In a move that signals growing municipal resistance to provincial directives, Sudbury Mayor Paul Lefebvre confirmed this week that the city’s automated speed enforcement cameras will remain operational, directly challenging Premier Ford’s recent statements on traffic enforcement technology.
“These cameras are working exactly as intended – slowing drivers down in school zones and community safety zones where our children and families walk every day,” Lefebvre told reporters during Tuesday’s council briefing. “The data speaks for itself. We’ve seen average speeds drop by 17% in monitored areas since implementation.”
The mayor’s stance comes just weeks after Premier Ford called automated speed cameras “cash grabs” during a press conference in Mississauga, suggesting his government might restrict municipalities’ ability to deploy the technology. Ford’s comments echoed his 2018 decision to cancel the previous Liberal government’s planned expansion of photo radar.
For Sudburians like Melissa Thorne, a parent of two elementary school children, the cameras represent more than just revenue generation. “Before the cameras went up on Howey Drive, I watched cars fly past the school zone at 70, sometimes 80 kilometers per hour,” she explained during the public comment period. “Now my kids can walk to school without me worrying constantly.”
The city’s traffic safety report, released last month, supports Thorne’s observations. The document reveals a 42% reduction in speeding violations in the first six months after camera installation, with 89% of ticketed drivers not reoffending within the monitored period.
City Councillor Geoff McCausland, who chairs Sudbury’s Operations Committee, points to the broader implications of the standoff. “This isn’t just about cameras or tickets – it’s about who decides what safety measures work best for our specific community,” McCausland said. “Toronto’s needs aren’t Sudbury’s needs.”
The tension highlights a growing rift between the provincial government’s top-down approach and municipalities seeking more autonomy in community safety decisions. According to a recent Association of Municipalities of Ontario survey, 78% of responding communities support maintaining or expanding automated enforcement options.
Traffic safety expert Dr. Veronique Boisvert from Laurentian University sees the conflict as part of a larger pattern. “We’re witnessing a fundamental disagreement about evidence-based policy,” she noted. “The research consistently shows these systems reduce speeds and save lives, but there’s a political narrative that sometimes overshadows the public health perspective.”
The financial aspect cannot be ignored. Sudbury’s program generated approximately $1.2 million in revenue last year, with proceeds directed toward road safety initiatives and infrastructure improvements. Critics like the Canadian Taxpayers Federation have questioned whether municipalities have become dependent on this income stream.
“Every dollar from these cameras goes back into making our streets safer,” countered Lefebvre. “We’ve installed four new pedestrian crossings and upgraded sidewalks in school zones using these funds.”
The Ford government’s approach stands in contrast to Quebec, where automated enforcement has expanded under the CAQ government, and British Columbia, where the NDP has likewise increased the use of speed cameras in high-risk corridors.
While provincial legislation governs the overall framework for automated enforcement, municipalities currently maintain authority over implementation within designated safety zones. Sources within the Ministry of Transportation suggest the province is drafting new regulations that could limit this local control, though timeline details remain unclear.
For now, Sudbury’s seven cameras will continue operating in school and community safety zones, with council unanimously backing the mayor’s position during Tuesday’s vote. The city plans to add three additional cameras by year’s end, pending approval from the Greater Sudbury Police Services Board.
As municipalities across Ontario watch this developing tension, the Sudbury decision may signal a watershed moment in provincial-municipal relations on traffic safety governance. With municipal elections approaching next year, local control over community safety measures could emerge as a defining issue for candidates across northern Ontario.
“At the end of the day,” reflected Lefebvre, “we were elected to make decisions that protect our residents. Sometimes that means standing your ground, even when Queen’s Park pushes back.”
