is reader-funded journalism. To keep it going and free-to-view, it takes people like you to act now and subscribe today for €5, €10, or €20 per month.

Cycling fines will not cover bicycle helmets or high-vis says Gardai

Gardai will not be issuing cycling on-the-spot fines for not using bicycle helmets or high-vis, the Garda press office confirmed this afternoon. We asked for confirmation of this after an official Garda account on Twitter posted an image which was described as confusing by many members of the public.

Legislation would have to be changed for such fines and successive ministers for transport, including the current one, have stated that there is no plan for such a change.

Sergeant Brian Whelan of the Garda press office told that the inclusion of helmets and high-vis in the image tweeted by the official Garda Traffic Twitter account was just to show safe cycling. 

He said the finable offenses are covered by the text below the image, and confirmed none of these, not even cycling without due reasonable consideration, includes the wearing of helmets or high-vis.

(article continues below image)  

In one Tweet, Dan Morrin writes: “@GardaTraffic very misleading poster, it’s implying that fluorescent clothing is a legal requirement which isn’t the case” and another Twitter user, Shane Kavanagh, replied and said “@Danjamin1 @GardaTraffic i agree Dan, i read it about 5 times to try ascertain whether a helmet is now compulsory and to whom it applies??”

Another user, Ian Murphy tweets: “@GardaTraffic poster insinuates items pictured are required. Extremely poorly produced poster. Should not be endorsed by AGS. @RSAIreland”.

Another example, from a user called Jim, asks: “Can @Paschald clarify that image on @GardaTraffic poster does NOT relate 2 newly introduced FCPN’s? @IrishCycle”. is reader-funded journalism. That means it's funded by readers like you.

Subscription drive update: reached its target of 270 subscribers by the end of August -- thank you to all who have helped! Our new target is to have 300 subscribers by the end of 2022 -- originally this was hoped to be exceeded by the first year of running the site full time (end of October).

If you can help push above 300 subscribers, please subscribe today for €5 or more. If you have already done so -- thank you!

Please remember, every month there's a natural drop-off in subscriptions due to people getting new cards, cards stolen, Revolut not topped up etc.

*** is a reader-funded journalism publication. Effectively it's an online newspaper covering news and analyses of cycling and related issues, including cycle route designs, legal changes, and pollical and cultural issues.

There are examples, big and small, which show that the reader-funded or listener-funding model can work to support journalism -- from the Dublin Inquirer and The Guardian to many podcasts. To make it work for, it just needs enough people like you to believe!

Monthly subscriptions will give's journalism a dependable base of support. But please don't take free access for granted. Last year had an average of 15,800 readers per month and we know our readers include people who cycle and those who don't, politicians, officials and campaigners.

I know only a small percentage of readers will see the value of keeping this open enough to subscribe, that's the reality of the reader-funded model. But more support is needed to keep this show on the road.

The funding drive was started in November 2021 and, as of the start of June 2022, 250 readers have kindly become monthly subscribers -- thank you very much to all that have!

But currently, it's only around 1.6% of readers who subscribe. So, if you can, please join them and subscribe today via

Cian Ginty


  1. It’s what we can expect from the RSA. The conclusions they draw from surveys are tenuous, their advice is poor and often inaccurate. I have little confidence in that organisation, it needs an overhaul and a change in leadership.

  2. Leaving aside whether the helmet / fluorescent top is in / out, what is the difference between item 4 and item 7. Does anyone know the difference between a red lamp that is lit and a red lamp that is illuminated?

    • It’s an error, one of those should refer to ‘cycle’ or bicycle traffic lights as used on a limited amount of cycle routes.

  3. They’ve also made a mistake in no.7- it should read ‘cycle traffic lights’, not just ‘traffic lights’. The text of no.4 and no.7 as included in the poster are identical, except for the synonymous ‘lit’ and ‘illuminated’.

  4. Cian…..Garda Brian Whelan.has obviously NOT read the legislation! There is NO REQUIREMENT to have a front reflector!! This Press Release/Tweet is a Joke! Not properly checked, misleading etc! Garda office need to redact/withdraw this post!


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.