Select committee: Transport Committee

Recommendation 11

Third Report: E-scooters: pavement nuisance or transport innovation? Published 2 Oct 2020 Paragraph 71 Addressed to Department for Transport
Recommendation (the committee's words)
In our view, the speed of e-scooters should be suitable for the local environment they are deployed in. A “one size fits all” approach will not work. Speed limits in the trials can be determined at the local level by local authorities and, in the case of rental e-scooters, via ‘geo-fencing’ technology installed by companies. Operators should work closely with local authorities to plan and implement the most appropriate speed limits for rental e-scooters in local areas.

From: Transport Committee, Third Report: E-scooters: pavement nuisance or transport innovation? (HC 255), paragraph 71, 2 October 2020

Government response

The government responded to the whole report on 14 December 2020 (deadline 2 December 2020).

Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.

The government welcomes the report and says evidence from the time-limited trials, running until autumn 2021, will inform decisions on whether to proceed with any legislative changes, and if so on what basis.

  • On the regulatory framework and driving licences, the government "partly agrees", saying it will understand impacts first and "will consider all the evidence from trials before making any specific decisions" on licence requirements, should e-scooters be legalised.
  • On pavement riding, it agrees and says it "is considering a range of options to monitor its extent"; if legalised, "pavement use would remain prohibited".
  • On environmental impact, it "partly agrees", noting that setting local sustainability objectives "was not a condition set by the Government", but agrees that environmental impacts be monitored.
  • It agrees to publish the central evaluation framework for the rental trials, saying that "Once finalised it will be made publicly available".

Read the government's response ↗ Report an error