Wilmot and Oxford politicians react to provincial plan to cancel speed cameras

Lee Griffi, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter

Premier Doug Ford recently made it obvious he wants to eliminate every speed camera across the province, but two area heads of council aren’t so sure about the move.

Ford has dismissed automated speed enforcement (ASE) cameras as a “tax grab” and says he wants them removed from municipalities. He has warned that if cities don’t scrap the programs voluntarily, the province may force them to. Ford argues the cameras don’t necessarily slow drivers and sees them more as a revenue tool for municipalities than a genuine road-safety measure.

Wilmot Mayor Natasha Salonen explained she had been critical of the program, not because of its intent but rather the unintended consequences.

“There are issues with the provincial legislation that have caused a lot of the frustrations people have with the fines being doubled, and (the cameras) can only be in school or community safety zones where fines are doubled. When we look at Wilmot, our rural roads are where we have very bad speeding accidents and high-speed incidents, and the higher result in potential death.”

Rural roads are not eligible for the ASE program and Salonen said for that reason she isn’t supportive of the current program, but is open to tweaking it.

“How could it be better utilized as a tool? There are other jurisdictions globally that seem to make it work.”

Salonen said she also has concerns about the province saying it would replace cameras with funding for road-safety measures like flashing speed signs and speed bumps. She added every dollar from camera fines goes right into infrastructure.

“There have been other promises for funding we haven’t actually realized in our community from the province. The (Region of Waterloo) puts all the fine money into reserves for road safety, which is taking it right off the tax levy. Speeding is one of the biggest complaints I get.”

Oxford County does not have any speed cameras but is considering adding a program to the 2026 draft budget. Warden Marcus Ryan said county council passed a motion calling on the provincial and federal governments to do everything in their power to help municipalities implement traffic-calming measures.   

“It’s one of the most common complaints I get. People call and say vehicles are speeding past my house, my kids’ school or the park. I can change a number on a sign from a 60 to a 40, but if they speed past the 60, they will speed past the 40.”

He added there is a lot of evidence ASE works and slows people down in front of locations where children are. He explained Ford’s claim of a cash grab is simply untrue, echoing Salonen’s comment.

“The provincial legislation requires any money from those fines be spent only on traffic calming and speed control, so this is not a cash grab, not a simple revenue generator. The alternative now is we don’t do that traffic calming and speed control, or we tax everyone for it.”

Ryan suggested it is fair to collect money from someone speeding in front of a school or a park rather than tax everyone else.

“I would remind people there are signs up warning people there is an automated speed enforcement camera ahead. People have every ability to not pay this fine by just not speeding,” Ryan said.

Salonen acknowledged she rarely hears from constituents when things are running smoothly, but she has received considerable pushback on the ASE program. Many residents agree with Ford’s view that it is little more than a cash grab, but she added speed mitigation is one of the top requests from residents.

“When we have residents actively requesting and advocating for speed mitigation and road-safety implementation, but then in our budget, it’s a very expensive thing to implement and put on the tax levy, this was one way for the people who were speeding to pay for infrastructure improvements to reduce speeding.”

Salonen doesn’t believe scraping the entire system is the right way to go, but reassessing the provincial regulations does make sense.

“Let’s come up with something reasonable. We need to balance safety with actual behavioural change. Right now, I see people who choose to use side streets instead and speed down those to avoid speed cameras, so they are causing issues on other roads that never had problems.”

Salonen said she supported the program initially as she thought it would result in behavioural change, but instead, it is causing more frustration with drivers.

“In Wilmot, we had one of our cameras cut down four or five times. It didn’t hit the tax base because it was covered under insurance, but as we know, every time someone makes a claim, everyone’s rates go up. It does have an impact.”

The Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police has argued that speed cameras help reduce dangerous speeding, especially in school zones and community safety zones, and should be considered safety tools rather than revenue generators. Some critics note Ford’s government legalized and enabled speed cameras in 2019, so this new push is seen by some as a dramatic reversal of earlier policy.

Legislation is expected to be tabled this fall at the next sitting of the Ontario Legislature.