Perhaps one of the best examples is the RSA’s “Going to School” guidance document. The opening statement:

“Research shows that children under 12 should not cross roads on their own. They cannot decide how far away a car is or how fast it is going. They should be taken to school by a responsible adult.”

To add insult to injury, on the “Pedestrian Safety” section of their website, under the banner “Keeping Your Children Safe on the Road”, they have the following:

“Our research shows that children do not have the ability to safely interact with traffic until they are 12 years old. Before this age, their judgement skills and perception of speed and distance haven’t fully developed. This is why they need the help of an adult to safely walk on and cross the road.”

Notice what’s missing. The RSA frames everything as the child’s limitation. But it’s the driver deciding how fast the car is going. They can slow down. They can choose to be cautious. And what about the speed limit? The road layout? But instead, the entire burden is put on the vulnerable pedestrian, or rather, the child.

It’s tempting to reply that I walked to school in Norway, in a semi urban area, from the age of seven years old. The majority of the over 2.5 km route each way did not have a footpath. It did however have a low speed limits and lots of speed bumps. And perhaps most importantly: children walking to school, or wherever they wanted, was an accepted road user group. That is not the case in Ireland it seems.

That said, a scientific rebuttal is much stronger, and I have not been able to find a strong body of evidence to support such a frankly mad claim. It’s like saying that “our research shows that children cannot read until they are six years old” when the research actually shows that reading ability develops gradually, and younger children are, on average, less likely to have developed it yet.

Or let’s bring it closer to home. Imagine if the RSA recommended that adults under the age of 45 should not travel independently to work and must use public transport. Weird right, however oversimplified.

The RSA have seemingly just chosen some rather arbitrary number with enormous consequences. According to the RSA, my parents, or at least some responsible adult, should have walked with us for 5 or 6 years before being allowed to walk to school alone. God forbid I let the RSA know that we were allowed to cycle to school from the age of 10 or 11 after passing a basic road safety and cycling test.

More worrisome is the complete lack of context. The RSA seems to think that because of children’s development, they cannot engage safely with traffic. Full stop. Children in other countries walk independently to school at a young age. So a more accurate statement from the RSA would be:

”Our research shows that, in Ireland, children cannot safely walk to school alone, not because children are incapable of navigating their environment, but because we have designed an environment around cars rather than people. In car centric, pedestrian hostile places, children are thus expected to rely on adults to compensate for roads and streets that are unsafe for them to navigate independently.”

Children’s development is fairly set, albeit far from as set as the RSA would want you to think, but other factors can change, namely road design and driver behaviour.

But instead, they blame children, or rather their neurodevelopment. “Children, because you’re not developed enough, you cannot walk to school and be independent.”

We are all too aware of the results of this way of thinking and ‘guidance’ from the state agency of the Irish Government to promote road safety. Congestion. Poor air quality. Physical inactivity. Lack of independence. And generally, a society consumed by cars. In Dublin, where I live, you often have to walk several hundred metres in either direction to find somewhere to ‘safely’ cross the street. And I say ‘safely’ because nowadays, a red light for motorists seems to be suggestive only.

It’s therefore not surprising to see this rather grim statistics from the CSO:

“55% of primary school children travel to school by car. The percentage of children going to school by car increased from 24% in 1986 to a peak of 60% in 2016.”

You wonder what has changed? Children’s development or our attitude towards cars.

So what would I like to see the RSA write?

“As children’s judgement skills and perception of speed and distance often aren’t fully developed, we, as an organisation, and as society, must do everything in our power to make their environments safer. This includes reducing speed limits to 30 km/h on all urban roads, providing safe, continuous footpaths or walking routes to all schools and areas such as playgrounds and sports pitches, in addition to safe, protected cycle paths. Every child should be enable to walk to school safely.”

But that would require a fundamental change of the RSA. And it appears that won’t happen anytime soon.

Last night, I came across a recent analysis from the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU) in the UK that examined the extent to which British newspapers linked extreme heat and climate change during the June 2026 heatwave. This came on the back of a World Weather Attribution study finding that fossil fuel emissions, and consequently climate change, have rapidly worsened European heatwaves in just a few decades.

The ECIU analysis examined media articles in top UK national newspapers from Monday 22 June to Sunday 28 June (i.e. a week), counting how many articles included the phrase “extreme heat” or “heatwave” while also referring to “climate change” or a similar term such as “climate” or “global warming.” The results were striking: almost three quarters (72%) of the articles that referred to “heatwave” or “extreme heat” during the period failed to reference climate change.

Inspired by this, I decided to run a similar analysis for Irish media using LexisNexis. I used the same search parameters, “extreme heat” OR “heatwave” AND “climate change” OR “climate” OR “global warming,” for the month of June 2026 across seven outlets:

• Irish Examiner

• The Irish Times

• RTÉ News

• Irish Independent

• Irish Daily Mail

• The Journal (Ireland)

• Sunday Independent (Ireland)

In total, 234 articles mentioned either “extreme heat” or “heatwave.” The Irish Examiner (44 articles) and the Irish Times (40 articles) published the most, while The Journal (31) and the Sunday Independent (16) published the least.

When I narrowed the search to articles linking “heatwave” or “extreme heat” explicitly with climate change (using the search terms “climate change” or “climate” or “global warming”) it returned 107 articles. That means just 46% of all articles mentioning extreme heat in June 2026 made a reference to climate change, while 54% did not. RTÉ performed best, with 63% of their extreme heat articles referencing climate change, followed by The Journal at 61%. Only 25% of Sunday Independent articles made a similar link, and the Irish Daily Mail fared worst at just 15%.

As for “net zero,” only four articles (1.7%) connected extreme heat with the urgent need to move towards net zero. For context, 14 “heatwave articles” mentioned “ice cream.” The priorities…

As Gareth Redmond King, Head of International at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, put it:

“If recent heatwaves are the symptom, then climate change is the illness, and net zero is the medicine. When public understanding of this link is so low, it’s vital that the dots are joined between these three concepts to help make us all better.”

We may be slightly ahead of the UK in making the climate connection, but Irish media still largely ignores the link between extreme heat and climate change while glorifying harmful temperatures as leisurely beach trips and ice cream weather.

And yes, my quick analysis is not perfect, but it does prove a point.

And a new heatwave is looming. This is only the beginning.

We are rapidly approaching 2°C of global warming. The Paris Agreement target of limiting warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels appears increasingly unattainable given the current pace of action.

A stable climate is now a thing of the past.

This trajectory will negatively impact all life on Earth in myriad ways, but it will also guarantee more severe, longer-lasting, and frequent heatwaves.

Recent estimates from the UK suggest that over 90% of all homes in the country will be at risk of overheating by 2050. Crucially, low-income households, people from minority ethnic backgrounds, social renters, and elderly people and children face the highest risk from dangerously hot living conditions. Heat kills.

While I am not aware of equivalent statistics for Ireland, our housing stock is surely comparable to that of the UK, suggesting we face similar vulnerabilities. Irish homes are not built for a 2°C global warming world. They can’t even cope with the current heatwaves.

Add to that the government’s “beds in sheds” policy, which will encourage people to build small self-contained modular homes in their back gardens. I doubt that many of these new “homes” will have air conditioning, or proper ventilation for that matter, so if faced with a 30°C or 40°C heatwave, many of these sheds will become unbearably hot.

Ireland is wildly unprepared for the extreme weather patterns we will face in the coming years. Just look at how our media covered last week’s heatwave: images of people sunbathing, swimming, or eating ice cream. If climate change was mentioned, it was usually at the end of the article, where most people had long since moved on to the next article. The disconnect is astounding. We’re walking blissfully towards some cataclysmic sunset, hand in hand with politicians and the media.

That said, I don’t mean to say that going for a swim during a heatwave is bad. Far from it; for those who can safely access these ‘cooling places’, it can even be life-saving. But that is also the point: access to such ‘cooling places’, be it somewhere to swim or an air-conditioned building, is far from equal.

Imagine this: A Saturday during a heatwave. The bus from O’Connell Street to Seapoint is a 45-minute ordeal of heat and overcrowding. With no safe cycling lanes and the DART frequently shut down for weekend maintenance, the fastest and most reliable option remains the car. This stark disparity exposes inequality: those who have access to a car can bypass the gridlock, while everyone else is left stranded in the heat.

Heat not only exposes inequality, it worsens it. Heat kills, but not equally.

There is no one solution to this. We must double down on climate action and mitigation, but also increase our efforts on climate adaptation: air conditioning in all hospitals, care homes, and schools; community cool spaces; greener cities and urban spaces; and better access to blue spaces, to name but a few actions.

In essence, we need cooling rolled out at scale. But that is easier said than done. Not because we don’t have the solutions, but rather because we seem unwilling to connect the dots and act accordingly.

The result? 500 meters of isolated, overly complicated, disconnected infrastructure.

The timeline? Seven months.

To put that in perspective: a common garden snail could have easily travelled over 200 kilometres in that same seven-month window. That’s 200,000 meters.

Yet, at the opening ceremony, Lord Mayor of Dublin Councillor Ray McAdam declared: “This is what delivery looks like.”

Christopher Manzira, Director of the Dublin City Council Active Travel Programme Office, echoed the sentiment, calling the 500-meter stretch “world-class active travel infrastructure along the River Dodder.”

Let’s be clear: This isn’t delivery. This isn’t world-class. And it certainly isn’t progress.

Dublin City Council’s Active Travel Network plan promises 314 kilometres of high-quality, safe, and inclusive walking and cycling infrastructure. That is, if it is every finished. Because at the current pace of “delivery,” we aren’t looking at a decade-long rollout. We’re looking at a century (if even).

If 500 meters takes seven months, completing the full network would take us well into the next century.

And let’s talk about the “world-class” claim. The new stretch is overly complicated. Despite the active travel team’s stated goal of “decluttering footpaths,” they managed to install over a dozen signs along just half a kilometre. It looks cluttered. And a cycle path that needs to many signs is certainly not intuitive. It’s the opposite of world class.

Worse still, it is my understanding that there are currently no ongoing construction works on new infrastructure.

I long for political honesty. Integrity. The ability to say: “No this isn’t good enough. We need to do so much better”.

Meanwhile, our snail has long since reached Galway.

This lack of progress is disturbing on its own merits. But it becomes catastrophic when viewed against the backdrop of the ongoing fossil fuel crisis.

Cities across the globe are reimagining their streets. Just think of the pandemic, when cities across the world reallocated road space to create so called “resilience bike lanes”—temporary measures that in many cases became permanent. They are implementing 30 km/h zones. They are launching campaigns for car-free days.

Irish cities? We did barely anything during the pandemic. And now, in the face of a fuel emergency, we are celebrating 500 meters of disconnected path as a victory.

We deserve better. We deserve a city that moves. For all.

Imagine if Dublin had committed to 50 kilometres (no not 50 metres) of cycle paths this summer alone. Ambitious? Yes. Possible? Absolutely.

Combine that with a city-wide 30 km/h speed limit and a proper campaign for car-free days, and Dublin could be transformed almost beyond imagination. We could build a healthier, cleaner, and more resilient city—one that actually offers people a viable alternative to the car.

Instead, we have a snail-paced bureaucracy celebrating a half-kilometre milestone as a triumph.

This is not what delivery looks like.

I was quite surprised to see Ireland listed as one of the ‘committed countries’, given the Irish government’s track record on climate action, perfectly exemplified by their response to the current fossil fuel crisis.

In the lead-up to a conference aimed at transitioning away from fossil fuels, the Irish government has done, well, the exact opposite.

Since the current energy crisis began with the US-Israeli war on Iran, the Irish government has introduced no meaningful measures to reduce Ireland’s reliance on fossil fuels. Most of the €750m package of fuel supports provided so far has arrived as neatly wrapped fossil fuel subsidies. The government’s slogan might as well be: “Drive on, we’ll pay.” The harm, however, is on you and me.

That said, the Irish government’s presence in Santa Marta—or lack thereof—aligns well with their recent actions. The Minister for Climate, Darragh O’Brien, will not attend. In his place, only three officials from his department. I wonder if they went willingly.

It makes sense, I guess, as Minister O’Brien is busy scrapping the Dublin Airport passenger cap—a move that will significantly increase flights from the airport and consequently increase fossil fuel use and emissions. It seriously raises the question: will Minister O’Brien’s tenure as Minister for Climate lead to a net increase in emissions? A mind-boggling idea.

The Irish government seems more than willing to put their name, or rather the name of the country, on declarations and commitments, but when it comes to action, there is little, if any, meaningful action to show for it. They are serial committers.

This energy crisis is not the first fossil fuel crisis, and unless we act now to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels, it will not be the last. As such, this crisis can be used for good; it can improve health and wellbeing and nudge us towards a greener, more equitable future for all.

But that means making fundamental changes to our lives, not simply adding more fossil fuel subsidies.

For example, this could be the summer when Ireland’s transport system changes beyond recognition: an unprecedented rollout of temporary cycle lanes becoming permanent, car-free, people-first streets (on a regular basis), fast-tracking of much-needed public transport projects (tram systems for Galway, Cork, and Limerick, and a much more extensive one for Dublin, please), and a proper transport app for all urban centres (where you can plan your trip, track your bus in real-time, and pay for tickets—all in one place). The list goes on, and so do the positive co-benefits.

Because ultimately, regardless of their reasoning or intentions, fossil fuel subsidies and use cause harm to both planetary and human health.

2026, this summer, could be the year where Ireland truly changes, for the better, for all. But if we are to do that, our government, our leaders, will have to change from being willfully unwilling to truly acting like they’re part of a ‘coalition of the willing’.

I’m in. Are you?

But let’s not get carried away.

At this stage, it is a grand design. Nothing more.

Fairly bland, dressed up to look transformative by a suspiciously vivid blue sky, the kind Dublin produces maybe three days a year, and a row of conveniently whitewashed buildings. There is no sign of a Costa Coffee. No Circle K. No clutter. No broken bottles. No chaos.

Just serenity, sunshine and pious architectural virtue.

The square itself? Yes, there is a splash of greenery. But mostly it is a vast expanse of grey.

And if I know Dublin City Council’s fondness for questionable slab choices, it will look pristine for approximately 72 hours after construction wraps, before the grime, gum and streaks settle in for the long haul.

Actually, scratch that.

Some of the slabs will be laid days, weeks, if not months before completion. They will already show signs of wear and tear before the square is even finished. The recent Barrow Street mess comes to mind.

You can buy slabs suitable for Barcelona’s weather all you like. This is Dublin.

Rain wins.

Add in a few, read many, concrete blobs. Cracked or broken slabs. Who knew they could not withstand the weight of a semi trailer? A scattering of electrical boxes.

And we are closer to reality.

As for the water feature. Dublin is many things, but a city of fountains and water features it is not, bar the falling water kind, namely rain.

Based on the state of Dublin’s canals and waterways, I would be suspicious of what that feature might look like after a few months. Yes, I know the canals fall under Waterways Ireland. But DCC are not without blame.

Strip away the blue sky. Add in the biblical rain we have endured for what feels like months, years even. God, who cares at this point? Remove the lads on stilts, drafted in to suggest whimsy and continental charm.

What you are left with is not a world class, lively square, the kind you stumble upon in cities across Europe, but something closer to a sterile, windswept mare.

Smithfield, anyone?

You might say I am negative. Cynical, even. And maybe I am.

But I would love to be proven wrong.

So what would I like to see improved?

More fun. Space for kids. Interesting features to break up the monotony of the grey slabs and concrete. The Superkilen Park in Copenhagen is a great example of a vibrant, interesting recreational space where people actually gather!

More trees. Actual planting. I recommend you and DCC google “Place de Catalogne” in Paris for inspiration.

This would also help with climate resilience and make the square better able to accommodate heavy rainfall. I note that rain gardens and underground water storage are included in the plans, but the vast areas covered in slabs and concrete do not appear climate resilient to me.

And what about public toilets? How can people linger and soak in the city without access to such basic amenities?

Lastly, for the next phase, please, please provide more realistic artwork. No fake blue skies and no men on stilts. Portray the truth, not some polished fantasy.

I hope this does not come across as too divisive or dissident. That is not the intent. But I think it is crucial that people speak up against a low level of ambition.

For every person asking for more, there are countless others who, through inertia, lack of ambition, or vested interest, oppose the progress Dublin deserves.

We should not settle for an improvement.

We deserve better than that.

And if this ends up as Smithfield with better PR and a nicer render, do not say you were not warned.

There are, of course, many things the government could do to reduce emissions and reduce the harms of climate change, but one of the most obvious ones, and one of the simplest, is to ban fossil fuel advertising.

In order to explain how the fossil fuel industry influences our health, let me introduce you to the concept of the commercial determinants of health. In a recent article, Gilmore and colleagues defined commercial determinants of health as “the systems, practices and pathways through which commercial actors drive health and equity”. This, of course, recognises that these commercial entities can make both positive and negative contributions to human and planetary health, and, crucially, that they do not act in isolation, but rather as part of a complex system, including our governments.

So why fossil fuel companies? Well, fossil fuels, through air pollution alone, are responsible for up to one in five deaths globally. Add to that morbidity and mortality from fossil fuel extraction and the wider effects of climate change, and fossil fuels likely surpass smoking in terms of lives claimed. Every year.

Yet, we cannot imagine tobacco companies advertising for a Christmas musical, but we do not bat an eyelid going to the Bord Gáis Energy Theatre to watch said musical. And yes, I am well aware that Bord Gáis also supplies renewable energy, but it is, by definition, a fossil fuel company.

The fossil fuel industry are masters of branding. Take the sponsorship halo effect, which occurs when positive traits of a sponsored entity, such as a sporting event, are transferred to the sponsoring brand, that is, a fossil fuel company, consequently building trust, normality, and perhaps more worryingly, loyalty. Perhaps the perfect example is Eni, an Italian oil and gas company, sponsoring the 2026 Winter Olympics Milano Cortina. Fossil fuel companies are, of course, killing winters, so the irony is not lost on me.

They have normalised their presence and use of their products. Take flying away for the weekend, an enormously polluting activity, yet it is associated with joy, wellbeing, and positive emotions.

It is normal to use fossil fuels indiscriminately every day, but it should not be. We need to reshape our norms and make it socially irresponsible to use fossil fuels. Of course, this is not the fault of individuals, but rather fossil fuel companies, and our governments, for letting fossil fuel companies dictate our norms as a society. The tobacco industry did this successfully for decades, delaying public health intervention and interfering with research. The fossil fuel industry learned all their tricks and doubled down.

So let us ban them from advertising. Let us dismantle their political, financial, and informational power. Let us strip away their assets, one by one. Let us disrupt the status quo.

Last year, I was part of a campaign by Irish Doctors for the Environment, urging the Irish government to ban fossil fuel advertising in Ireland. They did not listen, but throughout the world, individual cities such as The Hague, Amsterdam, and Edinburgh are leading the way, banning airlines, car manufacturers, and cruise lines from advertising in their cities, and France has also recently banned fossil fuel advertising. Even the UN chief, António Guterres, has called for a global fossil fuel advertising ban.

It is not a perfect measure. It has lots of loopholes and technical issues that need to be ironed out. What constitutes a fossil fuel company? What does not? But it will send an important message. That we no longer tolerate their governance. That we will not tolerate the negative health effects fossil fuels are having on millions upon millions of innocent bystanders.

Saunas are inherently social, and as such the resurfacing of saunas in Ireland is a social movement. Modern saunas have become places for people to socialise, away from AI fuelled drivel and doom scrolling. They offer a much needed respite for our constantly besieged brains.

Saunas, at their best, are part of something bigger. Not only can we reconnect with others, but also with our surroundings. They are fantastic at reclaiming public spaces that have been made inaccessible through decades and decades of policies prioritising corporate wealth, read greed, over the common good.

But in Ireland, that potential is being underused.

In Ireland, saunas, and urban saunas in particular, are too often tucked away down alleys or hidden in the back of parking lots. Contrast this with Scandinavia, where saunas are frequently built beside lakes, rivers, or the sea, whether rural or urban, and where plunging into cold water is part of the ritual. That is not to say that Irish saunas are not great spaces, but we are missing a huge opportunity by not combining them with our blue spaces more often.

I should of course also point out that there are fantastic exceptions. Some brilliant Irish saunas are already popping up by the sea or along rivers. But imagine if this became the norm, not the exception.

And in fairness, this is not the fault of those running the saunas, but rather a lack of ambition and action from the government, councils, and Waterways Ireland. Because as it stands, most urban waterways in Ireland remain so heavily polluted that you cannot safely swim in them, which is an absolute disgrace.

That said, even beyond location, saunas here could be so much more than they currently are.

Right now, sauna culture in Ireland does not act as an antidote to our corporate, capitalist culture. Instead, it has largely become part of it.

They are not accessible either. For instance, the recently opened sauna in the Grand Canal deserves credit for being wheelchair accessible, but 35 euro for 75 minutes is not affordable to a vast part of the population. There is something profoundly corporate and alien about a public sauna in Google’s basement. It feels worlds away from the roots of the sauna tradition.

Compare this to Norway, one of the most expensive countries in the world, where 90 minutes access to the floating urban sauna village in Oslo, run by the Oslo Sauna Association, costs about 22 euro, or 13 euro if you are a member of the sauna association. Membership is 35 euro per year.

The Oslo Sauna Association is a voluntary, non-commercial organisation, and any surplus is reinvested into developing its activities. Anyone can become a member. Their vision is simple. Sauna to the people.

I am not saying that people should not be allowed to make money from saunas or run sauna businesses. Of course they can. But there needs to be a balance between commercial and not for profit saunas around Ireland.

Because saunas can do so much more than being spaces to improve your own health and wellbeing or socialise. If we let them, they can become powerful community creators. They can bring people together, reconnect us with our surroundings, and turn underused or derelict areas into spaces of health and wellbeing for all.

Authors can afford to slowly construct plots and narratives. But in reality, we’re accelerating towards something humanity has never experienced before.

There’s a line in the book that keeps coming back to me: “you wake up and you’re in a bad movie from the future.” That’s what it feels like right now.

The news this week should terrify us all. Ireland is set to miss its emissions-reduction target by half. By half. Read that again. And again. And yet this fact was treated, ironically, as “back of the envelope stuff” by both the minister and much of the media.

The Irish Times piece, titled “Ireland will miss emissions-cut target by half, says Minister for Climate Darragh O’Brien,” reads almost like a feel-good article.

The final sentence in the article: “He (Minister O’Brien) said the Luas extension to Finglas could go out for tender during 2026, allowing a possible start in 2027 and a possible completion date as early as 2030.” A four kilometre LUAS extension will do nothing to our national emissions.

The following day, we learned that the Government is ploughing ahead with legislation to scrap the Dublin Airport passenger cap. The Irish Times responded by writing that the cap “finally could be laid to rest in 2026.” Finally laid to rest. Millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide will be emitted as a consequence of this decision. People will die. It’s a betrayal of future and current generations. But the Irish Times article made no mention of emissions, climate change, or human health. It did, however, find space for what felt like free advertising for airlines: more routes, more destinations. Woohoo, no more cap.

It feels like waking up in some terrible futuristic horror movie. Except it isn’t the future. This isn’t some dystopian climate novel. This is now. This is happening.

The nightmare is now.

And yes, I haven’t forgotten about the US. But perhaps the most terrifying thing about what’s happening in the US and beyond is how this deluge of horror and injustice makes European and Irish politicians look “normal” by comparison. It’s like we should be happy with the lesser of two evils. But their actions are not normal. They are not sane. They are not compatible with a liveable future. Our baseline level of government decency, honesty and concern for the public’s wellbeing has completely dropped.

It’s the shifting baseline syndrome in practice, both in terms of our forever degrading environments and what we’ve come to expect from our leaders.

So now more than ever, it is important to look out for each other, especially for the people you know who care. Because caring right now is exhausting. Trying to remain sane in an insane world is exhausting.

So check in with each other. Meet up. Talk about this, but also find time to talk about the seemingly mundane, but yet so important issues. Find strength and solidarity in fellow ‘sane ones’. Let’s keep at it.

And who knows, maybe the sequel will be better.

Once in the harbour, a meagre five-minute stroll from the central train station, combined with a floating sauna. And once in Akerselva, a river running through Oslo. Admittedly, that river dip was also combined with a lovely riverside sauna.

I’ve written about how Dublin has turned its back on its water before. But this is an understatement. This has not happened by accident. It is deliberate. A lack of ambition and vision means that Dublin’s waterways, and the sea close to the city centre, remain unsafe for swimming.

An article from earlier in the year even showed that swans in the greater Dublin area can carry extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL), a multi-resistant bacteria. Another shocking indictment of the mismanagement of our waterways. And don’t even get me started on the nitrates derogation. In Ireland, we pretty much treat our waterways like an open sewage.

These waterways should be immense sources of health and wellbeing for everyone living in Dublin. But as is, they are not. For example, imagine what could happen if we coupled our booming sauna movement with safe blue spaces across the city.

That said, I’m not going to say that Oslo’s waterways are perfect. Far from it. There are significant issues with pollution and bacteria counts. But, and this is a major but, there is ambition. There’s a will to make Oslo’s blue spaces available to the people living in Oslo.

That is not the case in Dublin.

Oslo didn’t use to be this way. The area around the port and harbour used to be industrial and largely inaccessible, dominated by roads, congestion, containers, and fenced off from the public. But thanks to major urban redevelopment, large parts of the old port area have been transformed for city use rather than traditional port operations. Or, to put it differently, transformed for people use.

The redevelopment plans have meant that most cargo handling in the central port has been relocated a few kilometres south of the old one, freeing up prime waterfront land for housing, culture, parks, and public spaces. Expensive? Yes, but for a modern city like Oslo, it makes sense to move the port out of the city centre. It simply doesn’t need to be there anymore.

The freed up space has become a vibrant urban quarter, home to the Oslo Opera, the new Munch museum (albeit a terribly ugly building), and the Deichman main library, as well as apartments and promenades along the water. The transformation has also included multiple new waterfront bathing spots and public swimming facilities, including several different saunas.

None of this existed a few decades ago. And no, it’s not perfect. There are plenty of issues. But do I think Dublin will change in a similar way in the coming decades? Will the Grand Canal, the Royal Canal, the Dodder, the Liffey, or even the harbour become swimmable?

I don’t think so. There’s simply no ambition. There’s no will.

So when Dublin City Council (DCC) published plans for the other side of the hospital campus (the New Children’s Hospital side, along the South Circular Road), I allowed myself a flicker of hope. That hope evaporated the moment I saw the original designs: yet another unambitious, narrow, tokenistic mess of cycle lanes, that even disappears at points. It is far from best (international) practice. The logic behind the design was obvious: include a cycle path, but above all, avoid inconveniencing drivers.

It makes you wonder: Who does DCC consult? Who comes up with these ideas? These designs? And why they floundering in trying to reinvent the wheel, and not looking to the successful examples of safe infrastructure already out there?

The same thinking is evident in the recently published plans for the Suir Road / Davitt Road junction, just up the road from the hospital campus. Again, an overly engineered, convoluted design that follows the same principle: protect the status quo and maintain car dominance. Cyclists and pedestrians can make do.

DCC seem completely unable to truly reimagine spaces. As is, the Suir Road / Davitt Road junction is nothing short of a mess. With the planned redesign, it will be as much of mess, but with some added, confusion cycle lanes.

Back to the South Circular Road. I made a submission to the public consultation, raising concerns about the poor overall quality, the disappearing cycle lanes, and whether anyone had considered if wider, fully protected cycle tracks could support emergency access, allowing ambulances to bypass traffic and reach the hospital faster. DCC’s response to this? Nothing. Ignored. Or rather, the familiar line they used for most submissions: taking space from cars is not an option because it would worsen congestion and impair emergency access. A recent report from Limerick, presented to Limerick City and County Council, refutes this unequivocally, illustrating that cycle lanes can not only maintain, but improve emergency vehicle access.

Oh the irony.

Reading DCC’s other responses was an equally disheartening experience. The lack of ambition is startling. A vision for a city that prioritises people over cars is nowhere to be found.

As things stand, no child can safely cycle to the new children’s hospital. A fact that will not change if the current plans are implemented. And while families travelling long distances with sick children have very real concerns regarding access to the hospital by car, a safe, high-quality cycle route is not a threat to them. If anything, it contributes to a calmer, cleaner, safer environment around the hospital. Less noise. Less pollution. A better place for everyone.

Yet DCC continues to churn out half-arsed, overly complicated, poor-quality designs. Nobody wins. Even those who think the car wins are mistaken.

Bad designs happen. But consecutive bad designs show something more troubling: an unwillingness to learn, to improve, or to show leadership.

We must ask ourselves, and of decision-makers – why the fear of change? There is any amount of evidence and guidelines that demonstrate how a shift away from cars is better for our health, our environment and our economy. There are brilliant guidelines from countries and cities around the world that we can and should learn from.

Dublin has every potential to be a 15-minute city, but at this stage, it requires bolder measures. But we keep choosing the alternative: install sub-standard, disjointed, poor quality infrastructure that protects cars’ sacred status on our roads, and fails to protect people, whether they are walking, cycling, or any other form of wheeling. This subsequently proves difficult to change or remove in the future, and is a waste of resources and taxpayer money. Heaven forbid we should do it right the first time – measure twice, cut once.

Combine that with the glacial pace of delivery (and glaciers are now moving faster…), and Dublin, and everyone living here, is in trouble.

When I was younger, I had a rather strange obsession with Ayn Rand. Don’t get me wrong — I’m not a fan of laissez-faire capitalism or her brand of individualism; quite the opposite, in fact. But I was fascinated by her writing, her thinking, and perhaps most importantly, by what set her mind apart from mine.

The quote above is from her perhaps most famous book, Atlas Shrugged. It’s part of the long radio speech delivered by the novel’s central figure, John Galt. The speech is LONG and includes some questionable opinions and ideas, but even so, it has stayed with me, and especially that little part.

Lately, I’ve been thinking about it more and more. Because I feel like my sparks are fading, one by one. There is a kind of despair in the air these days: the current political landscape, the public discourse, the worsening climate and nature crisis, and the lack of meaningful action, all worsened by a widening disconnect from Dublin.

I just got back from spending a week with my family in Greece. Going to a Greek island in late November feels like stepping back in time. There are no tourists. It’s eerie, cold and rainy, yet refreshing, and in strange way, heartwarming.

I spent the days balancing work with helping out on the family farm, debuting as an olive picker. It’s hard work — unwieldy nets to gather the fallen olives, long sticks, strange electric contraptions to shake the branches — but it’s peaceful. Somehow, I felt a renewed sense of purpose. It’s a hard life, but it gave me a glimpse of an alternative to our western, individualist, capitalist, and fossil-fuelled lives.

Coming back to Ireland was tough. It was back to the hustle and bustle, the loudness, the fumes, the cars, the constant striving for more. Gone were the simple plant-based meals with family, made from home-grown or locally grown vegetables. In their place were Tesco’s plastic-wrapped vegetables shipped from the other side of the world and Christmas ads galore, telling you to buy, buy, buy.

This might sound like a small thing, but to me, it crystallised a much heavier truth: the guilt of inadequacy, of not having done enough. We haven’t been able to turn the tide, to regain momentum. We have failed to tell the story. To open people’s eyes to the alternative: a fairer, greener, and healthier future for all.

The irony of the title Atlas Shrugged isn’t lost on me here. But while Atlas carried the world alone, I’m part of the most amazing community of like-minded, inspirational people who do their utmost to make a meaningful difference.

That community. That camaraderie. That’s what keeps me going. So, contrary to Ayn Rand’s beliefs, I truly hope my sparks are replaceable. Tomorrow is a new day. Maybe the air will be different.

And to my community, thank you.

The video focused on safety tips for people cycling. While some of the advice was perfectly reasonable, the overall impression was less a genuine effort to encourage cycling and more a piece of propaganda reinforcing car dominance and victim blaming.

Cyclists were essentially told to always dress like a cross between a Christmas tree and Bob the Builder, and to always use the cycle path (never mind that these paths are frequently blocked by parked cars, buses, littered with broken glass, or simply unsafe by design).

Of course, as a healthcare worker, I’m not suggesting people should cycle around in dark clothing with no lights. Common-sense visibility matters. But there is a difference between basic safety measures and placing the entire burden of avoiding collisions on the most vulnerable road user, while leaving the behaviour of those driving multi-tonne vehicles largely unexamined.

Meanwhile, the Garda officer in the video cycled along the quays near Heuston Station, one of the most notoriously dangerous places to cycle in Dublin. As someone who cycles along the quays to get to work, I can attest to how hazardous this route is.

Last week, a taxi driver tried to drive me off the road along the quays approaching Heuston Station because I dared to use the bus/cycle lane (nowhere does it say “taxi lane” — and the fact that taxis do not belong in bus lanes is worthy of a separate piece).

The most shocking part of the incident was that the car behind the taxi was a Garda car. The two Gardaí in the car had front row seats to the incident and saw exactly what the taxi driver did: he honked his horn aggressively and passed me with only a few centimetres of clearance — yet they did nothing. They just looked on.

The message I’m left with after watching this social media video and experiences like the one last week isn’t that cycling is “fast, healthy, and fun,” but that if you dare to cycle, it’s your responsibility to armour yourself so that someone driving an SUV or truck doesn’t hit you.

If An Garda Síochána is serious about improving safety, then the next video should focus on the group with the greatest capacity to cause harm: motorists. A clear, public commitment to enforcing speeding, dangerous driving, and illegal parking in cycle lanes or on footpaths would do far more for road safety than telling cyclists to dress like hi-vis mascots. I challenge the Gardaí to make that video, and more importantly, to back it up with action.

No one disputes that Dublin urgently needs more homes. But destroying one of the few remaining green spaces to achieve that goal is a terrible idea – environmentally, socially, and economically.

Dublin is already running out of green space. Take Phoenix Park out of the equation, and the city suddenly drops to one of the least green capitals in Europe. While the land in question is not currently an accessible green space, every patch of natural land left inside or near the city matters, because green spaces are vital infrastructure. They help cool the air, absorb rainwater, shelter wildlife, and give people a place to breathe. These are all key features we are going to desperately need in the years to come. Once green spaces are gone, they’re gone.

Access to green space is also deeply unequal. The World Health Organization recommends at least nine square metres of green space per person. In the Liberties, for instance, residents have access to just 1.7 square metres each. In parts of the South-East Canal Ring, people enjoy fifteen. That’s a tenfold difference. This should serve as a stark reminder of unequal access to green spaces. The city should be working to level that imbalance, not make it worse by removing what little green remains near working and middle class neighbourhoods.

Access to nature directly improves public health. By fostering a healthy environment for physical activity and closeness to nature, it lowers the risk of heart disease, reduces stress, encourages exercise, cuts pollution, and builds stronger communities. According to a recent report by the European Environmental Agency, only 31% of Dubliners have access to quiet green space near their home, with 22% of Ireland’s population exposed to harmful noise levels. The sounds of nature, such as birdsong and running water, can provide acoustic masking of harmful noise pollution from traffic and construction. Protecting nature is not an obstacle to good city planning, it is good city planning.

The Metro argument also misses the point. Yes, the new Metro will bring huge opportunities, but public transport shouldn’t only connect people to and from the city centre. It should also connect people to nature. In Oslo, several metro stops exist primarily to bring people to forested areas and hiking trails surrounding the city. Imagine a future where Dubliners hop on the Metro on a Saturday morning to visit the fields and woodlands near Glasnevin, not the remains of them paved over for more housing.

Instead of erasing green spaces, Dublin should be reimagining its low-density housing. The city has thousands of poorly designed, poor quality low-rise developments that could be redeveloped into high quality, well designed apartments built with sustainable materials and access to sunlight and amenities. We ought to build homes around green spaces, not on top of them. That’s how we create a more sustainable, liveable, and equitable Dublin. At present, Dublin City Council has paused all compulsory purchase orders on derelict housing. If we are to build sustainable cities, we must prevent low-density urban sprawl, protect our green spaces, and use the resources already present within urban areas.

As the 17 hectare plot of land in question is already zoned for Future Development Potential, it should be recognised as an excellent opportunity for long-term green planning. A large, publicly accessible community organic farm perhaps paired with allotments and a park would be an ideal use of the land. Community farms are a fantastic way to address Ireland’s rising food insecurity and unequal access to fresh produce.

Rezoning farmland near Glasnevin may look like a quick win for housing, but in the long run, it’s a loss for everyone. Dublin’s challenge isn’t just about where we build, it’s about how we design and build our city. If we keep trading nature for short-term fixes, we’ll end up with neither homes worth living in nor a city worth living in.

Dublin’s urban planning has historically been very haphazard and reactionary, placing band aids on immediate problems and resulting in incoherent infrastructure. There is excellent data available on many aspects of Dublin’s urban geography, both from within DCC and from other institutions. This data should be used to take braver, bolder decisions to completely overhaul Dublin’s planning, aligning with national and international guidelines and best practice. Dublin has the potential to become one of the greatest, greenest and healthiest European capitals, such as Paris or Copenhagen, if our leadership musters the courage to seize this opportunity with both hands.

While we seem hellbent on building road infrastructure that encourages an almost infinite growth in both car use and numbers, the active transport infrastructure, or often complete lack of it, abides by the opposite principle.

A prime example is the new Clontarf cycle route. When opened, it was hailed as a revolutionary piece of infrastructure that would change cycling in that part of Dublin. Sure, it is better than what was there before – nothing – so in that sense, seeing it as an improvement is a fairly useless measure.

As you can see from the picture below, the mobility lane is too narrow. I was left cycling behind this gentleman for a few hundred metres before I found an area where I could pass him with some degree of safety. Not a big deal, you might say. It is. This mobility lane was not built to encourage more people to cycle, but rather to accommodate the brave few who already do. Thousands will not be able to cycle along here during the morning commute because there is simply not enough room for that to be a comfortable experience. Imagine a cargo bike or tricycle on this lane. They will fit, but only just. It is wildly inadequate. Accessibility is another key issue as wheelchair and hand-cycle users typically need wider lanes to travel safely and comfortably.

Furthermore, narrow infrastructure like this prevents people from enjoying one of the best parts of cycling: social cycling, where two people can ride comfortably next to each other, chatting, laughing and getting from A to B with company in a health promoting manner. Again, someone made a conscious decision not to allow this.

The same can be said for the newly opened Royal Canal Greenway by Croke Park. Is it an improvement? Sure. But an improvement from nothing is not a measure of success. Far from it. It is clear from the picture below that this greenway was never meant to enable thousands of people to cycle or walk safely and comfortably. It is more of a box-ticking exercise.

The contrast with Copenhagen, where they have taken a completely different approach, could not be starker. In Copenhagen, the cycle lanes are wide and accommodating, in places as wide as or even wider than the lanes for cars or buses. There is very little complicated engineering pushing people into tight spaces or strange solutions. The approach is simple: take space away from cars and give it back to people.

So while the politicians bask in the spotlight, cutting ribbons on average at best active transport infrastructure, it is the people of Dublin who will pay the price. It is us that have to deal with the poor infrastructure built today for the coming decades.

All active transport infrastructure should be designed for a future Ireland where active travel is not a niche alternative, but a major transport mode. We should be planning for tens of thousands of daily cyclists and hand-cycle users in Dublin, not just accommodating the few who currently tolerate unsafe or inadequate routes.

If we are serious about cutting emissions, improving public health and building fairer, more liveable streets, we must start building for the Ireland we want, not the one we have.

But still, for cars it is build and they will come. For cyclists it is build something and tick a box.

Meanwhile, in Dublin, we’re supposed to be grateful at the prospect of contactless payments maybe arriving in 2029(!!). How have we ended up treating something so basic as a moonshot? The technology exists. It’s been used elsewhere for decades.

Other Cities Have Done This for Years

Look at Copenhagen’s DOT app. It does everything you need in one place. If there’s a festival or major event, they can instantly roll out special passes or temporary discounts to encourage people to use public transport. That’s how you change behaviour — not through speeches or free tolls during GAA matches in Dublin (a populist, car-centric non-solution proposed by Michael Healy Rae), but by making public transport the easier option. In Oslo, their transport app lets you watch your bus move on a map in real time. No guesswork. No ghost buses. No “maybe it’s coming in five minutes”. You know where it is. There is accountability.

A key aspect of such an app is that it has to look good and be easy to use, while still allowing for people who don’t have a smartphone to pay, ideally contactless, but also with cash and Leap cards. No one should be excluded, but we need to move from the 90s to 2025.

Dublin is one of the tech capitals of the world, yet the city often comes across as medieval when it comes to technological solutions, or complete lack thereof.

An app like this won’t solve Dublin’s transport problems. Far from it. But it would help move Dublin in the right direction.

This Should Be the Easy Part

Even if we get one meagre metro line by 2040, and maybe a few metres of extra LUAS tracks, Dublin’s public transport system as a whole will still be decades behind our European counterparts. But at the very least, we ought to have the best transport app. In the grand scheme of things, a functional, intuitive, all-encompassing transport app is such a small investment that could make a massive difference.

I’m well aware that TFI has a range of apps that will do some of these things, but I want to emphasise some, and the fact that they seem to think it’s a positive that they have a range of apps, each doing one thing (often poorly), as opposed to one integrated app. In addition, none of them look slick or up to date.

There might be some semi-valid barriers to implementing such an app. For example, Dublin’s complicated bus scene, with a lot of private companies providing basic services instead of one public company providing public transport for the greater Dublin region. However, there is nothing that shouldn’t be easily overcome if there’s a will.

Neither should this take years to implement. Apps like this already exist. They’ve been tried and tested for years in other cities. Yes, most cities have better and more integrated transport systems, but these are issues that could be addressed.

It’s time for Dublin to embrace these technologies and become a smarter, more sustainable city. If there’s a will, there’s a way.

Over the last few weeks, I’ve written a few letters to the editor about the recent car-free day held in Dublin on Sunday, the 21st of September. The idea or concept is, of course, very welcome, as it creates a more people-friendly, inviting urban environment, particularly for children, who are allowed to play safely on their streets.

Because what happens when you close streets to cars and open them to people is exactly what you would expect: people do non-driving things. Everything calms down. There are no fumes, no noise pollution, except, perhaps, for children’s laughter. It allows people to connect with their surroundings and their communities. Car-free streets are a fantastic prescription for happiness, wellbeing, and social connection.

But there is a but. There always seems to be with Dublin City Council. The so-called car-free day saw just 25 of Dublin’s more than 4,000 streets and roads closed to traffic, and only for three hours, between 1 pm and 4 pm. That is less than 1% of all streets and roads in Dublin, and only for a meagre three-hour window, which amounts to just 12.5% of a single day. And if we take it one step further: three hours once a year is just 0.03% of the entire year. That is the tiny amount of time in which the few lucky children living on or near one of the affected streets were allowed to safely play and enjoy their street in a car-free, safe environment.

Furthermore, it was not well advertised to the general public, or to those who don’t live on one of the few streets actually closed to cars and opened to people. There might have been a map, but I was not able to find it.

As someone who cycled, walked, and ran around large parts of Dublin 2, 4, and 6 that Sunday, I noticed no difference. The streets were as clogged with cars as always, not filled with children playing.

Another argument I encountered is that 25 streets is how it started in other cities. Again, that might be so, but Dublin is so far behind other cities that we cannot afford to take it slow.

There seem to be plans to repeat the event next year, at least I hope so, but again, such an event should not be a once-off, never to be seen again until the following year. It should happen every Sunday, and not just on 25 streets but across the city.

Just look to Colombia. Born out of an anti-car protest in 1974, Bogotá opens up many of the city’s streets to people every Sunday.

In Paris, the scheme Paris Respire (“Paris Breathes”) closes certain districts or quartiers to cars either every Sunday or one Sunday per month, and on public holidays, between the hours of 10 am and 6 pm. Some districts are closed every Sunday.

The lack of ambition shown in Dublin, paired with the habit of treating minimal progress as an end in itself, breeds complacency and stagnation.

These car-free days could be a way to show people in Dublin that life without cars is, in fact, better. For everyone. We could use them to gently, not slowly, make more and more of Dublin car-free, people-first. Permanently.

If Dublin is serious about promoting sustainable, community-oriented urban spaces, this is the kind of action required. We should be embarrassed that Dubliners, and in particular Dublin’s children, are only given the chance to enjoy their streets safely one day of the year.

The streets should belong to the people every day of the year, not to cars.

It should serve as a reminder of what we are missing in Dublin. Across the Irish Sea, the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has promised to make rivers in London swimmable within 10 years. In Paris, the swimming season in the Seine has just been extended. Since July, nearly 100,000 people have taken a dip at the three designated bathing sites along the river. The water quality is still not perfect, and they admittedly missed the deadline for last year’s Olympics, but after a century-long ban, the Seine is once again swimmable.

The same cannot be said for the Liffey, Dublin’s canals, or even much of the sea close to the city centre. These blue spaces could be an enormous source of health and wellbeing for Dubliners, but as is, they remain heavily polluted. Dublin’s waterways remain susceptible to sewage spills and overflows, especially the Liffey, which acts as an emergency valve for Dublin’s outdated sewage network. In practice, we treat our waterways like an open sewer.

Across Europe, other cities are showing real ambition to make their waters swimmable. In Oslo, for example, you can step off the train at the central station, walk a few hundred metres, and find yourself in a floating sauna in the harbour, where you can warm up before going for a dip. In Copenhagen, they’ve coupled world-class cycling infrastructure with swimming, giving residents across the city easy access to blue spaces. As with Paris, there are of course issues and periods where the water quality is not considered safe for swimming, but these cities treat their waterways with greater respect than we do in Dublin.

Compared with Oslo or Copenhagen, Dublin also doesn’t feel like a seaside capital. Yes, there are plenty of places to swim along the coast, but for many Dubliners living inland, the sea is simply not accessible.

Dublin shows no ambition. We are left with a once-a-year swim, where only a handful of brave souls enter.

Imagine a Dublin where you can safely go for a swim in the Grand or Royal canals. Imagine a floating sauna village in the Grand Canal Docks next to a floating pool. Imagine if we restored some of the tidal pools along the coast. These should not be unrealistic or idealistic ideas.

We should be working to make Dublin a blue, swimmable city once more.

Just yesterday, I cycled home along the quays. As usual, it was a frightening experience. As a cyclist, you’re treated like dirt. The so-called cycle lanes are dangerous, suddenly forcing you from the left side of the road to the right, only to drop you into a bus lane.

Instead of addressing the real issue—the complete lack of high-quality active transport infrastructure—Dublin City Council (DCC) seems more concerned with running odd social media campaigns that encourage further conflict between road users. Another campaign just launched focusing on getting more young women to cycle is welcome, but again, it completely ignores the root cause: the lack of safe, high-quality infrastructure.

I appreciate that, compared to other European cities, DCC has limited power. But I rarely, if ever, hear our councillors complain about that. Instead, they seem content to pose smiling in front of sub-standard, even poor, ‘active transport’ projects, delivered at a pace that would make a snail seem fast.

Every centimetre of active transport infrastructure installed in Dublin today should be world-class. It should follow the highest, tried-and-tested standards from countries like the Netherlands and Denmark. Cycle lanes should be wide enough to accommodate thousands of cyclists—not the narrow, compromised versions we are still getting today, which can barely handle current numbers. In Ireland, we perfectly abide by the principle of induced demand when it comes to road building for cars: build more and wider roads, and you will get more people driving. However, when it comes to cycle lanes, we are told to be thankful for whatever we get.

The contrast with the Danish approach couldn’t be starker. The cycling infrastructure in Copenhagen is unapologetic. It’s far from perfect, but the approach is clear: take a lane from cars, elevate it, and make it a wide, segregated cycle lane. A significant proportion of side streets are one-way for cars with contraflow for people cycling. Traffic lights are prioritised for pedestrians and cyclists. Drivers wait. There are hardly any ‘beg buttons.’ As a cyclist or pedestrian, you glide through the city. As a driver, you don’t. It’s the complete opposite of Dublin.

My mind keeps going back to cycling in Copenhagen, where the strength is in the numbers. During rush hour it feels like you’re part of something larger than yourself, an organic flock moving through the city. You glide alongside children waving from their seats, teenagers, women in high heels, older men with laughing kids, even bachelorette parties. It isn’t perfect, but that’s the beauty of it: in an imperfect world, they’ve embraced cycling as a normal, everyday activity. Unlike Dublin, it isn’t stressful there—it’s blissful.

One day, an older woman sped past me on a standard bike (I barely saw any e-bikes or e-scooters while I was in Copenhagen). I caught a whiff of cigarette smoke and realised that she was not only cycling faster than me, but doing so while smoking. Even as a healthcare professional, I couldn’t help but smile. “You go on,” I thought to myself. There was no lycra, no fancy bike in sight, just a woman enjoying a cycle.

Back in Dublin, what’s being built now, like the Clontarf scheme or the recent greenways, is a disservice to the people of Dublin. Not wide enough. Not safe enough. Not intuitive enough. Certainly not future-proofed for a city where thousands could cycle daily, if we designed the city for people, not for cars. DCC should be building better infrastructure than what exists in Copenhagen today. They should be saying, “Hold your horses, Copenhagen, we can and will do better.” That is what Dublin needs.

Right now, the car remains almighty king in Dublin. In Copenhagen, the humble bike is queen.

Enter the forest play school.

The idea is as simple as it is brilliant. Parents bring their children to a designated meeting point in the city, where a bus takes them out of the urban core to a forested area. The bus ride itself can be used for singing or educational activities, before the children are set free to roam in the forest for the day. Summer or winter, sun or rain, they spend their day outdoors.

That is not to say that forest play schools are the norm in Copenhagen, but they are an option.

Healthy, natural forests have everything children need to learn and grow. Imagine your child coming home with stories about what they had seen or done, or the staff telling you they found your child happily napping under a tree. It might sound too idyllic to be true, but it’s not. Children attending these play schools learn and develop according to the rhythm of nature. Every day is different. Nature itself shapes what and how they learn.

I believe Dublin has enormous potential for forest play schools and similar initiatives aimed at reconnecting people, and especially our children with nature. The Dublin and Wicklow mountains are right on our doorstep. They are an underused treasure.

Compared to other European capitals, Dublin has a reasonable amount of green space, but this is heavily skewed by Phoenix Park, which does not represent a healthy, natural ecosystem. Data from across Europe tells us that we need to do much more to increase green infrastructure, urban tree cover, and access to natural spaces. Forest play schools will not directly add to those numbers, but they can provide enormous benefits for Dublin’s children.

It is well established that spending time in nature provides immense physical and mental health benefits. It improves concentration and supports learning (though performance should never be the main focus of a play school). Crucially, early experiences in nature are also strongly linked to pro-environmental attitudes later in life.

It’s encouraging to see Ireland’s first outdoor school opening in Wicklow. This is a welcomed first step. But we must go further. Much further.

One crucial point: access to green space is far more limited in lower-income urban neighbourhoods than in wealthier ones. Initiatives that bring children out into nature could play a vital role in addressing this inequality.

If forest play schools are to make a real impact, they cannot become a privilege reserved for the wealthy few. A bus (or ideally buses) departing from central Dublin, for example, could give families from across the city access, regardless of income or neighbourhood. These schools must be designed to combat, not reinforce, social inequality.

If we want our children to connect with the natural world, benefit from it, and grow into better stewards of it than past and current generations, then forest play schools are an obvious step forward.

This idea should not be seen as controversial, extreme, or “alternative.” The real extreme is the reality we live in today. A reality where we have taken away children’s freedom, locked them inside, and systematically disconnected them from the natural world.