Debate contribution: Antisocial Scrambler and e-Scooter Use
Debate contribution by Mr Andrew Muir on .
- MLA
- Mr Andrew Muir
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 21 April 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Opposition Business
- Heading
- Antisocial Scrambler and e-Scooter Use
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5497956
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member for his intervention. I am aware of statutory bodies' responsibilities, but when it comes to private landowners' responsibilities, I will need to speak to you in a bit more detail about the specifics. I know of a location in the Strangford constituency where scramblers are used on a private landowner's land, but that is done in an organised fashion. That shows understanding of the importance of the sport, but it is also done to keep people safe and to protect the wider environment. It therefore can be done, but if scramblers are being used on a private landowner's land, there will be civil powers to address that. I am happy to discuss the matter with you. Alternatively, you may wish to write to the Justice Minister to seek clarity on the specifics of the incident to which you referred, because I am not aware of it. The DUP amendment to the motion:
"calls on the Minister of Justice to introduce mandatory registration at the point of sale".
Members will be aware that vehicle registration is primarily administered by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) UK-wide, and the UK Government do not appear to have any definitive plans to introduce registration at the point of sale. Other jurisdictions, however, such as the Republic of Ireland and Germany, have started to move away from a reliance on the traditional enforcement model, which focuses on police intervention, towards the introduction of a stronger regulatory framework. The Justice Minister is aware that police forces in England, Wales and Scotland have used drones as a tactical tool to tackle the illegal and antisocial use of scramblers, e-scooters and e-bikes. The amendment calls for that to happen here. In Northern Ireland, the use of drones to tackle antisocial use of vehicles is an operational matter for the Police Service of Northern Ireland, and it is a matter of public record that the PSNI has operated drones since 2013 to help detect, prevent and investigate crime. The deployment of such resources is an operational matter for the Chief Constable to consider, so it would not be appropriate for the Justice Minister to comment further or to direct the use of drones for particular types of crime. As my colleague Nuala McAllister said, there is an opportunity to raise that issue for further scrutiny through the Policing Board. Developments in other jurisdictions demonstrate not just the need to ensure that adequate enforcement powers are available to the police but the key role that robust regulation of such vehicles through road safety legislation plays. That is why it is vital that any government response to the issue comprehensively considers the need for change in both areas of the law and why the Justice Minister has committed to working with the Minister for Infrastructure to ensure that any necessary amendments to the law in Northern Ireland are identified. It is important to note that any such amendments would require both primary and secondary legislation to be enacted and would cut across the responsibilities of the Department of Justice and the Department for Infrastructure. Given the limited time left in the mandate, and the current legislative agenda, the Justice Minister sincerely does not believe that any such changes are possible before the next Assembly mandate.
I thank the Member for her intervention. Yes, powers are in place, and it is important that they are used. There is a wider societal issue, which has been raised throughout the debate, about the need for people, particularly parents, to understand the risks associated with e-scooters, given their availability for purchase online at relatively low cost, which are to do with not just road safety but, as has been highlighted by the relevant statutory bodies, the risk of fire in houses. A wider collective approach is required to the use of existing legislation and the consideration of any new legislation in the next mandate. The Justice Minister believes that it is important to await the outcome of the recent Home Office consultation to ensure that any amendments are comprehensive. It is important that the House understands that, if we are to bring something forward, it needs to do the job. As I said, the Justice Minister remains committed to working collectively with the Department for Infrastructure to introduce any necessary amendments as soon as possible. In conclusion, I hope that the Assembly recognises that the issue cannot be adequately addressed by the police and the justice system alone. Enforcement powers must be complemented by accompanying regulations that properly restrict the illegal use of the vehicles on our roads and in public spaces. It is also vital that recreational initiatives, such as the motorcycle awareness project, are developed to ensure that there are adequate opportunities for the vehicles to be used safely in the community. I know of one location where that occurs. Taking account of recent developments, and in response to today's debate, the Justice Minister plans to write to the Minister for Infrastructure, the Minister for Communities and the Chief Constable to propose a joint meeting to discuss the development of a cross-government approach to the issue. I trust that the Assembly recognises the Minister's commitment to responding to the issue and will support the proposed way forward. We support the motion and the amendment.
886 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.94).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.94 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.81 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.17 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:26 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.