Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: How does Ontario's speed camera revenue compare to other Canadian provinces?
Executive Summary
Ontario’s automated speed cameras have produced substantial ticket revenue in 2024–2025, with Toronto issuing about $40 million in automated speed-camera fines in 2024 and continuing into 2025, and several Ontario municipalities reporting millions more; however, no single source in the assembled dossier provides a comprehensive, province-to-province revenue table for Canada [1] [2]. The debate juxtaposes clear safety evidence for reduced speeds against provincial political moves to ban cameras framed as anti-“cash grab” policy, leaving cross‑provincial comparisons incomplete and contested [2] [1].
1. Why Ontario’s headline numbers matter — big-city revenue and municipal plans that added up quickly
Ontario municipalities have reported large, concentrated sums from automated enforcement that are driving the public discussion: Toronto’s roughly $40 million of automated-camera fines in 2024 and the city’s growth to roughly $45 million in 2025 stand as the most prominent figures cited, while regions such as Waterloo and Barrie reported multimillion-dollar tallies and projections that underscore scaled local programs [1] [2] [3]. Those municipal totals are being used by proponents and opponents alike as shorthand for the program’s fiscal footprint, but they do not translate into a direct provincial ranking against other provinces because comparable, consolidated provincial totals are not provided in these sources [3] [4].
2. Safety data complicates the “revenue” framing — cameras reduce speeding while producing fines
Independent and municipal studies cited here show measurable reductions in speeding, for example a study finding a 45% reduction in speeding and a 10.7 km/h drop in an 85th percentile speed in Toronto when cameras were active, indicating safety benefits that coexist with revenue generation [2]. That safety evidence is central to municipalities and road‑safety advocates who argue that fines are a byproduct of enforcement that prevents collisions and injuries, not merely a revenue source, a point emphasized in municipal planning documents and public statements [2] [4].
3. Political reaction: a provincial ban pitched as protecting motorists from a “cash grab”
Ontario Premier Doug Ford announced plans to introduce legislation to ban speed cameras, publicly characterizing them as a “cash grab” that allegedly “gouges the taxpayer,” and citing municipal fine totals in the political rhetoric [1]. This political framing directly challenges municipal narratives that emphasize safety, and the promised provincial ban places planned municipal revenue streams and expansion projects — such as Waterloo’s now‑jeopardized projection of $158.72 million cumulative by 2029 — at risk, illustrating how the dispute is simultaneously fiscal, public safety, and political [4] [1].
4. Municipal variation in Ontario shows program diversity, not uniform revenue generation
Data points from several Ontario municipalities show wide variation in outcomes and revenue: Barrie reported over $1.2 million in ticket revenue with a surplus of $535,684, while Waterloo had collected around $3 million with aspirations for far larger future revenue, and Toronto’s automated program generated tens of millions [3] [4] [1]. These differences reflect program scale, placement strategy, deployment timelines, and local decisions about revenue use or surplus handling, and they caution against treating “Ontario” as a single monolithic figure without standardized, province‑level aggregation [3] [4].
5. What the other provinces’ picture looks like — gaps and signals, not direct apples‑to‑apples
The assembled sources do not provide comprehensive, comparable figures for other Canadian provinces; instead they supply local signals such as Ottawa cameras issuing fewer tickets in 2025 relative to the prior year, which may imply declining local revenues but does not allow a full provincial comparison [5]. Because automated enforcement policies, reporting standards, and program scales differ across provinces, this patchwork of municipal reports and studies cannot be reliably synthesized into a clear nationwide ranking without additional, centralized data collection that these sources do not supply [5].
6. Stakeholders’ incentives and possible agendas shape how revenue is reported
Mayors, municipal staff, provincial officials, and advocacy groups each have distinct incentives: 29 mayors publicly urged preserving speed cameras as municipalities argued for safety and budget stability, while the provincial executive framed cameras as taxpayer gouging to justify a ban [6] [1]. These competing frames are consistent with political and fiscal agendas—municipalities defending local policy tools and revenue streams, and provincial leadership advancing a policy to respond to political criticism—so reported revenue figures are often presented selectively to support those agendas [6] [1].
7. Bottom line: Ontario’s figures are large but not definitively larger than other provinces
The dossier establishes that Ontario cities have generated substantial automated‑camera revenue in 2024–2025, with Toronto’s tens of millions being the most salient figure, and multiple municipalities reporting multimillion totals or ambitious projections; nonetheless, there is no consolidated, comparable national dataset in these sources to say Ontario’s total surpasses each other province’s total definitively. Resolving that question requires standardized, province‑level or national reporting of automated‑enforcement receipts and ticket counts, which the current sources do not provide [1] [4] [5].