
Lack of action on proposal to close key Wicklow artery is slammed – ‘Too little, too late'
Since Easter numerous protests have taken place in the area, as residents look to call a halt to plans to close what is viewed as a vital access route to the town – the Herbert Road junction – to make way for the N11/M11 Bus Priority Interim Scheme.
The campaign group has grown from just 10 key members when it was formed in April to over 2,300 followers and counting on its Facebook page. In recent weeks over 10,000 leaflets have been distributed to local estates.
Despite the calls for the scheme to be paused for a review, Wicklow County Council has indicated it will progress with its plan, which is being developed in partnership with Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII), the National Transport Authority (NTA) and the Department of Transport.
The council has said previously it is 'committed to ensuring that the closure of each direct access point is considered carefully' and the implementation of any major road improvement features 'will improve journey times for the residents of east Wicklow'.
Local resident Clare Finnegan started the campaign from a picnic table over three months ago. Speaking during the meeting she said they won't stop until a proper solution is found.
'The invitation to speak in the chamber here this evening is too little, too late, but we will remain humble, we will grow strong as our councillors continue to do nothing. The core idea of government is that the government is held accountable to the people who elected them. We call on you to do more for our community which needs your support at this critical time.'
'The town of Bray needs a traffic management plan. 773 buses will be delayed over the course of any given day if the closure goes ahead. This junction is a vital artery for Bray - linking communities, supporting businesses, and ensuring access to schools, homes, and the seafront.'
'Despite their critical role in this process, TII has shown little willingness to explore viable alternatives, instead treating this move as non-negotiable, even though the scheme does not depend on the removal of this junction.'
'When we attended the monthly meeting of Wicklow County Council in April, we found the comments from the Chief Executive Emer O' Gorman to be dismissive, with inconclusive information from engineers. We were told bus corridors are the way forward.' she added.
Having received a pledge from Ms O'Gorman during that meeting to contact the Taoiseach and Transport Minister about the issue, Ms Finegan also grasped the opportunity in June to present Ms O'Gorman with a letter during the sod turning of the Fassaroe Park and Ride facility asking for an update, delivering a second letter seeking a meeting with representatives from the NTA.
Meanwhile churchwarden of Saint Brigid's Church Gordon Lennox warned elected members in the chamber that compulsory purchase orders for the bus corridor will make access impossible for hearses, wedding cars, and anyone with mobility needs.
'The church lies at the bottom of Herbert Road, and it has been serving families since the 1860s. The building is a protected structure. If the county council move ahead with this plan, they may be in breach of its own county development plan. There is also a consecrated burial ground in the church grounds, with many family members of residents buried there.'
The junction of the N11 and Herbert Road, in Bray, with the entrance to Kilbride Church, which would be closed off to make way for the bus corridor.
Separately local businessman Donal Egan highlighted the potential toll on businesses if the plans go ahead. He cited a statement issued by the Bray Chamber of Commerce.
'The closure of one of only four key access and egress points to Bray will inevitably cause increased congestion both within the town and on major surrounding routes such as the Southern Cross and the Dublin/Bray Road. This will lead to longer delays and higher costs for businesses operating in Bray.
'Bray already experiences significant traffic challenges during weekends and peak summer periods due to the high volume of day visitors. Removing Herbert Road as an access point will only worsen the situation, making Bray less accessible and potentially deterring visitors.'
'There is growing frustration among residents who feel their voices are being ignored. It is unacceptable that the expressed concerns of local elected representatives are not being considered in the decision-making process.'
Councillors widely praised the group for their efforts in highlighting the issue with Cllr Joe Behan stating it was 'the most powerful grassroots campaign I have seen in the town over the last 40 years'.
'This proposal will cut 25 per cent of the access available to the town. It is a cheapskate solution to improve public transport in the area. The move will be dangerous for traffic.
'You all must be praised for holding fire to elected members feet.' he added.
Cllr Melanie Corrigan who was left 'speechless and overwhelmed' following the presentation, commended the group for leading their campaign with dignity and respect.
'It's an appalling situation, I will work to try and stop the plans going forward.' she added.
Cllr Dermot Daisy O' Brien acknowledged the people powered campaign that has grown in prominence and impact.
'Does the will of the people matter in this process? What's at stake is clear for residents. Up to now though, their concerns have been dismissed. We need to think about the future of the town.' he added.
To date, over €1.45 million has been spent on the scheme which Cllr Malachai Duddy branded as a 'complete waste of money' and 'a form of imprisonment for residents', while Cllr Ned Whelan called it the 'stupidest' plan he's ever heard of.
Cllr Ian Neary apologised for the lack of action from the elected representatives, while paying tribute to the work of the campaign.
Cllr Caroline Winstanley informed the chamber that the proposed closure will be an agenda item for the July meeting of the Municipal District's traffic and transport subcommittee.
Cllr Erika Doyle called for better communication and community engagement from the relevant state agencies. As Cathaoirleach of the district she will also write to the council's chief executive to express their concerns and reiterate their support for the campaign on behalf of the eight local councillors.
Attention now turns to Tánaiste Simon Harris, who has invited all Wicklow Oireachtas members across all parties to attend a meeting with the Transport Minister Darragh O' Brien to discuss the issue.
The meeting on July 9 is expected to be met with further protests by the campaign group outside the gates of Leinster House.
Sinn Fein TD John Brady is also due to submit a petition which has amassed thousands of signatures against the proposal since the start of the campaign.
Funded by the Local Democracy Reporting Scheme
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Extra.ie
11 hours ago
- Extra.ie
Australia outlaws YouTube for teens as media ban widens
Australia has announced that YouTube is going to be added to the sites covered by their unique social media ban for teenagers. The video-sharing site was originally exempt from the ban but that decision has now been reversed with the possibility of a legal challenge now on the way. Due to a survey which found that 37% of minors reported harmful content on the site, the worst showing for a social media platform, Australia decided to comply with their internet regulator's urges. Australian PM Anthony Albanese confirmed the ban extension. Pic:Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese stated: 'I'm calling time on it.' He went on to highlight that Australian children were being negatively affected by online platforms and reminded social media platforms of the responsibility that they have to keep users safe.. The PM added: 'I want Australian parents to know that we have their backs.' The ban will broaden to include YouTube from December onwards. YouTube has hit back at the decision, stating that it is used by nearly three-quarters of Australians aged 13 to 15 and should not be classified as social media because its main activity is hosting videos. A YouTube spokesperson wrote: 'Our position remains clear: YouTube is a video sharing platform with a library of free, high-quality content, increasingly viewed on TV screens. It's not social media.' Platforms that were already covered by the ban, such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok, were unhappy with YouTube's exemption last year and complained that it has key similarities to their products, including letting users interact and recommending content through an algorithm based on activity. Originally, the government had exempted YouTube due to its popularity with teachers but now all accounts for under-16s will be outlawed, with parents and teachers allowed to show videos on it to minors. YouTube have hit back at the decision. Pic:Angela Falkenberg, President of the Australian Primary Principals Association, stated: 'Teachers are always curators of any resource for appropriateness (and) will be judicious.' Adam Marre, Chief Information Security Officer at cybersecurity firm Arctic Wolf, added that social media platforms like YouTube have been flooded with misinformation due to the rise in Artificial Intelligence. He said: 'The Australian government's move to regulate YouTube is an important step in pushing back against the unchecked power of big tech and protecting kids.' The decision now brings a potential legal challenge from Alphabet, the company that owns YouTube, after they already threatened to withdraw some Google services from Australia in 2021 to avoid a law forcing it to pay news outlets for content appearing in searches. Last week, YouTube told Reuters that it had written to the government urging it 'to uphold the integrity of the legislative process'. Australian media then said YouTube threatened a court challenge, but YouTube did not confirm that. Communications Minister Anika Wells told Australian parliament: 'I will not be intimidated by legal threats when this is a genuine fight for the well-being of Australian kids.' The Australian government is due to receive a report in the near future on tests of age-checking products, with the results set to influence the enforcement of the ban introduced last November. Currently, social media platforms that fail to take the 'reasonable steps' to keep out Australians younger than 16 will face a fine of up to A$49.5million (€27.9million).


RTÉ News
15 hours ago
- RTÉ News
Australia widens teen social media ban to YouTube, scraps exemption
Australia said it will add YouTube to sites covered by its world-first ban on social media for teenagers, reversing an earlier decision to exempt the Alphabet-owned video-sharing site and potentially setting up a legal challenge. The decision came after the internet regulator urged the government last month to overturn the YouTube carve-out, citing a survey that found 37% of minors reported harmful content on the site, the worst showing for a social media platform. "I'm calling time on it," Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said in a statement, highlighting that Australian children were being negatively affected by online platforms, and reminding social media of their social responsibility. "I want Australian parents to know that we have their backs." The decision broadens the ban set to take effect in December. YouTube said it is used by nearly three-quarters of Australians aged 13 to 15, and should not be classified as social media because its main activity is hosting videos. "Our position remains clear: YouTube is a video sharing platform with a library of free, high-quality content, increasingly viewed on TV screens. It's not social media," a YouTube spokesperson said by email. Since the government said last year it would exempt YouTube due to its popularity with teachers, platforms covered by the ban, such as Meta's Facebook and Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok, have complained. They said YouTube has key similarities to their products, including letting users interact and recommending content through an algorithm based on activity. The ban outlaws YouTube accounts for those younger than 16, allowing parents and teachers to show videos on it to minors. "Teachers are always curators of any resource for appropriateness (and) will be judicious," said Angela Falkenberg, president of the Australian Primary Principals Association, which supports the ban. Artificial intelligence has supercharged the spread of misinformation on social media platforms such as YouTube, said Adam Marre, chief information security officer at cyber security firm Arctic Wolf. "The Australian government's move to regulate YouTube is an important step in pushing back against the unchecked power of big tech and protecting kids," he added in an email. The reversal sets up a fresh dispute with Alphabet, which threatened to withdraw some Google services from Australia in 2021 to avoid a law forcing it to pay news outlets for content appearing in searches. Last week, YouTube told Reuters it had written to the government urging it "to uphold the integrity of the legislative process". Australian media said YouTube threatened a court challenge, but YouTube did not confirm that. "I will not be intimidated by legal threats when this is a genuine fight for the well-being of Australian kids, "Communications Minister Anika Wells told parliament today. The law passed in November only requires "reasonable steps" by social media platforms to keep out Australians younger than 16, or face a fine of up to A$49.5 million (€27.9m). The government, which is due to receive a report this month on tests of age-checking products, has said those results will influence enforcement of the ban.


Irish Examiner
a day ago
- Irish Examiner
Meta's ban on political ads will mean less transparency and more slop for users
Meta's announcement on Friday that it will ban all political ads in the EU on Facebook and Instagram is terrible not just for political advertisers but for the public as a whole. I was Facebook's first Political Ads representative in Europe, and I launched their Political Ad authorisation and oversight process before leaving the company in 2019. I now advise political campaigners on how to use digital tools, including ads. From Obama through the Arab Spring to Marriage Equality, at first we were convinced social media was a force for good in elections. But Brexit, Trump and the Cambridge Analytica scandal brought a reckoning: social media companies should be held responsible for nefarious political marketing, given that bad actors now had a way to reach the electorate at a scale and impact never seen before. Facebook's response at the time was to launch a complex authorisation and transparency process for all political advertising on its platforms. Anyone who wanted to run ads about politics, elections or 'social issues' must prove they were located in the country their ad targeted, providing their national ID, locally-billed credit card and their IP address. Verifiable contact details for the organisation promoted would be included in an 'Ads Library', where all political ads would be saved for seven years. Clare O'Donoghue Velikić: 'Our presidential election in October may yet shape up to be more fractious than we thought.' The Ad Library would also show how much money had been spent on those ads, and the demographics of people targeted. (You can see this today at All political ads then required a 'Paid for by' disclaimer, including the name of the paying organisation within the ad itself. This process was cumbersome but effective, if imperfect, in protecting democracies against foreign interference in political matters, and to counter 'astro-turfing': setting up fake grassroots organisations to create the impression of widespread local support for a niche position (as we have seen the far right attempt many times, including here in Ireland). The Ads Library also provided oversight to journalists, regulators and the general public, who can see what political ads have been run, by whom, how much money they spent, and roughly who those ads targeted. In 2019, Facebook (now Meta) knew that they were unlikely to make enough money back from political advertising in the EU to justify the investment in these oversight tools. Restrictions on political fundraising and election expenditure in most EU countries mean we will never see the levels of spending on election advertising as in the US. Calin Georgescu, the winner of the first round of Romania's presidential election walks among supporters outside the Romanian parliament in Bucharest in February. Tens of thousands of fake TikTok accounts churned out millions of views of AI-created disinformation, ultimately resulting in an annulled election there. File photo: AP/Alexandru Dobre Even as a sales rep for Government & Politics marketing, I never had a revenue target for political ads. For Facebook, trying to atone for its failures around Cambridge Analytica, political advertising in the EU was essentially a loss leader: if political parties and governments trusted Facebook, and used their tools to help run elections, then they might feel more favourably towards the company within broader business-related legislation. Six years later and the mood has shifted both politically and at now-renamed Meta. EU legislation has finally caught up with micro-targeting tactics, and in October 2025 the Transparency and Targeting of Political Advertising (TTPA) regulation comes into force. Google, who never had as thorough an authorisation and transparency process for political ads as Meta's, responded in late 2024 that they would ban political ads in the EU. But until now, most of us in the political campaigning world were confident that Meta's political ad process, with its local authorisation, verification and transparency through the Ad Library, would be sufficient to meet their obligations under the TTPA. Not so, says VP of Public Policy Europe at Meta, Markus Reinisch. The TTPA would require further changes to Meta's Political Ad processes 'at significant and unsustainable cost', 'without guarantee that our solution would be viewed as compliant'. Non-compliance with the TTPA leaves tech platforms facing penalties of up to 6% of their turnover; for Meta, this could be as high as €7bn. Still smarting from a €200m EU fine in April, Meta are now saying the quiet part out loud: political ads in the EU don't make them enough money to justify the investment in authorisation and transparency. The threat of such heavy fines seals the deal: Meta would rather lose their meagre European political ads revenue than take the risk of non-compliance. So does the TTPA achieve what it had hoped, protecting Europeans from bad political campaigners who use creepy social media tactics, and increasing transparency around electoral processes online? Sadly, the outcome will be the exact opposite. 'Rage bait' Sensationalism and 'rage bait' fuel the organic algorithm - the tech behind most social platforms which decides which non-paid content it will show people, out of the millions of stories, pictures and videos posted each day. It's extremely hard for mainstream 'vanilla' political content - sharing about work on homelessness, or Dáil speeches, or inviting people to a public meeting - to get picked up by the organic algorithm and shown in social media feeds. Meta ads have met this gap for most political campaigners in Ireland and the EU until now - pay a small amount and ensure your content reaches your constituency, or people across the country who care about the theme you're discussing. Non-mainstream political voices, particularly those on the far right, have always been more willing to create organic content which 'games' the algorithm - gets picked up and shown to more people - by creating outrage, shock, sensationalism or disinformation. Now, in the age of AI video production, content creators will be able to churn out algorithm-baiting videos at a scale never seen before. Without verification against fake profiles and astro-turfing, bad actors can create multiple profiles to share this content widely and quickly, before it can be detected - as happened in Romania's recent election, where tens of thousands of fake TikTok accounts churned out millions of views of AI-created disinformation, ultimately resulting in an annulled election. These content bot farms were driven from outside Romania: without any localisation oversight, foreign interference in political social media will rise. TikTok does not allow political 'ads', but had insufficient detection mechanisms to prevent this non-paid overseas manipulation of a democratic process. Calin Georgescu, winner of the first round of last year's annulled election in Romania (left) with presidential candidate George Simion (right) as they cast their votes in the first round of the presidential election rerun in Romania on May 4, 2025. The election there was annulled because fake profiles, astro-turfing and bad actors created outrage, shock, sensationalism or disinformation. File photo: AP/Vadim Ghirda Meanwhile, as we watch the dodgy money move into these unregulated spaces, there will be fewer (likely almost zero) counter voices from mainstream political parties and activists. Of those who manage to gain organic reach through the algorithm, incumbent politicians and parties who have built up large followings on social media will be at a significant advantage over new candidates, smaller parties and niche movements. Finally, with no public library of political content on Facebook and Instagram, there will no longer be any oversight of what's out there - no information for journalists or the public, no record for regulators to review after elections. Backing away from its own Political Ad Library, Meta will be taking away from the EU a profoundly important tool for transparency - the exact opposite of what the TTPA intended. The briefing shared by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage on Friday stated that 'the regulation aims to make it easier for voters to recognise political advertisements, understand who is behind them and know whether they have received a targeted advertisement, so that they are better placed to make informed choices during elections and referendums.' The true outcome of Meta's exit from political advertising will be an EU electorate subjected to unregulated, sensationalist AI slop, without insight or accountability. Will this steer electoral outcomes? Our presidential election in October may yet shape up to be more fractious than we thought. Clare is the Director of ODV Digital, a digital consultancy for the political and campaigning sector, based in Dublin Read More Will tech giants finally take online safety for children seriously?