Debate contribution: Antisocial Scrambler and e-Scooter Use

Debate contribution by Mr Brian Kingston on 21 April 2026.

MLA

Mr Brian Kingston

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

21 April 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Opposition Business

Heading

Antisocial Scrambler and e-Scooter Use

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5497717

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. On behalf of the DUP, I rise to propose our amendment, which takes nothing away from the SDLP motion but adds some important action points that we hope all parties will support. The misuse of small motorised vehicles in public spaces is a growing danger for everyone, including those who ride them. For over 25 years, communities such as mine in North Belfast have suffered from the inappropriate use of petrol scramblers and quad bikes on public roads, footpaths and grassed areas, where they cause immense damage and a danger to the public. Such vehicles are not permitted in parks, nor are they to be used on public roads unless they abide by the same regulations as any other motorised vehicle; that is, be registered with a number plate, have their road tax paid, be the subject of an insurance policy, and be approved as roadworthy, including working lights and indicators. Without those, they should only be used on private land, with the permission of the landowner. In recent years, the invention and inappropriate use of electric scooters and scramblers has taken things to another level and greatly increased the danger that is posed. I expect that all Members have seen young people using those vehicles on roads and footpaths irresponsibly, including without lights on dark nights, posing a risk to themselves and to pedestrians and motorists. It is clear that legislation needs to keep up with that growing danger and that it is not currently doing so in Northern Ireland. Recently, I submitted an Assembly question for written answer to the Justice Minister, asking for her assessment of the adequacy of existing legislation in that regard. My colleagues Phillip Brett and David Brooks have submitted similar questions for written answer to the Minister, pointing in particular to clause 8 of the Crime and Policing Bill, as currently amended, in England and Wales.

In her reply, the Minister of Justice stated that her Department:

"will consider the need to make equivalent changes to the vehicle seizure regime in Northern Ireland, in consultation with the Police Service for Northern Ireland and the Department for Infrastructure."

We now need to see action on that undertaking. I have raised the matter many times with senior police officers. They have told me that they avoid engaging in high-speed chases with the drivers of such vehicles, owing to the danger involved to all, but they do seek to identify ownership and to seize vehicles that are being used inappropriately. Our amendment therefore highlights the benefit to the PSNI of providing it with resources for drone-equipped officers to gather evidence and identify ownership. Our amendment also calls for the introduction of legislation that emulates clause 8 of the Crime and Policing Bill, as currently amended, in England and Wales. The clause removes the requirement for officers to issue a warning before seizing a vehicle that is being driven antisocially and illegally. Currently, when owners make a legal challenge to have seized vehicles returned, it often succeeds, resulting in more antisocial behaviour, owing to the inadequacy of current police powers in Northern Ireland. We should also all be concerned about the cost to the PSNI of storing seized vehicles that have not yet been destroyed. The Minister is aware of proposals to reduce the disposal time frames for seized vehicles. The question remains of whether she plans to explore similar legislation for Northern Ireland. We should move to allow the destruction of confiscated vehicles or to deprive the user of them permanently. Small fines are proven to be ineffective if users have such vehicles for involvement in crime, as some do. Education initiatives, including the motorcycle action project (MAP) in west Belfast, have been undertaken across communities in Northern Ireland to inform the public about the use of scramblers and e-scooters. That successful work should continue and be encouraged. Many Members have no doubt attended road safety roadshows that are run in partnership with local policing and community safety partnerships (PCSPs) to make young people aware of road dangers. The use of scramblers and e-scooters should be incorporated into those already successful events. We also cannot overlook the role of parental responsibility in ensuring that such vehicles, when purchased for their children, are used legally. There may be a lack of awareness among parents of the law surrounding e-scooters in particular: a lack of awareness about where they can be used, about who can use them and about how they should not be used in public spaces such as roads, footpaths and parks. Mandatory registration of the vehicles at the point of sale, as we propose, would also make it clear to owners and parents that they are not toys and, when misused, can have serious consequences. I commend our amendment to the House.

803 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:25 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification