A week after wrong-way cyclist severely injured a woman in Toronto, an Ottawa councillor is asking city staff to look at licensing cyclists.
“What I’d like to see is just basically the pros and cons,” said Orleans Coun. Bob Monette Wednesday, after he made the following request to staff (which was brought to my attention by my colleague, City Hall reporter Jon Willing):
“Can staff provide a detailed analysis on the potential of licensing bicycles in the City of Ottawa as well, the cost associated with the implementation. Also – what would be the benefits of required bicycle licensing?”
Monette says it’s partly a question of cyclists giving back what the city’s paid out to make cycling safer, such as the $1.3-million segregated bike lane pilot project along Laurier Ave.
“We share the road with everybody, everybody pays licence fees for cars, mopeds, motorcycles,” he said. “Right now the city has spent a lot of money on the safety aspect of bike lanes.”
He also thinks it will make it easier for police to identify the minority of cyclists who blatantly disregard traffic laws, as well as helping safety education.
“Too many bicyclists are not wearing helmets, too many aren’t signalling,”Monette said. “It’s very difficult for officers to enforce — you need to be able to identify the person.”
In addition, he said, “it could be somewhat of a revenue stream (though) we do’t want it to be a burden for people to register their bikes.”
Monette underlined that he wasn’t pushing for licensing — he merely wanted to see if it makes financial sense.
“Once we have all that information then we’ll decide how to move forward,” he said. “If someone has a problem paying $5 or $10 then maybe they can find another way to pay for the infrastructure.”
If the numbers add up and the city goes ahead, cyclists pleading poverty can expect a deaf ear from Monette.
“If cyclists don’t like it, then too bad for cyclists,” he said.
But it turns out the city has already crunched the numbers on licensing and found out it’s not worth it.
River Coun. Maria McRae apparently also posed a similar question from staff, and got the following response (again, thanks to Jon Willing for this):
“The Provincial Government grants municipalities the authority to pass by-laws by way of the Ontario Municipal Act. The City of Ottawa does have the authority to pass by-laws concerning bicycles under Section 51 of the Act.
This matter was fully reviewed a number of years ago (prior to amalgamation) by the Intra Municipal Law Enforcement (IMPEC). Previously, the Ottawa Police Service had deemed it desirable to license bicycles, however, upon further study and consideration, it was determined that this venture would not be economically viable. The data collected on the subject revealed the licensing of bicycles would be cost prohibitive. The expected cost of administering the proposed program would cost an estimated $100,000 annually, while the expected revenue generated by the licensing of bicycles would be an estimated $30,000-$40,000 per annum.
In addition, the activity of cycling, used as a form of transportation, reduces traffic congestion and is both environmentally and economically beneficial. The City of Ottawa encourages the public to adopt alternate forms of transportation, including the use of public transit, walking and cycling, to reduce the strain on public roadways. The licensing of bicycles may discourage individuals from embracing this particular transportation substitute.”
The other issue this raises is the perception of who pays for road infrastructure. It’s often argued that cyclists don’t pay gas tax or car registration fees, so they aren’t entitled to be on the road.
I suspect that the bulk of the municipal money that’s used to build roads comes from property taxes, which cyclists do pay, so the argument doesn’t carry much water. But I haven’t had the time to do the research.
Is there anyone out there who has?
Maybe everyone using sidewalks, ie. pedestrians, should be licenced also, since building sidewalks is expensive. Where there are no sidewalks, pedestrians should be ticketed for using the road, which, following Monette’s logic, is to be used only by motor vehicles.
What about foreigners crossing over from planet Gatineau? Would they require an Ottawa cyclist’s licence to pedal across the bridges?
Bike licenses are nothing new. Many countries have them. All vehicles using public roads should have a license, and be safety checked. In addition, bike riders must have a competency certification/license. No-one should be on the road without having demonstrated their competency to integrate with all forms of traffic using the road. Using a public road is not a right, it is an earned privilidge. Like motorists, cyclist should have to produce a license when requested to do so by police, whether it is for an infraction or for a random traffic stop. If cyclists insist on their right to be on public roads, in accordance with the highway traffic act, they need to be treated as any other vehicle driver on the road. This is not a taxation or revenue issue. It is a common sense and safety issue, as well as a fairness issue. Equal expectations means equal obligations. No exceptions.
Councillor Monette should be careful about the helmet statement, I do not believe helmets are legally required for cyclists unless you are under 16 years of age. Let’s not get into the helmet debate, although I would highly recommend them for everyone.
5-10 bucks… I’d pay that in a second! I have a car, pay the fees but I refuse to pay an additional 115 a month to park my car!
What’s the point of having a comments section, if you do not print the comments?! Mine has been waiting since 11:53pm last night. That’s more than 12 hours. Useless.
I find Monette’s inquiry interesting. Foolhardy perhaps, but interesting.
The very concept of licensing cyclists represents the cognitive dissonance so often exemplified by certain City officials. One hand openly promotes cycling, while the other sees the activity as problematic and in need of greater control/administration.
The issue of licensing bicycles in Canada has a storied past and one does not need to look far before it becomes clear that the concept fails to achieve the intended results. For instance, this issue has been examined by the city of Toronto – perhaps the nation’s best candidate for a licensing system – on three separate occasions.
Each study resulted in recommendations to reject licensing due to:
• The difficulty in keeping databases complete and current; and
• The difficulty in licensing children, given that they ride bikes too
• The fact that licensing in and of itself does not change the behaviour of cyclists who are disobeying traffic laws.
I would add that bicycle licensing will also set an unattractive precedent for other modes of transportation relied upon by city residents. Though bicycles are the most popular alternative vehicle, many residents also rely on mobility scooters, e-scooters, skateboards/longboards, and rollerblades. All these forms of transportation share the roads and pathways with cars and bicycles. Should they fall under the same licensing requirements? Perhaps a glib argument but certainly a consideration.
Given Toronto’s findings, and our own – as referenced by your article, it is clear that any study into bicycle licensing in Ottawa will unnecessarily waste both time and money.
Instead, resources should continue to promote safe and respectful cycling in the city. And officials and residents should take pride in the steps this city has taken with respect to promoting the benefits of biking.
I for one am proud that Ottawa recently received a silver-level cycling friendly community award.
I am proud of the city’s progressive bicycle infrastructure – we’ve introduced the Bixi, downtown segregated lanes, the commuter park and cycle pilot, and the Cycling Safety Training Courses.
In fact, these are accomplishments we should all be proud of. These initiatives help to ease congestion on the roads, mitigate environmental impacts, and improve the health of residents. As both a biker and car owner, I am happy to see these benefits first hand.
The city is once again looking at this issue all wrong. It’s time for cyclists to police themselves!
Instead of licensing bikes the city should turn the entire cycling infrastructure over to the bike clubs. The bike clubs would then charge a yealry fee for a permit for cyclists to access the infrastrucutre. In turn the bike clubs would provide third party liability insurace for the infrastrucutre and also provide volunteer services for maintaining the infrastrucutre and patrolling the paths and cycle lanes. New cycling infrastrucutre would be paid for by the bike clubs. Too many complaints or too many unresolved issues and the city pulls the infrastructure from the clubs and the cyclists find themselves back in traffic.
This system works well for the snowmobile and ATV clubs in the province.
They build and maintain thousands of KM of trails including bridges and they carry third party liability insurance to protect themselves. They also know that failure to live up to expectations means less trail access.
Time for cyclists to stop asking for hand outs and start giving them selves a hand up.
MyOpion: Due to a glitch in the system I have to manually approve most of the comments, and I can only monitor it consistently when I’m at work. I just got in for my evening shift, which is why it’s coming live now …
Look each day more laws are passed, more taxes, more fees.. Just let the cyclist and walkers be free. Cyclist who are riding on sidewalks with pedestrians should get a ticket..
Cyclist who ride on a sidewalk down baseline RD or don’t stop in a residencial 4 way stop–simply leave them alone.
Licensing is only another tax, which we certainly don’t need. Property taxes pay for the infrastructure we all use and that is good enough.
And licensing will not make bikers obey the rules any more than they do now.
If the argument is going to be based on a user pay theory than the first place Council should be focusing their attention is on the large numbers of Quebec Residents that cross into Ottawa each day to not only use our roads but many other city services that OTTAWA taxpayers pay for.
I guess that would be called a political hot potato and I highly doubt that any of our city politicians would have the stomach to table susch a motion to explore that option….easier to go after the easy target ….cyclists!!!
This is the expected backlash resulting from the encouragement by actvists to try to increase cycling among journalists and others that last pedalled a bicycle when they were in grade school.
Licencing is a non-starter. Government is screwing up cycling as it is. The last thing we need is more useless bureaucracy. There’s enough of that at City Hall already.
If the City wants to fund infrastructure improvements and reduce congestion in the downtown core they need to implement a congestion charge like in London (UK). All revenue could be earmarked for transit and downtown infrastructure projects. Further, remove on street parking in the core in favour of commercial parking lots.
See how many people convert to riding, car pooling, and transit once the car centric transportation paradigm shifts. We done it to ourselves and the only way to address congestion is by making cars pay the true costs of using the roads that are currently paid for by everyone, whether they have a car or not.
No no, no no and No.. Are you people nuts? There is absolutely no reason for this other than another revenue stream..
This is the very beginning of tyranny.. Say no to this, or you may find breathing air needs a license next.
I am more concerned with a law enacted that prohibits cycles from passing cars on the right when cars are making a right hand turn at an intersection. Either get off the bike and walk it through the intersection or stay to the left of the car and proceed through the light.