Is the National Safety Council planning to rid Ireland of all cyclists? Especially children?

by John Thu May 20, 2004 20:28

You have good intentions I'm sure but you are getting rather over-excited without justification. First, the reason the number of people cycling to work is going down and the number of people driving to work is going up is because people are becoming more prosperous, especially the working-class. Before the Celtic Tiger took off only the middle-class could afford cars. Following the Celtic tiger, however, huge swathes of the working-class can also afford cars, especially now that the FF/PD government have reduced unemployment to virtually nothing. As a result, car ownership in Ireland has doubled in the past 10 years. Its not the middle-class who are responsible for this doubling of car ownership, because they allready had cars 10 years ago. Its the working-class who are responsible for the doubling of car ownership in 10 years, because they can afford them now whereas 10 years ago they couldn't. I'm only throwing that fact in because a lot of the people who read this site are socialists who are under the mistaken impression that this government is screwing the working-class into the ground. I'm not suggesting you are one of those people. Surely you'd agree that this increase in prosperity among the working-class is a good thing. Surely you don't wish to return to the days when only the middle-class could afford cars. As people become more prosperous, they tend to choose more technologically advanced means of transport. You may not like it, but its peoples' choice. Its not just cycling to work that people are turning their backs on as they become more prosperous. You may have noticed that far fewer people ride a horse to work now than used to be the case, say a century ago. Second, the health problems arising from the switch to greater car usage are being somewhat exaggerated. The number of premature deaths in Ireland is dropping fast. The death rate among the 15-24 age group has fallen by 19% since 1998, and the death rate among the 25-34 age group has fallen by 16% in the same period. And its not just the younger age groups. The death rate among the 55-64 age group has fallen by 18% since 1998 and the death rate among the age 65-74 age group has fallen by 23% in the same period. People are using their cars to drive to the golf course and the leisure centre, so they are actually getting far more exercise now than before because of the increase in car ownership. That's why the death rates are plummeting. If you've been cycling a lot and for a long time, you might have noticed that you are stopped to allow funerals to pass by far less than was the case 10 years ago. I'm not making this up. The CSO figures came out last week and they show the number of deaths annually in Ireland at an all-time low, down about 10% on what they were in 1998. Third, its a fact of life that bicycles and heavy goods vehicles are not natural bedfellows. They ought to be kept separate as much as possible. The best way to do that is to build lots and lots of motorways. A decade ago Ireland had hardly any motorways. Now, because of the FF/PD government's motorway building program, new motorways are opening every month. A a result, the number of fatalities on Irish roads, including those of cyclists, is much lower than it was a decade ago. The number of road fatalities per capita in Ireland fell about 30% between 1998 and 2003.
They are now lower than in most EU countries,
especially France and the Mediterraenean countries, but still not as low as in the best ones, such as the UK and the Scandanavian countries. The best way to get it down to the levels in those countries is to complete the motorway program as soon as possible. Unfortunately, its being held up every time a few stones are found that date from Viking times, or some species of grass or snail is found that's considered a bit rare. So, if I was you, I'd write to Seamus Brennan and tell him to get his finger out with regard to completing the motorway program, so there will be far fewer heavy goods vehicles clogging up the roads in urban centres and knocking down cyclists like yourself. Regarding your other points about speeding and so forth, I'm with you on those. The technology exists to really go to town on those who speed or drive over the alcohol limit, and it should be used. I'd bring the alcohol limit down to about 50mg or even 20mg, I think its 80mg at present. And, I'd have speed cameras everywhere. I'm not anti-cyclist. In fact, I can't even drive, and I used to go regularly to see the Tour De France in the days when Sean kelly and Stephen Roche were at their peak. But, the cycling lobby does itself no favours by throwing its lot in with all these anti-capitalist, anti-American, pro-environmentalist organisations. Accept that the motor-car is here to stay, that 90% of the population find it a wonderful convenience, and don't be campaigning to get rid of it. If you do that, you'll get far more support for those sensible changes you ask for that aid cyclists. Well, that's enough from me. I'm leaving the office now to walk home. Yes, I said WALK, its a 30-minute walk, and I'll be taking care while doing it not to be knocked down by any motorists OR cyclists.

by The Driver Fri May 21, 2004 01:02

Bet it doesn't change this person's position

by antithesis of john Fri May 21, 2004 01:17

hi. your comments make sense within the box. but i was wondering, what are you opinions on global warming?? the design of cities and urban spaces?? the sheer waste that cars are in terms of resources?? blah blah blah.

by P1 - None Fri May 21, 2004 14:28

John, you are a shit stirrer with no interest in positive contributions to any of the thredas you comment on.

I've been cycling & driving all my life including many years living abroad and nothing I have experienced there or previously in Ireland can compare with the anti-cycling hostility of car drivers that has developed in this country in recent years. This has been compounded by an almost most complete refusal by road-planners to include pro-cycling proposals in their planning.

Sadly, I won't let any of my children cycle in Ireland and I wouldn't advise anyone else to do so either.

As for the rest of the tedious nonsense about car ownership contributing to healthier lifestyles - I think its time you took your medication.

by Joe Fri May 21, 2004 14:40

Peak oil anyone?

Maybe driving isn't such a good option after all?

by John Fri May 21, 2004 17:15

Well P1, I really seem to have upset you. I don't know why. All I did was give figures showing that death rates in Ireland for all age groups are falling dramatically. And also that the number of people killed on the roads in Ireland per capita has fallen by 30% since 1997/1998. I'd have thought you'd be pleased by both these facts. Why the hostility? Is it because both have occurred at a time when the number of cars in use has been rising, and this doesn't fit in with the picture you want to portray of increased car use leading to more and more premature deaths. Well, it doesn't and the figures prove it.

I have more figures for you. I'd have thought that, as you are a cyclist, they'd have made you ecstatic, but after your reaction to my previous comment, I'm not so sure. I can't vouch for these figures, but I got them off a reputable web site, that of an organisation called the Galway Cycling Campaign. Perhaps you have heard of them. Here are the figures
they give:

number of pedal cyclists killed in Ireland in 1988 was 57
number of pedal cyclists killed in Ireland in 1996 was 22

surely that is good news.

And don't blame motorists for all of the 22 deaths. The same web site states that 9% of the fatalities of cyclists in 1996 involved no other road user, and another 9% involved collisons with pedestrians. In fact the number of cyclists killed in 1996 where no other road user or just a pedestrian was involved (18%) was almost as great as the number killed involving goods vehicles (22%).

Surely you would agree that the helmets could have saved lives in the 18% of cyclists' deaths that occurred which involved no other road user or just a pedestrian.

I'd be interested to see more up-to-date figures for cyclists' deaths on the roads sometime. These are for 1996, but that's the year the Galway Cycling Campaign web site gives them for. All I know is that since 1996 the total number of deaths per capita on Irish roads has fallen another 30%, but I don't have any more up-to-date figures for the number of cyclists among them.

As for the oil price, in 1985 it was 30$ per barrel, in 2004 it is 40$ per barrel. That's just a slow increase. Most things have increased far more in price in that time, even the price of bicycles and cycling magazines I'd guess, and and peoples' incomes have quadrupled over the same period. So, in real terms the oil price is far lower now than it was then. In fact, that is one of the things parties like the Green Party are complaining about.

by Joe Fri May 21, 2004 17:19

And in May 2003 it was 28 dollars a barrel now its 37 dollars a barrel. That's a fast increase. You could argue if its a short term blip but that aside its every obvious that we are pretty close to peak oil production (weeks?, months? years?) so celebrating the greater number of cars on the road and hoping for more is a bit like a turkey celebrating the plentiful supply of food in November.

But you just go an stick your head back in the sand if you like!

by fuinseog Fri May 21, 2004 22:11

For an intelligent airing of the issues, have a listen to Liveline last Wednesday (from about 20 minutes in)

http://www.rte.ie/rams/radio/latest/Wed/rte-liveline.smil

For road safety and statistics read Davis, R, "Death on the Streets, Cars and the Mythology of Road Safety", Leading Edge 1992

Please note that medical care is getting better and people are surviving accidents now who were dying from them 10 years ago. It should be obvious that that does not mean the streets are getting safer. Nor does it mean the streets are getting safer when fewer people get knocked off bikes or run down if it is a result of fewer people cycling and walking.

http://www.spokes.org.uk/isitsaf1.htm

For an intelligent discussion of the whole area see
Risk by John Adams .

by steve Sun May 23, 2004 19:35

but it's a little weak although partially true. Cycling levels are higher in some more affluent european countries so there isn't really a direct link between affluence and transport choice (although there is to a certain degree) . The impact of economic growth on land-use is having an effect though. It is really down to the government being incapable of following through on their own policies such as the NSS and SPG's etc. Dublin now sprawls as far as 100km from the centre and that is clearly not a compact urban form more conducive to cycling. I dont have figures but I would like to see the impact of the QBC's and a modal shift from bike to slightly more efficient bus on overall cycling levels. Or the figures when multi-modalism is taken into account (which realistically isn't a viable option YET with current public transport options)