When is MTO going to get serious about protecting this industry from itself? A segment of this industry is hell-bent on destroying the rest of the industry’s reputation. The good carriers are powerless to stop the scourge, so we have to rely on the regulator to do its job. MTO is not going to solve the problems plaguing this industry by putting handfuls of trucks out of service at surprise roadside blitzes.
Over the past week MTO and the Ontario Provincial Police publicized the results of two truck inspection blitzes in southern Ontario. The earlier blitz in Guelph put 14 out of 34 trucks (41%) out of service. A later blitz in Collingwood sidelined 11 of the 33 trucks (33%) inspected.
In a targeted blitz the out-of-service rate should be 100%. If the truck cops were going after the worst offenders, why wouldn’t the rate be that high? If that were the case, I’d give the cops a pat on the back. The published results show the cops aren’t going after the trucks most deserving of an inspection.
The press releases from the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) are nothing more than a publicity stunt. These blitzes do not contribute in a meaningful way to truck safety.
That’s not to say the odd truck with some critical defect isn’t corralled at least temporarily, but the MTO’s own statistics show there’s almost no causal connection between vehicle defects and serious collisions.
Each year, Ontario publishes a report called Ontario’s Road Safety Annual Report. They provide a snapshot of road safety data and emerging trends including fatalities, injuries, collisions and more from all categories of vehicle and driver in the province.
You can find statistics on fatalities, injuries and property damage collisions, the types of vehicles involved in collisions but hardly any meaningful conviction data.
Among other data, ORSARs show the number of trucks involved in fatal collisions that also had some defect that could have had — not necessarily did have — some causal impact on the crash.
Across reports ranging from 2011 to 2021, for example, the numbers range from a low of 1.4% in 2019 to a high of 7% in 2025. The 10-year average is 3.25%.
In 2012, among the 98 large trucks involved in fatal crashes, none had an apparent defect that may have contributed to the crashes they were involved in.
When you consider the time and effort put into roadside inspections, not to mention the cost of those huge inspection sites around the province, it doesn’t seem like road safety money well spent. To me it’s symbolism over substance.
On top of that, the names of the carriers caught with defective equipment or other genuine safety concerns are never published. This might possibly alert a concerned shipper (yeah, right) to the actions of a carrier hauling their freight. There’s also the shaming element. Who wants to be in the news for that sort of thing.
Between 2008 and 2019, the Auditor General has repeatedly criticized the province for poor enforcement efforts.
The long list of specific criticisms over the years has included: too few enforcement officers; a substantial decline in the number of roadside inspections; inconsistent enforcement across districts; inadequate follow-up on unregistered operators; slow or incomplete implementation of technology and risk-based inspection reforms; and lax oversight of carrier self-testing of drivers.
The 2008 report says 20,600 operators involved in collisions or inspections did not have CVOR numbers (or NSC number for my western readers), and the ministry took little follow-up action to ensure registration.
On driver testing, the AG noted in 2019 and again in 2021 that carriers that test their own drivers had much higher pass rates (95%) when compared to those tested at DriveTest centers (69%). Additionally, it was noted that many carriers with very poor collision records have been allowed to continue testing their own drivers.
The most recent shocker, as described here by trucknews.com’s associate editor, Leo Barros, has MTO handing out driver CDL suspensions to drivers rather than dealing with the root causes of how they got the phony licences in the first place.
Overall, the AG reports note some improvement, but many structural issues remained unresolved since they were originally flagged as far back as 2008.
Folks, the out-of-service numbers we see published from time to time are just a smokescreen. Setting up these roadside blitzes contributes almost nothing substantial to highway safety.
While the ORSAR’s fall short on attributing causal factors for the fatal crashes, Transport Canada and the OPP suggest the problem lies with drivers.
Transport Canada lists the most frequent dangerous driver actions as inattention/distraction and speeding or driving too fast for conditions.
Also, citing from various sources, the OPP attributes many truck crashes to careless and/or aggressive driving, speeding or driving too fast, following too closely, improper lane changes, and driver fatigue.
Hmm, weren’t ELDs supposed to solve the fatigue problem?
Remind me again why should we pay any attention to the results of a roadside blitz in a gas station parking lot? And, I ask, why are MTO’s truck inspectors busy twisting wheel nuts with their gloved hands when they now have the statutory authority to pull trucks over on the highway if they aren’t driving properly?
The Ministry has a lot to answer for in not taking more aggressive action against these fly-by-night companies. The offending carriers know they can get away with almost anything, short of making a U-turn in the middle of a freeway. Oh wait. Haven’t I seen video evidence of stunts almost that bad on Highway 11 in Northern Ontario?
Come on, Dougie. Ditch these pointless roadside inspections and put our money where it’s going to do some actual good: properly resourced enforcement policies and enforcement action with some actual teeth. Get some of these bad actors off the road, please.
