Official Report 1119KB pdf
The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-19918, in the name of Sue Webber, on dealing with the dangerous use of e-bikes and e-scooters. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I invite members who wish to participate to press their request-to-speak buttons.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes with concern reports of the growing dangerous use of e-bikes and e-scooters across Scotland, but particularly in Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Dundee and Glasgow, and across major towns; understands that some e-bike and e-scooter users are often observed showing no regard for the traffic laws, endanger other road users and pedestrians, appear to violate the legally mandated speed limit and often do not use high-visibility clothing; believes that many users often wear what can be seen as intimidating clothing, such as balaclavas and face coverings; is concerned at reports that e-bikes and e-scooters are increasingly used to commit organised crime and vehicle theft; notes calls on the Scottish Government to give Police Scotland the appropriate resources and vehicles to counter people who use e-bikes and e-scooters in these ways, such as by seizing the vehicles, and further notes the call for greater action to be taken against the antisocial use of e-bikes and e-scooters, to provide a safer environment for roads users and pedestrians.
18:02
I thank everyone who has taken the time to stay behind and speak in this members’ business debate, given the challenging weather tonight.
Last week, in the chamber, I asked the Minister for Victims and Community Safety how the Scottish Government
“plans to respond to the reported increase in antisocial behaviour and criminality associated with people using e-bikes”.—[Official Report, 3 December 2025; c 21.]
That is why I am pleased to have the chance to raise the issue again. My motion for debate today addresses one of the fastest-growing threats to public safety on our streets: the dangerous and antisocial use of e-bikes and e-scooters across Scotland. I want to make it clear that, when I talk about e-bikes, I am also referring to the e-motorbikes—such as Sur-Ron bikes—that we see being used.
We have all seen it—in Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Dundee and Glasgow, and in towns across the country, these vehicles are being misused in many ways that put ordinary people at risk. Riders are weaving through traffic with no regard for the highway code. Vehicles exceed legal speed limits and often have modifications that make them even more dangerous. Pedestrians are put at risk by reckless drivers. The riders are dressed all in black, with balaclavas and face coverings, and they are breaking the law and committing crimes. I believe that action must be taken and that people should not feel scared or intimidated by the actions of these hooligans.
Some members may think that I am exaggerating, but I will list a few examples of recent e-bike and e-scooter crime in Edinburgh alone. In May this year, police charged nine people during an initiative targeting illegal e-bikes and e-scooters in Leith. Offences included dangerous riding and using phones while “in control”—in inverted commas—of these machines.
In July, a 16-year-old boy was stabbed and robbed of his e-bike. In November, Police Scotland seized 13 e-bikes and charged men between the ages of 18 and 45 with offences including riding with no insurance, riding with no licence and riding with no helmet. Residents had complained of antisocial behaviour such as riding on the pavement, speeding and causing alarm.
Just recently—in the season of good will—a masked thief on an e-bike stole an 8-feet-tall Christmas nutcracker statue from outside a bar on George Street. The statue was worth £900, and the closed-circuit television showed the suspect breaking a £350 table in the process of getting away with the theft on his e-bike.
At the weekend, there was an incident much closer to my home. James from the Currie, Balerno & District Round Table contacted me to say:
“We were out on the Juniper Green Santa run tonight and got buzzed a couple of times by wee punks on the off road bikes”
and the
“first time ... they were blasting horns.”
He told me that he was
“concerned they would try and nab a collecting tub so told elves to hold them tightly”.
I know that it seems like I am making light of that, but nothing is sacred or left untouched by those who are hellbent on intimidating people who are out volunteering for charities. At a time when businesses are already struggling, that is the last thing that people need to deal with.
I want to make it clear to those who are listening to the debate or who may be listening back tomorrow that law-abiding cyclists, responsible scooter users and those who genuinely benefit from using electric vehicles should not be tarred with the same brush as criminals, but the numbers who are abusing such vehicles continue to grow.
Reports from Police Scotland confirm that such vehicles are increasingly used in organised crime, vehicle theft and antisocial behaviour, and it is not only in Scotland that that is happening. Police forces across the United Kingdom and internationally are responding to the rise in e-bike-associated criminality with targeted operations and seizures and by using new advances in technology.
In 2024, across the UK, police confiscated 937 illegal e-bikes—that was up from 511 in the previous year. There have been police and multi-agency operations in Southampton, Greater Manchester and Merseyside, all leading to arrests, the recovery of stolen vehicles and the seizure of e-scooters and e-bikes. The people arrested and the vehicles seized during those operations have been linked to drug smuggling, robberies, knife crime and money laundering.
Further afield, cities such as Paris and Amsterdam have introduced strict licensing and registration rules for high-powered e-bikes, alongside police patrols targeting antisocial use. In addition, police departments in New York and Los Angeles have set up specialised task forces to tackle e-bike-enabled robberies and drug trafficking, often using plain-clothes officers and undercover stings.
Last week, I met an ex-police officer from West Midlands Police who had been working in the gang unit. He told me of intelligence that they had received that criminal gangs were disguising themselves as Deliveroo drivers to supply and courier drugs across the area, filling their teal bags with drugs and moving about the city with impunity. He told me that he went undercover as a Deliveroo driver and worked with colleagues, and they soon had enough information to put a stop to that illegal activity.
The Parliament has a duty to protect the public and to uphold the rule of law. Local authorities and Police Scotland are already stretched for resources and funding, and this problem requires more than the occasional police operation. We need a serious plan that is targeted at this growing threat to public safety on our streets. That is why I am asking the Scottish Government to act decisively by giving Police Scotland the resources that it needs; empowering officers to seize vehicles that are being misused—and let us not give them back; and sending a clear signal that we will not tolerate such behaviour in our communities.
Too often, our police are left without the tools, the vehicles or the resources to enable them to respond effectively. Local enforcement is not enough; I believe that, given the scale of the problem, we need a national response. That is why I am calling today for the creation of a nationwide police task force that is dedicated to tackling the criminal misuse of e-bikes, e-motorbikes and e-scooters. That task force must be equipped to investigate and dismantle the networks that use those vehicles for drug dealing, car theft, house break-ins and other organised crime.
Furthermore, high-visibility clothing is not a fashion statement but a necessity, and yet too many riders ignore it and choose instead to cloak themselves in darkness to intimidate people and commit crimes. Traffic laws and speed limits exist for a reason. They are not optional, and they are not suggestions—they are the rules that keep us safe.
Some will say that my proposed approach is heavy handed, but the problem continues to get worse. We need campaigns that raise awareness, but we also need police on the ground who are equipped with the right vehicles to pursue offenders, and who can seize dangerous machines, to protect the public.
Our constituents deserve to feel safe. My motion is not about politics—it is about public safety, restoring confidence in our communities and saying that Scotland will not tolerate intimidation, lawlessness or crime on our streets.
With that in mind, I call on colleagues across the chamber to support my motion, so that we can send a message that Parliament will act—that we will give Police Scotland the tools that it needs and establish a nationwide task force to break the link between e-bikes and organised crime. That will enable us to protect pedestrians, road users and communities and reclaim our streets from those who misuse e-bikes and e-scooters for crime and intimidation.
We move to the open debate. I advise colleagues that we have a lot of interest, so I would be grateful if members could stick to their allocated speaking time, given the time already.
18:10
I thank Sue Webber for bringing to the chamber this important debate on the dangerous use of e-bikes and e-scooters.
As convener of the cross-party group on accident prevention and safety awareness, I stress that these vehicles are not only a concern for the people who ride them; they pose huge risks to pedestrians and other road users, and to anyone—including service dogs—sharing our roads and pavements. Safety has to come first.
It is important to be clear from the outset that not all e-bikes are dangerous—many are safe, efficient and environmentally friendly. However, we are seeing a serious and growing problem with black-market and illegally modified e-bikes. Too often, e-bikes are fitted with cheap conversion kits that let them reach speeds far beyond what the manufacturers had ever intended. To illustrate the danger, I highlight that a recent police seizure recovered an e-bike that was capable of reaching 70mph.
The issue is not only excessive speed. Illegally modified bikes pose a serious fire risk, particularly when they are being charged. There have already been fatalities in the United Kingdom that have been linked to fires that were started by e-bike and e-scooter batteries. The combination of extreme speed, instability and the risk of battery fires makes the bikes a very real public safety concern.
Alongside the physical dangers, we cannot ignore the rise in antisocial behaviour that is associated with some e-bike and e-scooter use. Ms Webber excellently laid out some of the problems, such as riders weaving through pedestrians, ignoring traffic signals and using pavements and shared spaces irresponsibly. That is becoming increasingly common. For communities, it is destructive day-to-day behaviour that shapes how they see e-bikes and e-scooters. It reinforces how urgently we need to address the wider safety issue.
In Scotland, the law is clear: e-bikes and e-scooters are already regulated in terms of their speed and power output and where they can be used. Police also have the authority to seize vehicles that are illegally modified or are being used dangerously. Recent enforcement activity shows that the unsafe modifications and reckless behaviour are not isolated incidents—they are widespread, and the risks are very real.
We need a balanced approach. E-bikes and e-scooters offer convenience and real environmental benefits, but public safety must come first. Education and awareness raising are essential to help people understand the dangers of illegal modifications, reckless use and antisocial behaviour, and unsafe charging.
Alongside that, enforcement must be robust. Those who put themselves or others at risk must be held accountable. We should look to the role of manufacturers, retailers and local authorities in ensuring that people have access to safe and legal e-bikes and e-scooters. I have worked extensively with the Society of Chief Officers of Trading Standards in Scotland to look at how such measures can be implemented in our communities.
E-bikes and e-scooters can absolutely be a positive addition to our transport system, but the dangers that are posed by illegal modifications, reckless riding, antisocial behaviour and battery-related fires cannot be ignored.
I make a final plea to the minister. The police are frustrated that, when they seize vehicles, a small fine is paid and the vehicle is then released back to the owner. If we could have stronger legislation for repeat offenders, that might help the situation.
18:14
I congratulate Sue Webber on bringing the debate to the chamber, because the issue is—as we have just heard—a real menace throughout the country. In Aberdeen, Union Street is already suffering as a result of swingeing business rates; the damage to our oil and gas industry caused by the Scottish Government and the UK Government; short-sighted and damaging council policies such as a low-emission zone and bus gates; and the chronic underfunding and underresourcing of the police, which led to their piloting of a non-investigation of crimes approach.
We can throw into that mix e-bikes and e-scooters. People have become ever more reluctant to venture forth, as users of the bikes—clad in black with their faces covered, generally without lights and often in groups—are racing up the pavements, hurling anything from abuse to consumables. As e-bikes are often used on roads illegally, they are frequently linked with antisocial behaviour, the intimidation of communities and danger to other road users and pedestrians.
As Sue Webber said, we also know that e-bikes are being used to deal drugs. She is right that the underfunding and underresourcing of the police makes it challenging for them to deal with the issue, but the north-east police do what they can. They run a community action team, which investigates issues such as e-bikes and the antisocial behaviour that is associated with them. The police have seen many positive results and have managed to seize e-bikes and charge individuals. They have experienced officers who know much about this menace. There are specialist road policing officers who carry out vehicle examinations and regular patrols to examine and combat the issue. Nonetheless, our police feel constrained, because chasing a rider in a vehicle pursuit could result in serious injury or worse to the rider, to the police or to the public.
Using other methods such as DNA tagging spray to tag illegal e-bikes and their riders often allows for seizures and cross-referencing with other crimes. Police are also dependent on public-reported sightings to help them figure out who is using such vehicles and where they are being stored. Often, police are able to overlap that information with CCTV footage from across the city. However, that is the operational aspect. If we, in this place, do not act to support the police and communities properly, we also own the consequences.
In my justice policy paper “Cracking Down on Crime”, which was released last month, Scottish Conservatives set out a number of initiatives that we would bring in if we were to form the next Government. We must back the police not only with proper funding and resources, but with the tools that they say that they need to tackle dangerous behaviour, such as enabling them to restore visible policing across Scotland, especially on our high streets.
We must take a zero-tolerance approach to antisocial behaviour, including the misuse of e-bikes, with tougher penalties for reckless e-bike and e-scooter use, intimidating clothing and the harassment of pedestrians.
My concern relates to the member suggesting that more visible police—or more police on the beat, as we might say—is somehow a solution. I propose to him that it is not much of a solution, because these kinds of people will simply get on their mobile phones and say, “There’s police about there,” and evade them. That happens in all circumstances; it just moves the problem somewhere else.
I respectfully disagree with Christine Grahame. I understand her point—that we cannot swamp one area with police and move the problem to a different area. However, the approach that I described is part of the solution. I am perfectly happy to send her a copy of my justice paper, because I think that she would enjoy it. Part of the solution is to have more visible policing and patrols, particularly on our high streets, such as Union Street, because that will ensure that such behaviour is not perpetrated there. Nonetheless, Christine Grahame is absolutely right that there needs to be a whole-city and whole-system approach, and that is what she will find in my justice paper.
Scottish Conservatives absolutely would target the organised crime and vehicle-based offending that Sue Webber identified and would make it easier to disrupt the gangs. As Clare Adamson said, we must ensure that there are real consequences for repeat offenders, and we must address the issue of community payback orders being breached.
I congratulate Sue Webber on lodging the motion. This is a real issue for the people of Scotland. I know that our police do their absolute best, but let us use the powers that we have in the Parliament to back them and give those in our justice system the resources and the tools that they need.
18:19
I thank Sue Webber for securing the debate and raising the important issues that her motion highlights. It is good to hear cross-party agreement from Clare Adamson and Liam Kerr, who I know both campaign on issues of community and public safety.
I want to speak in the debate because the issue of e-scooters has been coming up a lot in my local communities. It has been raised by local constituents—last week, it was raised by some local postal workers, who were almost victims of e-scooters at the hands of very young children. They described a situation where it was quite dark and the postie was nearly knocked off his feet. For me, it is a matter of community safety and public health.
We have very recently had some stark warnings from Police Scotland and from medics at the Royal hospital for children in Glasgow. I was concerned to read that, between May and October this year, more than 30 children required emergency care at the Royal hospital for children—that is an increase from four cases in the same period last year.
Mark Lilley, who is the major trauma co-ordinator at the hospital, said:
“We know eScooters are popular and may feature on many Christmas wish lists, but the risks are significant.”
Some of the injuries that have been sustained by children aged between seven and 14 include
“major head trauma, broken femurs, chest injuries, and severe lacerations.”
Those are really serious matters.
In the conversations that I have had locally, people describe near misses. I am not asserting that those incidents are actually recorded anywhere, but one man told me that his wife was almost knocked over by an e-scooter on the street, and he has a very young grandchild. They are very concerned about the issue.
There is a wider point about policing. I think that people want more visibility from the police, and they want to know who is in their community policing team. With regard to resources for police officers, we need to ensure that our police are safely equipped to deal with these matters. I understand that if there is an incident involving an e-scooter or an e-bike, the police need to respond to that in a safe manner.
I hear what Liam Kerr says about his party’s response on these matters, but Anas Sarwar has very recently made it clear that the issue has to be a higher priority, and Scottish Labour has set out our plans on resourcing our police and making sure that we have clarity about community policing in every ward. I think that that is what the public wish to hear.
Monica Lennon might also be very interested in my justice paper. Would she like me to send it over after the debate?
I am always looking for bedtime reading, particularly when I am struggling to get to sleep at night. [Laughter.] Liam Kerr knows how to get the paper to me.
Those serious points are well made. We all understand that, with regard to young people and children, it is illegal for anyone under the age of 14 to ride an e-bike in Scotland, and privately owned e-scooters cannot be used legally on public roads, pavements, cycle lanes or other public spaces. We want our pavements, streets and communities to be safe for everyone. In the wrong hands, used in the wrong place, these e-scooters and e-bikes can be dangerous weapons.
I am not trying to ruin the spirit of Christmas, but I know that parents are under real pressure to buy these e-scooters for their children. I was recently upgrading my mobile phone in a local electrical store in Hamilton that sells household goods as well, and the minute you walk in the door, there is an array of e-scooters in front of you, and parents feel real pressure. We need everyone, including retailers, to be responsible. However, I would like to hear from the minister today on the point about policing, because I feel that the big issue is a lack of enforcement. I will leave that point with the minister.
18:24
I thank my colleague Sue Webber for bringing this important debate to the chamber. Her motion highlights the growing problem of the dangerous and antisocial use of e-bikes and e-scooters, and I welcome the fact that Parliament finally has the opportunity to debate the issue. The dangers that we are seeing from these vehicles are becoming a frequent concern in many communities. Members are quite right to highlight that they are hearing about many such issues from concerned constituents.
It is true that the problem appears to be worse in our large cities—Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Dundee and Glasgow—but it is also clear that the problem is not confined to urban areas. Concerns have been raised repeatedly across my region about these vehicles, in areas such as Clackmannanshire, Stirling, Fife and Perthshire.
Earlier this year, a 19-year-old was arrested after a collision involving an e-bike in the village of Fallin, in Stirlingshire. Accidents are happening regularly, and individuals are requiring medical attention. We often hear reports of these vehicles being ridden dangerously along pavements and paths, and—as we have heard this evening—the riders wear balaclavas or face coverings to conceal their identity.
Despite the fact that it is illegal, as we have heard from other members, these vehicles are becoming an increasingly common sight on our streets and pathways.
In the previous decade, we became used to seeing motorised scooters being used for crime, including in drive-by thefts and vandalism. Those scooters were small, manoeuvrable and fast, and they were easy to get hold of and to get rid of. For many criminals, they were an ideal partner in crime. E-bikes and e-scooters are smaller and more nimble to manoeuvre, and they are better able to be modified, which makes them even more dangerous and fearsome. Naturally, that means that it is even harder for the police to deal with them, and they are sometimes difficult to trace. Vehicles have to be designed in a better way to ensure that we manage that.
There are areas—across many constituencies and regions, as we have heard—that are quickly becoming known for these problems. A tough approach from Police Scotland is needed to tackle the issue. In some cases, it will also require innovation from Police Scotland, because new technology often calls for new approaches. I look forward to hearing whether the minister, along with Police Scotland, is considering any new approaches to tackle the issue.
As Sue Webber’s motion highlights, Police Scotland’s approach should include seizing these vehicles permanently, without giving them back; we do not want them to be returned. The use of CCTV in crime hotspots also has a role to play. I am aware that the Scottish Government has been encouraging further anonymous reporting of these vehicles through the Crimestoppers service. That is also a valuable tool, but further measures have to be put in place to ensure that there are tough consequences for these individuals if they are using e-scooters and e-bikes. Local police must be allowed to tackle the issue in the way that they see fit, in order to manage their communities.
As I have said, we also need political leadership on the issue. The bikes can move at excessive speeds, and they run the risk of starting battery fires. They are dangerous to our communities and to individuals.
In conclusion, the onus is on the Scottish Government and Scottish National Party ministers to come up with a detailed, comprehensive action plan and to ensure that Police Scotland is given the resources that it needs to take those actions. The public are demanding action to keep communities safe, and it is our important responsibility, as MSPs, to provide that. It is high time that people were listened to and that a plan was delivered and acted on.
18:28
I was not going to contribute, but I have managed to get some free time this evening and it is a very important debate. I agree with much that Sue Webber said, but I will start with the “Highway Code”, which is UK wide. If you look up e-bikes, it says that you do not need a licence, and the bike does not need to be registered, taxed or insured—presumably, along with all that, it does not need to have an MOT.
We start from that position. If we had a registration or licensing system and addressed all the other issues such as insurance, we would be starting with a sound grounding, rather than simply saying that we need more police.
Does Christine Grahame understand that the position that she describes is because those vehicles are not legal on the roads? It is vehicles on our roads that require those things, so if we required e-bikes to have licences, MOTs and so on, that would actually put the problem legitimately on our roads.
They are illegal on pavements, but they are actually legal on roads. If you look at the “Highway Code”, which I have looked at carefully, you will see that they can go wherever a bicycle can go, and bicycles are legal on our roads. Of course, bicycles are in the same boat—you do not need a licence to have an ordinary bike. I ask the member simply to look at that.
However, I absolutely do not dispute that they are a menace, not just because of their speed but because of the way that they are driven. Much depends on defensive driving by motorists to evade them when they are weaving in and out of traffic. The riders deliberately make themselves menacing—macho, if you like—by being dressed in black. That adds another problem: apart from all the other problems, you cannot see them.
Most of the time—and sometimes for other cyclists—it is almost impossible to see them until you are just about upon them, quite apart from the weaving in and out. Even a cyclist, under the “Highway Code”, is supposed to have a front light and, at the back, not just a reflector light but a red flashing light so that they can be seen. Many of the e-bikes do not have that. I would start, therefore, with simple, practical things such as licensing and so on, and enforcing the requirements in the “Highway Code”.
Obviously policing helps, but I have concerns about that approach. Again, I make the point that it might be all right in town centres, but you will come across these vehicles when you are driving along the Portobello Road or coming through Holyrood park, and you cannot expect police to be on patrol all the time. The vehicles are not just there; they are delivering for various food chains and so on, so we have to consider the issue everywhere.
I will be interested to hear what the minister has to say about how the police are tackling the issue, but I would also like to know whether the Scottish Government is in conversation with the UK Government—this is not a hostile point, or a matter of what is or is not devolved—about how we can strengthen the requirements for the owners of these vehicles to have a licence; to be registered, taxed and insured; and to have an MOT, which every one of us with a vehicle needs to have. That would be a start.
Will the member take an intervention?
Yes, I will take the intervention, although I was about to sit down.
I think that the problem—as my motion should perhaps have intimated—is illegal use, or illegal e-bikes. All the issues arise when they hit speeds of 15 mph and above.
I also have concerns about Deliveroo riders—other food providers are available—but that is perhaps for a separate debate.
Yes, I appreciate that there are restrictions in the definition of a e-bike, and limitations on speed, but we know that the riders break those.
All of that would be part of it. If a rider was licensed, we would simply remove their licence, as we would do with anybody else who uses our roads if they were abusing the highway code and causing accidents and so on. We should consider that aspect as well. I am not completely opposed to policing in urban areas and pedestrian centres where there may be particular issues. However, with regard to general road usage, I would like to see these vehicles have to fulfil the requirements under the UK “Highway Code”, including the requirement for licensing.
18:32
I, too, thank my colleague Sue Webber for bringing this important debate to the chamber—
Can we have your microphone up, please?
Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.
In the past few months, I have had near misses from a souped-up e-scooter or e-bike in Edinburgh. One morning, I came into the office and said to my colleague Sue Webber, “I was nearly knocked over by a bike last night in the Meadows, and it was a souped-up e-bike.” She said, “Well, I’ve got a members’ business debate coming up,” so I am delighted to be speaking today.
Sometimes, in Edinburgh in the evening, it feels like there is a scary swarm of riders, many with balaclavas and no lights on their machines. I ask members to imagine what that would be like if they were partially sighted. The training centre for Guide Dogs Scotland is in Forfar, in my region, and the organisation has a campaign called scoot aware to raise awareness of the alarming effect of e-scooters on people with sight loss.
As we have heard today, fast, heavy and powerful e-scooters are being ridden in an antisocial way, and that is already having a significant and detrimental impact on the lives of people with sight loss. E-scooters can reach high speeds and are relatively silent. One guide dog owner said:
“My guide dog ... and I were ... hit by a rider. I could hear two voices getting closer and the next thing I knew I was hit with such a force that I was knocked over”
the dog.
One of my constituents in Aberdeen said to me:
“E-scooters and bikes are a genuine hazard on the pavement for guide dog owners. My dog’s harness was clipped recently as a rider passed much too close. I have a young dog, not yet three, and he now stops when he is aware of a rider in front or even coming from behind. I carry third party insurance and it would be good if cyclists and e-scooter riders were similarly insured. At least if I was injured, my care home costs would be paid. A collision is a daunting prospect for me and I would appreciate you writing to local councils in respect of stopping parking on pavements and e-scooters and bikes. The sooner riders and drivers are made aware of just how hazardous this is and the effects of isolation, because they are afraid to go out, on visually impaired folks, the better.”
According to research by Guide Dogs, 78 per cent of people with sight loss had had a negative experience with e-scooters, 80 per cent had had an e-scooter rush past and frighten them, 12 per cent reported that their guide dog had been disturbed by an e-scooter, 10 per cent had been hit by an e-scooter and 2 per cent had been hit and injured by an e-scooter. The number of people who have already been involved in a collision is deeply worrying. Those results are deeply alarming. I am delighted that Guide Dogs has contributed to my speech, because I feel that it is very important for the minister to hear that research.
It is important to note that, in July 2020, the United Kingdom Government introduced e-scooter trials in England. The trials were originally due to end in November 2021, but they have been extended, with the latest extension going to May 2028. Action from the Scottish Government is long overdue. The problem simply cannot be ignored.
18:36
I, too, thank Sue Webber for securing the debate on this important issue. I agree with my colleague Monica Lennon that the debate is timely, given that, at this point in the year, more e-bikes might be being bought. People must think of the consequences.
We are hearing a common story from representatives around Scotland. People across my home city of Dundee are concerned about the growth in antisocial and criminal behaviour that is facilitated by e-bikes. Just this weekend, residents in Ardler explained to me the menace that is being caused in their community by people recklessly driving e-bikes at high speed. Last week, I spoke with residents in Kirkton who are being menaced by people driving e-bikes at speeds of up to 50mph in built-up areas, racing through red lights, riding on pavements and intimidating other road users.
A few months ago, I was overtaken on Riverside Drive in Dundee by two young men—boys, really—who were doing wheelies at more than 30mph, putting themselves and other road users in huge danger. As with the experiences to which other members have testified, those riders were in black clothing, with their faces covered, so it was impossible for the police to identify them, and it was frightening for children and residents to witness them.
No training, no licence and no insurance are required for what are vehicles that can travel as fast as a car in residential areas. They pose a real danger in our communities. According to UK Government data, 1,312 collisions involving e-scooters were reported in the UK in 2024, and six people were killed in collisions last year.
The cumulative impact of such behaviour on our communities is significant. People feel that our streets are not safe, parents are worried when their kids go out, and older people are hesitant to leave their houses.
Recently, I dealt with a case of damage resulting from a police chase involving e-bikes in Strathmartine, in Dundee. Such damage is being done to our communities by reckless users of e-bikes, and overstretched councils are having to do additional work to clean up the mess that those users leave behind.
As other members have testified, it is impossible for the police to identify such e-bike riders, because they often wear black clothing and cover their faces. That leaves local people with the feeling that those riders are untouchable and there is no way of dealing with them. The sheer number of racers and bikers is overwhelming, and the police seem to be unable to pursue them and sanction them accordingly.
I might have misheard Michael Marra, but I thought that I heard him show a certain degree of sympathy for my proposition that e-bikes should be licensed, registered, taxed and insured. As well as allowing users to be traced, that would act as a deterrent in relation to the way in which some users behave.
I have some level of sympathy for that proposition applying to the different forms of vehicles that are being used. We must get a grip on their general use. Many of them are illegally imported and, frankly, will not be taxed or licensed appropriately. We must get a grip on their proliferation in society, by whatever means. The grey areas that members have described, such as those in the highway code—where the vehicles can and cannot be used, and where their illegality depends on the speed that they can do—are some of the issues that need to be navigated, to ensure that we can deal with their proliferation.
People feel that those who use these vehicles are untouchable, so we need Police Scotland to be equipped with the tools and the resources to enable it to tackle the issues straight on.
Scottish Labour has a plan to restore local policing and deliver a named community and crime prevention officer in every community across Scotland. Alongside their colleagues in the force, those officers will work with local councillors to identify opportunities to reduce crime and respond to local incidents.
Scottish Labour also wants to ensure that the police are locally accountable, with a statutory requirement for councils to be consulted on local policing plans and to take evidence from local policing divisions, all of which, I believe, will help to tackle localised issues such as the dangerous use of e-bikes and e-scooters and dealing with those who engage in such behaviour. For far too long, our police officers have been neglected and our communities let down. That must change.
18:41
I congratulate my friend and colleague Sue Webber on securing this important and, I believe, timely debate. I place on record my entry in the register of members’ interests, which notes that my wife is a police sergeant in Moray.
I want to focus on the impact that the issue has had, and continues to have, in Moray. However, I must start with Christine Grahame’s proposal. If she believes in any way that there is consensus in the chamber on her proposal, she should count me out.
My local police divisional commander disagrees with Christine Grahame. Chief Inspector Mike McKenzie, who is the local area commander for Moray, wrote:
“E-scooters cannot be legally registered by the DVLA, which means they are illegal to use on public roads.”
He is very clear—[Interruption.] If Christine Grahame wants to come in, I will give way to her in a second, but—[Interruption.] In a second. I am sorry. I will give way once I have made the point that I want to put to Christine Grahame, which is that—I say this with the greatest respect—even if she disagrees with Chief Inspector McKenzie, it is naive in the extreme to say that licensing, taxing and registering the vehicles will solve the problems. The people who will do all of that are not the ones who are currently using those vehicles on public roads. They are the ones who are buying them to be used off road, in fields and so on. The ones who are causing the problems will not suddenly, overnight, start registering their vehicles, which will then solve the problems. I am sorry, but I do not agree that that is the solution.
I respectfully give way to Christine Grahame.
I know that the member is keen to have clarity in the chamber. I was speaking about e-bikes; I did not mention e-scooters. The fact is that what I said about e-bikes is the case. Although an e-bike is defined as being limited to speeds of no more than 15mph, we know that many such bikes can be adapted. The safest approach is to require the same kind of rules for e-bikes as we require for motorists’ vehicles.
I will come on to that. However, you will need to help me to do so, Presiding Officer—the clock is ticking.
Indeed. If you could take us up to 6.46, that would be helpful.
Okay—that is fine.
I was speaking about e-scooters. If Christine Grahame was speaking about e-bikes, I apologise.
However, going back to my original point, I do not believe that simply requiring people to get licences and regulating their vehicles in some way will solve the problems. I believe that the people who will do things properly are the ones who buy e-bikes and e-scooters for the right reason, which is not to use them on the road. They will not be the ones who are causing the problems, and the people who are causing them will simply ignore that guidance.
Consequently, we need to get to the bottom of the policing issue, which I want to focus on. I would be interested to know whether the minister is aware of how often Police Scotland pursues such vehicles. Michael Marra mentioned that damage was done following a police pursuit. My understanding is that such pursuits are relatively rare. To go back to Liam Kerr’s point, the police are worried about pursuing such vehicles, because if the offenders, who are on illegal vehicles—whether they be scooters or e-bikes—fall off and are injured, the police are potentially liable, as they entered into a pursuit. I would be interested to know what discussions the minister has had with Police Scotland about what police officers can do to pursue such vehicles and those who use them.
I also said that this is quite a timely debate. If people leave their Christmas shopping as late as I have, they will still be going about it. I believe that, when some parents are buying these e-scooters and e-bikes, they are unaware that they are illegal. Christine Grahame wants more legislation, but I just want people to understand the legislation that is in place at the moment and that these vehicles are not suitable as gifts, because of all the problems that we have discussed.
Chief Inspector McKenzie went on to say that
“anyone purchasing an e-scooter has a responsibility to be aware of the law and the implications of using one in a public space.”
I think that too many people are unaware of that.
Clare Adamson made a very good point about batteries. Councillor David Gordon, chair of Moray Council’s planning and regulatory services committee, echoed that point when he said:
“E-scooters are powered by lithium-ion batteries and in recent years some people have unknowingly bought unsafe or counterfeit models that fail to meet UK safety standards—with tragic consequences.”
He went on to say that people should know exactly what they are bringing into their homes. He explained:
“Unregulated devices can pose a serious fire risk.”
The problems in communities have been well articulated, and we have experienced those in Moray. We have also seen the problem with batteries, some of which are potentially counterfeit, that are coming into people’s homes. That is a disaster waiting to happen. We have seen the tragic consequences of the use of such e-scooters and e-bikes. Therefore, we need tougher enforcement. We need to get the message out from this debate that e-scooters and e-bikes are not toys that are suitable for people to purchase and place under the Christmas tree—they are dangerous vehicles that are wreaking havoc. I would like to hear from the Scottish Government what it will do to ensure that action is taken and that the police can do their job by tackling such crimes.
18:46
I thank Sue Webber for bringing the debate to Parliament and all members for their contributions highlighting the dangerous and antisocial use of e-bikes and e-scooters in our communities.
Sue Webber highlighted recent incidents in Edinburgh and also across the UK. Members have highlighted serious concerns, and the Scottish Government shares those concerns. Several members here have been at various meetings on the work that I and minister Jim Fairlie have been doing on this issue all year.
We share members’ concerns about issues including riders travelling well above the speed limit, intimidating conduct, impacts on public confidence and, of course, injuries to people. Police Scotland’s recent partnership with the Royal hospital for children in Glasgow highlighted a rise in serious injuries associated with e-bikes, and that must be addressed. That is why its recent work to share key messages about this issue, whether in person at the hospital, through press or on social media, is so important, particularly as we approach the festive period.
As Monica Lennon highlighted, people should think twice before buying e-scooters or e-bikes for children and should remember that it is illegal to use e-scooters in public spaces in Scotland. Many high-powered vehicles bought online are not legal for use on public roads, so they can be extremely dangerous, especially for our children.
Police Scotland has also made it clear that anyone riding a non-compliant e-bike or e-scooter on the public road is likely to have it seized by officers. Members are well aware that policing in Scotland is operationally independent. However, I agree with colleagues across the chamber that robust police action is a critical part of the response to the illegal use of or action resulting from e-bikes and e-scooters.
At the end of last week, a constituent spoke to me about the fact that cameras had been removed from lights in the Hyndland area of Glasgow. He feels that that is a danger to road users because police are less often able to see what is going on. Is the minister is aware of that issue, and would she like to work with me to address it?
We have on-going conversations with Police Scotland. That specific issue has not been highlighted to me, but I will be happy to discuss it with Pam Duncan-Glancy as we take this forward.
In exchanges in the chamber last week, we discussed an initiative whereby City of Edinburgh Council is looking to deploy mobile closed-circuit television cameras in hotspots. Does the minister agree that that approach might be ramped up and brought out nationally?
Yes. I was going to get to that issue, but I will raise it now. I think that it was raised during general question time last week. The issue is really complex. It is about deciding how we should approach it, because the situation is different in rural areas and in cities such as Glasgow and Edinburgh.
For example, City of Edinburgh Council has led the way with a multi-agency approach, although I believe that the focus was more on the use of quad bikes and motorbikes in parks and green spaces. The approach taken elsewhere could be very different, and there will be variations in what different councils can do, but that council could be leading the way with that example of a multi-agency approach. After all, I do not believe that this is a matter just for Police Scotland; there has to be a joined-up approach, and I think that some learning can definitely be taken from what the City of Edinburgh Council did last week.
I just want to mention a few examples that members have highlighted today. When I and the Minister for Agriculture and Connectivity met His Majesty’s chief inspector of constabulary on the antisocial use of vehicles several weeks ago, we discussed HMICS’s recent review of roads policing, as well as the powers that Police Scotland officers have in relation to the antisocial use of e-bikes and other vehicles. I was pleased to note that a planned review of community policing is to take place next year, and I encourage anyone who might have useful evidence to engage with the inspector on that.
We also discussed officers’ work with colleagues at the Royal hospital for sick children, which has seen a significant increase in injuries relating to antisocial use of these vehicles. I and Mr Fairlie will meet the chief inspector again in the new year to get a deeper understanding of work that is happening on the ground.
With regard to members’ comments on Police Scotland’s powers, throughout the year we have had discussions with the police, in which they have advised that the current powers under the Road Traffic Act 1988 and the Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Act 2004 are sufficient to respond to the misuse of off-road vehicles. However, the Government remains committed to doing all that we can to support enforcement, and we are open to further legislation action, if required.
I might have misheard, but I think that the minister referred to off-road vehicles. E-bikes are, of course, on-road forms of transport.
It is a complex issue. We are looking at all off-road and on-road vehicles, anyone using these vehicles in parks or on roads, and delivery drivers, too.
Police Scotland is carrying out work on its vehicle seizure and disposal powers, including the retention period that I know that members have raised in our on-going meetings, and we are working closely with key stakeholders to understand the current landscape. That work will build on changes that the Home Office is exploring with regard to reserved legislation on vehicle seizure. Indeed, I think that a consultation on that has recently finished.
I reassure members that I and Mr Fairlie will continue to ensure that Police Scotland and the Scottish Police Authority are fully aware of the concerns being brought to Parliament. Members have expressed a desire for a robust policing approach across Scotland that will reduce unwarranted variation. That expectation is entirely reasonable; indeed, ministers are reflecting it in discussions with both the SPA and Police Scotland.
Beyond policing, members will recognise that this is a complex challenge, and I can say that we are acting in other areas, too.
Will the minister give way?
I am just conscious that I am coming up to the seven-minute mark, Presiding Officer. Will I get this time back?
I can give you the time back.
I thank the minister very much for taking my intervention. I know that Mr Stewart has mentioned Crimestoppers, but my local police have been working with Neighbourhood Watch Scotland, too. I know that that will bring back images from the 1970s, of curtain twitching and so on, but, like everything else, that initiative has gone online. It has the neighbourhood alert system, which not only alerts those who have signed up about incidents that are happening in their area, but provides a point for reporting such incidents. That gives the police the data to map some of the hotspots and the times at which these things happen.
I know that Neighbourhood Watch is sharing that information with my local police force, but I am not sure about the situation across the rest of the country. Therefore, I think that it would be worth members looking into that and encouraging their constituents to sign up to be part of that process.
Minister, I can give you some of that time back.
Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I thank Clare Adamson for highlighting that aspect. It is something that we could all be doing in our constituencies and our regions.
As I was saying, beyond policing, members will recognise that this is a complex challenge, so we are acting in other areas, too. For example, with regard to delivery platforms, several members have raised legitimate concerns about the behaviour of some riders in the food economy. Jim Fairlie and I have reached out to the major delivery companies to discuss expectations with regard to safety, compliance and responsible conduct. I should say that we have just done that, and we are waiting for them to get back to us about having a meeting with them. In any case, companies operating in Scotland are expected to play their part in keeping our streets and communities safe.
As members will know, the Government has undertaken national communication activities to complement local efforts, and statutory local antisocial behaviour strategies, which are the responsibility of councils and Police Scotland, can encompass tackling e-bike and e-scooter misuse, too, as well as preventative work. Members will agree that investment in prevention can help to address the underlying causes of the behaviours that members have described. That is why we continue to invest in the cashback for communities programme, which has provided crucial early intervention to more than 15,000 young people.
I am aware that I am running out of time, so I will move on to the key issue of product safety. As many members will know, many of the most dangerous e-bikes entering the market are imported; they are high-powered models that do not comply with UK standards, and my officials are working with the Office for Product Safety and Standards as it implements the new Product Regulation and Metrology Act 2025 and strengthens controls. Although the Scottish and UK Governments differ on some issues—for example, licensing for off-road vehicles—there is significant common ground, and I want to work constructively on this shared challenge where we can.
Let me address the specific point in Sue Webber’s motion about face coverings—
Very briefly, minister.
Of course, if anyone feels threatened or unsafe in public places, they should contact the police. We have sought views from Police Scotland on whether further powers might be required in relation to the criminal use of face coverings, and we have been advised that, at this time, additional powers are not needed. However, we will keep the legislation under review.
In closing, I thank members for their contributions. I commit to ensuring that the issues that have been raised are discussed with the SPA and Police Scotland, and to engaging with members as we address this challenge and maintain our collective focus on keeping people safe.
That concludes the debate.
Meeting closed at 18:56.Previous
Decision Time