As many are already aware, the Queensland Government is currently holding an inquiry in to e-mobility which was triggered by, among other things, a high number of e-scooter related injuries over the last few years and the increased use of illegal, overpowered e-bikes and e-motorcycles. And, as I’ve written previously, I’m 100% in favour of addressing these problems. I do believe that, illegal, overpowered devices should be removed from our streets and bikeways and there should be an education campaign around the safe use of e-mobility devices. There are several other measures that could also be thrown into the mix.
However, I think what we don’t want is for the findings and recommendations of an inquiry like this to lead to any kind of legislative overreach or blanket restrictions on things that are actually quite nuanced and deserve a nuanced approach in order to protect innovation and progress in the uptake and development of active transport. I also think, the subject of active transport being quite an emotive one, heightens the risk of the outcomes of such an inquiry happening for the wrong reasons or for reasons other than those outwardly stated.
Several submissions like this one from QUT have already been made to the inquiry but unfortunately I’m already seeing deference to the use of the “R” word (registration).
“The evidence suggests that the current regime of fines in the absence of registration and education is ineffective in affecting compliance or reducing the prevalence of injury. The base line therefore for all PMDs and e-bikes should be registration and some form of minimal training/certification”
And so, the nightmare begins.
Firstly, for the purposes of this discussion the definition of what I think should be a legal PMD or e-bike is what we have as being legal already – that is, e-bikes complying with the EN15194 standard limited to an assisted speed of 25km/h and e-scooters also limited to 25km/h which gives us e-devices that move at bicycle speed but without requiring the physical effort that bicycles require to move forward.
Having said that, the problem PMDs that need to be targeted are the high powered ones which are already illegal. But without providing any reason, explanation or nuance, the author of QUT’s recommendations swiftly makes the unqualified presumption that registration should apply to all PMDs which would fix all problems. Registration of bicycles has been studied countless times and dismissed as untenable, costly and a deterrent to use so, assuming that the only PMDs considered legal to use will only be doing bicycle speeds (and in many cases less that bicycle speeds) there is no reason to apply registration to currently legal PMDs.
The recommendation goes on to talk about problems with identifying people in the case of crashes and other incidents involving PMDs:
“Recourse for compensation may face significant challenges including –
(1) identification of the tortfeasor where, for example, the e-scooter or e-bike rider leaves the scene of an accident;”
Again, assuming that we’re only keeping the currently legal 25km/h PMDs around, this is as ridiculous as suggesting that every skateboard, bicycle, unpowered kick scooter and children’s balance bike should also require registration. By extension of this logic, shoes should also require registration. People carry various forms of identification already even if only a mobile phone which is linked back to that person so there is no need to add this extra layer of administrative overhead under the guise of filling a gap in being able to identify people.
My prediction is that such a blanket requirement for registration of all PMDs will simply hurt the advancement active transport. Specifically, I predict such a requirement will:
- Deter uptake and participation in active transport.
- Hurt the Queensland e-bike industry. I think the sale and uptake of e-bikes as a genuine alternative to driving will decrease hurting retailers and wholesalers alike as (particularly) e-bike registration requirements for e-bikes that are already compliant will create a barrier.
- Increase road congestion by more people resorting back to driving.
- It’s also possible that the wider Queensland bicycle industry could be affected as many retailers who sell unpowered bicycles rely on e-bike and scooter sales as an income source as well as the ability to cross-sell between e-mobility devices and unpowered bikes.
I think a blanket PMD registration requirement also risks acting as the thin end of the wedge on the way to registration requirements of unpowered, analogue bicycles. Again, the concept of bicycle registration has been studied and rejected countless times the world over and is utterly unthinkable to introduce here because it would effectively kill off the entire bicycle industry in Queensland. I’m probably drawing a long bow on this but I think in today’s world something like a PMD registration requirement could risk being a potential precedent for such horrendous legislation to be put on the table later. I hope I’m completely wrong about this one but it is one to stay vigilant about – it would be a mighty, mighty blow to active transport and cycling more generally.
A blanket requirement to register all PMDs also has a real risk of causing a statistical false positive of hospitalisation reductions because if hospitalisations are reduced post registration requirement, it will be because fewer people are e-biking and scootering, not because PMD registration has made PMDs safer. Legislation to limit the import of illegal PMDs is already on the way and I think that will be what actually reduces hospitalisations. Registration of all PMDs will simply punish users of currently legal PMDs for no extra benefit. This is especially so for compliant e-cargo bike users which is probably the most innocent sub-group of e-mobility users because they really only use the power of their devices for torque not speed when hauling heavy loads. In every other way, e-cargo bikes are characteristically just a bicycle.
Uptake of e-mobility is on the rise because people are realising that there are better, cheaper alternatives to driving. Sure, there’s going to be issues to address with that change and I definitely don’t think kids should be allowed to ride what are effectively overpowered, unregistered motor vehicles on public roads but let’s just address those issues and not throw the baby out with the bath water. Active transport should be grown and encouraged but recommendations like the one QUT have put forward sound like a bunch of excuses to use to try and abandon and discourage it.
Additionally, it’s worth pointing out that some people clinging to irrational nostalgia and harbouring unfounded fears of a loss of the perceived convenience of driving if other forms of transport “take over” surely relish any blow to public and active transport advancements but the reality is that Queenslanders and Australians more broadly cannot keep using cars the way we have been into the foreseeable future. Specifically so around our major centres like Brisbane. E-mobility devices, bicycles, public transport and walking all need to be part of the mix as alternatives to driving and the barriers to achieving the uptake of those modes should be removed wherever they arise.
I can’t be certain what the result of the e-mobility inquiry will be but I really hope common sense prevails and we don’t end up in the dark place that the QUT recommendation outlines because that will simply stifle the development of active transport and, more broadly, the general state of transportation in Queensland.
Ride safe and see out there sometime.