Journalism and cycling

Chips Lovell · 08-11-2016 10:25am

tomasrojo wrote: »

This handily ties in with his general approach of never making any decisions about anything.

As a cyclist, I think his reluctance to actually do anything for fear of criticism is him making a highly effective minister for Transport. Long may it continue.

CramCycle · 08-11-2016 10:36am

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

As a cyclist, I think his reluctance to actually do anything for fear of criticism is making a highly effective minister for Transport. Long may it continue.

Normally I would disagree and say that a good politician should take the risk of being pushed out, due to unpopular choices, if they are in fact for the greater good. So few exist though so its hard to give examples. In this case though you may be right. He is not exactly pro cyclist from what I can tell so he may be better off doing nowt.

Chuchote · 08-11-2016 10:39am

CramCycle wrote: »

Normally I would disagree and say that a good politician should take the risk of being pushed out, due to unpopular choices, if they are in fact for the greater good. So few exist though so its hard to give examples. In this case though you may be right. He is not exactly pro cyclist from what I can tell so he may be better off doing nowt.

Donogh O'Malley: free secondary education for all and rural school buses.

Cyclists might be as well to extend their canvassing to the Minister for Health, given lots and lots of research showing that switching people to cycling has a positive effect on health.

In Ireland, amputations of legs and arms are rising fast, due to terrifyingly swelling numbers of people with diabetes due to inactivity and bad diet. Heart disease is an endemic problem for Irish people. Depression is growing at a terrifying level. Children are making obesity records in Europe.

Good cycleways are the easiest way of tackling all these problems. Some articles:

Cycleways a better investment on health than other spending http://road.cc/content/news/206615-bike-lanes-one-best-investments-public-health-returns

NY finds cycleways save health costs http://www.foxnews.com/health/2016/09/29/bike-lanes-are-sound-public-health-investment.html

https://www.tcd.ie/policy-institute/assets/pdf/John_Pucher.pdf

https://totalwomenscycling.com/lifestyle/how-cycling-helps-in-my-battle-with-depression-20265/#wtvUIDYuFw8iEZL8.97

http://www.cycling-embassy.org.uk/wiki/cycling-and-public-health

Chuchote · 08-11-2016 10:58am

Deedsie wrote: »

Plastic bag levy, smoking ban are two of my favourites.

And - showing that even fascistic party membership doesn't always make a difference to good law, Mary Harney's slap-bang institution of clean air legislation. I'll never unforgive her for that.

tomasrojo · 08-11-2016 11:01am

Ban on burning smoky fuels in Dublin was fairly stiffly opposed, I think (pensioners will freeze to death without coal!). Exemption for Bord na Móna products was probably to be expected, and obviously unwarranted on health grounds, but it was well worth doing. Think it was Mary Harney, of all people.

I sort of agree about Ross' activity maybe being for the best (I said so anyway), but transport really is a very important brief, and decarbonising transport is really important, given that the government have officially decided not to tackle agriculture. But nothing is happening. Cycling might be rising, but so is private car use. And the whole nonsense about cycle track mandatory use never being rescinded suggests that there's a deep anti-cycling sentiment in the DTTAS, and having such a cipher in charge might mean they get some really negative decisions made.

EDIT: was typing while Chuchote was posting about smokeless fuel.

Wishbone Ash · 08-11-2016 11:06am

Deedsie wrote: »

Plastic bag levy, smoking ban are two of my favourites.

They could not be described as 'unpopular' decisions though. Most people were in favour of them.

Something like transferring motor tax to fuel prices to ensure those that drive more, pay more. As Humphrey Appleby would say "a brave decision Minister".

Chuchote · 08-11-2016 11:12am

Car tax, insurance and NCT costs all on petrol and higher on diesel, I'd say; this would also free a lot of garda and civil service hours, and it would mean that there was absolutely no incentive not to take the NCT every year (apart from if you're driving a crock, which could be policed easily, and completed NCT could remain the only one that needed an annual disc in your windscreen).

Incidentally, I'd also stop this nonsense of dyed diesel for farmers; let farmers buy their diesel normally but be given tax relief on buying it.

tomasrojo · 08-11-2016 11:25am

There is the problem of border counties. Fuel would end up being way cheaper over the border. Probably is already with Sterling slump. But, yeah, a charge on use would be better that how it currently is, in theory. The way it is, by the time you've paid all the unavoidable costs, you probably feel that you might as well get as much use as possible out of the car to get value.

Chuchote · 08-11-2016 1:28pm

Does no one remember the rage at the smoking ban? The Kerry (I think it was) publican who led a pledge to defy the ban, then quickly backed down when brought to court? And the plastic bags ban, the anger at that? And at the glossy cigarette packets being hidden in shops? And currently at the possibility of plain packaging for these monstrous cancer- and heart-disease-causers? The people who said banning smoky fuel was an attack on the poor because the rich had central heating? And indeed the anti-water-charges anger (which I personally think is nothing to do with paying for water usage, and all to do with the fact that it's seen as a scam quango for FG/FF's BFFs)?

The current anti-cyclist rage fomented by certain irresponsible shock jocks on radio and in print is part of the same us-and-then populism.

Fian · 08-11-2016 1:39pm

tomasrojo wrote: »

There is the problem of border counties. Fuel would end up being way cheaper over the border. Probably is already with Sterling slump. But, yeah, a charge on use would be better that how it currently is, in theory. The way it is, by the time you've paid all the unavoidable costs, you probably feel that you might as well get as much use as possible out of the car to get value.

Yes, this is a big problem. I would love to see these taxes transfer to fuel costs, makes perfect sense. Some alleviation for trucks etc. would be required. Fuel economy would be given the weight it deserves in buying decisions instead of buyers being able to externalise the pollution impacts.

Border counties would be emptied of fuel stations and you would have loads of cross border fuel shopping though. At least that would be limited in terms of range by the fuel you burn to get up there and back versus the savings. I imagine Dublin would be out of range where it would make sense to cross border shop for a full tank of fuel?

Weepsie · 08-11-2016 1:51pm

Knowing how much booze people bring back from France, people would be filling tanks, bottles, cylinders and any receptacle they could to carry fuel from across the border.

We're a fairly tightfisted lot (me included) always thinking of ways to save money so we can spend it elsewhere

Chuchote · 08-11-2016 1:51pm

Pre-EU there used to be loads of cross-border fuel shopping all across Europe. It's a thing we forget. Truckers could tell you to the penny how much they'd save by buying in Slovenia instead of Switzerland, and be able to calculate the effect of the weight of the fuel against the price savings, etc.

By the way, there wouldn't have to be a different fuel price for trucks, just tax relief on proven (nationally-bought, not foreign-bought) fuel bills.

And anyone caught crossing the border with an empty tank and coming back with a full one more than once could have to pay for and display tax, insurance and NCT discs at a commensurate price…

Wishbone Ash · 08-11-2016 2:10pm

Weepsie wrote: »

Knowing how much booze people bring back from France, people would be filling tanks, bottles, cylinders and any receptacle they could to carry fuel from across the border....

I doubt it. Motor insurance would be invalidated if a claim was made and it later transpired that the motorist was transporting fuel outside the fitted fuel tank. (I think the max permitted is 5 litres when getting petrol for lawnmowers, chainsaws etc.) During the fuel crisis of the 1970's, house insurance companies ran adverts warning customers about storing fuel at home ,in sheds, garages etc.

Moflojo · 08-11-2016 2:26pm

Chuchote wrote: »

Car tax, insurance and NCT costs all on petrol and higher on diesel, I'd say.

The problem with this, as I see it, is that within a decade there will probably be a mass transition to clean fuels and electric vehicles (which people can just charge at home).

buffalo · 08-11-2016 3:34pm

Chuchote wrote: »

And currently at the possibility of plain packaging for these monstrous cancer- and heart-disease-causers?

I haven't heard any anger at this, apart from the cigarette companies.

magicbastarder · 08-11-2016 4:38pm

the likes of the big supermarkets must love the idea of minimum pricing.
say they sell a cheap bottle of gin for €15. the minimum pricing might mean the price has to rise to €22; this is not a tax, where the extra revenue is accrued by the government. the extra revenue is pure profit for the shop; and alcohol like that probably has a quite inelastic demand, so they just end up making more money.

brocbrocach · 08-11-2016 6:19pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

the likes of the big supermarkets must love the idea of minimum pricing.
say they sell a cheap bottle of gin for €15. the minimum pricing might mean the price has to rise to €22; this is not a tax, where the extra revenue is accrued by the government. the extra revenue is pure profit for the shop; and alcohol like that probably has a quite inelastic demand, so they just end up making more money.

Yep they're focusing on the supply without first working on demand, so price will go up to a minimum level (whatever that means) and all those people who need alcohol to function/have a good time will just buy it at the higher price. They could do the same to petrol actually - if they have a principled objection to big multinationals undercutting the small man - and that might actually get a few more people cycling, but alcohol is one of the few cases where such an approach is just about trousering lobby groups' cash and will be of no benefit to society.

Wishbone Ash · 08-11-2016 6:41pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

the likes of the big supermarkets must love the idea of minimum pricing....

I can't see how it would favour the big supermarkets. Minimum pricing usually favours the small corner shops, hence the reason why newspapers and tobacco products are the same in your local newsagents as in Tesco. It alcohol was the same, most would prefer to buy in in a small outlet.

magicbastarder · 08-11-2016 7:07pm

i didn't say it'd favour the supermarkets over small shops, i just said supermarkets probably love the idea. you're correct in that it'll make small shops more competitive, but it would probably also result in higher marginal gains (per bottle sold, anyway) for the likes of tesco who have their cheap own-brand spirits.

Chuchote · 08-11-2016 7:17pm

In my own, limited, experience, wine is the same price/quality in the corner shop, though the cut-price supermarkets have cheaper spirits and vermouth.

Wishbone Ash · 08-11-2016 7:23pm

Higher margin per unit but less units sold methinks.

magicbastarder wrote: »

... for the likes of tesco who have their cheap own-brand spirits.

Now there's a thing. How would it work if the minimum price of a bottle of spirits was say €25. Who's going to pay €25 for Tesco whiskey if a bottle of Jameson is the same elsewhere?

Chuchote · 08-11-2016 8:49pm

Anyway, yes - the cigarettes - the people I heard giving out about the idea of brandless packets are those who buy their cigarettes cheaply from street dealers. I'm not sure what difference it would make to them, but they explained it to me… still don't understand…

Meanwhile, back to cycling: if Shane Ross were willing to stick his neck out and take a little risk, he could clear roads, cut pollution, increase good health, all for 100 times less than the price of building roads for cars -

http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/1-mile-protected-bike-lane-100x-cheaper-1-mile-roadway-chart.html

San Francisco Bicycle Coalition recently published an article on the cost of a mile of bike lane in San Francisco versus a mile of other forms of transportation. The difference was stark, but PeopleForBikes made the starkness much more evident by creating a chart of those numbers.
(chart below, may require some scrolling)

Fighting Tao · 09-11-2016 2:06pm

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

I doubt it. Motor insurance would be invalidated if a claim was made and it later transpired that the motorist was transporting fuel outside the fitted fuel tank. (I think the max permitted is 5 litres when getting petrol for lawnmowers, chainsaws etc.) During the fuel crisis of the 1970's, house insurance companies ran adverts warning customers about storing fuel at home ,in sheds, garages etc.

Being from the border area there are plenty of people who fill the car tank and jerry cans to transport across the border. People don't even consider that their insurance may be invalidated. Depending on the exchange rate people select which side of the border to purchase fuel.

On a side note it still cheaper in Dundalk than Newry partially due to a price war in Dundalk itself since Applegreen took over the pumps at one station and the station right beside them re-opening after years of closure.

magicbastarder · 18-11-2016 11:29am

a rare positive story about cycling.
http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/shifting-the-balance-of-horsepower-an-irishman-s-diary-about-cycling-in-the-city-1.2870679#.WC7XHeTkSD0.twitter

tomasrojo · 18-11-2016 11:40am

magicbastarder wrote: »

a rare positive story about cycling.
http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/shifting-the-balance-of-horsepower-an-irishman-s-diary-about-cycling-in-the-city-1.2870679#.WC7XHeTkSD0.twitter

Could have left out the last sentence. Also, missed opportunity to work in "On your bike!" in that proud Irish Times tradition.

Chuchote · 19-11-2016 8:49am

Stupid letter in The Irish Times responding to Frank McNally's article

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/self-driving-vehicles-1.2873880

Would it be too much to hope that the future may also bring self-driving bicycles, programmed not to break red lights or scatter pedestrians as they speed along footpaths?

Roadhawk · 19-11-2016 10:41am

Chuchote wrote: »

Stupid letter in The Irish Times responding to Frank McNally's article

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/self-driving-vehicles-1.2873880

kind of true though...

CramCycle · 19-11-2016 10:42am

Everyone on this thread is now stupider for having read that man's letter.

Fighting Tao · 19-11-2016 12:28pm

CramCycle wrote: »

Everyone on this thread is now stupider for having read that man's letter.

Phew. I read your post before reading the letter. I'm safe!

Chuchote · 24-11-2016 7:20am

Irish Times report on the Liffey Cycle Route on the North Quays

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/proposed-liffey-car-ban-opposed-by-inner-city-communities-1.2879444#.WDXeLOifZMc.twitter

Proposed Liffey car ban opposed by inner city communities
Dublin residents express concerns over plan to create continuous cycle path along quays

about 14 hours ago
Olivia Kelly

Plans to ban cars from parts of the Liffey quays to facilitate a continuous cycle path along the river from Heuston Station to the Dublin docklands will be available for public consultation from next year.
However, Dublin City Council is already coming under pressure from communities and schools in the north inner city to drop the plan, amid claims it would push more cars into residential areas.
The council is proposing to permanently ban private cars and lorries from Ellis and Arran Quays on the north side of the Liffey, and to divert traffic for 1.5km through the residential streets of Stoneybatter and Smithfield.

Journalism and cycling

Comments