New Minister for Transport Eamon Ryan

newcavanman

micosoft wrote: »

Huh? On what basis do you make this statement?

It was discused on Sean O Rourke show recently, about the complete inadequacy of the electrical infrastructure to cope with a large increase in the number of electrical vehicles

TrailerBob

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Handing Eamon Ryan the transport brief is like trying to get a dog to choose the colour pallet for a painting.

The man is fiercely anti car, militantly pro cyclist and his policies are all completely centred around funnelling the tax money of the average worker out of their pockets to serve those who can afford to live near public transport or love his cycling fetish.

This is all bad news for those either forced to commute by car because they cannot afford accommodation near public transport, or those who work rurally or depend on cars for their work.

Its very much an attack on the working and lower middle classes.

It's the main ministerial appointment I have an issue with. I don't have a problem with him having climate action really, but transport is such a big area and requires a level of understanding of the reality outside of south Dublin that the last incumbent lacked and theres no improvement here

kirving

Jizique wrote: »

the companies love selling them as they make really high margins but 95% of them are diesels which should not be in built up areas

1. Automotive OEMs do not typically make high Net Profit Margins at all.



2. Remind me who it was again that pushed diesels so heavily just over 10 years ago?

frozenfrozen

give everyone a house in dublin, build up 30km and use the old cars to power the lifts to get home. your commute in the lift would be quite fast on the way to work (terminal velocity) and you could sleep or read the paper on the way home so it wouldn't matter

Duckjob

Lundstram wrote: »

I pay about €3000 per year to run my car. That is handsomely taxed.

Cyclists pay nothing.

Both use the same roads.

Cyclists, pay up or shut up moaning.

I'm not the one moaning, I'm delighted with Eamon Ryan as transport minister

AndrewJRenko

whisky_galore wrote: »

Do you?

Yes, I do. Why is that relevant?

AndrewJRenko

Lundstram wrote: »

I pay about €3000 per year to run my car. That is handsomely taxed.

Cyclists pay nothing.

Both use the same roads.

Cyclists, pay up or shut up moaning.

Why should your running costs for your personal property have any relevance to public policy?


And the pedestrians who use the same roads for crossing - what should those freeloaders pay?

newcavanman

KaneToad wrote: »

Why should he wear a helmet? It's not a legal requirement and research is mixed about their efficacy. It's usually non-cyclists who insist cyclists should always wear helmets and always use cycle lanes.

Because when they get knocked off or fall off their bikes, they are the first to scream murder , that noone else is worried about what happens to them .
in the last month ive seen 3 cyclist and one e-scooter driver falling off their own machines, with no one else involved .
I think ill burn in hell as i couldnt stop laughing at them

Rows Grower

lalababa wrote: »

I despair. I don't think a qualified phycologist would last long making those leaps of the imagination.
I'm out of this thread.. it's not a serious thread... it's mainly green bashing.

I was answering the questions that were asked by the person who started the thread...

"What's your initial thoughts?"

"Is it a good or a bad thing for Ireland's motor and transport industries?".

I feel sorry for you that you feel so offended by my opinion but it was asked for.

McGaggs

McGaggs wrote: »

They can already do that. There's nothing magical about leading a building that stops a company leading a building in Delhi instead.

If a big group of their workforce decide they don't want to work any more and push it then it could be a nice little nudge in that direction.

gordongekko

TrailerBob wrote: »

It's the main ministerial appointment I have an issue with.

Not to drag off topic

but

We have a taoiseach who was in cabinet for almost 20yrs who approved policies that ended with us being almost bankrupt.

A minister for marine from the marine heartland of offaly.

A justice minister who spend the last few years in brussels in what seems like a junket role. Its a huge step up for her and i wish her all the best.

A singer has been put in charge of media and senior hurling.

Someone with little experience in charge of Equality, Children, Integration and Disability.

A lad with a masters in international development in charge of health.

And in Education a department with a need for reform they have handed it to a secondary school teacher.

The west has been forgotten.

At least we know what will happen with Eamon Ryan. God only knows how the rest of them will perform.

JC01

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why should your running costs for your personal property have any relevance to public policy?

Just read your own sentence back there and see does it even make sense to you.

Jizique

JC01 wrote: »

We don't need 98% of the things we have. Cars are a fact of modern life and I pay enough to use them that I fully intend to drive whatever the hell I want.

Why should you or anyone else get to ban me from the functionality of my own car? Even if there were actual public transport alternatives to my car I've zero interest in starting my day off dealing with people on a bus/train/whatever. So long as I continue to pay this countries extortionate charges for doing so I can't see how your argument has a left to stand on

So even if there was great Munich-style public transport, you would still insist on being allowed to drive as you have no interest in dealing with other people? I suggest this is typical of the SUV driver, zero respect or time for others.

newcavanman

Masala wrote: »

How will be standup to Michael O Leary and his beef on airport charges by the DAA. And what will he do when Shannon Airport come calling playing the poor mouth.

Overall.... how is he on Aviation??? Does he feel that we should only have 1 airport and all the others should be let go

In The World of Greens, we would ban air travel for allordinary people. It would be reserved for our hard working government and public servants, who would put aside their Eco Feelings and endure the nasty air travel , despite their personal views .
In short, the Greens would like us to live in a 1950s type world, albeit with 2020 social policeys

Rows Grower

KaneToad wrote: »

Why should he wear a helmet? It's not a legal requirement and research is mixed about their efficacy. It's usually non-cyclists who insist cyclists should always wear helmets and always use cycle lanes.

He should wear a helmet to help protect himself against head injury if he is involved in an accident while cycling.

I'm surprised I have to explain this to someone who has the ability to type.

If you know of any research that says this is not true throw it up there and educate us all.

The little SUV obsession is laughable. Was your nose put out of joint when the neighbour bought one or something?

Rows Grower

Rows Grower wrote: »

He should wear a helmet to help protect himself against head injury if he is involved in an accident while cycling.

I'm surprised I have to explain this to someone who has the ability to type.

If you know of any research that says this is not true throw it up there and educate us all.

As is normally the case for cyclists, defying the views of motorists is more important than any logic. Whatever the cost.

RandomViewer

Rows Grower wrote: »

He should wear a helmet to help protect himself against head injury if he is involved in an accident while cycling.

I'm surprised I have to explain this to someone who has the ability to type.

If you know of any research that says this is not true throw it up there and educate us all.

suspect his brains are in his arse, head is empty

Jizique

Kevin Irving wrote: »

1. Automotive OEMs do not typically make high Net Profit Margins at all.



2. Remind me who it was again that pushed diesels so heavily just over 10 years ago?

What has that chart got to do with the profitability of individual car models? Look at the discounts available on a Mondeo or a Passat v a Kuga or a Tiguan; look at the volumes of BMW 3/5 series v X3/X5 and the discounts over the last 5 years. Look on one of the UK sites, as discounts aren’t really a thing in Ireland. Margins on SUVs are significantly higher than saloons, and the bulk of SUVs are diesel, which is not suitable or short distance driving

frozenfrozen

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

The little SUV obsession is laughable. Was your nose put out of joint when the neighbour bought one or something?

Imagine how conflicted they are when their neighbour buys a 100k tesla

RandomViewer

frozenfrozen wrote: »

give everyone a house in dublin, build up 30km and use the old cars to power the lifts to get home. your commute in the lift would be quite fast on the way to work (terminal velocity) and you could sleep or read the paper on the way home so it wouldn't matter

Judge Dredd fan?

JC01

Jizique wrote: »

So even if there was great Munich-style public transport, you would still insist on being allowed to drive as you have no interest in dealing with other people? I suggest this is typical of the SUV driver, zero respect or time for others.

Practicalities first: I live in a tiny little village 30 miles from Dublin and commute about 20 miles further into the countryside. Since I'm not seeing this government managing to extend Dublin city to swallow up most of Leinster and building world class infrastructure across the whole thing while there at it that's kind of a pointless question.

But no, even in that unlikely scenario I still do not want to have to pack my boot full of necessities for work into a giant backpack and spend my morning fighting for a seat on a glorified cattle transport. Never mind the return journey after a 12 hour shift.

That's got nothing to do with respect or time for others. In fact I'm very much of the live and let live mentality. If anyone seems to be lacking in respect for others it's you. I could care less how you get about the place but yet your the one demanding to have a say in my transportation options.

RandomViewer

frozenfrozen wrote: »

Imagine how conflicted they are when their neighbour buys a 100k tesla

Gonna be a hard one

Jizique

frozenfrozen wrote: »

Imagine how conflicted they are when their neighbour buys a 100k tesla

If this is aimed at me, I have no problem with it. Diesel SUVs have no place in cities.

Lundstram

Jizique wrote: »

If this is aimed at me, I have no problem with it. Diesel SUVs have no place in cities.

Cyclists have no place in areas with no cycle lanes.

Want cycles lanes? Start paying for them.

Jizique

JC01 wrote: »

Practicalities first: I live in a tiny little village 30 miles from Dublin and commute about 20 miles further into the countryside. Since I'm not seeing this government managing to extend Dublin city to swallow up most of Leinster and building world class infrastructure across the whole thing while there at it that's kind of a pointless question.

But no, even in that unlikely scenario I still do not want to have to pack my boot full of necessities for work into a giant backpack and spend my morning fighting for a seat on a glorified cattle transport. Never mind the return journey after a 12 hour shift.

Hardly much point putting the infrastructure in place then, if people won’t use it

cgcsb

From reading their policies I don't think that they actually understand energy or how renewables work. They propose banning exploration for gas but don't propose what the alternative is. And of course the only alternative is importing gas from the UK and ultimately Russia which wouldn't meet the same environmental standards that extracting gas here would. This is clearly not a pro environment policy but a pro-Putin one.

On transport, Ryan actually fought against a metro route in his constituency because it would add about 5 seconds to some car journies for a tiny number of his wealthiest constituents.

Green party councillors have consistently opposed the development of high density residences on purely nimby grounds despite their lip service to denser, more environmentally friendly cities.

In short I don't view it as a pro environment party but just another one of pure self interest.

That being said if they manage to achieve a serious improvement to public transport is support them going forward and ignore the stupider parts of their manifesto.

Jizique

Jizique wrote: »

If this is aimed at me, I have no problem with it. Diesel SUVs have no place in cities.

Why SUV’s though? Some cars have a bigger footprint than an SUV, and a bigger engine, so is it the height that gets you all riled up about them or something?

JC01

Jizique wrote: »

Hardly much point putting the infrastructure in place then, if people won’t use it

Ergo the need for the cars, see where I'm coming from?

Mines only a diesel because of that clown Ryan.

RandomViewer

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What tax would you suggest for those freeloading pedestrians who use footpaths, cause collisions by walking out without looking, and use public roads frequently when crossing?

With dash cam footage it should be possible to prove negligence and no insurance layouts for injury or death. Making dashcams and helmet cameras compulsory might be a good idea