Chamber and committees

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.

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.

The Public Audit Committee’s unanimous report on Ferguson Marine is a damning indictment of SNP incompetence and failures in ministerial accountability. The SNP’s nationalisation of Ferguson Marine has resulted in islanders having to wait for delayed ferries and taxpayers having to foot the bill for the ballooning costs of new vessels. Since the yard was nationalised in 2019, the Scottish Government has poured more than £500 million of taxpayers’ money into this fiasco. What do we have to show for it? Two ferries—not quite two, remember—that are years late, are massively over budget and have still not been delivered.

The latest figures are staggering: £47.9 million has been allocated for 2025-26, including £38 million for the MV Glen Rosa and £9 million for yard improvements; an additional £14.2 million has been allocated for modernisation; and the forecast cost of the MV Glen Rosa now sits at £185 million, up from £150 million last year. That is not just mismanagement; it is a scandal.

The SNP promised island communities lifeline ferries back in 2018. Instead, the MV Glen Sannox entered service six years late, and the MV Glen Rosa will not be delivered until quarter 2 of 2026—which is getting closer and closer, by the way—a full decade after the original contract. Meanwhile, businesses on Arran and the Western Isles suffer, and confidence in the Government collapses.

The Public Audit Committee’s report exposes systemic failures: internal audit was so weak that assurance on governance could not be provided; exit packages exceeding £95,000 were paid without ministerial approval; and contractor arrangements bypassed board oversight, leaving the yard liable for £48,000 to HMRC.

What has been the SNP’s response? More money, more excuses and still no ferries. Douglas Ross said it best when he said:

“This is the SNP’s ferry fiasco—an embarrassment that has cost taxpayers hundreds of millions while islanders are left stranded. Ministers must stop hiding behind excuses and start taking responsibility.”

As I have said previously, it should be a given that a nationalised shipyard wins a Scottish Government contract, but ferries that should be being built on the west coast of Scotland are instead being made in eastern Europe.

Beyond the numbers lies the human cost. Ena Burke, from Arran, told reporters:

“When you live on an island the ferry rules your life. It puts huge pressure on us. You find yourself sitting there crying, thinking I can’t go through this anymore.”

Local business owner Morag Kinniburgh said:

“People are saying they won’t be back until the ferries are fixed because they can’t risk being stranded. My takings are down 20 per cent—tourists have heard the horror stories and stayed away.”

Barb Toab, from the Arran ferry action group, summed it all up by saying:

“We’ve gone beyond frustrated. We feel like we’ve been abused and ignored by the very people supposed to have our best interests at heart.”

The committee is clear on what must happen next. First, Ferguson Marine and the Scottish Government must immediately publish a revised business plan and strategy to set out how the yard will secure sustainable work beyond that on the MV Glen Rosa. Secondly, all future investment must be subject to transparent governance and rigorous value-for-money checks, with clear monitoring of outcomes. Thirdly, the Government must implement stronger oversight and accountability to prevent further cost overruns, including by providing a detailed plan to deliver the MV Glen Rosa without any further delay.

This fiasco is not about shipbuilding. It is about trust. It is about a Government that cannot deliver its most basic promises. The SNP’s failures have left islanders isolated, taxpayers fleeced and Scotland’s reputation for shipbuilding in tatters. The Scottish Conservatives demand clear ministerial accountability for every penny that is spent and every broken promise. A revolving door of transport ministers, chief executive officers and chairmen, along with the lack of a coherent business plan, means that the future of Ferguson Marine is uncertain, and the blame lies with the SNP Government. Enough is enough. The time for excuses is over—it is time for answers.

Will the member take an intervention?

Ferguson Marine’s future depends on it independently securing work both from the United Kingdom and overseas. It is a Scottish National Party Government-owned yard, so what action is the First Minister taking to ensure that it is competitive, restores its reputation for delivering projects on time and under budget, and can procure its own work rather than relying on a direct award?

I thank the minister for that response and for the letter that I received on Monday. She has used some of the content of that letter to respond to me and to Mr Hoy this afternoon.

Local authorities are already strained in trying to provide funding for youth work, and police budgets are stretched. Although I welcome the initiatives and operations that local authorities and the police are conducting, gangs and criminals have unlimited resources, and we need more than the occasional police operation—we need a serious plan that is targeted at this growing threat to public safety on our streets. Will the minister commit to prioritising that?

To ask the Scottish Government how it plans to respond to the reported increase in antisocial behaviour and criminality associated with people using e-bikes. (S6O-05241)

Section 11 proposes repealing paragraph (a) of section 48 of the 2002 act, which prevents the Scottish Information Commissioner from investigating how its office handles information requests. What is your rationale for removing that specific restriction?

The bill does not provide for the repeal of paragraphs (b) and (c) of section 48 of the 2002 act, which prevent the Scottish Information Commissioner from investigating the handling of appeals about the handling of information requests by a procurator fiscal or the Lord Advocate in their capacity as head of criminal prosecution and investigation of deaths in Scotland. Why was repeal of paragraphs (b) and (c) not included in the bill, even though consultation on that was recommended in session 5 of the Parliament?

You are referring to a bit of a behavioural or cultural change.