Active Travel Coalition Press Release – for Immediate Use

In the lead-up to COP26, and the World Health Organisation’s call for more cycling to improve health through increased physical activity and improved air quality [1], a newly-formed Active Travel Coalition is today seeking urgent action on the rollout of safe cycle routes nationwide.

The Active Travel Coalition is bringing together health, medical, environmental and cycling campaigners to call on the Irish government to show leadership on cycle infrastructure to enable families make the switch from the car to active travel modes of walking & cycling.

The coalition says that many people want to make the switch to cycling but are put off by the lack of safe, segregated cycle routes.

The Active Travel Coalition is seeking:

●        Faster rollout of the proposed high-quality ‘Safe Routes to School’ cycle path network.

●        Trial infrastructural change legislation & re-allocation of road space for walking & cycling.

●        Commitment from local and national politicians to lead the move to greater Active Travel.

●        Continued strong funding coupled with rigorous oversight for safe cycle route development.

●        Creation of networks of cycle routes, not just one-off routes that don’t interconnect.

Between 1991 and 2016 walking and cycling to school in Dublin fell from 64% to 46% while the percentage being driven to school increased from 17% to 41% [2]. Dr. Una May, Director of Participation and Ethics at Sport Ireland said “Sport Ireland research [3] shows that only 1 in 3 adults and 1 in 5 children meet recommended daily physical activity levels. Reaching the physical activity guidelines will require a mix of sport, recreational physical activity and regular active travel. Investments in active travel infrastructure can increase cycling to school and work, helping increase the number of children and adults meeting the recommended daily physical activity levels.”

According to Mark Murphy, advocacy officer with the Irish Heart Foundation, “30 minutes of moderate intensity activity, such as walking or cycling, five days a week, reduces your risk of developing heart disease and stroke, and contributes to overall improved levels of health. However, we know that if we want more people cycling, particularly school children, we need a major expansion of safe cycling tracks”.

Ireland’s policy is to reduce carbon emissions in 2050 by 80% on 1990 levels. Oisín Coghlan from Friends of the Earth says “transport accounts for 20% of emissions in Ireland. Given our carbon reduction targets in transport, a modal shift away from the private car is needed towards sustainable modes. Segregated cycle tracks, particularly in Dublin, are urgently needed to support this”.

Research from the National Transport Authority shows that 11% of adults cycle daily in Dublin but 46% would like to cycle or cycle more if they felt safer [4]. Dublin Cycling Campaign’s David Timoney says that we know from research and from the cycle traffic on the Grand Canal and Dun Laoghaire & Seapoint cycle tracks that segregated routes enable people of all ages and abilities to cycle.”

Dr. Sean Owens from the Irish College of General Practitioners says “the strongest evidence for reduced incidence of diabetes, obesity & cardiovascular disease is lifestyle measures centred around physical activity and healthy diets. Getting our patients, our families and our staff on their bikes for pleasure, or for a commute, is a triple win; better health for patients and families, better for the environment and better value for the public purse”.

Only 1 in 4 adults and 1 in 10 teenagers who cycle in Dublin are female. Mairead Forsythe from ‘Women on Wheels’ says that “the figures show a major gender gap in cycling in Dublin and while the barriers to more women and girls cycling are varied, the number 1 barrier is fear of mixing with motor traffic.”

Colm Ryder from Cyclist.ie and the Rural Cycling Collective adds that “In many areas developing cycle infrastructure will require a re-allocation of road space from the motor vehicle to active travel. We need to adapt our private car use to achieve the critical goals of an improved and safer public realm and more efficient movement of people around our towns, cities and rural areas“.

*The Active Travel Coalition consist of the following organisations:

Irish Heart Foundation, Irish Cancer Society, Diabetes Ireland, Irish College of General Practitioners, Sport Ireland, Cyclist.ie, Dublin Cycling Campaign, Women on Wheels, Irish Pedestrian Network, Friends of the Earth, Irish Doctors for the Environment & Faculty of Sports & Exercise Medicine (RCPI & RCSI).

For further information contact:

Dublin Cycling Campaign: David Timoney (083.333.9283 & davidtimoney@yahoo.com).

Cyclist.ie: Colm Ryder (087.237.6130 & colmryder@gmail.com)

ENDS

[1] https://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/environment-and-health/Transport-and-health/news/news/2021/6/promoting-cycling-can-save-lives-and-advance-health-across-europe-through-improved-air-quality-and-increased-physical-activity

[2] https://www.cso.ie/en/index.html

[3] Sport Ireland 2018 CSPPA and 2019 ISM studies.

[4] https://www.nationaltransport.ie/bike-life-2019-dublin-metropolitan-area/

15th December 2019
Prof. John Sweeney’s final report on the UNFCCC COP-25 Meeting in Madrid, December 2019.

See also his three previous reports : No Real Progress in Week 1, Waiting for Leadership and the EU’s Green New Deal, Deadlock at COP – Can the Chilean President Deliver Progress on Key Issues?

And so after two weeks of negotiations, COP25 finally came to a fractious end on Sunday, some 40 hours past the scheduled close. As the remaining bleary-eyed delegates gathered for the final plenary, the stands were being dismantled, the protesters had departed and the motto of the meeting “Time for Action” had a hollow ring to it. Make no mistake, this was a failure of epic proportions. Whereas in Paris in 2015 the countries of the world had come together to do business, in 2019 some of them came to obstruct progress and to place narrow national and financial interests ahead of the urgent needs of the global community. The science that told them there was less than a decade of present carbon budget left to burn to have a reasonable chance of avoiding the climate tipping points associated with a global warming of 1.5oC did not sway them. Neither did the vigorous participation of the global youth represented, nor the urgings of the Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, who expressed himself disappointed by the outcome. In his view, the international community had lost an important opportunity to show increased ambition on mitigation, adaptation and finance to tackle the climate crisis.

The main objective of COP25 was to finalise the remaining rules under which the Paris Agreement would be administered. Most of the non-contentious aspects had been agreed at earlier meetings. The chief concern at Madrid was how the global trading of carbon would be implemented, and how countries would be rewarded for safeguarding their carbon sinks, especially forests in areas such as the Amazon. There was also the issue of whether unused credits carried over from previous agreements would be recognised as part of any new trading regime. In these areas it was the big emitting countries of the USA, Australia, and Brazil who sought to thwart the wishes of the smaller and more climate vulnerable countries. It was hoped that any agreed arrangements would not facilitate large increases in global emissions from these big countries that could be offset against their credits. This would have the effect of causing further acceleration of global warming, with all the distress this would entail for the most vulnerable developing nations and small island states. For some of the large emitting countries, however, it was all about exploiting loopholes that might even enable them to double count their forest credits. The stalemate that resulted pitched the US, China, Australia and Brazil against a coalition of smaller states and the EU. No resolution was obtained after two weeks of bitter wrangling. The issue was left unresolved, to be returned to in COP26, and so another year has been lost while global emissions continue to climb.

It is clear that many countries are not keeping to the pledges to contain emissions that they made five years ago in Paris. Under the International Treaty that they signed then, a further round of stricter pledges are due to be made by the end of next year. Some of the biggest emitters questioned whether they would comply with this requirement. Perhaps the only positive outcome of the meeting was a decision that new pledges will be delivered by this time next year. But the enthusiasm for this came mainly from 80 countries, mostly small developing countries accounting for around 10% of global emissions.

The US will, of course, have exited from the Paris agreement altogether by this time next year and will not have to make any commitments at all. But this did not stop it from being obstructive, in particular when discussions concerning how to financially support poor countries seeking to cope with extremes associated with climate change. Loss and Damage discussions have historically been uncomfortable topics for the US in particular given its historically high contribution to the present problem. Rising sea level, severe droughts and floods and unprecedented storms are affecting many poorer tropical countries who have no significant greenhouse gas emissions, but bear the brunt of climate change impacts. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change recognises this in its principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities. It was hoped this would be addressed in Madrid by an appropriate funds transfer arrangement; but once again the big developed countries baulked at the prospect.

Among the big power blocs, the EU (minus Poland) emerged with some credit as it unveiled its plan for carbon neutrality by 2050. But the EU only accounts now for 10% of global emissions and needs active partners such as China, India, and the USA if the curve of increasing global emissions is to be turned downwards. Ireland also needs to actively support EU ambition in a way that has not characterised its actions in former years. The recently unveiled Climate Action Plan is wholly deficient in contributing appropriately to emission reductions which the UN Secretary General estimated as requiring on a global basis 7.6% reductions every year for the next decade. We cannot criticise other nations for playing the national self interest card if we ourselves seek to do the same.

There is no doubt but that the failure of COP25 is symptomatic of a world failing to advance the multilateralism ideals many of us grew up with. International cooperation in economics, politics and in solving environmental problems, such as ozone depletion, have now given way to narrow national and populist ideologies. What is most worrying about current developments in tackling climate change is however the disconnect between the power brokers and society at large. The advice of the scientists and the pleas of the young were ignored in Madrid. Indeed some 200 young people were summarily ejected from the conference after a protest, and the eloquent arguments presented by the young Irish activists at several side events fell on deaf ears. Attempts by some world leaders and some media commentators to direct personal vitriol against young activists even surfaced. In the words of Greta Thunberg:

“As you may have noticed, the haters are as active as ever — going after me, my looks, my clothes, my behavior and my differences…..It seems they will cross every possible line to avert the focus, since they are so desperate not to talk about the climate and ecological crisis. Being different is not an illness and the current, best available science is not opinions — it’s facts.”

The denial of facts, and the unwillingness to address the urgency of climate change as expressed so clearly by different segments of society, and the supremacy of national self-interest over the needs of ‘Our Common Home’ will unfortunately be the abiding memories of COP25.