• FireRetardant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Why should an entire province get the final say in a project that realistically only impacts a couple neighborhoods at best?

    • grte
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      None of Doug Ford’s friends are heavily invested in bicycle manufacturers, I guess.

    • apprehensively_human
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Clearly municipalities can’t be trusted to hold the provincial government’s leaders’ financial interests. More bike lanes means more people on bikes, meaning fewer cars being sold, meaning less money available for schmoozing from the auto industry. We can’t have that, it’s bad for the economy, or something.

  • merc@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Bro. Just one more lane for cars, bro. I swear, I’ll stop after that. I promise one more lane will fix it, then I’ll stop.

  • ImplyingImplications
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    edit-2
    23 hours ago

    The myth of consent.

    Townspeople: I consent to a bike lane!

    City Council: I consent to a bike lane!

    Doug Ford: I don’t!

    Is there someone you forgot to ask?

  • Avid Amoeba
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Are cities creatures of the province in all of Canada or does it depend on the province/territory?

        • Splitdipless
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          It might be okay. Let people read the rules passed down, as maybe there’s legal loopholes in there that can be exploited. Maybe the municipality can still close roads or remove lanes. Once you’re not putting a bike lane on street, the rules don’t matter.