No paywall and let's keep it that way. Support reader-funded journalism, subscribe today.

Renewed called for legal passing distance for motorists overtaking bicycles

A renewed called this week went out for a legal minimum passing distance for motorists overtaking bicycles after collisions with motorists in Kerry and Mayo resulted in the death a woman in her 60s and a man in his 50s.

Campaigners at Stayin’ Alive at 1.5 want a distance of 1.5 metres on rural roads, and 1 metre on urban roads when motorists are passing from the rear.

Ciaran Cannon, a Galway East TD for Fine Gael, told RTE news that the proposed that minimum overtaking distances have proven to work elsewhere and should be introduced in Ireland. He has tabled a private members bill looking to introduce the distances in law.

Here’s the report from RTE: is reader-funded journalism. That means it's funded by readers like you.

September subscription drive update: has 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), but this is unlikely and so the new target is the end of the year.

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. The argument against this that people seem this have settled on is the one that draws a false equivalence between a bicycle filtering up the inside of stopped or slow moving by bumper to bumper traffic and a car skimming by a cyclist at 80kph.

    “I’ll agree to a safe passing distance when cyclists are banned from filtering. It’s only fair”

    What’s the best way to fight that?

  2. Thanks Eric for raising that false-equivalence. It illustrates that many drivers don’t understand the massive kinetic energy disparities between their motor vehicles with significant mass (>1,000 kg) and velocity (50 km/h being the default urban speed limit) vs a lowly bike weighing approx. 15 kg pootling along at 10 km/h.
    Why do drivers get so irked at riders filtering up on the inside of static traffic at a junction? The stopped car/HGV has zero kinetic energy so filtering along poses little risk to the rider.


Leave a Reply

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