— Marc Coleman, self-proclaimed influencer of “governments, regulators, the EU, media and public opinion” thinks democracy is at risk in his local area… because of an active travel project.
— People who are ideologically opposed to active travel projects are effectively praying on others’ understandable annoyances caused during construction phases.
Comment & Analysis / Very long read: The construction phase of any major project is a problematic time — when a street is being redesigned, of course, it is going to be disruptive. The goal should be to limit that disruption and deal with issues as they arise.
But a recurring theme developing in Dublin is people using that time to rally people against cycle lanes. Dún Laoghaire–Rathdown County Council’s Dún Laoghaire Central project is now a prime example of this.
Dún Laoghaire Central is not just a cycling project — it is a pedestrian, cycling and public realm project. It’ll add greenery and give the roads a sense of place instead just being places people commute through, and it will provide safer streets for all road users. The work includes a junction where there are raw, unresolved issues over the death of student Greta Price-Martin.
The project was approved in 2022 before she died while cycling to work in a collision which involved a truck driver last year. Sadly, it takes time between the approval and construction stages.
So, it’s all the more surprising that Marc Coleman, a former Irish Times economics editor, is trying to make hay of this project. Is Coleman — who seems to be leading the charge — looking to make a name for himself in rallying against cycle lanes, or what is he at?
Logic does not seem to come into it. The planned two-year construction of the project started last month after years of planning and public consultation. The work at Bakers Corner, which is causing disruption at the moment and some understandable annoyance, is planned to last for a few weeks.
A planned public meeting about running the construction as smoothly as possible looks like it may be hijacked by a few people against cycle paths locally. It is set to take place at the Holy Family Parish Resource Centre at Bakers Corner this Thursday at 7.30pm
Even if Coleman is not looking to make a name for himself, his opposition to cycle paths (while maybe supporting the vague idea of them, just not in his area) offers some insights into the views held by a number of commentators and policy classes.
Let’s be upfront about this: It’s an example of how they repeat myths, twist issues like consultation and try to apply impossibly high barriers for councils to adhere to in terms of processes. He has just expressed his views very publically on X.
Who is Marc Coleman?
On his profile on X, he describes himself as a “Consultant (business & Govt) Leading policy influencer & Economist Ex Ibec ECB Dept Fin, Irish Times Ec Editor ScholMBA ASP Kiel. Views personal. History Nerd.”
He runs a consulting business, Octavian Advisory Consultancy Ltd, and he chairs the Monkstown Abbey Road Residents’ Association, which he set up.
His main work these days seems to be economic and public policy analysis, but there’s a wide range of services listed on Octavian’s website and LinkedIn page. In late 2023, The Currency reported that Coleman was “seeking up to €7m from business leaders to launch a new think-tank”… maybe his latest adventure is an audition?
In the context of rallying against current local, national and EU policy on active travel, the following lofty claim might raise some eyebrows: “We influence governments, regulators, the EU, media and public opinion. We operate across five continents and in five languages”.
The rallying cry
On February 22nd, he posted on X, tagging in local TDs Cormac Devlin, Richard Boyd Barrett, and Barry Ward. Coleman said that they “heard our RA [resident association] member strong opposition to cycle lanes” and that “They agreed to consult about any more cycle lanes.”
Resident associations regularly object to most street changes, as well as much-needed housing and other things, including sometimes schools.
Coleman claims Monkstown Abbey Road Residents’ Association represents 5,000 people, but even when asked, it offers no number of paid or unpaid members.
Residents’ associations are well-documented as not being representative of the general population. They are typically older, often people who are at or near retirement age and usually highly conservative (in the classical sense of wanting to conserve the status quo regardless of the benefits of change, such as much-needed housing or safer streets).
A high level of support for active travel
Survey after survey finds that a clear majority of people support active travel and public transport, and not just in general terms. When a Business Post RED C poll in 2022 asked the more direct question of politics of space — if people supported “fewer car lanes and increased pedestrianisation” — 66% of voters said they did.
Similarly, despite the “just build more roads” attitude expressed by some parts of the new Government, a Sunday Independent poll after the election found that the majority of Irish voters want 2:1 spending on public transport vs roads kept.
Kevin Cunningham, managing director of polling company Ireland Thinks and political lecturer, said: “The poor performance of the Green Party has generated a narrative that voters wish to shift backwards on this issue… Our data today shows this is not where the electorate is at.”
He added: “The evidence instead suggests that by 50% to 30% of voters want to maintain the 2-to-1 ratio of investment in public transport infrastructure over roads and that by 57% to 27% they do not believe the next government will do enough on the climate crisis.”
TDs are not councillors
However, the above issues are not even the most problematic part of what Coleman said. The two main problems are that TDs are not the politicians who oversee active travel projects (councillors are), and consultation was held on the Dún Laoghaire Central project.
The public consultation report for the project is available online with a quick Google (a research company should be able to find it). It outlines:
- 64% were in favour of the scheme proceeding as proposed.
- 23% were in favour of the scheme proceeding with a few changes.
- 12% were not in favour of the scheme proceeding.
- 1% did not state a preference in relation to this scheme.
The consultation ran across 6 weeks — as described in the report: “In accordance with the requirements of Part 8 a site notice was erected and an advertisement placed in the local newspaper. The plans were made available for viewing in County Hall and Deansgrange Library. In addition the project material was made available online on the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown Public Consultation Hub. The Elected Members were briefed in advance of the commencement of the process and a social media campaign was undertaken.”
Then councillors debated the issues for hours and voted 34-2 for the Dún Laoghaire Central project with just 4 abstentions.
There were only 358 responses on DLR Central compared to over 7,000 responses for the Dún Laoghaire Living Streets project, but the difference can be explained mainly by the differences in the project.
Living Streets includes pedestrianisation and filtered permeability, which block through routes for motorists. It also includes an area which is more mixed in nature, including shops and services used by people in the wider area, meaning it attracts both criticism and support from a wider area. While the DLR Central project is relatively light in terms of motoring restrictions
‘How do I object to this project?‘
On Sunday, Coleman added: “Hopefully Barry Cormac & Richard will attend Cllr Dan Carson meeting Thu next & call for new Bakers Corner.”
Cllr Dan Carson had to reply and clarify that it is not his meeting. To be clear: It’s a meeting mandated by the council for the construction company to hold as part of its effort to carry out construction on the project as smoothly as possible.
Coleman also asked: “Can I ask why contractors didnt consult before digging up the entire area?” But, as covered above, DLRCC held a Part 8 planning process for the project, which includes a statutory public consultation process, which is far more extensive than other processes.
Consultation and communication are important at different stages of projects. Consultation is not supposed to be shorthand for “How do I object to this project?”. The reality is that many people see consultation at the project level as a way to object to high policy decisions, and this is clearly the case with Coleman.
Do you know what hinders later-stage consultations? People are trying to re-run the primary project consultation for one reason or another — be it that they are clueless, missed the consultation or are trying to rewrite recent history. It’s often hard to say which exact one is at play.
Replying to Cllr Carson, Coleman said he assumed it was his gig as he had posters up about it. There’s a clear failure to research or deal with reality (or maybe attempts to bend reality) peppered throughout his interactions on X.
After a different string of interactions in the last few days and ample time for him to find and read the consultation report, today he posted: “Let’s get these facts established, and then we can comment.”
Also, today, he said that only a “very small number responded to consultation” and he said “People living in the real world – especially in tax generating private sector – have no time for these [consulations.].”
Jason Cullen, chair of the Dublin Commuter Coalition and also a local who’s active in community groups, told him: “If you don’t have the time to be on the committee of a residents association, then perhaps you should step down”
Twisting the meaning of the national election result
Coleman said: “Nov 29th election result may I think have anyway clearly shown how voters feel” — he confirms in comments to others that this is a clear nod to the losses by the Green Party at the national level, but street changes are approved by councillors, and the councillors from a wide range of parties who approved the project were reelected last year ahead of the national elections.
As this website covered, where pedestrianisation, cycle routes, and bus priority were election battlegrounds in Dublin, supporters won out. The Greens even retained the same number of seats in DLRCC, and so did councillors in Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, the Labour Party and independents who strongly supported active travel schemes in the area even when opponents to such claimed they’d have their heads on a stick.
And councillors did so in the ward where the Dún Laoghaire Central project is being built.
Coleman continued: “The general idea of consutation is to consult on a proposap first and then only proceed if agreement exists. What seems to be happening here is a fait accomplis being presented to local taxpayers.”
A democratic vote of 34-2 councillors is a sure sign of agreement, and so are only 12% of consultation respondents who are not in favour of the scheme proceeding.
As Kevin Cunningham (as referenced above) and others in the media have said, trying to make out the election was a referendum on “Green” policies is unwise. It really isn’t supported by data or anything really. Small parties get a kicking after going into government.
“East German approach to telling the proletariat what is good for them”
Cllr Michael Clark (FF) — who’s in the running for the prize for the most anti-active travel councillors in DLRCC — replied and said he’d be there on Thursday.
Coleman — remember, he describes himself as a history buff — then replied: “Hopefully we could reverse the East German approach to telling the proletariat what is good for them & revert to democracy where the people decide what happens.”
So, exactly how is DLRCC comparable to the oppressive regime in East Germany before German unification?
Residents of DLRCC just had fair and free elections last year, and councillors who voted for the project — and the more controversial Living Street project — were reelected.
“Why would people be against cycle lanes?”
A person replied to Coleman’s original tweet and asked: “Why would people be against cycle lanes?” stating that they are “just curious”. Coleman replied: “In right places – flat dense inner city areas that are well planned – they work not in outter suburbs There they worsen carbon emissions by causing jams (Except for minority of cycling enthusiasts who have luxury of working in Universities & don’t have to start work until 10am).”
Now, this is loaded.
The first part, “In right places – flat dense inner city areas that are well planned – they work not in outter suburbs” is pure nimbyism which is sadly the norm with all too many residents’ associations (I’ll cover more on dense below).
The bit that cycle lanes “worsen carbon emissions by causing jams” contains such classic anti-cycling fallacies which are repeated so often that two parts of it are debunked at cyclingfallacies.com — the claim that it makes congestion worse (it doesn’t) and that it causes pollution (again, no).
Providing sustainable transport options is part of climate action. For years now, those involved in climate action have argued that the largest enemy of climate action is no longer climate denial but climate delay. This includes the people who say they support cycling but then say don’t do anything to disrupt cars in my area.
As for the claim that cycling is a “minority of cycling enthusiasts who have luxury of working in Universities & don’t have to start work until 10am” — this is just pure fiction; the majority of cycling commuters are in work before 9am, like every other group of commuters.
This isn’t his first rodeo
A quick search of Coleman’s past mentions of cycle lanes on shows some predictable talking points against cycling.
Related to opinion polls showing support for cycling, in 2022, he said: “How people respond to surveys and what they think after policy implemented can be radically different.”
The reality is that while people get annoyed around the construction phase, it is a loud minority that stays bitter — the same goes for pedestrianisation, modal filters, and bus priority measures such as bus lanes and bus gates, etc.
In a discussion on X with Cllr Oisín O’Connor (Green), in 2022, Coleman goes through even more myths. He said that, in the Netherlands, “urban & spatial planning & public transport works to support/complement cycling”.
First, we’re talking about an area of Dublin that has better rail and bus provision than many Dutch cities, and myths about population density — often spread by commentators like Coleman — have hindered improvements in Dublin’s public transport system. To be clear, Coleman said he supports public transport more than cycling.
DLR has the second shortest average commuting distances in Ireland
According to the CSO, the DLRCC area has the second-lowest commuting distance in the country. It also has a number of employment hubs, which are well within a short cycling distance for many people.
Active travel is also for school children and third-level students with UCD, the Dun Laoghaire Institute Of Art Design and Technology, and the Dun Laoghaire Further Education Institute within cycling distance of many. Never mind that most trips we take are not commuting trips.
It sadly has to be said again that nobody is expecting everybody to cycle all the time. Just like all sustainable transport, it’s one part of the solution.
In other interactions, he also mentions our weather when the reality is that Dublin’s weather is roughly on par with that of Amsterdam and Copenhagen, where over 50%+ of residents in those cities cycle as their primary commuting mode. Let’s say Dublin will never be Amsterdam, but even if it can get to maybe 20-30% modal share, that’s a big win in terms of health and transport.
In 2021, Aidan Regan, a professor of political economy at UCD, posted on what was then Twitter and took aim at “conservative commentators” for trying to brand the “re-designing our urban areas for the bike is a middle class phenomenon”.
And, of course, Coleman also took issue with this. I mean, of course, he did, he continues to try to brand cycling — the most affordable mode of transport that can transport you across a city — as something only for the elites.
No cycle paths in the suburbs because of… feudal land laws
Coleman — who said he’s advocated for better planning and even cycling in one of his books — said in one of his 2021 replies that “Irish towns [are] built environment sprawl out for reasons going back to feudal land laws, regulations & customs about garden sizes and – until 1970s – cheap availability of land”.
But the reality today is that densification is happening in Dublin, including the suburbs, and cycling is part of the transport mix to support that. The status quo of maintaining the current space for cars won’t work.
And — again — the reality is Dutch, and Dublin suburbs and other areas are not a million miles away from each other when it comes to population density and the Dutch show that cycling works beyond city cores.
It took somebody else replying to explain to Coleman that Regan was not referring to people who drive cars generally as having a conservative ideology but that he was referring to “the people who actively campaign against the provision of safe infrastructure for those who wish to cycle”.
While not all “conservative” thinkers protect the status quo all the time, it’s part of more classical conservative ideology to fight for the status quo to remain as it is, at least a lot of the time. That’s even if many of these kinds of labels are losing their meaning.
Everybody else is self-righteous
In a separate interaction on Twitter in 2021, which is best described by a person who replied to him, “Calling on the Minister for Transport to examine tax spending on safe transport infrastructure because one cyclist wasn’t using a cycle line and accusing others of being self-righteous.”
He went on to claim that this misrepresented what he said, but in his opening tweet on that occasion, he asked: “Why are we paying taxes for cycle paths if cyclists take over pedestrian spaces as well?”
Most people would view you as daft if you said there should be no spending on roads until motorists stop killing people. Yet that kind of thing is often said about people cycling all the time when even the most reckless cyclists (thankfully) rarely kill people. It’s a clear value judgment with status quo biases baked in.
Finally, using defences such as he doesn’t even own a car, as he has a few times, is meaningless. Some people who cycle don’t think the State should be promoting cycle paths. Coleman is actually echoing at least some of the views of Conor Skehan, who also does not drive. Their modes of transport is not important when rallying against facts, data and evidence.
Cycling has been a bugbear of Colman’s for some time. If he’s the friend he claims he is to cycling or climate action, who needs enemies?
As a cyclist and parent I am delighted to see the progress via Living Streets initiative by DLRCC, however Local Authorities must reduce their dependence on the income created by on street parking in the towns thus creating congestion. Cycling through Dun Laoghaire itself is a nightmare, particularly Crofton Road, York Road and its surroundings. There is no reason a proper School bus service be provided along with cycle to school/college initiatives to relieve the chronic traffic congestion in Dublin. Resident only parking/proper traffic calming management is the only answer to create “living streets”. That is not happening. It seems as always certain areas benefit more from these improvements while other chronically congested areas are ignored. Political cronyism is alive and well.