Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has voiced strong support for expanding Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport, backing the Ontario government’s proposal and calling it a move that would benefit the economy and increase competition in Canada’s aviation sector.
Speaking near the airport in Toronto, Poilievre argued that expanding operations at Billy Bishop would improve convenience for business travellers by allowing direct access to the city’s financial district. He emphasized that strengthening air connectivity in downtown Toronto would support economic growth while also easing transportation challenges.
The Conservative leader also pointed to broader issues within Canada’s aviation system, criticizing the lack of competition at Toronto Pearson International Airport. He argued that expanding Billy Bishop could reduce congestion on highways between downtown Toronto and Pearson, while forcing major airports to improve service through increased competition.
Poilievre has long supported expansion efforts, previously urging the federal government to approve runway extensions that would allow jets to operate from the island airport. He reiterated that such changes could significantly enhance Canada’s air transportation network.
The proposal comes amid renewed debate over the airport’s future. In 2015, the federal Liberal government blocked similar expansion plans, citing the Tripartite Agreement that restricts jet operations at Billy Bishop. That agreement remains a key legal barrier to any changes.
More recently, the Ontario government has introduced legislation that could give the province greater control over land surrounding the airport, potentially replacing the City of Toronto as a signatory in the agreement.
However, the federal government has signalled caution. A statement from Transport Minister Steven MacKinnon’s office stressed that any changes to the airport’s operations would require consensus from all parties involved in the Tripartite Agreement.
The issue is expected to remain a point of political and economic debate, as governments weigh infrastructure growth against regulatory constraints and community impact.
