is removed. The project was given the green light by Canada in January, subject to conditions that include measures to limit the effects on Pictou Landing and the Mi’kmaq of Nova Scotia. Build Nova Scotia declined comment to The Narwhal.

16. Regional assessment of offshore wind development in Nova Scotia

Proponent: Government of Nova ScotiaLocation: Off Nova Scotia’s eastern shoreDescription: This regional assessment was completed in January 2025 and recommended five potential wind energy areas, four off Nova Scotia’s eastern shore and a fifth northeast of Cape Breton. Since then, Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston has proposed hundreds of turbines to be built as part of a project called “Wind West.” The prime minister named the “Wind West Atlantic Energy” project as one of his potential national-interest proposals in September.

17: Cooper Cove Marine Terminal expansion

Proponent: Port of ArgentiaLocation: Town of Placentia, Nfld.Description: Expansion of a seaport, meant to increase cargo storage and speed up vessel loading. In 2023, the Trudeau government committed $38 million to this $100-million project.

The Narwhal requested comment from the proponents of all projects that have not yet been listed as in the “national interest.” The responses received have been included.

Updated on Nov. 4, 2025, at 1:38 p.m. ET: This story has been updated to correct a line stating the Port of Montreal expansion had been chosen by Prime Minister Mark Carney for fast-tracking under the One Canadian Economy Act, as it has only been identified for consideration for fast-tracking. It has also been updated to include comment from the federal government, received after publication time.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Construction is set to start on Highway 413 — a megaproject that would cut through endangered species habitat, including the protected Greenbelt — in the northwestern parts of the Greater Toronto Area.

On Wednesday, Aug. 27, Ontario Premier Doug Ford announced that the first two contracts for the project had been awarded. He made the announcement in Caledon, Ont., where Highway 10 is being upgraded to include a bridge for the new highway. Upgrades will also soon begin on Highway 401/407, which will be the western terminus of Highway 413 and link the Halton and Peel regions to York.

Ford has pushed through legislation to fast-track projects like these, and the new prime minister has promised to “build, baby, build.” But the changing political climate leaves a lot of questions about how the project will proceed.

Michael DiMuccio, a director of grassroots organization Stop the 413 Now, who lives close to the proposed path of Highway 413 in Vaughan, Ont., said he’s noticed a lot more action in the area. “All of a sudden, we have construction people moving into the neighbourhood,” DiMuccio said.

Ontario Transportation Minister Prabmeet Sarkaria shared a video update showing crews on the ground back in December.

In its 2025 budget, released in mid-May, the Ontario government said it had identified 500 properties the province will need to acquire to build Highway 413. Expropriation notices have already gone out to some residents along the route.

Ontario’s Highway 413, mapped

Highway 413 would connect Toronto’s north and western suburbs, while another proposed highway project, the Bradford Bypass, would connect Highway 400 to the 404 in Bradford West Gwillimbury. Map: Jeannie Phan / The Narwhal

Ford and his Progressive Conservatives have been trying to build the highway — a 52-kilometre route through the York, Peel and Halton regions — since they were first elected in 2018. The project, which critics noted would run through Ontario’s protected Greenbelt and swaths of endangered species habitat, was a major tenet of Ford’s 2022 and 2025 re-election campaigns. 

For the last seven years, the Highway 413 project has seen its share of controversy. The National Observer found developers with real estate near the proposed route had ties to the Ford government. Then opposition parties promised to cancel the project if elected in 2022. And the federal government designated the project for an impact assessment in 2021, only to drop that review in April 2024 and refuse another request later that year from environmental groups. 

Instead, a federal-provincial working group was established last year with the goal of guiding Highway 413’s development, especially as it relates to federal environmental legislation like the Fisheries Act, the Migratory Birds Convention Act and the Species At Risk Act. Documents recently released to The Narwhal through access to information legislation show how provincial and federal members of the working group viewed their role and mandate differently.

Most recently, Bill 5, also known as the Protect Ontario by Unleashing our Economy Act, which passed on June 5, weakens the rules that protect land, water and wildlife. It will give the province the power to create “special economic zones” where regulations can be circumvented, and rewrites the Endangered Species Act.

Late last year, the province introduced Bill 212, or the Reducing Gridlock, Saving You Time Act, allowing the Ford government to exempt projects like Highway 413 from undergoing a provincial environmental assessment (as well as being the bill behind the much-publicized removal of bike lanes in Toronto). 

With so much change afoot, here’s what we know about Highway 413’s path forward, and where Ontario and Canada stand on seeing it through.

Highway 413 would cut through the protected Greenbelt, including forest and farmland that sequesters carbon and provides habitat for at-risk species. Photo: Katherine KY Cheng / The Narwhal

What do Ontario’s Bill 212 and Bill 5 mean for Highway 413?

Passed in late 2024, Bill 212 gives the Ford government the ability to exempt projects from typical provincial environmental assessments. Environmental assessments for the 413 have been ongoing since 2007, with several stops and starts. 

Bill 212’s passing in late 2024 meant Highway 413 can now go through an “accelerated” assessment with a more limited review of the highway’s environmental impacts. Crucially, this would allow the province to start on early work like bridges before the assessments are completed. Bill 212 would also allow the province to not publish the studies done as part of those assessments. 

While Bill 212 would essentially undo the province’s Environmental Assessment Act, Bill 5 would repeal its Endangered Species Act, Tim Gray, the executive director of advocacy organization Environmental Defence. This would mean “all the onus and responsibility ensuring that [endangered] species are not impacted now falls on the federal government,” he said in an interview, adding that despite the working group and Ford’s recent cozying up to Prime Minister Mark Carney, the provincial government “has put themselves into a direct line of conflict with the federal government because the highway goes through some of the best remaining high-quality habitats for federally listed endangered species.” 

And this could do more to slow down than speed up construction, Gray said. Since the province still has to comply with federal laws like the Species At Risk Act and the Fisheries Act, Highway 413 won’t necessarily be expedited.

Across Canada, courts have required governments to demonstrate proper due diligence and consultations, including with Indigenous groups, which these bills also circumvent. Projects without that due diligence have “been held up and delayed with those consultations being forced to take place,” Gray said. 

“We see this repeated pattern of the provincial government in Ontario thinking that the path to doing whatever they want is to bulldoze over other responsibilities. But in fact, it’s delaying projects, not accelerating them.” 

And it’s not just Highway 413 that these two bills impact: going forward, the provincial government has the power to designate any number of projects as being within special economic zones. On top of having major impacts for the environment by skirting important assessments and protections, the bills may also result in conflict with Indigenous groups, who say Bill 5 infringes on their Treaty Rights. 

Bill 5: a guide to Ontario’s spring 2025 development and mining legislation

Is the Highway 413 working group really working? 

The federal-provincial working group for Highway 413 was established in 2024, and it includes the province’s Ministry of Transportation and the federal Impact Assessment Agency. It sets aside the previously started (but never finished) federal impact assessment and, instead, asks the two agencies to work in tandem to find ways to avoid and mitigate environmental damage from the project. Other federal ministries like Fisheries and Oceans and Environment and Climate Change are also pulled in for input and comment. 

Documents acquired by The Narwhal through the Access to Information Act illustrate the push and pull over the terms of reference for the working group. Combined comments from the federal Fisheries and Environment ministries and the Impact Assessment Agency suggest federal members of the group were pushing back on the idea they were there to steward Highway 413 through to completion.

In a document prepared for a meeting last July, the discrepancies were on display. Under a subsection called mandate and responsibility, federal members crossed out several references to project delivery and supporting construction, replacing them with wording around better informing decision-making on the project. In a comment in the document attached to these changes, they note: “The scope of the technical working groups as per the [memorandum of understanding] is to support assessment of effects, support efficacy of mitigation measures identified by the proponent to lessen or avoid effects on fish, fish habitat, [species at risk], etc. in areas of federal jurisdiction. Our role is not a project delivery role.”

The Ontario government’s own research has confirmed 11 species at risk are living along the planned route of Highway 413. Clockwise, they are: butternut tree, bobolink, chimney swift, bank swallow, rapids clubtail, redside dace, western chorus frog, wood thrush, eastern meadowlark, barn swallow and olive-sided flycatcher. Illustration: Shawn Parkinson / The Narwhal

In a document for another meeting last August, the federal members again crossed out similar statements, including a new point under responsibilities that read, “Share information and assist with delivery of the Highway 413 project.”

As of November 2024, Gray said, Ontario was about a year away from having to apply for permits under the Species At Risk Act and the Fisheries Act. And construction couldn’t start until those permits came through. While Bill 5 creates the possibility of “special economic zones” where local and provincial laws no longer apply, as well as reforming endangered species protections, projects are still at the mercy of federal permits and their timelines. “The provincial government is looking to wipe away all provincial and municipal laws, but they’re going to have no impact on the application of federal law,” Gray said. 

In the documents laying out terms for the working group, the province initially suggested the working group would help “establish timelines for federal permitting that take into account the operational and construction timelines of the project.” The federal government corrected that and clarified “the operational and construction timelines of the project will be considered alongside the regulatory requirements, to the extent possible, to support a timely decision-making process.”

In the published terms of reference, they strike a balance: “The working group will establish a work plan and timelines for federal permitting that take into account the operational and construction timelines of the project, requirements set out in relevant regulations and the need for adequate provision of information and consultations before final decisions can be made.”

Feds warn Ontario falling short on Highway 413 consultations with Six Nations, Mississaugas of the Credit

In the documents, working group members from the Impact Assessment Agency shared a number of expectations in October 2024 related to federally protected species, including asking for a list of all the species not regulated by the province — like redside dace, bank swallows and western chorus frogs — and an outline of how Highway 413 impacts them. The federal representatives also proposed that the province publish these results. 

The Impact Assessment Agency told the Narwhal, “authorizations and permits are assessed and issued under the Fisheries Act and Species At Risk Act, which are also subject to consultation with impacted Indigenous communities.” The department also stated, “All parties of the working group worked together to finalize the terms of reference which remains current.”

When asked about Ontario’s Bill 5, the federal agency redirected The Narwhal to the province’s Ministry of Transportation, which did not respond.

Where does the federal government stand on Highway 413 now?

In a May 5 letter addressed to Prime Minister Carney, Ford identified Highway 413 as a key project he’d like the federal government to co-operate on. “I urge you to limit your government’s intervention into any other critical infrastructure projects where there is no federal jurisdiction to do so,” Ford wrote. 

The province published the letter alongside one sent from then-deputy prime minister Chrystia Freeland in November 2024 that suggested the federal government was very much in line with the province’s plans for Highway 413. Freeland proposed another working group that would, among other things, “identify ways to advance additional early works and streamline the processes for Highway 413 and Highway 69 to get these projects built faster,” she said, referring also to a project to widen the highway that runs from just north of Parry Sound to Sudbury. She continued that it is “in the best interest of Canadians and Ontarians to continue our great work together.” 

Federal government advised Ontario to reroute Highway 413: documents

That was under former prime minister Justin Trudeau, and prior to Bill 5’s introduction. But, Carney has also signalled interest in speeding up approvals and limiting redundancy between federal and provincial approvals. In the case of Highway 413, certain federal protections are the only rules left standing.

Gray, of Environmental Defence, said Bill 5 and 212 actually make the federal government a bigger barrier to Highway 413 because the province is eschewing environmental assessments, pushing responsibility onto the federal government and making it more likely to intervene.  

In addition to private residential property, conservation areas and farms will also be cut through if Highway 413 gets built. Photo: Katherine KY Cheng / The Narwhal

“I think you’ll see people within agencies like Fisheries and Oceans and Environment and Climate Change Canada identifying major conflicts between their legislative requirements for protecting species at risk, fish and the planned design of the highway,” Gray said. “The Ford government will respond negatively to that … but the federal government has the responsibility of issuing these permits, and issuing them in a way that willfully ignores opportunity to mitigate impact is illegal under their own legislation.”  

From Gray’s perspective, it would be “very strange” to see the federal government support the Highway 413 project. “There’s so many other important priorities across the country in terms of building public transportation and the rationale for this highway is very, very weak,” he said. 

Nonetheless, expropriation notices are going out and early work is humming along in different locations.

In Halton Hills, Ont., Jeannine d’Entremont, a leader with grassroots organization Halton Hills Climate Action, said she and other locals have seen crews out drilling for soil samples this spring. Her group, along with others, pushed for a federal impact assessment of Highway 413 but were denied at the same time as Environmental Defence.

But, d’Entremont said, “We’re not throwing in the towel.”

Updated on August 27, 2025 at 1:59 p.m. ET: This story was updated to include new information about construction on Highway 413.

Updated on June 17, 2025, at 1:45 p.m. ET: This story was corrected to state that Jeannine d’Entremont lives in Halton Hills, Ont., not Caledon, Ont.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Get the inside scoop on The Narwhal’s environment and climate reporting by signing up for our free newsletter.

Just over a month after almost one million Ontarians lost power in the midst of a destructive ice storm, the province is proposing to cut the meagre budget of emergency preparedness and response from $70 million to $66.2 million, even as it becomes a standalone ministry for the first time. 

The government is also decreasing its budget for emergency forest firefighting, from $177 million to $135 million, even as evacuation orders are already in place in at least one northwestern Ontario community this spring. 

These decisions to cut funds put towards the effects of climate change were some of the only mentions of the environment in the budget the Doug Ford government released May 15. Instead, it focused heavily on supporting drivers, with more talk of new and expanded highways (without offering additional funding), a ban on congestion pricing (which is working in New York) and a continued crackdown on the premier’s foe, bike lanes. 

Notably, the government has released new details about its long-promised Highway 413: it reconfirmed that it had completed 90 per cent of the “preliminary design work” for Highway 413, wants to start work on embankments and resurfacing and has newly identified “the need to acquire over 500 properties for construction.”

Ontario Finance Minister Peter Bethlenfalvy addressed the cuts to emergency and preparedness and firefighting Thursday, telling reporters the government has a contingency fund to cover such things, which doesn’t show up in the budget. “We always put money aside for what we can’t predict might happen,” he said. “But we’re there financially. We’ve always been there, whether it’s fire, floods or whatever may come.”

Bethlenfalvy said the government has taken several actions to address climate risk, which he said “is first and foremost for all of us.” He listed electric vehicle production as a solution even though none have been built in the province yet, noting, “we’re going to have some bumps in the road, but we’re going to get through that.” 

Bethlenfalvy mentioned nuclear power generation, which the province has made many promises about, and renewable energy, which it has cancelled more of than it’s seen built. Lower-emissions power can’t come soon enough, as the Independent Electricity System Operator recently reported Ontario’s electricity is now being produced with the highest percentage of fossil fuels since coal plants were operating in the province 20 years ago (back when we had smog days). The increase in natural gas electricity production in Ontario during Ford’s time in office means that the province’s grid was just 84 per cent emissions free last year, down from 96 per cent emissions free seven years ago. 

Much of the Ford government’s seventh financial plan feels like business-as-usual in many ways, even as the Progressives Conservatives tout the need to do business differently in the face of economic uncertainty. U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariff threats have already materialized into jobs lost and projects stalled across Ontario’s auto sector. 

Days earlier, Honda announced it would be pausing plans to build a $15-billion electric-vehicle plant in Alliston, Ont., for at least two years. The delay comes on the heels of news General Motors will be laying off 750 workers at its Oshawa assembly plant.

Still, the Ford government appears to be moving ahead on pledges it made as early as 2018, to build highways and speed up mining in the Ring of Fire in northern Ontario, a vast resource of critical minerals needed for electric vehicles — as well as other things, like weapons. 

There is little notable progress on these key files in the new budget, but the government has passed a suite of legislation of late to speed things up. 

The Ford government is supporting TC Energy’s proposal to build a pumped storage energy project on Georgian Bay. Researchers say the small disturbances that could result might have big consequences. Photo: Christopher Katsarov Luna / The Narwhal

Meanwhile, the government continues to do little to address the threat of climate change, either through tackling the province’s greenhouse gas emissions or recognizing the economic toll of extreme weather. This comes after Ontario’s independent financial markets regulator joined other provinces in deciding to stop work on climate transparency requirements for publicly-traded firms. And while the government made a fleeting acknowledgement of the impact of extreme weather on farms and wastewater systems in the budget, it offered little in the way of support for both. 

Instead, the budget focuses on critical minerals and the government’s attempts to decrease the amount of time it takes to get projects underway from 15 years down to two — an effort that poses huge environmental risk and has angered First Nations who say consultation and consent is not optional. 

Here’s how the environment file is stacking up after a busy week at Queen’s Park.

What are the environmentally significant pledges in the 2025 Ontario budget?

The Ford government continues to send strong signals it wants to move ahead with a massive, controversial pumped storage project in Meaford, Ont., proposed by pipeline giant TC Energy. The project would store large amounts of clean energy, but carries environmental and public safety risks as it moves water up and down the Niagara Escarpment from Georgian Bay, two sensitive ecological systems. 

The government reiterated its January announcement that it was “advancing pre-development work” for the proposal that would draw about 7,000 swimming pools worth of water out of the bay, pump it to a reservoir atop the escarpment using excess electricity and then pour it back down through turbines to generate electricity when it’s needed.

The budget said it was being “developed in partnership by TC Energy and the Saugeen Ojibway Nation,” which represents the Chippewas of Nawash and Saugeen First Nations, which have nearby unceded territory. 

Saugeen Ojibway Nation has expressed optimism about the project, but has also cautioned that it would like to carry out its own environmental assessment.

Despite the risk of military explosives, TC Energy wants to build ‘Ontario’s battery’ on Georgian Bay

The government also promoted its plan to build Highway 413 and the Bradford Bypass, and expand other highways, including a much-criticized proposal to dig a tunnel under Highway 401. 

The government is also permanently cutting the tax on gasoline and diesel and removing tolls on the provincially owned portion of Highway 407 East, it announced earlier this week. 

The budget noted the Progressive Conservatives are amending provincial laws to prevent the City of Toronto from tolling roads, implementing a personal vehicle tax or putting in place congestion pricing. New York City implemented congestion pricing this January, and evidence shows the policy has been an overwhelming success — with traffic and commuting times down, while retail sales, restaurant reservations and transit ridership are all up.

Meanwhile, the Ford government did not promise any new money for transit projects, but it did reinstate its vow to rip out bike lanes on major streets in Toronto. 

Bethlenfalvy told reporters the government has independent reports suggesting gridlock costs Ontario $56 million a year. The streets where bike lanes are being removed “all have subway lines,” he noted. 

“I’m a bicyclist myself, you know, but I think we need to meet you safely on bicycles. We also need to meet trucks and cars safely in Toronto and elsewhere, and we’ve got to keep investing in infrastructure like subways. It’s not either/or.”

The province is putting an additional $92 million toward electric vehicle charging infrastructure, for a total of $180 million with existing funding. 

A crash course in Doug Ford’s love-hate relationship with electric vehicles

Finally, the budget says the province will support “new pipelines connecting Alberta oil to new refineries.” It’s unclear what “new refineries” the government means, whether in Ontario, elsewhere in Canada or around the world. 

Asked about this, Bethlenfalvy said, “You’ve got to go from Alberta, through Ontario to connect to new markets in Europe and beyond.”

He said there is broad support across leaders to work collectively to ensure things like pipelines are built: “You can’t take forever to make a single pipeline. You’ve got to move fast. One project, one approval.” 

There are no current proposals being considered for a new oil or gas pipeline that would go through Ontario.

Treaty 9 First Nations representatives have told the Ford government that their consultation and informed consent is mandatory for mining and road development in the Ring of Fire. Photo: Carlos Osorio / The Narwhal

Mining and housing, meet budget and bills

The budget speaks once again about “unlocking the Ring of Fire,” a northern Ontario critical minerals deposit that the government considers “one of Ontario’s greatest assets in the face of economic threats from the United States.” 

It pledges $70 million over four years for an Indigenous Participation Fund, meant to support “Indigenous communities and organizations in areas of high mineral activity” to help them participate in mining development and “enable meaningful consultation.”

The government is also creating a $500-million Critical Minerals Processing Fund to help finance projects that will process the ore mined in Ontario. 

Ontario’s Bill 5 sparks new concerns where a legacy of environmental damage remains

But several proposed road projects needed to access the mineral deposits are still undergoing environmental and impact assessments, including a regional assessment that will look at cumulative impacts for the entire area.

This will include extensive consultations with dozens of impacted First Nations, including some that are proponents of road projects to the region. 

The government has also been pushing through legislation under Bill 5 that would amass power in the hands of cabinet to speed up development in “special economic zones,” remove protections for endangered species and create a new office to help companies get authorizations quicker to build mines and homes alike.

The budget also comes the same week as the government tabled Bill 17, housing legislation that may limit municipalities’ ability to impose green building standards (they’ve tried this before and failed, so details pending), delaying efforts to reduce fossil fuel usage for heating and cooling.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Get the inside scoop on The Narwhal’s environment and climate reporting by signing up for our free newsletter.

The Ontario government is repealing the Endangered Species Act, making it easier to build mines and infrastructure projects like Highway 413. 

On April 17, the eve of the Easter long weekend, the Doug Ford government released Bill 5, the Protect Ontario by Unleashing our Economy Act. It proposes to speed up natural resource development, shift energy regulation and designate areas in the province as special economic zones where cabinet could decide other laws no longer apply. 

Among those laws would be the new Species Conservation Act, a watered-down replacement for the 18-year-old Endangered Species Act. The new act redefines and narrows habitat for animals — to the specific area they den in, for example, rather than the broader area they use to travel and find food. And it gives politicians the power to decide which species are protected. 

In Ontario’s environmental registry listing for the new law, which is open for comments until May 17, the government declared the provincial Endangered Species Act too complicated. It also says the existing act has caused delays and additional costs for housing, transit projects and critical infrastructure. In the Endangered Species Act, recovery and stewardship are explicit goals. The new act removes those words entirely, and instead only references “protection and conservation” while “taking into account social and economic considerations including the need for sustainable economic growth in Ontario.” 

Endangered species laws have been in place in Ontario since the 1970s. Those laws were passed because animal and planetary health were slipping through the cracks of existing legislation that focused on things like land use and natural resource development, Justina Ray, president and senior scientist with Wildlife Conservation Society Canada, told The Narwhal.

A woodland caribou crosses a narrow straight of water in the Slate Islands provincial park, on Lake Superior. The act that protects caribou and other at-risk species in Ontario will be repealed under Bill 5, which passed first reading on April 17. Photo: Christopher Katsarov Luna / The Narwhal

Social and economic considerations already dominate the other decision-making frameworks, she said, so burdening species conservation laws with project timelines and cost is problematic. 

“It undermines the very rationale for having this law in the first place,” she said, likening it to a fire department weighing the bill for water damage before responding to a blaze. 

“The purpose of the emergency response is to act when lives, and in this case, species, are at risk,” Ray said. “Not to second guess whether intervention is economically convenient.”

In the news release announcing the bill, the province promises to establish a new conservation program to support community-based voluntary initiatives that replace the Species at Risk Stewardship Program, and increase the funding for species conservation work by up to $20 million. 

“The days of making proponents wait years for approvals and permits are over. We can and will build the Ontario of tomorrow in a way that protects the environment and protects jobs,” Ontario Environment Minister Todd McCarthy stated. The release also quoted a number of mining and business representatives who support the new act.

“By fostering a more efficient, business-friendly landscape, we are ensuring projects of strategic and critical importance to our economy can rise to address the unique and pressing needs of our time, while continuing to set the stage for Ontario’s global competitiveness for years to come,” Vic Fideli, Ontario minister of economic development, job creation and trade, said. 

Here’s what you need to know about the Endangered Species Act, and the province’s plans to replace it. 

What we know about Ontario’s proposed Species Conservation Act

The new law redefines habitat for species at risk, and outlines what has to be protected.

The Endangered Species Act defines habitat as, “an area on which the species depends, directly or indirectly, to carry on its life processes, including life processes such as reproduction, rearing, hibernation, migration or feeding.” 

By contrast, the new Species Conservation Act defines animal habitat as “a dwelling place or the area immediately around it, such as a den, nest or other similar place, that is occupied or habitually occupied by one or more members of a species for the purposes of breeding, rearing, staging, wintering or hibernating.” 

That means the areas needed for other processes critical to a species survival — like finding food — are no longer protected. 

“The current legislation requires the protection of habitat,” Tim Gray, executive director of Environmental Defence, told The Narwhal. “All of those requirements to protect habitat are erased in this new bill, and it only focuses on where the animal is actually found. So if it was a bird, that would be the nest; if it’s a tree, it’s the drip line [or the circumference] of the canopy of the tree.”

Altogether, it means project proponents aren’t as likely to mitigate harm or protect and achieve an overall benefit to the habitat. “It’s only very narrowly about the individual species,” Gray said. “All of the requirements for actually recovering species and creating new habitat, the number of individuals, all that is swept away as well.”

Ontario’s Bill 5, the Protect Ontario by Unleashing our Economy Act, has been proposed as a means of speeding up mineral development by streamlining permitting. It will create special economic zones in the province where cabinet can decide certain laws don’t apply, as well as repealing the Endangered Species Act. Photo: Chris Katsarov Luna / The Narwhal

The government said it needed a new habitat definition because current ones have resulted in “uncertainty” and “confusion” when deciding which activities are permissible. It noted the new definition includes clear terms and parameters, while “preserving core elements of species’ habitat.”

But the Species Conservation Act empowers cabinet to define terms like “adverse effect,” “alternative habitat” and “in the wild” in coming to its conclusions on permissible activities.

Under the new legislation, project proponents with proposals that could harm a species at risk will also be able to start work as soon as they complete an online registration process, rather than waiting for a permit from the Environment Ministry. 

“Registered activities will be required to meet all associated requirements set out in new regulations. The ministry looks forward to developing these regulations in consultation with the public and Indigenous communities over the coming months,” the notice for the bill reads.

Permits are currently required for land development, infrastructure, aggregate pits and quarries and other significant projects. The proposals are reviewed by the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks, which delivers guidance around best practices to minimize impacts to the species they’re likely to harm. The permitting process also assesses whether reasonable alternatives to the activity have been considered and, if harm must happen, whether the proponent has taken steps to reduce it. 

The proposal noted a “registration approach is already in place and used by the ministry for 95 per cent of projects” that are subject to the Endangered Species Act. The remaining five per cent of projects are likely more complicated, or deal with more deeply threatened species, like caribou, Ray said. According to the province, under the new law, nearly all of those remaining projects will fall within the registry system.

“There will still be requirements set out in regulation that protect species, and we will also continue to provide information and protection guidance for species through policies and implementation supports,” the notice states.

The major difference between the registry that exists and what’s proposed, Gray said, is that change to the definition of habitat, which means proponents no longer register to protect the broader area species use — just the individual.

Ontario is about to slash environmental protections. It already wasn’t funding them, auditor general says

A ‘trajectory of erosion’ in Ontario’s species at risk law

Ontario’s original protections for at-risk species were once touted as among the best in Canada. Various amendments to the Endangered Species Law have shifted that position and, Ray pointed out, there’s been no provincial review of what all these changes have achieved in terms of the wellbeing of at-risk species. Ontario had 22 per cent more species at risk in 2020 compared to 2009. 

“We’re looking at an ongoing trajectory of erosion,” she said.

For example, the More Homes, More Choices Act, passed by the Ford government in 2019, required the status of a species that also exists outside of Ontario, including outside of Canada, be considered during its listing: a lower threat category outside Ontario meant it would be given a similarly low classification in Ontario. 

The Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario, an independent committee of experts, currently classifies species using scientific information, then submits a report to the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. The ministry is required to amend the list of Species at Risk in Ontario to include those species within 12 months. 

This automatic listing under the Endangered Species Act was the reason Ontario’s species at risk legislation was once considered the best among the provinces and territories that have passed stand-alone endangered species laws. (Four provinces and Yukon have no stand-alone legislation to protect at-risk species.) Under the Species Conservation Act, that listing is at the discretion of the environment minister, who can also choose to delist species, regardless of what the science says, as well as appoint committee members. 

After a species is listed under Ontario’s Endangered Species Act, its habitat is meant to be immediately protected. The province is then supposed to develop a recovery strategy, publish a response statement and develop specific habitat protections for the species. And progress towards protection and recovery is supposed to be reviewed within five years. 

Each species faces its own threats and requires its own recovery plan. Ontario had published recovery strategies for 180 of the more than 200 species at risk as of December 2024. The new Species Conservation Act removes the requirement for the government to develop a recovery strategy, management plan, response statement and review of progress. 

Highway 413 has been a major focus during Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservatives tenure. The federal government previously clashed with the province over the project’s impact on endangered species. Photo: Chris Katsarov Luna / The Narwhal

This means only federally listed species will have a recovery strategy available for use in Ontario, and these are often subject to lengthy delays. But across Canada, provincial and territorial at-risk species laws are supposed to complement federal legislation, such as the federal Migratory Birds Convention Act, Fisheries Act and Species at Risk Act. 

Less than five per cent of the range of most terrestrial at-risk species occur on federal land, and protection for species listed under the Species at Risk Act only extends to individual plants and animals and their dwelling places on federal lands, such as national parks or First Nations reserves. The federal government can extend its protections to provincial lands through emergency orders and other means, but rarely does so. 

The vast majority of Ontario is comprised of provincially managed public lands, and provincial listings are meant to protect the habitat of at-risk species here as they’re not covered under federal law — similar to private lands. But now, migratory birds and aquatic species that are listed as endangered or threatened under the federal Species at Risk Act are excluded from Ontario’s proposed Species Conservation Act — the Ford government has said this will reduce duplication and allow projects to “move forward in a more efficient and cost-effective way.” 

“They’re changing the rules, and they’re saying, ‘Okay, we’re not going to take any responsibility for this set of species,’ ” Ray said. “That means that they will not do anything to help manage them on provincial lands … where [the province has] primary authority for many activities.”

In 2021, Ontario’s auditor general reviewed the province’s efforts to protect species at risk under the Endangered Species Act, releasing a critical and bleak evaluation. It found the province had never denied an application to harm an at-risk species or its habitat, nor inspected these activities it authorized to ensure they were in compliance.

Ford government is harming endangered species, boosting industry through environment ministry: audit

What do the changes to the Endangered Species Act mean for redside dace and Highway 413?

According to the province’s own accounting, biodiversity in southern Ontario is worth an estimated $84.4 billion per year (in 2008 dollars, or $122.5 billion dollars today, accounting for inflation). That’s the value of its provision of fresh water, nutrient cycling, carbon storage, flood control, pollination, culture, tourism and aesthetics. The Credit River watershed alone provides $371 million per year in ecosystem services and the Greenbelt provides $2.7 billion per year (in 2008 dollars, or $538.7 million and $3.9 billion today, respectively).

Highway 413 crosses both.

In January, the federal fisheries and environment ministers issued a critical habitat order for redside dace, a tiny endangered minnow threatened by development in southern Ontario, and Highway 413 in particular. The fish is federally protected, and the order states that the Endangered Species Act affords the minnow and its habitat additional provincial protection. 

Federal government advised Ontario to reroute Highway 413: documents

Redside dace have become a poster child for the fight against Highway 413. The 60-kilometre proposed route rings around the suburbs north and west of Toronto, crossing 85 waterways and the habitats of the butternut tree, the rapids clubtail dragonfly, the Western chorus frog and seven species of birds, in addition to the redside dace. 

Under the Endangered Species Act, the province established specific rules and best practices for protecting redside dace, such as techniques for installing sediment- control fencing. But provincial protections for redside dace disappear under the Species Conservation Act. 

The silver minnow, with a slash of red across its side, is still protected under the federal Fisheries Act, so any project that may harm it or its habitat must still receive a Fisheries Act authorization or a Species at Risk Act permit. But these rules have been in effect for years and failed to protect redside dace; they lost a staggering 81 per cent of their population from 2007 to 2017.

Gray noted much of the discussion in a federal-provincial working group on Highway 413 has been about each party’s jurisdiction and protection plans along the route.

The Ontario government’s own research has confirmed 11 species at risk are living along the planned route of Highway 413. Clockwise, they are: butternut tree, bobolink, chimney swift, bank swallow, rapids clubtail, redside dace, western chorus frog, wood thrush, eastern meadowlark, barn swallow and olive-sided flycatcher. Illustration: Shawn Parkinson / The Narwhal

Six of the bird species along the route of the highway are migratory and listed as threatened under the federal Species at Risk Act, meaning they’ll also be excluded from protections under the new provincial act. The butternut would only be protected around its roots on provincial and private lands. The rapids clubtail would likely lose protection on provincial and private lands in the area it forages and travels — activities that are no longer part of the new definition of habitat. 

“It just puts more onus on the federal government to do their job properly,” Gray said. “Now it will be very clear that the provincial government has complete disdain for any of these values along this highway, and the federal government will have to carry all the weight in ensuring that these species are not eradicated.”

The fact that the redside dace and its plight as an endangered species has become so closely tied to the fight against Highway 413 is symbolic, Ray added. It illustrates the lack of environmental laws in Canada that offer levers for regulation rather than enabling development.

“So when you have so few of them, sometimes it’s only the species-at-risk laws that have these kinds of elements, which reduces conversations down to one species, like the redside dace on Highway 413,” she said. “The redside dace is not about the redside dace. It’s about everybody else and the whole environment, but it’s the only lever there is.” 

— With files from Elaine Anselmi

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

As Premier Doug Ford heads back to Queen’s Park to officially start his third legislative term on Monday, climate change looms large in Ontario. Tens of thousands of people across the province remained without power Wednesday, a week after the worst ice storm in decades took down parts of the grid. 

The storm saw more than a million homes and businesses in Ontario experience power outages, particularly around Orillia, Peterborough and Muskoka. Since then, workers, including some from Saskatchewan and New Brunswick, have been working to replace 2,300 broken transmission poles, blown transformers and the wires that connected them. 

As of April 4, one of those affected was Jill Dunlop, Ontario’s brand-new minister of emergency preparedness and response and the MPP for Simcoe North, which includes Orillia. This is the first time Ford has given emergency preparedness full ministry status — in his previous cabinets, the issue was folded into the Treasury Board and led by an associate minister. 

The reason: Ford says the province has seen a greater need for emergency response in the last five years, “from flooding to tornadoes to hurricanes to the pandemic to wildfires that happen every single year.” As global temperatures grow warmer, fuelled by burning fossil fuels, scientists predict such extreme weather is expected to become more frequent and harmful. 

“My biggest concern right now is flooding,” Ford said on April 4 during a visit to Orillia, where he inspected the damage and gave kudos to the emergency response. “We’ve had a tremendous amount of snowfall, and we have to be prepared.” 

A home in Peterborough, Ont., one of the cities hit hardest by an ice storm in late March. In his third government, Doug Ford has created a Ministry of Emergency Preparedness, led by Jill Dunlop, an MPP from the Orillia region that was also heavily damaged by the storm. Photo: Elaine Anselmi / The Narwhal

As warm weather brings snow melt and spring rain, Hydro One, the provincial utility, is warning residents that potential flooding could slow down their work to restore power. 

The premier promised to speak to the Insurance Bureau of Canada to make sure Ontarians impacted by the ice storms “aren’t being punished if they make a claim” — even though the bureau has warned for years of higher rates across the country due to more severe climate events. 

Ford also promised to shift Ontario towards 100 per cent clean energy. He has said that before, but it’s in stark contrast to his government’s move over its first two terms to increase the province’s reliance on methane-heavy natural gas. And the message in Orillia was still contradictory: Ford and Energy Minister Stephen Lecce also said Ontario had to balance emissions reduction efforts with economic growth, and repeated promises to invest in transit, nuclear energy and helping industry shift away from coal power.

“You don’t have to be an extremist on one side and cut off everything,” Ford told reporters. “We can be environmentally conscious and create economic development and growth at the same time.” 

While the Ford government’s intentions for the environment aren’t always crystal clear, its new cabinet offers some insight.

As Queen’s Park comes back in session on April 14 here are some of the Ford cabinet ministers who could shape the future of environment and energy policy in Ontario.

Emergency Preparedness Minister Jill Dunlop spoke with media in Orillia on April 4 as part of a tour of the damage an ice storm caused to her riding of Simcoe North. Photo: Christopher Drost / The Narwhal

1. Jill Dunlop, minister of emergency preparedness and response

As the first minister in charge of emergency response, Dunlop will head Ontario Corps, a group of volunteers and skilled professionals that will respond to natural disasters and emergencies. The corps was launched in December 2024 and has seen more than 40,000 people trained in basic emergency management skills to respond to floods and winter storms, some of whom have been employed during the ice storm recovery. 

At the same time, the government introduced new emergency management legislation in December that would update policies for the first time in 15 years.  

Dunlop’s key challenge will be to explore how to be more proactive in emergency management, so Ontario communities can better prepare for and adapt to severe climate events, rather than react in real time and after destruction.

“We will apply maximum pressure to maximize our leverage,” Ontario Premier Doug Ford said as he announced a 25 per cent surcharge on electricity exports to the U.S. alongside Energy Minister Stephen Lecce. Photo: Premier of Ontario / Flickr

2. Stephen Lecce, minister of energy and mines

When he moved from Covid- era education head to the energy ministry last June, Lecce promised to make Ontario an “energy superpower.” Over the last several months, he has been at Ford’s side during multiple trips to Washington, D.C., to leverage Ontario’s energy relationship with the U.S. in the wake of Donald Trump’s tariff threats. 

At home, Lecce has put in motion plans for a “technology-agnostic” procurement strategy to manage Ontario’s growing energy demand. The journey to near-net zero emissions has the province pursuing a range of low-emissions technology, such as batteries and small modular nuclear reactors. In the short term, the Ford government has upped its use of natural gas — a move that has slightly increased Ontario’s emissions, but is presently unavoidable as nuclear plants are refurbished. Ontario doesn’t have enough renewable energy to fill the gap, not least because Ford cancelled hundreds of wind and solar projects the first day of his first term in 2018. 

Canada and the U.S. have shared electricity for more than a century. Is that at risk?

“Affordable energy is going to be our priority. Clean, too,” he said in Orillia after the ice storm. 

Lecce now has an expanded portfolio, including mines. Last week, he told iPolitics he plans to pitch Ontario as “the leading market for critical minerals for democracies in industrialized economies around the world.” For more than a decade, successive Ontario governments have touted the potential of the remote mineral-rich Ring of Fire region in northern Ontario, and Ford has promised to build roads there himself to see mines develop. This will likely be a high priority for Lecce, as well as for MPP Greg Rickford, whose continued oversight of the Indigenous Affairs ministry now includes a specific responsibility to form partnerships with First Nations in the Ring of Fire region. 

3. Greg Rickford, minister of Indigenous affairs and First Nations economic reconciliation, responsible for Ring of Fire economic and community partnerships

Rickford returns to cabinet with a very long title. He has been the Indigenous affairs minister since 2018 and now has a specific focus on furthering the government’s goals in the Ring of Fire. The northern Ontario region’s critical mineral deposits — which could be used in electric vehicle batteries, but also weapons and other technology — have been repeatedly highlighted by Ford as part of his government’s strategy to protect Ontario from the impact of American tariffs. 

Previously the Ontario minister of northern development and Indigenous affairs, Greg Rickford adds to his title minister of First Nations economic reconciliation, responsible for Ring of Fire economic and community partnerships. Photo: Carlos Osorio / The Narwhal

During a February campaign stop in Thunder Bay, the premier promised to speed up approvals and early exploration permitting for mining projects “that meet high operating safety and environmental standards,” adding that they “will be granted automatic approvals to proceed with early works” once companies meet their constitutional duty to consult local Indigenous nations. 

Rickford will have to navigate relationships with First Nations and businesses to make all that happen, while also addressing the environmental impacts of mining. The Narwhal reported in 2022 that Rickford had raised concerns the federal government’s approach to establishing Indigenous Protected and Conserved Areas encroached on Ontario’s jurisdiction.

Ontario is resisting Canada’s plans for Indigenous-led conservation areas

4. Todd McCarthy, minister of the environment, conservation and parks 

During the most recent election campaign, McCarthy was caught on doorbell camera telling a potential voter that the verified and widely reported on 2018 video of Ford promising to open the Greenbelt for development, was an artificially generated clip and “fake news.” Now, as environment minister, he’s in charge of protecting the ring of wetlands, wildlife habitat and farmland around the Greater Toronto Area, as well as the rest of the province’s air, lands and water. 

A former lawyer, McCarthy will have to help the Ford government realize pet highway and development projects. The government has already passed a number of legislative changes in order to fast track construction for some of them, including reducing environmental assessments for roads, rails and transmission lines. McCarthy will step in to shepherd proposed amendments to Ontario’s Endangered Species Act, which would change the parameters for protecting endangered species like the redside dace and butternut tree, found in an area proposed for Highway 413. 

Notably, conservation authorities have been shifted from the purview of the natural resources minister to the environment minister, leaving McCarthy to rebuild relationships with the agencies as they navigate issues of flooding and development after years of diminishing power under the Ford government. 

Ontario has more than 300 provincial parks, overseen by the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks, including Slate Islands Provincial Park on Lake Superior, seen here. Photo: Chris Katsarov Luna / The Narwhal

5.  Mike Harris Jr., minister of natural resources 

Mike Harris Jr. returns to cabinet for a second time, after a stint as Ontario’s first red tape reduction minister. He is the only Waterloo Region-area MPP to be named to Ford’s executive council, and his riding is currently divided over plans to expropriate hundreds of acres of farmland for a future Toyota facility. As natural resources minister, he will oversee forestry and hunting regulations. 

6. Kinga Surma, minister of infrastructure 

Kinga Surma continues on in her role as infrastructure minister, despite great opposition to her oversight of the demolition of Ontario Place, a lakefront park in Toronto that will be paved to make way for a luxury spa. The project has been scrutinized by the auditor general who found it was over budget and ignored guidelines and rules about fair procurement. 

Here’s the dirt: how Doug Ford is shaping Ontario’s environmental laws in his second term

7. Prabmeet Sarkaria, minister of transportation

Prabmeet Sarkaria is overseeing what Ford has repeatedly described as the largest investment in public transit in the country. The government has “put billions and billions of dollars … to get people out of cars and intro trains,” Ford said on April 4, and Sarkaria is in charge of making it happen. 

The Ford government has initiated a number of public transit projects, including local subway and rapid transit lines around the Greater Toronto Area, and has promised to further expand existing GO Train routes (as well as adding cupholders). But one of Sarkaria’s biggest challenges will be making public transit a feasible option for Ontarians, who have seen construction drag on for years on end and expensive, disruptive projects open with interminable problems (see: the Ottawa LRT).

The Ottawa LRT is set to be built over the next two decades but it’s seen various delays and challenges in operation. Photo: Kamara Morozuk / The Narwhal

The job also comes with overseeing a bevy of road projects that prioritize cars. These include roads like Highway 413 and the Bradford Bypass, both of which would run through Ontario’s Greenbelt, and ripping up bike lanes that remove a lane of vehicle traffic in downtown Toronto. Mayor Olivia Chow has hinted in recent days that a deal is in the works to keep the lanes in place.

In an attempt to have it both ways, there’s also the two-year-long feasibility study for the tunnelled transit route and expressway Ford promised under gridlocked Highway 401. The project would stretch from around Brampton, west of Toronto, to past Scarborough in the city’s east. 

7. Rob Flack, minister of municipal affairs and housing

Rob Flack, a London-area MPP, is taking on the weighty role of minister of municipal affairs and housing. He’s already used his role to grant strong mayor powers, which several Ontario mayors were given during Ford’s last term and the province has proposed expanding to 169 more municipalities: these allow mayors to approve proposals with fewer votes than usual, and have been used to see development proposals ushered through. Orillia’s mayor levelled up as a result of this month’s storms — and immediately used his new powers for a non-ice storm related item, making senior-level staffing changes at the municipality. 

Ontario’s housing minister has significant powers in expediting development, whether through ministerial zoning orders or empowering mayors to outweigh their councils. Photo: Katherine KY Cheng / The Narwhal

Flack can also apply ministerial zoning orders, which allow the province to overrule local government land use decisions to expedite the process of rezoning land for development. While these orders have existed in Ontario for a long time, Ford’s cabinet has used them more than any previous government and been criticized for applying them preferentially. 

Ultimately, Flack will have to balance environmental and development concerns as he aims to building 1.5 million homes in less than a decade — a promise Ford repeated constantly during his last term but quietly disappeared from the Progressive Conservatives’ 2025 election platform.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Get the inside scoop on The Narwhal’s environment and climate reporting by signing up for our free newsletter.

The federal government advised Ontario’s Progressive Conservatives to reroute their signature Highway 413 project to protect endangered species, internal documents reveal. 

The recommendation was made by Environment and Climate Change Canada officials in a June 2024 presentation given to federal and provincial bureaucrats as part of a joint working group for Highway 413. The Narwhal obtained copies from both federal and provincial governments through federal access to information rules and provincial freedom of information legislation. 

If built, Highway 413 would connect Toronto’s north and western suburbs, running though Ontario’s protected Greenbelt and swaths of endangered species habitat along the way. It was a major tenet of Premier Doug Ford’s 2022 election campaign, and continues to play a prominent role in his party’s current bid for re-election that will see voters headed to the polls Feb. 27. But the federal government has also had some oversight of the highway since 2021. 

What the federal government really thinks about Ontario’s Highway 413

That year, the federal government highlighted concerns about how the highway would affect protected species at risk of extinction and said it would review the project, a process known as an impact assessment. But the federal government dropped the assessment last year amid a court challenge from Ontario, saying the two levels of government would instead try to iron out their differences in the voluntary working group. The federal government declined a request to restart the impact assessment late last year, citing the working group as one reason a full review would no longer be needed.

The internal document obtained by The Narwhal indicates the two governments are still clashing about the project even as Ontario enters a provincial election campaign — and a federal election likely isn’t far behind.

Highway 413 and the Bradford Bypass are both signature projects of the Doug Ford government, and cut through Ontario’s Greenbelt. Map: Jeannie Phan / The Narwhal

In the presentation, Environment and Climate Change Canada said its experts were “not aware of a plan” from Ontario that would “sufficiently” lessen impacts to species at risk. For some species along the route, like the western chorus frog — which the federal government classifies as threatened but is not protected under Ontario law — and a dragonfly called a rapids clubtail, it “may be very challenging or impossible to offset” habitat that’s set to be destroyed by the highway, the experts noted. 

Highway 413 would run across Ontario’s largest remaining patch of habitat vital to the western chorus frog’s survival in the province, destroying an area equivalent to about 30 soccer fields. The federal government warned Ontario in 2023 that minor shifts in the highway’s route would be unlikely to help, as the frog can be impacted by highways up to 2.4 kilometres away. 

Avoiding harm in the first place “will be key,” the presentation said. The federal department recommended Ontario move sections of the highway that pass through at-risk species habitat, outlining specific concerns about the portion of Highway 413 that would pass over the Humber River, which empties into Lake Ontario in Toronto’s west end. 

Another slide in the presentation shows Environment and Climate Change Canada warned Ontario that federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault “must recommend” an emergency order under the Canadian government’s Species At Risk Act “if he is of the opinion that the species faces imminent threats to its survival or recovery.” 

These emergency orders are rarely used, but allow the federal government to impose a stricter set of rules to protect at-risk species on land where the province normally has jurisdiction — Guilbeault issued one in 2021 to conserve western chorus frog habitat in a Montreal suburb. If the federal government were to issue an emergency order for species living along the Highway 413 route, it could substantially delay construction, which the Ford government has said could begin as soon as this year.

The federal government redacted the line about the possibility of an emergency order in the version of the slide deck it released, but it was left in the copy The Narwhal obtained from Ontario’s Ministry of Transportation.

The Narwhal obtained two copies of a slide deck Environment and Climate Change Canada presented to the federal-provincial working group on Highway 413, one from each level of government. A key line about the risk of the federal government issuing an emergency order for species at risk near Highway 413 was redacted in the version released by the federal government (right) but not the one released by the province (left).

Environment and Climate Change Canada “welcomes the opportunity to review and collaborate with Ontario on mitigation plans to reduce this risk,” the slide said. 

The documents don’t show how the province responded to the federal government’s overtures, and it’s not clear whether Ontario’s plans have changed since last June. Ontario’s Transportation Ministry didn’t answer questions about the presentation and whether it changed the route in response. 

Guilbeault’s office redirected questions to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada. In a statement, the agency said discussions with Ontario about Highway 413 are ongoing. The agency did not directly answer questions about whether Ontario has heeded the federal government’s suggestions, or if Guilbeault is willing to pursue an emergency order if the two sides can’t agree.

The Ontario government’s own research has confirmed at least 11 species at risk are living along the planned route of Highway 413. Clockwise, they are: butternut tree, bobolink, chimney swift, bank swallow, rapids clubtail, redside dace, western chorus frog, wood thrush, eastern meadowlark, barn swallow and olive-sided flycatcher. Illustration: Shawn Parkinson / The Narwhal

Neither Ontario nor the federal government have given any public sign that the route has been changed, though Ontario announced in December it had finished its initial design for 90 per cent of Highway 413, including all bridges and crossings. Last fall, Ontario also passed Bill 212, which weakened environmental oversight of Highway 413.

The presentation also hinted at another possible roadblock for the highway: under a slide labelled “Policy and Legal Risks,” Environment and Climate Change Canada noted two First Nations — Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation and Six Nations of the Grand River — have raised concerns about how Highway 413 could impact Treaty Rights. Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation in particular is concerned its members are losing space for harvesting and ceremonies as projects like the 413 bring more urbanization to their territory, the slide noted. 

Doug Ford’s Highway 413 and bike lane bill prompted internal warnings around Indigenous Rights and federal intervention

Mark LaForme, the executive director of intergovernmental affairs for Mississaugas of the Credit, declined to comment on the document but said he’s disappointed the First Nation wasn’t included in the working group. Highway 413 will directly cross the nation’s territory, and Mississaugas of the Credit have significant concerns about its environmental impacts — especially on waterways.

Highway 413 is expected to cross 95 rivers, creeks and streams, and runoff from roads can drive pollution into watersheds. Harm to those waterways could impact the First Nation’s rights to use the water for sustenance fishing and boating, among other things, LaForme said.

Highway 413 will pass over the Humber River, one of many waterways along its route. The Humber River valley is a major wildlife corridor connecting Lake Ontario to protected Greenbelt land to the north. Photos: Katherine KY Cheng / The Narwhal

“We believe this will have significant impacts on our rights,” he said. “The water is very important to us.”

But when the nation brings up those concerns, its representatives are often speaking to bureaucrats who aren’t decision-makers, while Canada and Ontario talk behind closed doors.

“We were just excluded from that process completely, so we weren’t aware of the working group that Canada and Ontario set up to deal with this,” LaForme said. “Why were we not a part of that group?”

For years, the federal government has warned Ontario that it’s falling short on its consultations with First Nations. LaForme said Ontario’s Ministry of Transportation has been “quite forthcoming” with consultations recently and seems to be taking the process more seriously, though there’s no sign the province intends to change its plans for the 413.

“Doug Ford’s going to build this damn highway, that’s all there is to it,” LaForme said.

Six Nations of the Grand River did not answer an interview request. 

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Get the inside scoop on The Narwhal’s environment and climate reporting by signing up for our free newsletter.

The federal government will not subject Ontario’s Highway 413 to an environmental review, clearing the way for construction on the project to begin as soon as 2025.

Environmental Defence, an advocacy group, tried to urge the review forward in October after Premier Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservatives introduced a bill that weakened Ontario’s environmental oversight of Highway 413. The charity made a formal request to federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault, who was mandated by law to respond by mid-January.

The latest request for that federal oversight was, to some, a last hope for stopping the project before shovels hit the ground.

But on the Friday before Christmas — with the governing Liberals in turmoil following the resignation of former finance minister and deputy prime minister Chrystia Freeland and a controversial cabinet shuffle — the federal government quietly posted a notice online, saying there will be no review. 

The decision is a “sad commentary on both our provincial and federal governments” that leaves few avenues to prevent “environmental destruction,” Environmental Defence executive director Tim Gray said in a statement Monday morning.

If built, Highway 413 will connect suburbs north and west of Toronto, running through Ontario’s Greenbelt and prime farmland. It would also slice across the habitats of species at risk, including the western chorus frog and redside dace, a tiny, endangered minnow.

The federal government first designated the priority project of the Doug Ford Conservatives for review — called an impact assessment — in 2021, citing concerns about federally protected species along the route. That kicked off a process that stalled the project for three years, during which the federal government sounded alarms about Highway 413’s environmental impact, key information Ontario seemed to be missing and a lack of attention to Indigenous consultation, according to documents obtained by The Narwhal.

But Guilbeault called it off in 2024 due to a pending constitutional challenge. Instead, the minister opted to form a working group with the province to look at the environmental impacts of the highway. 

The Ford government is trying to build two major highways through Ontario’s Greenbelt: Highway 413 and the Bradford Bypass. Highway 413 would also run across a conservation reserve. Map: Jeannie Phan / The Narwhal

The notice of the federal government’s recent decision is signed by Terence Hubbard, the president of the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada, which carries out federal environmental reviews. Usually, Guilbeault would sign off on such an announcement. But in it, Hubbard wrote that the minister delegated the decision to him. 

Hubbard said the federal government already has tools to address impacts to federally protected species and concerns raised by Indigenous communities. In particular, he pointed to federal rules covering species at risk, migratory birds and waterways — all laws that require Ontario to seek federal permits before starting construction. 

Hubbard also said the federal government can handle environmental issues around Highway 413 through its working group with the province.

It’s not yet clear what information was factored into Hubbard’s decision. In the notice, Hubbard said he relied on a report by agency staff, which would eventually be made public but wasn’t yet available Monday morning. 

Guilbeault’s office redirected questions to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada. In a statement, the agency said Guilbeault delegated the “administrative” task because “there is a desire to make decisions in an efficient fashion.” The agency also said Canada has a “robust regime” of laws to ensure development happens sustainably. Its working group with Ontario will continue to meet until the federal government makes decisions about key environmental permits, or until the two governments reach consensus, the statement said.

Ontario has ‘no commitment to a timeline’ for finishing Highway 413, document shows

The office of Ontario Transportation Minister Prabmeet Sarkaria didn’t respond to a request for comment Monday.

Sarkaria has said the Ford government intends to start doing early construction work for Highway 413 as soon as next year, but a few obstacles may still remain.

In his statement, Gray pointed to the possibility the federal government will step in on Ontario’s management of redside dace. Some of the last places where the minnow can survive in Canada fall along Highway 413’s route, and a new federal strategy for the species’ recovery mandates the federal fisheries minister to issue an order by late January that could bar development in those areas. But it’s not clear how far the federal Liberals are willing to go on that front: they’ve already permitted development in redside dace habitat for years, even as the species has rapidly declined. 

Another potential snag for the province is an ongoing strike by the Ontario government’s engineers. Represented by the Professional Engineers Government of Ontario union, the engineers withdrew their work from Highway 413 and other key infrastructure projects this fall, raising the risk of delays. 

Updated Dec. 23, 2024, at 4:40 p.m. ET: This article was updated to include comment from the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada that was received after publication.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Get the inside scoop on The Narwhal’s environment and climate reporting by signing up for our free newsletter.

The Ontario government pushed through its bill to fast-track Highway 413 and dismantle Toronto bike lanes despite internal warnings it could risk legal challenges and worsen gridlock.

Those warnings are contained in a draft of a confidential Ontario government briefing document from summer 2024, which was circulated to news outlets over the past month as Premier Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservatives worked to introduce and pass Bill 212. 

The internal advice clashes with the government’s public messaging about the legislation — dubbed the Reducing Gridlock, Saving You Time Act — which it has claimed would reduce traffic jams by building highways faster and overriding municipalities to limit and remove bike lanes. Instead the draft briefing suggests the legislation could do the opposite and worsen congestion, along with risking other problems for Highway 413.

The document was first reported by the Trillium, which said it received the draft briefing from an advocacy group that obtained it from an unknown source. The document has also been reported by the Guardian. The Narwhal has reviewed the document, but has not independently verified its contents. 

Bill 212 has particular bearing on Highway 413, a signature project for the Ford government. If built, it would ring around suburbs to the north and west of Toronto, cutting through Ontario’s Greenbelt, prime farmland, waterways and protected wetlands.

The draft document shows the government was aware the bill could raise the risk of federal intervention on Highway 413, opposition from First Nations and court challenges — all factors that could add lengthy delays to the project.

Dakota Brasier, a spokesperson for Ontario Transportation Minister Prabmeet Sarkaria, did not deny the existence of the document but declined to comment on it unless The Narwhal allowed the government to see a copy. The Narwhal declined to do so to protect the source who provided it.

The confidential draft briefing outlines the potential pitfalls and legal risks of the legislation that would eventually become Bill 212. Such briefings are a standard step as the government deliberates over any new law: bureaucrats and political staff look at what the potential problems could be, before ministers in cabinet get briefed on the idea and decide whether to move ahead with it.

It’s not clear whether the warnings in the draft document were ever seen by cabinet ministers. 

Now passed, Bill 212 allows the government to begin early construction work on Highway 413 before it finishes studying how the project will impact the environment — and before it’s done consulting First Nations.

The proposed routes of the Bradford Bypass and Highway 413 would cut through Ontario’s Greenbelt. With Bill 212, the Ford government has designated them as priority projects and granted itself new powers to expedite construction. Map: Jeannie Phan / The Narwhal

The highway’s environmental impact has been controversial, and in 2021 the federal government stepped in and decided to subject the 413 to its own review process. It dropped the review earlier this year, after Ontario filed a court challenge.

The draft briefing warned that allowing early construction work to go ahead before environmental studies are finished could increase the risk that federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault might once again be asked to review the project.

That came to pass with a request for federal review from an environmental group just hours after the government introduced Bill 212. Now, Guilbeault has until Jan. 19 to make a decision. If he decides to take a second look, that could delay the project for years. 

The document also warned the government may not have planned for enough time to adequately consult with First Nations, and allowing early construction work to go ahead before that “may result in assertions about the good faith nature of the consultation.”

Research shows more highways don’t fix traffic congestion. So why is Ontario still building them?

Though the document concluded there’s a low risk a court would find the bill violated Indigenous Rights and Treaty Rights, it also flagged that First Nations could argue Ontario is not fulfilling the honour of the Crown — a Constitutional principle that mandates governments in Canada treat Indigenous Peoples fairly. 

The federal government has previously raised red flags about whether Ontario is properly consulting First Nations about the project. If Guilbeault believes Highway 413 will have a negative impact on Indigenous Peoples, he can use that as grounds to intervene on the project a second time. 

The draft document also warned new fines included in Bill 212, aimed at people and corporations trying to stop government officials from accessing their property for field studies on Highway 413 and other priority projects. The briefing warned there’s a “moderately low risk” those penalties could be found unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court of Canada could have an argument for or against it.  

Most of the debate over Bill 212 has centred on bike lanes: it gives the province the power to remove existing bike lanes and restrict new ones, targeting three bike lanes in Toronto in particular. Public servants warned the measure may be ineffective, the document shows. 

“This initiative may not reduce congestion as most research (e.g. New York, Washington, Vancouver) suggests reducing road capacity by introducing bike lanes can encourage biking and discourage car use, alleviating congestion,” the document states.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Get the inside scoop on The Narwhal’s environment and climate reporting by signing up for our free newsletter.

Ontario’s Progressive Conservative government has passed a controversial bill aimed at speeding up the construction of Highway 413 through Ontario’s Greenbelt, and removing downtown Toronto bike lanes. 

Bill 212, also known as the Reducing Gridlock, Saving You Time Act, passed Monday night after a chaotic, divisive month of protests, capped off when the government pushed through a raft of last-minute additions. Transportation Minister Prabmeet Sarkaria has argued the package will help relieve the Greater Toronto Area’s major traffic problems, even though decades of evidence shows new highways make congestion worse in the long run and new bike lanes can often make it better. 

Some of the bill’s biggest changes are aimed at highways. It aims to accelerate a short list of priority projects, including Highway 413 and the Bradford Bypass, both of which would cut through Ontario’s protected Greenbelt. And for the 413 in particular, it allows the government to start building it before finishing its environmental review or consultations with Indigenous communities. 

Most of the chatter about the bill, however, has revolved around the bike lane issue: hundreds have turned out to protests in Toronto as different sides argue about the number of people that use cycling infrastructure and how it affects everything from local businesses to emergency response times. 

Adding to the controversy, the Trillium reported that a leaked document shows the Ford government was warned internally that taking out bike lanes could actually worsen traffic. And in another story, the news outlet found that one of the major groups pushing against cycling infrastructure is backed by a former Progressive Conservative candidate, party donors and big players in the real estate industry.

Premier Doug Ford has hinted an early election may be on the way, and opposition parties accused him Monday of using Bill 212 to stoke division and distract from other problems like the crisis in Ontario’s health care system.

Now that the bill has passed, here’s what it could mean for how Ontarians get around. 

How Ontario’s new bill hits the gas on Highway 413 and puts the brakes on bike lanes

Highway 413 could be built faster — or it could get trapped in bureaucratic gridlock

Most of Bill 212’s text is aimed at highways. The biggest environmental impact on the table relates to Highway 413, which would run through endangered species habitat, cross waterways and cut through sensitive farmland, wetlands and forests on its way through suburbs north and west of Toronto.

The bill puts an end to the highway’s environmental assessment. Though the Ford government says it will still complete a set of environmental studies for the project, it just gave itself new power to withhold those reports from the public. The province will also be able to begin construction before those studies are complete, and before it has finished consulting with Indigenous communities.

Doug Ford’s Highway 413 and bike lane bill prompted internal warnings around Indigenous Rights and federal intervention

For a list of priority projects, including the expansion of the Garden City Skyway in the Niagara region as well as Highway 413 and the Bradford Bypass, the province will be able to override municipal bylaws to enable 24-hour construction. The law allows the government to do the same with any other highway project it chooses in the future.

It also makes it easier for the province to take land from private owners for these priority projects — a process called expropriation — by placing strict limits on how much time people are given before they have to leave. The bill also creates new fines for people and companies along the routes of those projects who try to stop officials from the Ministry of Transportation from entering their property for field studies. 

All of this could make construction for Highway 413 go faster. But there are a lot of other factors that could make it go slower, too. The provincial government’s engineers are on strike, and have stopped work on a variety of projects, including Highway 413 and the Bradford Bypass, which could cause major delays.

The proposed routes of the Bradford Bypass and Highway 413 would both run through Ontario’s Greenbelt. Map: Jeannie Phan / The Narwhal

The federal government could also throw a wrench in the whole thing. Soon after Sarkaria introduced Bill 212, an advocacy group asked federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault to give it a deeper review — Guilbeault is required to give his answer by Jan. 19, 2025.

That request could reignite an intergovernmental feud that has already held up Highway 413 once before. The federal government previously decided to intervene with the project in 2021 after a very similar ask from advocacy groups, effectively pausing major work on the project for three years. But in response to a legal challenge from Alberta, a Supreme Court decision found part of the law enabling such reviews was unconstitutional, prompting Ontario to file a court case of its own. In April, the federal government agreed to voluntarily drop the review and instead collaborate with the province as part of a Highway 413 working group. 

Guilbeault’s office has said the minister will base his decision on science and input from Indigenous communities. 

Canada’s environment minister has 90 days to decide whether to review Ontario’s Highway 413 — again

What’s going to happen to bike lanes in Ontario now?

The legislation gives the Ford government the power to rip out existing bike lanes, overriding municipal authority to decide what happens on the road. 

It also means new bike lanes will be a whole lot harder to build, requiring cities and towns to get an okay from the province to install bike lanes that would involve the removal of a car lane. 

That’s an environmental and public health issue, of course: bike lanes encourage more people to get out of their cars and swap four wheels for two, which helps reduce the air pollution fossil fuel-powered vehicles cause, with consequences for human health and climate change.

It also could have major consequences for safety, with cycling advocates arguing it will lead to more people on bikes being hurt or killed on Ontario streets. Last week, the province amended the bill to include a clause to shield the government from lawsuits from injured cyclists or the families of bike riders who are killed on the road. 

The bill specifically orders the removal of three Toronto bike lanes. They’re the same three Ford has already expressed ire about: the ones on Bloor Street West, University Avenue and Yonge Street. It’s not clear yet when that work could start or how quickly it would move. The City of Toronto has said the process could cause “multiple years” of further traffic disruption in the city, currently experiencing record levels of gridlock.

The government also hasn’t clarified whether it intends to remove the entire lanes or just some sections, though Sarkaria said it’s possible the government will tear them out in their entirety. 

Doug Ford’s attack on bike lanes threatens communities across Ontario

There’s also the question of which level of government will pay to decommission bike lanes and how high the bill may be. Ford has said the province will cover the cost. But the legislation itself doesn’t require that, and even says the province isn’t required to pay cities back for the costs of installing or removing bike lanes. 

The City of Toronto and the Ford government are currently arguing over what the price tag for the work will actually be. The city says it paid $27 million to install the three bike lanes and it will cost another $48 million to take them out. Ford and Sarkaria fired back, saying the estimate is impossibly high and pointed to previous bike lane removals that cost far less — though the province hasn’t attempted to come up with its own figure. 

Of course, there are also plenty of other cities with bike lanes in Ontario, and what could happen to them is even less certain. Ottawa has come up: though Sarkaria has pointed to some lanes there as examples of what could be in the province’s crosshairs, Ford has said he has no problem with the bike lanes in the national capital. 

It’s not clear if any other bike lanes across the province could eventually be on the chopping block. Sarkaria has said the province is working on developing a set of criteria for future bike lane removals. 

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.