Sir, Mr John Howard accuses me of being skilled and practised at distortion (June 25th). He then scolds me for questioning a "professional" study of expected traffic levels. But the "professionals" drastically misjudged traffic levels on the airport motorway, Just as they misjudged in the case of London's M25.
People, when given the option will make journeys that they would not otherwise have considered. When traffic congestion reaches an intolerable level, they no longer have that option. This is the mechanism by which all urban roads (like any urban transport system) tend to be full, be they in the narrow pre-car streets of Dublin or in Los Angeles, where 30 per cent of the land area is covered by roads.
The question is: what mix of transport systems should we choose? Mr Howard advocates spending even more on roads for cars, which already get the lion's share of resources.
I believe that our spending choice should move towards cycling and public transport, for the following reasons:
. Only a minority of adults (and no children) have access to a car. It is unjust to spend even more taxpayer's money on so few people.
. To reduce pollution, it is sensible to discourage use of the dirtiest form of transport.
. Car use has denied our children the freedom to be children. They can now play safely only in boxed in adult supervised areas.
. Car use is denying freedom of movement to people. I know several people who have stopped cycling because of fear of traffic. Car congestion blocks public transport. The elderly and disabled must stay at home if they cannot cope with climbing over the bonnets of badly parked cars and dashing across busy streets.
Mr Howard claimed in his original letter that there was nothing contentious about building more roads. I hope he will reconsider his opinions and his insults.
Yours, etc.,
Usher's Island,
Dublin 8.