Journalism and Cycling 2: the difficult second album

Is anybody actually reading what Eamon Ryan said.

The headline says - Cycling will become the most common way to travel in Ireland.

He doesnt anywhere say either that it will become the most common way to travel, or that that he is referring to the whole of Ireland.

He makes it clear he is talking about Dublin and other cities. And he says that cycling should become one of the mainstream forms of travel. Like - if he didnt think that when every other city in europe is going that way, then wtf would he be doing as minister for transport.

Where exactly is he deluded?

TBH- this eamon ryan is ruining the country shtick that I see over and over and over - its become a bit of meme, a truism - FFS there is fifty thousand post boards thread on how Green policies are ruining the country - but I dont see a problem with anything that he actually said here....

Could you please clarify which part of his commentary is 'deluded'; if you are so emphatic about it actually being 'deluded'.

Also - you are extrapolating from your own experience to ;everybody' - is your commute within a large city? 14km commute within a city? If its not then its got nothing to do with what Ryan is saying.

They changed things that were a lot easier to change, and you could change only some of them here so you wont get the same uptake.

They live in higher density of housing, thats not changing here. They dont have geographical issues like here. They have vast rail and public transport networks unlike us.

My journey is in a City.

OK you still seem to be saying two contradictory things at once: that it doesn't make sense for you to cycle because of the lack of safety and infrastructure (this is most people's complaint, it's a very reasonable complaint). As I understand it, the entire thrust of the argument that Eamon Ryan and his ilk are making is that we must invest in dedicated cycle infrastructure, but you're saying that he's deluded for that.

I'm not sure what point you're making about the child sharing the escooter with the adult, but very few children drive the car to school right now. And providing them with dedicated infrastructure could increase the chances of not needing an adult on the trip.

I genuinely don't understand what you're saying here. You appear to be describing scenarios which would be absolutely textbook candidates to benefit from dedicated cycle infrastructure. What would you think could be a proposed alternative? We have a growing population, we have cars getting incrementally bigger. I honestly don't think you've thought this through: small space, big vehicles, not going to fit more...need a solution....

Eamon Ryan does a poor job of communicating for sure, but I am absolutely confident that since the vast majority of journeys made by the vast majority of people are under 5km, that they are suitable for bikes. It's very much a question of making them safer and giving them the infrastructure. And obviously more mass transit too, without question.

Im saying hes deluded for thinking he can change the country to a situation where most journeys can be by bike.

He can make some changes and improve some things but even in my situation (which has a lot going for it) to ditch the car for the most frequent journeys i make it isnt possible, and its not possible because of things that he cannot change.

There are people coming from situations that are far less appealing for transferring from car to bike that will never be able to make that change, and I dont see any evidence that he understands this.

Again - where does he say he can change the country to a situation where most journeys can be done by bike.

That thread (and some posts in this thread) and similar threads across other social media is both hilarious and scary as to the ignorance of how our electoral system works and how little understanding people have of local, country and EU policies.

There's plenty of clowns who think anything what could be deemed green related will end immediately when/if the greens are not in government.

I agree that it doesn't even seem like €100 million has been spent never mind €1 billion! Especially when even in Dublin city there's no joined up protected/segregated cycle routes into the city centre..

Although this article goes a way to explain all the costs involved: https://irishcycle.com/2023/04/10/whats-the-typical-cost-of-walking-and-cycling-infrastructure/

Yeah, he doesn't say anything all that outlandish. Cycling suits cities, it's often very practical, cheap and fast, and quite a few cities in Ireland can see a lot more cycling. Dublin is already positioned quite high up the European capitals table for modal share of cycling. The state average is a lot lower, and conflating Irish urban areas with "Ireland" they're considerably distorting what he said.

Its a tricky one.

Normally when the govt has said XYZ has been spent, they get praised for it.

But in the case of cycle lanes they get hammered for it.

Moreover as journalists routinely exaggerate the amount.

Would be great to see Dublin CC spell out what specifically has been spent on cycle lanes.

As opposed to XXX has been spent on a really big project that includes major water work realignments, and of which only a portion is cycle lane - but we'll call the whole thing cycle lanes.....

But even if you read the article - what the journalist says directly contradicts what he actually says - in the quotes in the article.

Yes, I get that journalists want to get clicks, but this is so brazen.

Density certainly is changing here. Not fast enough, but it absolutely is changing and will continue to increase. Rail and public transport are all improving, slower that we'd like, but improving anyway.

Cycling can and will continue to improve, if we start seriously prioritising it.

More "consultation", "public engagement", "serious concerns", "sky will fall in" nonsense.

Businesses raise 'serious concerns' about plans to divert through traffic away from Dublin city centre (msn.com)

As Ryan correctly states "Every single time we’ve come to a decision, going right back to when we pedestrianised Grafton Street or Henry Street … and on every occasion you hear people say, ‘This is disastrous, it’s not going to work’.".

Should call the lobbyists bluff and propose reopening Grafton Street and Temple Bar to multi lane traffic.

Demands for consultation is really code for "I want to go to a meeting so I can shake my fist at the clouds".

There's two things at play here: one is whether Ryan believes cycling can become the dominant mode. It seems he didn't say that whatsoever. So you and I can park that one.

The other thing is whether it's pie in the sky to think large swathes of kids will switch to cycling. I don't see why that's outlandish at all.

A kid a few doors down from me drives to school 1.5km away. It's a 1km walk or a 1.5km drive. She drives it because it's convenient and easy and parking is free. On the same road she drives there is no cycle infrastructure and traffic is generally gridlocked in the morning. It's literally faster to walk than to drive. And when she gets there she must walk to the school from where she parks a few hundred metres away. It's absurd. In this scenario, I don't see why we wouldn't aspire to making obvious changes.

Bad weather is a not a significant deterrent even though it's frequently quoted. That's a topic for a different thread. The biggest reasons people don't cycle are the volumes of cars, lack of dedicated infrastructure, not feeling safe, distance to destination and because it's easy to drive. All of those except "distance" are very easy to resolve.