There are a myriad of reasons why expanding Billy Bishop airport is a terrible idea. Getting 10 million passengers, crew, and staff back and forth from the dead end at the bottom of Bathurst Street may be the most dreaded one.

Premier Ford says that if he gets his way, the tiny island airport will accommodate jets, and the number of annual passengers will rise from the current 1.8 million to nearly five times that number.

Even at the current level, congestion is a huge problem there. Anyone flying out of the island needs to know in advance whether there are construction closures, sporting events, or concerts. Being stuck under the Gardiner in exhaust-filled gridlock is no fun as you watch the cab’s meter climb while the departure time looms.

Not long ago the province enacted Bill 107, the Getting Ontario Moving Act, ostensibly to deal with a very real transportation crisis: traffic congestion. Of course, Ford has used  the act mostly to go after bike lanes, but the crisis is real, and everything about the island airport expansion plan will only make traffic congestion and gridlock worse. 

What about the current gridlock on Bathurst and the Lakeshore? Once Ford’s European-owned spa and the new science centre have been built at the former Ontario Place, how are an estimated six million patrons supposed to come and go? And don’t forget about the island the premier wants to build for a new convention centre under the new flight path south of the spa; you can’t make this stuff up.

Back to the island airport expansion plan. Currently, the island airport occupies just 85 hectares. Pearson sits on nearly 2000 and is accessible from every compass point due to a myriad of highways and a ring road. There is a whole underground city at Pearson for service vehicles. You can take a TTC bus to Pearson. You can take the UP Express from Union Station in 35 minutes, and it is very civilized. No concert traffic or construction closures will block your path. They could increase capacity at Pearson by adding a new terminal. This is NOT the case for the island; all construction vehicles, service vehicles, and construction crews will need to funnel through the same choke point as the passengers. 

The Toronto Port Authority (TPA) says the airport expansion will cost $5 billion. TPA’s net income in 2025 was $16.9 million. The province says it will not be paying for the expansion. So, who will? Doug Ford says the private sector. Why does this sound like Donald Trump’s ballroom? He promised it would be paid for by donations, but it turns out the American taxpayer will be on the hook.

There is a real American connection here too. After Premier Ford annexed the islands, and the airport, and a mainland park, the public then learned that the island terminal is owned by the U.S. investment bank, J.P. Morgan. How does this figure into the scheme? Why is the American bank benefitting while we all suffer from this stupidity. What does Doug get? 

The federal government, which holds constitutional authority over airports, has not taken a stand on the province’s plan. Ford’s plan is still at the spitballing stage. There is very little to comment on except what’s written on the back of a napkin. The feds have created a survey, and they have asked Transport Canada to review the idea from a regulatory perspective. It appears that Prime Minister Carney is looking for exit ramps that don’t include a hard “no” to Doug Ford. This at once perplexing and disappointing. No doubt the the 23 Liberal MPs within Toronto’s bounds must feel the same way.  Liberal caucus meetings on the subject must be “interesting.” 

It’s time for the federal government to show leadership and call out this plan for what it is:  very poorly conceived. No Doug, NO.

READ MORE EDITORIALS:

• EDITORIAL: Ford’s straw man fallacies (June 2026)
• EDITORIAL: Dougy and the jets (May 2026)
• EDITORIAL: The “Get it Done Act” should get Ford out (Feb. 2024) 
• EDITORIAL: The man who will never be mayor struggles to be premier(Apr. 2026)
• EDITORIAL: Take from the poor and give to the rich (Mar. 2026)
• EDITORIAL: ‘An international relations earthquake’ (Feb. 2026)
• EDITORIAL: Poilievre endorses Trump’s actions; he should never be PM(Jan. 2026)
• EDITORIAL: Toronto has matured; Doug Ford has not (Dec. 2025)
• EDITORIAL: Governing by gut, not facts (Oct./Nov. 2025)
• EDITORIAL: Pierre is in a political pickle (Sept. 2025)
• EDITORIAL: Fact over fiction: Ford’s Bill 212 fails on its merits (Aug. 2025)
• EDITORIAL: No experience necessary managing a school board (July 2025)
• EDITORIAL: Bill 5 recklessly endangers Ontario (May/June 2025)
• EDITORIAL: Thou shalt not park in a bike lane (Apr. 2025)
• EDITORIAL: Bike lane facts Ford knew (Mar. 2025)
• EDITORIAL: Poilievre’s perfect storm (Feb. 2025)
• EDITORIAL: An election designed to distract voters (Jan. 2025)
• EDITORIAL: Bill 212 causes congestion (Dec. 2024)
• EDITORIAL: Fact-checking Ford (Oct./Nov. 2024)
• EDITORIAL: An injection of ignorance (Sept. 2024)
• EDITORIAL: Road safety for some, sometimes (Summer 2024)
• EDITORIAL: Ford’s boozy billion-dollar blunder (June 2024)
• EDITORIAL: Ford needs to step up and lead for once (May 2024)
• EDITORIAL: The Vacant Home Tax: A multi-mayor failure (Apr. 2024)
• EDITORIAL: Ford‘s actions “reflect a juvenile understanding of the role of the judiciary” (Mar. 2024)