From top: Ranelagh village; Green Party Leader Eamon Ryan during pre-Budget 2020 submissions last week

This morning/afternoon.

Further to the ongoing immense brouhaha over Green Party Leader Eamon Ryan’s proposal that one car could service 10 villagers in rural Ireland.

Of Mr Ryan , whose parliamentary constituency includes Ranelagh, Dublin 6,  Journalist  and columnist Philip Nolan tweetz:

‘Eamon Ryan wouldn’t dare tell his cosy D6 constituents they shouldn’t have at least one family car to drive Jemima to crèche, or he’d be toast.

So piss off telling rural ireland, where we actually have no public transport, that we somehow should organise a rota.’.

Alternatively…

Green Party Councillor for Swords, County Dublin, Ian Carey respondz:

Philip, he didn’t suggest restricting car ownership for anyone. He was proposing something additional to increase mobility. He has been totally misrepresented on this. There are lots of young ppl locked out of car ownership because of insurance costs and need cheaper options.

Alternatively…

Climate change sceptic Fiona Marie Flanagan addz:

‘One car per 10 families? Wolves in the wild? Tree planting?

Don’t for one minute think that Eamon here has the creativity to come up with any of this nonsense by himself – it’s all taken from Agenda 2030, the UN blueprint for global control…’

FIGHT!

Update:

This afternoon.

Via Eamon Ryan

Wednesday: It Takes A Village

Rollingnews

Earlier: While You Were Sleeping

22 thoughts on “Rota This

  1. martco

    to those regarding GE vote-getting ideas, see? hm?

    now THAT’s an idea that just might work

    (but if he goes in straight to the endgame scenario he will get himself & his party killed, per Philip Nolan’s comments)

    improve the basics & slip in some of these group schemes for the young wans & it might stick

    slowly slowly catchy monkey

    1. Ciuncainteach

      Slowly slowly doesn’t cut the mustard at this stage Martco. Also, I wouldn’t place too much stock in Philip Nolan’s grasp of the barometer of public opinion.

      1. martco

        @Ciuncainteach

        and THAT’s why you will fail. sorry but that’s kinda simple & trite thing to say.

        going in hard with both boots (necessary or not) is never ever gonna work.

        I get your urgency but you have to understand you’re poking at a major part of Irish DNA here (I even know one fella who did his thesis on the subject- not me) out of necessity, history & other various factors car ownership IS whether you like it or not a major organ of how people function in this state at this time. you come to my house and tell me to give up my 151 reg VW Passat bluemotion diesel estate without a viable exit plan & I’ll tell you to FRO straightaway & leave. but if you come calling with a smart strategy to bridge people into a new way of doing things it might happen. fix public transport first then maybe some clever subversive schemes such as the one mentioned above & there’s a very good chance.

        us & them approach never works.

        (and I’m still not convinced Li-ion batteries is the way to go anyway no matter what the global argument but that’s another days work)

        1. Ciuncainteach

          ‘At this time’ – no doubt. Where we are is a result of policy decisions made over the last several decades. It’s not a part of our DNA. Changing this 40-year approach will not be simple or easy, and it does require making tough decisions. Better to make these decisions when we have time rather than when we’re compelled to act by a worsening climate.

          I understand why you might not want to give up on your bluemotion passat Martco in the absence of viable alternatives. My preference would be to build those alternatives so that the transition is as painless as possible.

          This government is still dedicating the bulk of its transport budget to building more roads however. Their approach to this issue is to move people into electric vehicles, which could be helpful to rural people such as ourselves that live where public transport options are not viable, but it shouldn’t form the basis of a national policy. EVs use unethically sources materials such as cobalt and lithium, they contribute to air pollution through particulate emissions (tyre dust, brake pad dust) which is impacting on public health, and they do nothing to alleviate the problems caused by congestion in our cities.

          The us and them approach may not be ideal, but you will never get everyone onside on any issue and we don’t really have the time to get everyone to start buying in before taking corrective action. We’ve known about the impact GHGs have on the climate for over 40 years at this stage.

          1. martco

            btw the Passat was just an everyman example
            (I personally drive something which in my view is far fairer to the planet but would perplex many nouveau greenies)

  2. john f

    Hopefully the novelty the Greens are currently enjoying will dissipate by the next election. These scumbags are all about larger government and more state control over people’s lives. People need to remember what he and his party did the last time they were in government.
    I listen to the interview and I have no doubt you meant what he said about cars in rural Ireland. I agree with the commentators that say you wouldn’t dare suggest this for his own constituents and his ideas come straight from the agenda 2030 UN publication.

    1. Nigel

      The absolute hytserics this incredibly tame proposal has provoked is amazing. There’s plenty about it to be thrashed out and discussed, if we could only hear ourselves over the nise of heads exploding everywhere.

      1. Ciuncainteach

        Totally voluntary community-led initiatives such as car sharing schemes are evidence of encroaching state control? Then referencing the SDGs as a UN 2030 agenda to control lives? They’re entirely voluntary goals that National Governments self-report on.

      2. Ciuncainteach

        Not to mention, one of their main criticisms of the ER protests is that they aren’t ‘providing solutions’.

        Methinks they’re being slightly disingenuous….

          1. Ciuncainteach

            I am not inferring any sinister motives Mr Pee Pee.

            Maybe they don’t see the conflict in both calling for solutions and shooting down any suggestions for corrective action as unrealistic without outlining their justifications for doing so.

          2. Pee Pee

            Disingenuous is the opposite of genuine, no? They believe that climate change isn’t being taking serious enough, and measures proposed are akin to sticking a blue plaster on a gaping wound.

      3. GiggidyGoo

        Well, maybe that’s true, but Ryan seems to have found an idea floating around somewhere – obviously not his, as, as usual, it’s pie in the sky without any back up buried in some tree huggers musings.

  3. Stan

    I’ve met loads of Green Party people here in the UK who are proper enviro-lefties with radical ideas. I’ve yet to meet an Irish one who wasn’t effectively an FG-er with a bike.

  4. Pee Pee

    Sitting for hours in traffic because of one car per person, is something that we will look back upon, and think what the heck.

    1. some old queen

      Sitting in traffic on Pearse Street for a whole hour because the Samuel Beckett bridge is not designed to accommodate even average levels of car traffic is something that we will look back, and think- who exactly gave planning permission for that ostentatious yet dysfunctional piece of crap?

Comments are closed.