Micromobility is another issue on which the government’s lack of dynamism is causing frustration, with the failure to bring forward legislation in the King’s Speech to legalise e-scooters on public roads drawing new criticism from campaigners.
In an article on TransportXtra, Richard Dilks, chief executive of national shared transport charity Collaborative Mobility UK (CoMoUK), pointed out that the government had previously committing to doing so when parliamentary time allows and described the absence of legislation as “a significant blow that will prolong uncertainty and deter investment”.
Of course, “when parliamentary time allows” is merely a function of the government’s priorities, which is what the King’s Speech is meant to set out, and Dilks urged the government “to rethink its timeline”.
CoMoUK was a signatory to an open letter sent to the Prime Minister called for legislation to create a new powered light vehicle class, giving e-scooters and other e-mobility options access to public roads.
The letter was also signed by operators including Lime, Voi, and Bolt, local councillors, and transport and environmental organisations such as Campaign for Better Transport and Clean Cities.
Dilks described the failure to legislate as “deeply frustrating”, adding:
Recent parliamentary answers from transport ministers suggest that Labour is completely stuck on many of key issues it should be addressing.
In response to a question from fellow Labour MP Darren Paffey about the “planned timetable is for announcing further details on the regulation of private electric scooters, as indicated in the Advanced Manufacturing Sector Plan”, roads minister Simon Lightwood said:
The Government is committed to pursuing legislative reform for micromobility vehicles when parliamentary time allows.
We understand the importance of providing a clear legislative timeline and my Department is working with colleagues across government to secure this.
So another example of when being committed to something doesn’t mean actually doing anything about it. Maybe just extend the trials again?
Other MPs have been asking what is happening about pavement parking, including Labour MP Damian Egan. Lilian Greenwood is fully aware that it’s an issue that needs to be addressed, but:
The Government fully understands the serious problems that vehicles parked on the pavement, and other obstacles on the pavement, can cause for pedestrians, especially for people with mobility or sight impairments and disabled people with wheelchairs, prams or pushchairs. To inform next steps, the Department has considered the potential options, assessing the costs and benefits to households and businesses, which includes well-being, social isolation and economic opportunities. This assessment drew on existing evidence, including the 2020 pavement parking consultation. We will announce the next steps and publish our formal response as soon as possible.
It’s now the fifth anniversary of that pavement parking consultation closing. Neither the Tories nor Labour has had the courage to take it forward.
And then there is the promised and widely trailed road safety strategy, “the first for ten years”.
Our Road Safety Strategy is under development and will include a broad range of policies. We intend to publish by the end of the year.
But in subsequent answers, such as this one, she appears to have backed away from this target date, saying:
More details will be published in due course.
“In due course” is of course what officials and ministers say when they can’t or don’t want to give a date. I’ve asked the DfT to clarify and transport secretary Heidi Alexander has been in front of the Transport Committee this morning.
Of course, if Lightwood is to be believed, the department is still carrying out “assurance” of evaluations of smart motorway schemes that National Highways completed in 2022.
The question is, are they incompetent, or just kicking the tricky stuff into the long grass?
Transport Insights 
Leave a comment