elections and cycling

Macy0161

tomasrojo wrote: »

March 2011 to February 2016 doesn't have much to show for it either.

Definitely not a defender of them or their policies (especially on transport/ cycling), but a fair whack of their first period was tidying up the mess/ seeing off the trioka.

magicbastarder

i've changed the thread title as the election is neither recent nor local.

JMcL

Chiparus wrote: »

The greens promotion of diesel was the most asinine polluting program visited upon the state.

To be fair, at the time they were promoting it the science said that was the right thing to do on balance. As we all now know the "science" turns out to have been severely gamed by a pack of lying cheating gob****e motor manufacturers.

plodder

JMcL wrote: »

To be fair, at the time they were promoting it the science said that was the right thing to do on balance. As we all now know the "science" turns out to have been severely gamed by a pack of lying cheating gob****e motor manufacturers.

"Science" might be putting it a bit strongly. I only recall unchallenged claims made by motor manufacturers about supposedly "clean diesel". When did we start believing everything the motor industry says?

magicbastarder

the regulators were also testing the cars too, remember.
i can't remember if there was criminal cheating of the testing going back to when the greens were in power, but they were probably relying on what the official testing agencies were telling them, rather than the manufacturers.

droidus

Climate is probably my #1 issue along with other environmental and planning concerns, but even though I have a good green candidate Im not sure I will vote for them, primarily because they are essentially a centre liberal party (at best), Eamonn Ryan is a gob****e, and despite their recognition that radical change is needed its not reflected in their policies, or, indeed, their record.

plodder

All they had to do was connect a monitoring system to a car out on the road as opposed to on the test bed, which is exactly what they did in California. It was a case of see-no-evil, hear no evil, in Europe, due to the political clout of the motor industry, together with the fact that they could get approval in one country, which then had to be accepted throughout the EU. Netflix has a good documentary film about it.

boardbeer

JMcL wrote: »

To be fair, at the time they were promoting it the science said that was the right thing to do on balance. As we all now know the "science" turns out to have been severely gamed by a pack of lying cheating gob****e motor manufacturers.

I think the science is and was uncontroversial on this: diesel is more efficient per km, releasing less CO2 in the process. There is no evidence that CO2 emissions were faked or gamed. And for the global climate, CO2 is really the only thing of interest. Locally, however, NOx and particulates are a serious (yet non-global heating-related) concern, and that's what the cheating was all about.
Interestingly, new medical research is showing that the ultra-fine particulates emitted by petrol engines may be a more insidious and problematic emission than that of diesels.

droidus

AFAIK the consensus is that diesels still emit more fine particles than petrol engines in real world scenarios, and of course, the C02 benefit is only 10%, which will obviously vary dependent on size of vehicle and type of use. Particulates are a health massive issue in cities, linked to everything from childhood asthma to heart disease to dementia. We have billions of them in our hearts and brains.

The Greens standing behind either petrol or diesel was nonsensical especially without a serious simultaneous push for alternatives, public transport etc.

Breezer

droidus wrote: »

The Greens standing behind either petrol or diesel was nonsensical especially without a serious simultaneous push for alternatives, public transport etc.

They had 6 TDs. Fianna Fáil had 77. Greta Thunberg was 4 years old. It was their first time in government. And the arse fell out of the economy.

Now they’re targeting 10-15 seats, neither big party is going to get anything like 77, and there’s a worldwide popular climate movement for populist politicians to latch onto. And hopefully a bit more money to spend.

And hopefully if they do get in, they’ll be more ambitious and hold their nerve more in negotiations, having had the previous experience.

I’m not saying they’re perfect, but if climate change is your number one issue, is there a better candidate/party to for you to vote for (genuine question)?

magicbastarder

plus, bertie was wise enough at the time that he didn't *need* the greens for a majority, IIRC. thus lessening the threat they could pose in case of a major split - they couldn't use the threat of a walkout bringing down the government to leverage their already meagre enough numbers.

droidus

Breezer wrote: »

They had 6 TDs. Fianna Fáil had 77. Greta Thunberg was 4 years old. It was their first time in government. And the arse fell out of the economy.

Now they’re targeting 10-15 seats, neither big party is going to get anything like 77, and there’s a worldwide popular climate movement for populist politicians to latch onto. And hopefully a bit more money to spend.

And hopefully if they do get in, they’ll be more ambitious and hold their nerve more in negotiations, having had the previous experience.

They colluded in the appalling Shell to Sea debacle, which they opposed prior to the election, and most damningly, Ryan was the minister responsible at the time. That should have been a red line for any Green politician with even a shred of principle. Fossil exploration licenses also increased during his tenure. These aren't just mishaps, or pragmatic compromises, they are deeply hypocritical repudiations of everything they (supposedly) stood for. Only Labour rival them for coalition betrayals of fundamental values. They also propped up FF through the bailout and for 2 years afterwards.

I’m not saying they’re perfect, but if climate change is your number one issue, is there a better candidate/party to for you to vote for (genuine question)?

Its a good question. it depends if you believe that climate can be tackled within a neo liberal economic framework, and if you think various left parties can be trusted to implement climate policies.

One thing I can say with certainty, climate will be everyone's #1 issue soon enough.

JMcL

boardbeer wrote: »

I think the science is and was uncontroversial on this: diesel is more efficient per km, releasing less CO2 in the process. There is no evidence that CO2 emissions were faked or gamed. And for the global climate, CO2 is really the only thing of interest. Locally, however, NOx and particulates are a serious (yet non-global heating-related) concern, and that's what the cheating was all about.

Yes, you're 100% correct - I'd misremembered. The subsequent fall from grace of diesel though is down the the particulates and it was only really VWs outing in 2015 that sent the brown stuff in the direction of the rotating thing. So my original point is still relevant that it's not really fair to blame the Greens for the woes of diesel as on the available evidence in 2007/8 diesels were the least bad option. Not saying they were flawless in that government - other examples have been pointed out - but they were painted into a corner by the larger party so to get any of their policies implemented (anybody seriously reckon Noel Dempsey would have come up with a bike to work scheme?) they had to compromise. Paired with the perfect storm of the financial collapse, it saw them wiped out as is frequently the case with minority coalition partners here.
Still, if climate is a concern, as somebody else said, who are you going to vote for?

boardbeer

JMcL wrote: »

Still, if climate is a concern, as somebody else said, who are you going to vote for?

What is the SDs position on climate change for this election? They published an encouraging paper in 2018 which sounds like they would invest in cycling: Safer-Cycling-for-Healthy-Communities-Web.pdf, but other than sections on Biodiversity and Investing in Quality Public Transport (launching soon) (no content) I didn't find much to suggest an end-to-end policy on these challenges.
However, my local candidate, Catherine Murphy, is one of the few politicians out there I'd trust to do what they say.

JMcL

boardbeer wrote: »

What is the SDs position on climate change for this election? They published an encouraging paper in 2018 which sounds like they would invest in cycling: Safer-Cycling-for-Healthy-Communities-Web.pdf, but other than sections on Biodiversity and Investing in Quality Public Transport (launching soon) (no content) I didn't find much to suggest an end-to-end policy on these challenges.
However, my local candidate, Catherine Murphy, is one of the few politicians out there I'd trust to do what they say.

They do seem to have some fresh ideas, even allowing for Stephen Donnelly being kidnapped and brainwashed by FF, and I'd been hoping they'd be running candidates countrywide this time out but not to be. They've a heavy concentration in Dublin and the commuter belt, a few around Cork and Galway, then the odd random individual scattered around the rest of the country. Nothing in Waterford which due to a few high profile retirements etc is extremely open this time

AndrewJRenko

JMcL wrote: »

They do seem to have some fresh ideas, even allowing for Stephen Donnelly being kidnapped and brainwashed by FF, and I'd been hoping they'd be running candidates countrywide this time out but not to be. They've a heavy concentration in Dublin and the commuter belt, a few around Cork and Galway, then the odd random individual scattered around the rest of the country. Nothing in Waterford which due to a few high profile retirements etc is extremely open this time

Donnelly never really fitted in with them policy wise. It's mad that they have no SocDem candidate in Dublin Rathdown, it should be ripe for them.

Macy0161

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Donnelly never really fitted in with them policy wise.

Prefers changing with the populist wind, as is FF's want...

droidus

Here's their biodiversity plan.https://www.socialdemocrats.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Biodiversity.pdf

Chips Lovell

As a socialist, the Soc Dems should appeal to me, but I find it hard to warm to them. Politically, there is little between them and Labour and the only thing keeping them apart is personal differences. If they can be put aside, it's only a matter of time before they merge.

Also don't have much time for Catherine Murphy, mainly because of her (likely inadvertent) role in further the whole Denis O'Brien/Irish Water conspiracy theory.

droidus

Hmm...

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1222541261107859456

magicbastarder

well, i got to do my usual election routine today. keep the candidate you don't want elected talking, and let the candidate you do want elected, go after a very brief chat.

They'll never be in a position to have to put their money where their mouth is and actually deliver what they propose so can offer the sun moon and stars or what ever it takes to get elected. People who vote them in based on that can delude themselves and say ah well they weren't in government but sure maybe next time.

They like their spot at the trough.

droidus

Sure, its not as if a small, radical party ever had a significant effect on government policies. Cough (PDs) Cough.

Free public transport and airline tax are both reasonable suggestions. The former has been adopted in many cities to great success and the latter is currently being seriously considered at EU level.

magicbastarder

luxembourg has adopted free public transport; where else?

i did sign a petition recently calling on the derogation on airline fuel from being charged taxes to be abolished. didn't tell my father in law, who runs an air cargo business...

droidus

About 50 cities or towns in Europe, another 50 or so worldwide. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_public_transport

Macy0161

droidus wrote: »

Hmm...

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1222541261107859456

Spent the last 30 years opposing every "polluter pays" charge that's been introduced, sometimes successfully, but now all of a sudden all over climate change and the environment....

droidus

I certainly dont agree with all of their positions, but I really dont think that's true. The fact is that inaction on climate change has led to an alignment between the left and environmental concerns, in that the only credible solution now involves the radical curtailment of corporate and private interests - which also applies to transport policy.

Seth Brundle

Galway Chamber election manifesto makes traffic a priority

Galway Chamber of Commerce has released its election manifesto, calling on candidates and voters alike to Get Galway Moving and tackle traffic congestion.
Traffic is not a new issue in Galway, but there are fears that the problem could get even worse. The National Development Plan forecasts that the population of Galway City will grow by 50% by 2040.

At present just 38% of trips in the city are made using sustainable travel Galway Chamber says, saying that there is an urgent need to improve transport infrastructure in a way that will encourage a reduction in car use.

Galway Chamber’s members represent almost 25,000 people working in Galway and 78% of members ranked Accessibility as their first or second priority.

Haldir

For what it's worth...
https://www.socialdemocrats.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Safer-Cycling.pdf

Breezer

Jim O’Callaghan’s (FF) leaflet mentions he’s a cyclist and wants safer cycling. Then goes on to talk about how he opposes the Luas Green line being “destroyed” and “communities cut in half”. I’m sorry Jim, part of safer cycling involves taking cars off the road, and to do that we need adequate public transport. That’ll be a no from me.