Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I welcome our guests and thank them for attending. We pestered the clerk and the Chairman for some time to put this issue on the agenda. I am very pleased that we are hearing from our guests.

We should change the narrative relating to this issue. This is not a case "you"; it is about "we". Regardless of whether or not one cycles, we all benefit. If we thought differently, we might well act differently. I have asked quite a lot of parliamentary questions to find out what the spend is. It is incredibly difficult to pin it down, which is one problem.

Another problem is the fact that no one has ownership of the issue. Somebody made a point about 30 different organisations. That kind of fragmentation does not help in terms of driving change. If somebody owns it, it gets done. If there is a budget for it, it gets done. I am an offender who primarily drives into town when the Dáil is sitting and I can see the growing number of people who cycle. We have created the conflict between cyclists and motorists because we have not designed the city and our towns to accommodate a more sustainable form of transport, be it cycling or walking. The Luas is a fantastic and very important investment but the number of people who cycle to work outnumbers the number who commute using the Luas. Nobody says that the investment in the Luas should not have happened but if we put even a fraction of that into cycling, we might arrive at an arrangement where there is less conflict. When I travelled in different cities in Europe, I tended to take photographs of good ideas such as contra-flow systems or proper segregation of cycling. One sees large numbers of people cycling but one does not see the conflict. A very good submission that contained lots of ideas was made in October. I would like us to take those ideas, put them into a report and make some recommendations to the Department and Minister so that there is an outcome from today's meeting.

A colleague of mine who is a councillor in Naas is a cyclist advocate. Terrific work has been done there in terms of a plan that was put in place. One will see other people who, because they are personally invested in something, are the ones who make a difference. It should not have to be like that. There is an extremely good plan in NAAS in respect of which there is a lot of buy-in. Where something like that is put in front of people, it is amazing how they will see sense in it. However, it must come from public bodies rather than just from advocacy groups and there must be support for it.

The number one issue is getting infrastructure right. We have a great distance to go. We mix bus lanes with cyclists. Bravery awards come to mind. The way we design things is problematic. We do not target the spend at the numbers who are cycling. Are our guests happy with the design manual? Does it need to be changed or is it just the implementation? They referred to having people embedded within the Department as opposed to just the NTA.

On the fiscal side, it makes complete sense. It was only when our guests put it in the submission that it jumped out at me that it is so obvious that it should be done with regard to inequality or even advantage in terms of a financial incentive for e-bikes or extending the cycle to work scheme to cycling to school so that there is some degree of investment. Our guests might talk us through some of those types of ideas or questions regarding the submission, which is the basis for the kind of report we should make. It is not a question of us reinventing the wheel but we could make some good recommendations on foot of the submission.