Sir, – Judicial comments describing cyclists in Dublin as a “nightmare” deserve careful consideration, not because of the details of the single case, but because language used from positions of such authority shapes how issues of road safety and transport policy are understood (“Cyclists have become a nightmare in Dublin: Judge reduces €50,000 damages award by 80%,” January 12th).

When complex questions are reduced to shorthand labels attention shifts away from the factors that genuinely influence both behaviour and risk on our roads.

Cycling in Dublin and in Ireland generally is characterised by absent, fragmented or discontinuous cycle lanes, limited physical separation from traffic, shared bus and cycle corridors, weak junction design and frequent loss of priority.

There has been some improvement in recent years, but it remains far from sufficient. The lack of a coherent and continuous network still makes safe and predictable cycling an unrealistic option for many people in their daily commute, particularly for children travelling independently to and from school.

Poor behaviour exists among all road users, cyclists included, and it should be acknowledged. Road safety is not advanced, however, by concentrating on behaviour alone while overlooking the environments and transport cultures that shape it.

In cities and towns across the country, where large volumes of single-occupant cars continue to dominate daily travel into urban centres, often without safe active-travel options or reliable public transport alternatives, friction between road users and elevated risk are a predictable result.

There is also an asymmetry of risk that should be recognised. Poor behaviour by cyclists mainly endangers cyclists themselves.

Poor behaviour by drivers places cyclists and pedestrians at serious risk of serious injury or death. This reality underpins the concept of vulnerable road users and should inform how these issues are discussed in public.

From a One Health perspective, cycling is a public good. Active travel supports public health, reduces air pollution and carbon emissions, eases congestion and contributes to more liveable cities.

Realising these benefits depends on political choices, including sustained investment in protected and continuous cycling infrastructure and a serious effort to reduce car dependence.

Comments made from positions of authority carry particular weight. Care and balance matter if public discussion is to shed light on real policy challenges rather than reinforce unhelpful narratives. –Yours, etc,

Prof TONY HOLOHAN,

Director,

UCD One Health Centre,

School of Health and Agricultural Sciences,

University College Dublin.

Sir, – There is some truth to Judge James O’Donohoe’s comment “You never know with cyclists what they are going to do or anticipate what they are going to do”. Cyclists are forever at the mercy of the weather (be it wind, rain or ice) and do not have the protection of a large metal box to stop them from swaying one way or the other. They are also at the mercy of patchy infrastructure, often being forced to share lanes with buses and/or general traffic which in a city as congested as Dublin (11th most congested in the world according to a recent report) makes for a hairy ride.

While the judge was using the opportunity to moan about his own grievances as a motorist in the capital, it’s a shame he didn’t also take the time to highlight some of the very simple solutions, like segregated cycle lanes, that would make the city safer for cyclists and pedestrians while also making it easier for motorists to navigate. – Yours, etc,

CAROLINE MURPHY,

Churchtown,

Dublin 14,

Sir, – While it is never pleasant reading about injuries people suffer as a result of a road incident, the number of cyclists and e-scooter users who fail to make themselves visible by fellow road users is no joke.

Do these other road users actually realise just how invisible they are on the road?

I regularly pass cyclists, e-scooters and runners, clothed from head-to-toe in black, with no lights, no high-vis jackets and no helmets. Lights and high-vis jackets (and helmets in the case of cyclists and e-scooters) should be mandatory by law and, until this happens, the number of fatalities and serious injuries will continue to rise, year on year. – Yours, etc,

DEE DELANY,

Raheny,

Dublin 5.

Sir, – A number of issues arise. The judge in the case feels free to give his personal opinion generally about cyclists and suggests this opinion has legitimacy in coming to terms with his judgment.

Based on your report he had ample evidence on which to make his judgment. The question is would his decision have been different if he had been a cyclist?

What is also important to note is that there are erratic cyclists and motorists. On many occasions the “erratic” cyclist is trying to avoid poor road surfaces, cycle paths that suddenly end, pedestrians and other obstacles. What is also important to note is that in a collision between a vehicle and a cyclist the latter will always fare a lot worse.

What is needed is mutual respect. – Yours, etc,

JOSEPH MURPHY,

Killester,

Dublin 5.

Sir, – Of course it isn’t the large super-sized jeeps speeding in built-up areas or trucks disregarding cycle lanes or taxis “owning” the shared cycle taxi lanes that are the nightmare. It’s clearly the vulnerable cyclist who is at fault. – Yours, etc,

MIKE MORAN,

Clontarf,

Dublin 3.

Baptism and the Catholic Church

Sir, – As someone of the same generation as Mary McAleese, I find her article on the constitutional effects of Catholic infant baptism bears no relation of the lived experience of Ireland over our lifetime (“Mary McAleese: Baptism denies babies their human rights,” January 12th).

The beliefs and the canon law of the Catholic Church have in no way hindered the majority of my siblings, from a fairly conventional provincial Catholic family, in deciding to ignore them in their daily lives. In light of their actions, my decision to try to conform to the Catholic faith was in the knowledge that I was fully free to decide not to.

Clearly, the particular precepts of any belief have no effect on constitutional or legal rights in the State, except insofar as the democratic majority decides. Parliamentary and constitutional votes over our lifetime have reflected the change in the balance of beliefs over that time.

The comparison with Germany is interesting, given that the German state forces its citizens to financially support their registered faith group through the Kirchensteuer/church tax. In that case, the right to religious freedom clearly requires the state to have a system to formally recognise a citizen’s change in belief, something that is not necessary in Ireland. – Yours, etc,

LIAM MULLIGAN,

Letterkenny,

Co Donegal.

Sir, – Mary McAleese opposes the practice of baptising infants, describing it as a “long-standing, systemic and overlooked severe restriction on children’s rights”.

First, in her eagerness to point the finger at the Vatican, Mrs McAleese seems to labour under the misapprehension that it is only the Catholic Church which baptises infants, when in fact it is the practice of virtually all Christian denominations the world over.

Anabaptism (the practice of not baptising infants) is practised by just a tiny minority of Christian faiths including Quakers, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mennonites, Mormons and the Amish, which together number just over 1 per cent of the 2.4 billion Christians in the world.

Therefore, Mrs McAleese’s views puts her not only at the outermost fringes of the Catholic Church, but on the fringes of Christianity itself.

Second, Mrs McAleese appears to advocate court action, or the introduction of legislation, to prevent infant children from being baptised “without their consent”.

It’s a fundamental tenet of human society the world over that parents should make decisions on behalf of their children, including in relation to their health, education, and moral upbringing. If the decisions of parents in relation to religious upbringing are to be ousted, then what justification remains for parents to have a say in any of these other matters?

For example, does Mrs McAleese believe parents should be prevented from making important and potentially life-altering medical decisions on behalf of their infant children? If not, why not?

In her haste to mount yet another attack on the Catholic Church, Mrs McAleese appears to have overlooked the profound internal contradictions and wider implications of her position. – Yours, etc,

BARRY WALSH,

Clontarf,

Dublin 3.

Sir, – As I grappled with Mary McAleese’s latest poke at the Vatican, I was flabbergasted to read that I too, having been baptised soon after birth, am somehow still a member of the Christian faith “with substantial inescapable obligations of membership” despite the fact that I do not practise any religion and observe only the laws of the State as I meander along life’s path.

I find the suggestion anyone “must honour the compulsory obligations entered into at Baptism” ludicrous. That said, better not to take any chances. So perhaps Ms McAleese would revert and explain exactly what these baptismal bonds she believes so tie us are made of and, specifically, how do they prevent us simply walking away from it all? – Yours, etc,

JIM O’SULLIVAN,

Sligo.

Magdalene survivors

Sir, – Reading Kitty Holland’s article “Donnybrook Magdalene laundry survivor faces eviction: ‘I have nowhere to go. I am frightened’,” (January 12th) brought to mind the State apology I attended in Leinster House in 2013.

On that day, then taoiseach Enda Kenny, on behalf of the State, issued an unreserved apology to the Magdalene women, explicitly acknowledging the State’s role in the hurt and stigma they endured.

These women were failed by systems meant to protect them. Those systems must now be capable of responding and adapting to survivors’ needs and ensuring such failures are not repeated.

The State’s apology rings hollow when its funded housing providers move to evict Magdalene women. – Yours, etc,

DAMIAN O’FARRELL,

Project Manager,

Survivors of Institutional Abuse,

Dublin 8.

Stepping out

Sir, – I just love Frank J Byrne’s letter today (“Caught in the headlights,” January 12th).

He tells us that he is an ardent walker of many years standing.

How does he do it? – Yours, etc,

BRENDAN O’SULLIVAN,

Quin,

Co Clare.

Irish beef and Mercosur

Sir, – Further to Eugene Tannam’s assertion that “The farmers can stop complaining, they killed their own golden goose” (Letters, January 12th). In all my life in agriculture I’ve never met a farmer who set the price for his products – dairy, beef, grain etc.

Farmers are price-takers, not price-makers and are subject to the harsh realities of supply and demand and free market rules while still bound to restrictive rules and EU regulations and the dreaded paperwork and costly red tape.

They are subject to rules on antibiotics, animal welfare, fertiliser usage and traceability, etc, that are entirely alien to agricultural production and products in Brazil.

The only one with choices under the Mercosur deal is the consumer who must decide health over price. – Yours, etc,

TOMÁS FINN,

Ballinasloe,

Co Galway.

Sir, – Surely, normal veterinary food safety checks as they apply to all foods entering the European Food market will apply to beef coming from the Mercosur countries. This should reassure us consumers, should it not?

If further logic on the Mercosur debate pertains – and that beef produced for consuming in the Mercosur countries is laced with hormones, antibiotics and other non-sanctioned medications – should the health of the people of these countries be compromised at this stage?

As Irish-produced beef is top quality it will hold its place in the market place.

Irish farmers should not fear the challenge. – Yours, etc,

GERALDINE GREGAN,

Clarecastle,

Co Clare.

An Post fails to deliver

Sir, – I see that An Post plans to increase the cost of a stamp to ¤1.85 for national delivery.

I have to say that this is rather a surprise given the diminishing service I have experienced from An Post.

This year, we received more Christmas cards in January than in December, despite all being posted well in time for pre-Christmas delivery.

One example – among many – was a card posted in Carrickmacross on December 18th which arrived here on January 9th.

How can An Post justify increasing prices for a service that abjectly fails to meet the published service levels ? – Yours, etc,

BILL HARTE,

Rathmines,

Dublin 6

Sir, – You report that An Post is to increase the cost of stamps because people are sending fewer letters.

This is an interesting business model: increasing the price of your product because of falling demand for it.

This semi-State business model will doubtless be adopted by private sector companies. – Yours, etc,

LARRY DUNNE,

Rosslare Harbour,

Co Wexford.

Sir, – I am not one to complain about An Post. It’s a magnificent service, well worth the cost of a stamp, and I hope that I never forget its creative kindness during the Covid period.

But what happened this Christmas to the Christmas cards?

I posted mine well in advance of the suggested date in Dunshaughlin, Co Meath.

Some have been reaching the addresses on the envelopes, in Co Clare and Co Meath, only in the past few days and at least one has not yet reached its intended destination.

Am I the only one who was disappointed by the usually champion service? – Yours, etc,

MARGARET McCANN,

Dunshaughlin,

Co Meath.

Some dry wit

Sir, – In late 2025 there was a superb sequence of “is this a record?” letters in this newspaper.

The excessive coverage of “Dry January” on these same pages must indeed be some sort of record. – Yours, etc,

ROSS GARVEY,

Sandymount,

Dublin 4.