Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on Transport and Communications debate -
Wednesday, 2 Mar 2022

Road Traffic and Roads Bill 2021: Discussion

The Road Traffic and Roads Bill should really include e-bikes and e-scooters. We will have to rename it. From Bird, I welcome Ms Victoria Springthorpe, head of policy for the UK and Ireland, and Mr. James Padden, general manager for the UK and Ireland. From Spin, I welcome Mr. Brit Moller, head of public policy. From Zipp Mobility, I welcome Mr. Will O'Brien, vice president for growth and government affairs. From Lime, I welcome Mr. Hal Stevenson, public affairs manager for the UK and Ireland.

All witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative they comply with any such direction. For witnesses attending remotely from outside the Leinster House campus, there are some limitations to parliamentary privilege and, as such, they may not benefit from the same level of immunity from legal proceedings as a witness who is physically present does. Witnesses participating in this committee session from a jurisdiction outside the State are advised that they should be mindful of domestic law and how it may apply to the evidence they give.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate where they are not adhering to this constitutional requirement. Therefore, any member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts of Leinster House will be asked to leave the meeting. In this regard, I would ask any member partaking via MS Teams to confirm, prior to making his or her contribution to the meeting, that he or she is on the grounds of the Leinster House campus.

Members and all those in attendance in the committee room are asked to exercise personal responsibility in protecting themselves and others from the risk of contracting Covid-19. I ask the witnesses to limit their presentations to approximately three minutes. They will have to present a summary. This is to allow members to ask questions. The time for questions will also be limited.

I call Ms Springthorpe to make her opening statement.

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

I thank the committee for its invitation to come before it today. Bird is a last-mile electric vehicle company dedicated to bringing affordable, environmentally friendly and safe transportation to cities and towns across the world. As the company that founded the industry of e-scooters, we are trusted to operate in more than 350 markets, half of which are in Europe. We manage shared micromobility programmes through our electric scooter and electric bike partnerships with local authorities.

The company believes that shared micromobility helps communities strengthen the local economy, alleviate traffic and parking congestion, reduce harmful emissions and enhance transport access. Bird is one of the few shared micromobility companies to research, develop, design and manufacture our own scooters. Our team of former automobile and aerospace engineers build vehicles to incredibly high standards. Our goal is to create the safest and most sustainable vehicles in the industry.

We welcome the legislation and applaud the Irish Government, in particular the Minister for Transport, Deputy Ryan, and the Minister of State, Deputy Hildegarde Naughton, for creating a new category of powered personal transport, through which electric scooters will be legalised on Irish roads. In particular, we believe the specifications set out in the legislation, with a maximum speed of 25 km/h and a maximum weight of 55 kg, are appropriate to ensure electric scooters are a viable alternative to private car use in Ireland.

We also welcome the statement made last week by the Minister and the Minister of State that the proposed maximum power rating of 250 W for electric scooters could be adjusted through secondary legislation to account for technological developments as well as their safe and efficient use on hilly terrain. We are encouraged by the fact the Minister has proposed outlawing the use of electric scooters on footpaths. Our view is that electric scooters, like bikes in Ireland, belong on the roads and cycle lanes. Local councils should decide specific areas in which e-scooters should be used or restricted.

As an organisation, our number one priority is the safety of our riders and the safety of the general public. We welcome the strict prohibition and appropriate sanctions against the consumption of alcohol while operating an electric scooter. However, studies have shown that legislation requiring helmets and high-visibility equipment is ineffective and significantly reduces modal shift. We wish for this to be excluded from the legislation in Ireland. Instead, it is essential that providers and governments educate the public on the importance of wearing protective equipment and encourage them to do so.

Our safety approach in running micromobility is why we recently announced a first-of-its-kind partnership in Ireland. Our partnership with the Irish School of Excellence will see 80% of all secondary schools in Ireland have access to best-in-class e-scooter safety training for those aged 16 and older. We are delighted to invite committee members to attend this training in their locality

We are thrilled by the potential Ireland holds for the uptake of shared micromobility. While Ireland remains heavily reliant on car use as the primary mode of transport, even for journeys under 2 km that are ideal for micromobility, we believe this could be the dawn of a new era of sustainable travel across the country, complementing existing and planned infrastructure. I thank the committee again for inviting us today.

Ms Springthorpe has set a very good example of staying within the time limit. We will expect everyone else to follow suit.

Mr. Brit Moller

I am speaking to the committee on behalf of Spin, a globally recognised shared e-scooter and e-bike company based in San Francisco, California.

Our mission is to create a world of 15-minute cities and to meaningfully reduce urban congestion, pollution and the long-standing dependence on cars.

Today, I have been asked to share a few comments in respect of the Road Traffic and Roads Bill 2021 which provides for the provision of e-scooters in Ireland. To cut straight to the point, we very much welcome the Government approval of the Road Traffic and Roads Bill 2021 and commend this committee on the recent legislative actions taken regarding the definition of personal powered transporters, PPTs. As I understand it, the proposed definition of PPTs has been recently amended so that the weight, speed, and power output of e-scooters can be varied through future regulations. We believe this nimble and forward-looking approach is particularly sensible in the context of innovation in the micromobility sector. E-scooters are a young and rapidly evolving form-factor, where vehicle design changes are continuously taking place to improve public safety, sustainability and reliability.

Consistent with previous discussions I have had with members of this committee, Spin strongly supports the efforts to legalise e-scooters in a manner that prioritises safety and a level playing field from a market point of view. To that end, we strongly urge the Minister and the Department of Transport to move forward with developing regulations for e-scooters that are squarely in line with safe and tested international precedents. When it comes to minimum design standards, such as vehicle weight and power output, there are clear evidenced-based standards from other countries to draw upon. We recommend that the Department look to countries such as the UK, Germany and the US to put in place e-scooter vehicle standards that have already been proven to be effective and to lead to widespread public use.

To share one lesson learned from the last five years of the continuous development of micromobility, through our close partnerships with cities and community stakeholders, we have seen first-hand that public engagement and rider education are the most important factors for making e-scooters a safe and reliable mode of transport. In other words, it is not the device technology per se, but rather the performance of shared e-scooter operators that makes the biggest difference.

While Spin supports the legalisation of private e-scooters, it is important to keep in mind that shared e-scooter operators provide the additional benefits of ongoing rider education and access to best-in-class vehicles. Every time a rider wants to ride a Spin scooter, for example, they are presented with locally-specific educational content to ensure that riders know the rules of the road and understand expectations regarding parking and riding behaviour. With this in mind, we urge local authorities to carefully consider not only the onboard scooter technology, but also the well-documented performance histories of operators in the future development of shared rental schemes.

Once again, we appreciate this invitation to offer our experience and our recommendations for maximising the public value and potential of e-scooters in Ireland as a safe personal mobility option. The Road Traffic and Roads Bill 2021 represents an exciting opportunity to advance sustainable mobility options and to deliver a range of benefits, both individual and societal. We strongly support this legislation and are always happy to offer additional input and guidance as this legislative process moves forward.

I thank Mr. Moller for keeping to the time. I call Mr. O'Brien who has three minutes.

Mr. Will O'Brien

I dtús báire, gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach agus le baill an choiste ar son Zipp Mobility as cuireadh a thabhairt dom teacht anseo inniu agus ár dtuairimí ar an mBille um Thrácht ar Bhóithre agus um Bóithre, 2021 a roinnt leo go háirithe maidir le cúrsaí e-scútair.

Our company, Zipp Mobility, is Ireland’s leading shared micromobility provider and we strongly support the efforts being made to legislate for the use of e-scooters in Ireland. We currently provide shared e-scooter and e-bike services to cities and towns across Ireland, the UK and mainland Europe. We are an Enterprise Ireland client company and have been awarded high potential start-up status. Since our founding in 2019, we have grown to a team of 25 people and we hope to create 50 more high-paying and skilled jobs in Ireland over the next 18 months. At Zipp, we believe in mobility done right. This means it is our mission to do everything we can to help decarbonise transport, but it must be done in a principled way that respects the needs of our entire communities.

Before we discuss electric scooters, it would be worth contextualising this conversation by reviewing Ireland’s transport-related greenhouse gas, GHG, emissions. Transport is the second largest contributor to Ireland’s greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, the transport sector has been Ireland’s fastest growing source of greenhouse gas emissions since 1990, with the sector's emissions having doubled in that time. When this is broken down further, it is clear that private car usage is the leading cause of transport emissions, contributing to nearly 50% of total transport emissions in some years and consistently being over twice the size of the next largest emissions category.

Ireland has set the ambitious goal of reducing its emissions by 51% by 2030 and getting to net zero by 2050, which means we need a 7% reduction in emissions annually for the next eight years to achieve these goals. In 2020, despite the Covid-19 pandemic and an economic slowdown, we only achieved a reduction in emissions of 3.6%. This illuminates how great a task we have at hand. It is vital that we consider every solution possible when seeking to decarbonise transport. We can start by looking at our cities, where more than 60% of our population lives. We can provide those people with safe and sustainable transport options, like e-scooters. E-scooters could be transformational for reducing our reliance on private cars. For a young person who cannot afford a car, an e-scooter could be a safe and sustainable alternative. For people who live too far away to walk to a public transport link, providing shared e-scooters could help people to get those links and improve public transit usage.

I thank the Chair and members of the committee once again for inviting me to speak. I hope to give the committee my views as a representative from the shared micromobility industry and also as a young Irish person. I hope to communicate how passionate we are about ensuring Ireland becomes a world leader in climate action. Legislating for e-scooters may seem like a small step, but with a task this big ahead of us, it is not about silver bullet solutions but about the myriad of small steps we take together as a nation in our quest to conquer the greatest problem of our age: climate change.

I thank Mr. O'Brien. I call Mr. Stevenson who has three minutes.

Mr. Hal Stevenson

I thank the Chair and the committee for the invitation to discuss this legislation. Lime is the world’s largest and most experienced micromobility provider. Founded in 2017, our mission is to build transport systems that are shared, safe and sustainable. We operate e-bike and e-scooter sharing schemes in more than 200 cities across 30 countries globally and we are contracted to run services in many of Europe’s major capitals, including Paris, Rome and London. To date, we have safely delivered more than 250 million sustainable rides across our global operations. This amending legislation will see for-hire and private e-scooters legalised in Ireland. It is vital we use data and shared experience from countries with existing regulations to get this right, for riders and non-riders, and to deliver on the safety and sustainability aims that underpin this legislation.

We can use this data and experience because Ireland is well positioned as one of the last European countries to regulate e-scooters. This presents an exciting opportunity to learn from existing regulatory regimes and to help deliver this innovative new transport technology in a controlled way that works for everyone. Following the Government’s approval of this draft legislation, we have made a significant investment in our Irish operations that will be delivered over the next 18 months. This is aimed at helping us to develop our business and to serve communities across Ireland, including in Dublin, where our European headquarters are already located. Effective e-scooter regulation puts cities and people first. We are focused on using our global experience to launch and run well-managed services that work for cities by delivering a long-term impact via a focus on safe riding, responsible parking, environmental benefits, equitable access and data sharing.

I again thank the committee members for their time. I look forward to discussing their views on this amending legislation in more detail and to working together to ensure that we can use this Bill to help create green, shared and affordable transport systems across Ireland.

I thank Mr. Stevenson. We will proceed to members. We have approximately 45 minutes remaining, so I propose that each member has five minutes. I suggest that two minutes, at most, be used for questioning to allow three minutes for the witnesses from the representative bodies to answer. I ask for key pinpoint questions to be asked that will allow us to go to the representatives of all the groups to see what their views are on each aspect. I call Deputy O'Rourke.

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. An element was highlighted as being important, namely, engagement and training. I ask the representatives of each of the groups to outline what they think that looks like in an Irish context.

We will go to people in the order in which they spoke initially. I call Ms Springthorpe from Bird.

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

I echo the comments made earlier. We all agree, as an industry, that engagement and training are vital to e-scooters being successful. Regarding the training aspect, as a company we undertake that technologically and in person. Every rider who signs up to the app in Ireland will be told the rules of the road and will then undergo safety quizzes and be requested to take safety pledges, which will be pushed out to them every two to three rides. Additionally, we invest around 100 hours in in-person community engagement and training in every city in which we launch to help the public to get used to the vehicle. We appreciate that it is a new mode of transport in Ireland, and one that not many people have experienced unless they have been to other markets on holiday. Therefore, we ensure that we have that in-person element in every town pre-launch.

As I mentioned, we also have a partnership with the Irish School of Excellence to deliver training for those aged 16 to 18 in schools. We typically find that age group is the most problematic in respect of riders. We are focusing that aspect on educating those aged 16 to 18 in respect of how to use an e-scooter properly and how to park compliantly.

There are many different parking options with e-scooters so we must ensure they understand every option in detail, including how to dismount a scooter properly. You need things like geofencing, electric throttle and training for younger age groups so that when they reach 18 or whatever the age limit will be, they will be fully educated by that time. To reiterate, we think education is the most vital piece of getting this right in Ireland.

Mr. Brit Moller

Similar to what Ms Springthorpe mentioned, we do both in-app education and in-person education. I want to highlight the value of public engagement specifically with community stakeholders. For example, Spin has held a few in-person e-scooter demonstrations in Ireland with the National Council for the Blind and for members of this committee. This feedback is important so that we can make adjustments to our service. Maybe we can add a sound to e-scooters to make them more noticeable to the visually impaired. When it comes to rider education, we hold several in-person demonstrations to explain how our e-scooters work and emphasise the local rules because we find that repetition of this information is critical to getting this right. In addition to the in-person education, we also will repeat these rules in the app every time a rider takes a trip to ensure that he or she at least knows the rules and that we take the appropriate steps if the rules are not being followed.

Mr. Will O'Brien

Similar to other speakers, we do in-app and in-person training. Before we launch in a city or town, we typically do a few weeks of training-only events so that access to e-scooters will only be from within the safe confines of a supervised area. We take a place such as a carpark and have a number of members of the Zipp team showing people how to use the e-scooters, and handing out free helmets, high visibility jackets and giving them promotional materials to thank them for coming. In addition, complementing the communications we provide in-app, our social media regularly runs competitions to promote safety messaging.

On the engagement side, this is by far one of the most critical things to get right in Ireland. We need to introduce e-scooters to communities in a way that is acceptable to them, not to just come in overnight and drop a few hundred or 1,000 scooters in a city and leave. It is critical that we talk to residents' groups and members of the visually impaired and disability communities and get them on board, making them a key part of the design of the trial, taking on board their feedback both pre- and post-launch as we iterate through the trials. As I mentioned, in our operations in the UK, we meet monthly with a wide group of stakeholders, including residents' groups and members of the blind community, and work with the local guide dog teams to report on any incidents. Ensuring there is a feedback loop there is critical so that when they report problems to us, we are able to make the amendments. One of the great things about these shared e-scooter programmes is that because there is an operator above the system, if change is sought, it can be introduced.

Mr. Hal Stevenson

Ours is a very similar set up which includes mandatory in-app training and in-person sessions that we run for our riders. Across the panel the benefits of the higher services that we provide are visible in terms of having that constant touchpoint with the rider. What is interesting about this amendment is how it applies to how private e-scooter users will be regulated or legalised, where there is not the same touchpoint. People are able to buy something over the counter. How do you regulate who uses that and how much training they get? If we take it back to base principles, what we are trying to deliver is hopefully something that is safer than the current situation but also delivers something that provides a meaningful modal shift and a sustainable way for people to get around. There is going to be a tension or a balance between wanting to introduce some form of organised, official training without creating unnecessary barriers to usage. Perhaps it could be some form of standardised online training that stops short of a provisional licence or a driving licence requirement. Whether getting on a for-hire e-scooter or a private e-scooter, a person needs to know how to use it and need to use it safely. What we do not want to do is dissuade people from taking that step if there are onerous training or requirements that are not in keeping with the technical specifications.

I thank the witnesses for coming in and putting together their presentations. We are in a bit of a vacuum in that we have not seen the full detail of the legislation but the witnesses have experience of dealing with legislation in other countries and what works and what does not work. From that experience, are there things that the witnesses consider essential that must be in the legislation? There is an issue around engine size, battery size, the power of the vehicle and so on. Equally they might reference the fact that we had a committee meeting with the National Council for the Blind of Ireland, NCBI, of which most of them are aware. How would they respond to the concerns of NCBI about footpaths, the noise, how doable it is to add some kind of a noise so that people are aware of the e-scooter's existence? Is that doable? They have far more experience in this industry than we have but it is coming and it needs to be implemented well. They all have great experience of doing that but what do we need to have in the legislation that may or may not be there or is being talked about? What do we need to do to be an example of best practice because there are cities in which it has worked very well but equally there are cities where it has not worked well?

Mr. Brit Moller

I thank the Senator for the question. The approach taken so far by allowing the Department to revise the standards when it comes to vehicle weight or power output is the right way to go. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, following international precedent is important so that there are not new standards being pulled out of a hat. Specifically, when it comes to power output, 500 W as a maximum continuous rate of power is the standard. Companies can always do their part to regulate the actual maximum speed of the vehicle. Even if the power output is 500 W, the maximum speed can be 12 km/h or 15 km/h, as deemed appropriate by a local authority. When it comes to vehicle weight, we recommend, also in line with international precedent, around 50 kg. That allows a wide variety of vehicle and for more safety technologies to be put on the vehicle. Lastly, one other vehicle specification point worth considering is the number of wheels on e-scooters. This is form-factor is evolving quickly. Some e-scooters now have three wheels which can make them more appealing to people like my mother who might not want to get on a two-wheel e-scooter because she would feel the balance is not great. Allowing for multiple, maybe three-wheel vehicles also might broaden the field to the public.

Mr. Will O'Brien

On the regulations, to echo what Mr. Moller said, it is quite important to leave the power with the Department to constantly iterate and update these things in regulation. However, the three critical areas that you probably need to get right are weight, power and speed. Looking at best practices, we have the opportunity to cherrypick them. Looking at weight, in Germany and the UK, the maximum limit is 55 kg, not including driver weight. That is reasonable and allows for a degree of innovation on the current vehicle types. The sector is moving quite quickly so that if there are extra technologies that need to be added to the e-scooter that can add weight. On the power side, more than 500 W would definitely be required. Some countries have that. Austria has an upper limit of 600 W, Estonia 1,000 W, Finland 1,000 W and the US 750 W, which is quite common. On speed, 25 km/h as an upper limit is what is being done in the UK and a number of other countries. Moving towards how we are working with the disability groups, speed is a big concern, but with the geofencing technology, we have the ability to set specific speed zones in different areas in a city. You definitely would not want e-scooters going down pedestrianised streets, so we can block them off on our back end and ensure e-scooters do not go there. There are other areas where you might set a slow-speed zone as well. We are working with these groups regularly to bring these sorts of measures into our operations.

Mr. Hal Stevenson

I thank the Senator for his question. I completely agree with Mr. O'Brien's remarks in terms of how we can legislate for this, so that this maintains a functional purpose and can deliver the modal shift and get people out of cars and onto e-scooters. Of the three, speed is probably the most important.

Lime independently designs and develops all of its vehicles. They are built for roads and have had the level of investment to ensure that they are safe for use on roads. If we start limiting vehicles to speeds of around 12 km/h, they will not be safe for use on roads because of the speed at which other vehicles travel. We are looking at a speed of approximately 20 km/h to 25 km/h. We want that speed and we designed our vehicles or scooters for use on roads, so we would really push for legislation around the use of electric scooters on pavements. That is not an appropriate place for them to be used and we completely understand and sympathise with the views of groups like the National Council for the Blind of Ireland. That should be in place.

The only additional point is that when we consider national legislation versus local authority regulation, there are interesting points around issues such as mandatory parking zones, which we absolutely support and should be in regulation. They probably do not need to sit at this first stage of national legislation and they can probably be done on a city by city or town by town basis based on the layout and format of the service.

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

Senator Horkan asked about addressing the concerns of disability groups, as a company we have engaged in many of these groups in Ireland, including the National Council for the Blind of Ireland, the Irish Wheelchair Association and Age Action Ireland. As Mr. O'Brien indicates, the main priorities are noise and speed when the vehicles are used on footpaths. We would welcome seeing things such as bells being mandatory according to legislation, as they are in the UK. They are a way to alert other road users. There is an active group in the industry to look at a noise solution currently and it is being researched as a cross-industry effort. As with electric cars, it is considering what the minimum requirements should be.

With regard to speed, there is an industry standard of geofencing, which can prohibit the use of these vehicles in certain areas, as Mr. O'Brien has indicated. As a company, our vehicles have accuracy of between 10 cm and 20 cm, and we ensure the technology is top of the class to prevent issues. On the use of vehicles on footpaths, we strongly agree with what has been set out in terms of not using the vehicles on footpaths. We really think those are a protected space for different community groups. As an industry we are also constantly looking at technological ways to prevent problems in that regard. We are testing in America and Madrid in Europe a prevention technology that would not allow a scooter to use a footpath.

On the question of legislation and what is or is not missing, the rest of the team set out restrictions on 250 W systems prohibits the most modern vehicles in the market. We are happy with the 55 kg element, as it is appropriate weight usage, and the speed of approximately 20 km/h or 25 km/h is appropriate. Mr. Padden, who worked with the UK Department of Transport, might speak more to this.

I ask Mr. Padden to be brief. I must be fair.

Mr. James Padden

A month ago I was writing the legislation for the UK with the controls-----

We certainly want to hear from you.

Mr. James Padden

I will not repeat what has been said but in the UK we were angling to keep primary legislation as flexible as possible because this is an industry that will keep innovating quickly. As far as we are able to take broad powers, I would advise the committee to do so and put the detail into secondary regulations. It would agree about some of the ratings around mass and similar characteristics. Aim at top speed but do not worry too much about power because speed can be limited.

Where is the legislation in the UK currently?

Mr. James Padden

We have run trials for two years and my former colleagues are hoping to introduce legislation this year. It is not yet guaranteed.

Has primary legislation on electric scooters been brought through in the UK at this point?

Mr. James Padden

There will be a transport Bill this year and there are negotiations about what will go into it. We hope-----

So we are not that far behind the UK.

Mr. James Padden

Ireland is ahead, indeed.

We might come back to Mr. Padden on that.

I welcome all our witnesses and thank them for their engagement. I will show a little bias in welcoming Mr. O'Brien to the meeting. I had the pleasure of being in school with his dad. It is a family tradition-----

His dad and mum had him when they were very young.

His grandfather and grandmother were also great entrepreneurs. In fairness to Mr. O'Brien, he has been very proactive.

A free scooter will be on its way.

Will's dad and I were in school today but our politics are very different. That is beside the point.

The scooter has just been downgraded, Senator Buttimer.

We are still friends. I thank everybody for being here. It is important that this engagement and that which we have had previously can set the scene for what is very important legislation. Having used electric scooters on a trial basis, albeit in a very controlled environment, I know that the safety issue is absolutely paramount. We had representatives from the National Council of the Blind in Ireland in with us. In the context of the safety element, how do we get the balance right between the pedestrian and vulnerable user on the footpath, cyclists in cycle lanes and the public road? How do we get the safety aspect right in considering the most vulnerable users?

I propose that the Senator lines up his questions and then each of the participants might respond in turn. Does the Senator have a second question he wishes the witnesses to address?

My total contribution can be distilled into the safety issue. We all accept the argument about reducing congestion and we are all in favour of climate action. We must consider how to address parking problems as well, as we do not want our footpaths or pavements littered with electric scooters. There is also the question of speed, age verification and helmets. A fundamental concern of mine is illegal riding on footpaths and dangerous driving. How can we get that right? This is important. Our gentleman friend from California, Mr. Moller, has spoken about the work done there. In developing the regulations and legislation, public safety is important. This is about protecting our vulnerable road user and illegal riding on footpaths and dangerous driving. We all accept the need to have and promote a modal shift in public transport and private car use, and an electric scooter will play a significant part in that. With regard to costs, how do we incentivise reduced costs for those who might potentially use electric scooters?

There are two questions. The first concerned the older person or vulnerable pedestrian. How can we give them a level of security with safety precautions in electric scooters? There was also a question of cost. It is only fitting that Mr. O'Brien should lead us off on this.

Mr. Will O'Brien

The question of managing the relationship between electric scooters and pedestrians is absolutely critical. To simplify the matter, there is the proactive and reactive approach, and we need a bit of both. We need to be preventative in the first instance in order to stop collisions and such incidents happening and then afterwards we must be prescriptive and react, making changes that seem to fit.

On the question of preventing incidents in the first place, technology is coming on in the industry in leaps and bounds. The scooters we have this year are very different from those we had last year. Every operator in this industry is committed to reducing collisions. This can happen through technology in a number of ways and GPS is going to be the main tool by using targeted geofencing and getting it really accurate. All operators are working on that. It is about working for quite a considerable number of weeks ahead of a launch so we can find the right places in Cork city that can be geofenced in order to prevent collisions. That will be critical. Much of that will be on the operator side and happen at a local authority operator level.

On the cost side of things, it will again likely happen at a local authority level between local authorities and the operators they select. It may be part of procurement to ask operators what their pricing model will be, and that is something we saw in the UK, which favoured operators coming in at lower prices. It is one option.

Is that in respect of rentals?

Mr. Will O'Brien

Yes. It is important to remember there is also a quality element and it is not just about who can provide the cheapest service. It is about who can provide a service that works for everyone in the community.

While cost certainly is something we need to look at, there must be a balance. All of that can be considered as part of the procurement with local authorities.

Mr. Hal Stevenson

I thank Senator Buttimer for his questions. I agree with him on the importance of contributions from groups like the National Council for the Blind of Ireland. It is vital to have its feedback when it comes to introducing the legislation and making sure it is working for everyone. We have engaged with the organisation previously and invited it to join our newly formed Irish disability advisory board.

The Senator referred to the need for balance in how we manage pavement space. From our perspective, we do not see a need for balance. For us, e-scooters are not toys but road vehicles and should be used on the road. There is no need for a balance in that regard. Pavements are for pedestrians and we have technology that can deal with that. Legislation can also help with it.

Is that a universally accepted view? There seems to be some confusion about it. Can we take it that everyone here today agrees that footpaths will be a no-go area?

Mr. Brit Moller

Agreed.

Mr. Hal Stevenson

Yes. As I said, we have the technology to deliver that and legislation can make it enforceable.

In terms of the balance between cyclists and e-scooter users on cycle lanes and other cycling infrastructure, Lime is the world's largest provider of shared e-bikes and e-scooters and, again, we do not see that as a conflict requiring a balance. As far as we can see from our data, users of Lime are regularly switching between the two different modes and like to use that type of infrastructure for both. We are not seeing issues in that regard. It is great when the infrastructure is put in place and we have seen huge progress in that area throughout Ireland in the past 12 months or so.

On cost, our mission is to provide affordable green transport systems. It is crucial that we do not price people out of our services. There is no point in trying to deliver a sustainable initiative like this and having people walk past because they cannot afford to use it. We offer a standard pricing, with a cost of approximately €1 to unlock a scooter or bike and a 15 cent per minute fee to ride it. Users are looking at a cost of around €5 for a 30-minute trip. Beyond that, we also offer affordable rates via our Lime access programme, which gives a 50% discount on all rides for concession pass holders. In addition, where people have a discounted pass to use the Luas, for example, that discount will automatically apply to their Lime rides.

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

We generally have a one-size-fits-all approach to pricing. Within markets, we tailor our permanent pricing to the average regional income. We offer discount pricing for HSE workers and students, for instance, and a large number of free rides for jobseekers and so forth. We see ourselves as being accessible in the mobility sense but also the financial sense. In addition, we offer a weekly and monthly pass for regular users.

On the pavement space issue, we all agree that we do not want to see e-scooters on the footpath in Ireland. There are three approaches to preventing this. As already mentioned, the first is technological. There is geofencing technology and we are testing out our blocking technology to prevent footpath riding by scooter riders. When they approach a footpath, the scooter will slow down and then stop. Education is another important factor. Once we agree what the rules of the road are in Ireland, we all, both providers and local authorities, need to educate as many people as possible through campaigns, advertising and in-app and in-person training. The third factor is punishment. We all need to have a zero-tolerance approach to any attempt to footpath-ride. For us at Bird, if any of our users are caught on a pavement in the UK, they are banned from our service. We have a very high-tech identity detection system that prevents anyone from opening a second account. If someone is banned from our service, he or she is banned for life.

Mr. Brit Moller

I echo the views already shared. On protecting pedestrians, many companies now have anti-footpath technology that can detect in real time whether scooters are being illegally driven on a footpath. A point for local authorities to take on board is the importance of data sharing, which includes being able to continuously share on a monthly basis how often footpath riding is occurring and information on the active deterrent steps taken by operators, whether that is automatically reducing the vehicle speed or banning those users in order to limit repeat offending.

On pricing, similar to the other companies, we have equity-based pricing. We encourage local authorities to consider setting equity-based standards and encouraging operators to provide discounted rides, either based on location or individuals' income status.

Mr. James Padden

We are speaking as e-scooter operators and the committee is looking to regulate the private and rental market. Everything my colleagues said is absolutely right. The legislation that is brought forward will have to include sanctions. The committee cannot rely on e-scooter operators to take sanctions against people using private vehicles. That is where the work Bird has done with the Irish School of Excellence is really important in terms of setting the norms with young children.

Who should impose the sanctions?

Mr. James Padden

The way we have done it in our trials across the UK has been through the police. That has been quite difficult and involves imposing points on future licences and issuing fines.

To clarify, the penalty is of such severity that it involves points going onto people's driving licences?

Mr. James Padden

It is at the moment. When the legislation comes forward, e-scooters will be decoupled from the motor vehicle categories. There will be a new set of sanctions but they will look very similar to what we currently have. We want those sanctions in place.

Will the sanctions be imposed by police or local authorities?

Mr. James Padden

They will not be a civil matter. The sanctions will be imposed by the police.

I thank all the witnesses. They have managed to get through a significant number of the questions. They spoke about geofencing and technology fixes. Thinking of some of the roads in Irish towns, we have an imperfect system as it is. When I visited Strasbourg some time ago, it was necessary to be watchful of getting run over by a bicycle or e-scooter but there was a significant amount of space on the roads and, to a degree, on the pavements, where riders were sectioned off. There are cycle lanes on pavements in some towns in Ireland. It is probably the case that a huge number of ad hoc arrangements have happened. On some level, we might want to start all over again but we cannot do that.

I get what the witnesses are saying about riders experiencing a slowdown as they approach a pavement. Even in Strasbourg, with all its fabulous road networks, I noticed that riders just crossed over the pavements. There probably is an element that people have become accustomed to doing it. There is the question of what the operators can do and the reality of what happens in terms of private purchasers. There are young fellows buying e-scooters who go out on them dressed in black and without any lights on the vehicle. That is the type of behaviour we are getting complaints about at this point. What do the witnesses propose in this regard? What is absolutely necessary to be done in order to ensure safe use? I get the point about education and telling people what they should do, but how do we ensure all vehicles are sufficiently lit and are noisy enough, in line with what the National Council for the Blind of Ireland, the Irish Wheelchair Association, Irish Guide Dogs for the Blind and other organisations are seeking? In reality, those organisations are probably looking for speed limits that are a lot lower than what the witnesses want. It is a question of how we can deliver all of that, accepting that we all want it to happen.

Before inviting the witnesses to respond, I note that the Deputy's last point is fairly straightforward. Noise is a big factor for people, particularly when it comes to scoops in speed. People do not want a situation where they feel utterly exposed. Pinpointing Deputy Ó Murchú's question, what specifically can be done to give security to vulnerable groups?

That question is across the board for all the witnesses. They might also like to delve into the issue of private riders.

Mr. Hal Stevenson

I thank the Deputy for outlining his questions and concerns. Geofencing is a really useful tool but it is not a silver bullet. It is implemented by GPS, which means there is some level of drift. It is very appropriate for things like preventing people from riding in crowded squares where there are a lot of pedestrians or passing foot traffic. It is much less well-suited, and we do not use it, on pavements that are perpendicular to roads because the level of certainty needed to interfere with the rider in terms of slowing or stopping the vehicle is not appropriate to what can be delivered with GPS.

In layman's terms, how does that GPS work?

Mr. Hal Stevenson

The vehicle is essentially tracked via a chip or a SIM card in the scooter, and that corresponds with our back end system.

But you cannot do anything. Say someone is approaching a crowded space, what can you do to him or her?

Mr. Hal Stevenson

Depending on where the vehicle is, we can change how it behaves. We can reduce the speed-----

Remotely.

Mr. Hal Stevenson

Yes. It is all done remotely on our system, which, again, is one of the huge benefits of for-hire services such as the ones we provide versus a privately owned vehicle where once it has been bought over the counter, beyond having minimum hardware or speed requirements, it becomes very difficult to regulate usage, which is where things like rider education, road signage and enforcement will come into play, which will definitely be part of considerations.

Regarding noise on approach, the Chairman is right. It is a concern that has been raised across all our disability advisory boards and we have regular conversations about it. Our view is that all vehicles should have a noise-emitting device. We have bells on all our scooters as standard. You need to be able to alert pedestrians to your presence. We are involved in a pilot research process on a continuous audible warning because while there is clear appetite for, there is no significant amount of concrete data about what we have at the moment that sets out how you do it but also demonstrates the benefits - things like the directional nature of a continuous noise. We can put a noise in our scooters in our warehouses tomorrow, but it is very difficult to turn that into something that has a positive impact on the ground in terms of what that noise sounds like, how we make it directional and how we standardise it across markets. It is something we are working on with other providers and we have a road map to delivering something but for us, it is somewhat of an unanswered question and there is more research to be done before we would want it written into regulation.

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

The anti-footpath technology we are developing does not use the geofencing method. It is an industry-first integrated sensor fusion system on what we call the brain of the scooter whereby we store maps that capture the rules relating to the road. These upload in real time from a distance, not manually on the scooter, so that can dictate in real time where the footpath is and prevent that from approaching.

To go back to noise, speed and visibility, we very much agree with what Mr. Stevenson said about the noise approach. He mentioned the research being done by industry. As an industry, we need to agree what this noise is and rather than have piecemeal operators with lots of different ones, agree what the industry standard should be. We are excited for this research to happen, but bells should be compulsory on scooters as a form of alerting pepole.

I do not think anyone has touched on visibility yet. We agree there should scooters should have high visibility. Our scooters have lights on the front and rear and plenty of reflective tape. In the UK, we operate partnerships with the blind association over there. As a result of that partnership, we adapted our vehicles to have more reflective tape. We should see this mandatory visibility of the vehicle in regulations but maybe in councils. We do not think high visibility should be mandatory in legislation but we encourage riders to wear high-visibility clothing as much as possible. We have what we call a helmet selfie whereby if people take a selfie wearing a helmet or high-visibility clothing, we can give them credit off their next ride to incentivise their use. Part of it involves technological developments while part of it involves education.

Mr. Brit Moller

This issue is more within the purview of local authorities, which can get into the more granular details of what safety standards they want to put in place. We believe that anti-footpath technology is the most promising tool for correcting pavement riding in real time. We use a downward facing camera that can read the topography of roads and detect almost instantly whether a rider has gone up on a footpath and make the necessary intervention such as slowing it down, emitting a sound or even bringing the scooter to a complete halt within a few seconds.

The other thing that has not been mentioned is the importance of precision parking. Scooters can tip over and pedestrians can trip over them so having tools to enforce very precise parking in designated zones is another safety recommendation we have for local authorities.

Mr. Will O'Brien

If we are talking about it in the context of collisions and safety, the committee has heard from us about the education and training stuff we do. It has heard about geofencing. If a user is not using the service properly, what can you do to minimise the risk even further? You then start looking at the scooter. As Ms Springthorpe mentioned, the visibility of it is critical. Our scooters are bright yellow so they stand out like a sore thumb in that regard. Reflective tape is another very easy measure to put on to scooters. Again, local authorities can talk to operators and say the standard for their scooters is a certain amount of reflective tape. That is an easy thing for us to add if they want more. We have front, back and side lights on all of our scooters. We are also looking at indicators to give that visibility and an indication to other road users of which way riders are going and how they are using the road. The bell is critical. It is such a simple thing. Everyone knows how to use a bike bell and knows the context in which to use it so ensuring that is on every e-scooter is a good idea. I think the bell could be in the regulations. It is quite a common standard.

We are researching other things around lighting in UCD where we have a project looking at adaptive lighting systems - not just having a static light on all of the time but a lighting system that lights out and put lines down the front to show the oncoming track of the scooter. For example, in London, there is a light on the front of Boris bikes to allow someone who cannot hear them to see them on the road in front of them. Another thing is looking at light that does not just project backwards but also on to the back of the user so it would come up from the back wheel of the scooter and illuminate the user's back. We are looking to progress things with Irish researchers. We are progressing a noise device project similar to other operators so there is a whole range of things. After you have done all these things and if there is an accident, it is critical riders are banned, which is something we do if there is ever an incident like this and we have a report. We have registration plates on all our scooters so if they see registration 101750 at 2.15 p.m. on Ballincurr Road and pull out that, we can go back at our back end and see that Will O'Brien was on that scooter and involved in that accident and can ban him from a service. I ride quite sensibly.

I would say it would be Senator Buttimer who would be banned. He is more than likely to be the man driving the zip scooter.

The apple does not fall far from the tree.

Mr. James Padden

On the initial point about contested spaces and constricted space, Bird operates in trials in a couple of areas in the UK. One of them is in the historic town of Canterbury in Kent. We have challenges with footpaths and work really closely with the local council in terms of dealing with that and using proper parking spaces. All the technology can help to make that work in a historic town like that-----

But you need bespoke solutions for places like that. That is the reality.

Mr. James Padden

Yes. You have limited space. It involves really regulating parking and providing a suite of parking options such as docks but it can and does work.

We now turn to Deputy Carey who, no doubt, has a great plan for the roll-out of e-scooters in Clare

In Clare, we have a very deep association regarding this issue through a man called Kieran O'Brien. He runs the Irish School of Excellence, which has run a pilot scheme with Bird. For me, this is about user safety and the safety of others. In fairness, all the groups here today have touched on that. The collaboration between the Irish School of Excellence, which is based in Ennis, and Bird about going into schools throughout Ireland to deliver a training programme for pupils within the school setting is a wonderful initiative.

Will the representative from Bird elaborate on that aspect? The representatives from the other companies might indicate if that is something they are considering. Equally, is this something that is done in other jurisdictions and that should be replicated here? Should a provision be inserted into the legislation to require people to have completed a mandatory training regime before they can get control of one of these e-scooters?

I am trying to decide who we are starting with next. I call Mr. Moller.

Mr. Brit Moller

We also applaud what Bird is doing with the Irish School of Excellence. We take similar steps in cities across the US. We see the value of in-person demonstrations and training, especially at the beginning of a rental scheme when members of the public are not familiar with the devices. Many in-person events must take place to emphasise the rules on how to use these devices safely. We have also done demonstrations with the National Council for the Blind of Ireland to get more critical feedback on its concerns because we know that vulnerable populations might have more safety considerations in mind when it comes to the sound of the vehicle, as we mentioned, and where these vehicles should be parked. Keeping all that feedback in mind is important to crafting a tailored service in each local authority.

I call Ms Springthorpe.

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

To elaborate on our e-scooter safety schools, our partnership programme with the Irish School of Excellence will be available to 80% of secondary schools across the country. Everyone will have one in their constituency, and members should feel free to get in touch for our demonstrations. The programme will be available for those aged between 16 and 18. The reason we are undertaking this partnership is that we find this younger age group the most problematic. They are less likely to read the in-app training information and things like that. We find it essential to speak to as many of the in person as possible.

The course is split between theory and practice elements, like a driving school would be, and it will cover all sorts of topics, including what the rules of the road will be in Ireland once these vehicles are legalised and how to ride properly. E-scooters are a unique mode of transport, especially concerning the balancing element, which is unique to any kind of bike or anything like that. One aspect, for example, explores how riders should bend their knees properly and where to place their feet on the footpath. We were talking about geofencing, which is unique to e-scooters, and we inform people how to interact with those geofences when they encounter them, because many riders do not know what to do the first time they are on an e-scooter. How to park properly is another aspect covered in this regard. As was mentioned, there are four types of parking: free floating; virtual docking; hard docking; and the lock-to-Bluetooth tethering cables. This aspect of training concerns what to do in the context of all those parking solutions. Another aspect is how to ride safely. Beginner mode is a slower speed than what the national average would be to allow new users to get used to training at that speed on private lands away from roads and cycle lanes. They can get a feel for the e-scooter first before going elsewhere.

Touching on the comments made previously, regarding the content we are using, we are engaging with the Road Safety Association, RSA, and different disability groups to highlight, from their perspective, how to interact with vulnerable road users and other transport modes and vehicles, such as bikes and lorries. E-scooters have a unique blind spot in respect of bikes, and I wish to highlight that aspect. Not only will we be teaching that from our point of view, but the Irish School of Excellence will be teaching those driving schools how to spot an e-scooter from the perspective that is unique to a bike as well.

I call Mr. O'Brien.

Mr. Will O'Brien

We provide similar in-person training. Generally, there are two groups of in-person training. There are the targeted in-person training sessions, where a specific community is picked and go out to them. Before we launch, we will engage with transition-year-type programmes and aspects like that in a local area. We will seek to get training brought into the curriculum prior to our launch. That is the targeted training aimed at those aged 16 to 18. Additionally, there are also general training days that we might do in a town square on Saturday and Sunday mornings in the three or four weeks pre-launch. We will seek to do that in every town and city in which we launch. The only place people will be able to use these e-scooters before we launch will be in a ring-fenced area, which will have promotion, hand-outs, all the guidelines potential riders need to know and hi-visibility vests and helmets. Those are the sorts of things we wish to provide to people to ensure they ride scooters in the safest way possible.

It is also important to remember that this is not just a one-off thing that we will just do before we launch or for a month or two afterwards. It must be continuous. We are nearing the two-year mark now in some of our UK-based operations and we are continuing to do these training days and demonstrations. We have one seaside location which it seems is going to be very popular again this summer, so we are already planning how many training days we need to do there and trying to ascertain that we get enough people to attend.

I call Mr. Stevenson. I am conscious of time.

Mr. Hal Stevenson

Similar to the other providers, our provision in this regard involves mandatory in-app and in-person training. Talking about safety in the context of this amending legislation, some of the key things to consider include scalability, and that applies to some of the innovations we talked about in respect of camera-based pavement detection, and the communication of safety measures to private e-scooters as well. Training is something that we, as responsible operators, provide as standard and as a matter of course to our users, as the committee has heard. If we are considering how that is translated into national legislation, it also applies to private e-scooters. There might be different answers if two or three retailers were on the panel regarding what they are going to offer their customers buying products over the counter, which is an important consideration. Ultimately, that ends up in a situation where it is necessary to ensure that most of these requirements are written into formal tendering or procurement processes undertaken by local authorities. That is intended to ensure when we set about bidding on services that there is a focus on safety in those responses submitted and a requirement on those tendering to commit to a certain number of in-person training sessions and-or mandatory in-app training and whatever else.

Elsewhere, is it the local authorities that typically run the e-scooters rental schemes in each area?

Mr. Hal Stevenson

Yes, exactly so. The national legislation sets the minimum standards and the framework and then the local authorities are invited to tender for them. They set their own regulations.

That is the model used in all the jurisdictions in which Lime is operating.

Mr. Hal Stevenson

Yes, that tends to be standard.

Is Deputy Carey okay with those responses?

That is perfect. I thank the Chair.

It is my turn now. I have a few quick questions. Staying with the power and speed of these e-scooters, the legislation provides for an upper speed limit of 25 km/h. What are the witnesses' views on that? The legislation also provides for a power rating of 250 W. Again, what are the witnesses' views on this point? It is a big issue for us. We have covered everything else, so in the time remaining, these are the two of the key components of the legislation that I see in need of further examination. When I am finished, I might come back to Mr. Padden regarding what is happening in the UK. I call Ms Springthorpe first.

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

Setting a speed of 25 km/h speed limit is perfect. We agree with that as a maximum speed rating.

All the companies can regulate the speeds of their e-scooters.

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

Yes.

It is possible for the companies to decide that an individual e-scooter could only go at 20 km/h. There is that capacity.

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

Yes, we have that capacity. If local authorities want areas in which there are speed limits of 15 km/h, 10 km/h or 5 km/h, then we all have the ability to do that.

I ask Ms Springthorpe to turn to the 250 W power aspect.

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

As we highlighted, the 250 W element is the problematic area in the legislation for all providers.

It has not been discussed today. It is a critical point.

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

All our newest vehicles have that rating and all the operators in the industry represented here have vehicles with power ratings greater than 250 W. The reason we asked for a higher power rating concerns durability in hilly terrain. We do not want to have situations where lower-powered e-scooters cannot go up certain hills. It is problematic because it is a safety issue. It would also prevent feature innovation in respect of safety technology. Only two countries in Europe have 250 W as a power standard. None has done that though primary legislation, but through secondary legislation or as a legacy from bikes and e-bikes. Those jurisdictions still allow operators with larger vehicles to operate. Therefore, we recommend taking an approach similar to France, which allows unlimited wattage but where there are restrictions on the permissible speed and acceleration, or adopting what is done in markets like Spain and allowing a higher rating of 500 W or 750 W.

What should be the upper limit?

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

If there has to be an upper limit, we would go as high as 1,000 W to allow for future innovation. As an industry-----

If 250 W comes in, will the companies operate at 250 W?

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

We would not want to operate at 250 W. We want to proactively-----

Is Ms Springthorpe saying it is a safety feature?

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

It is a safety feature. Some 250 W would struggle with heavy terrain.

That is your argument.

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

Yes, that would struggle with heavy terrain.

The counter-argument is that if you give the high wattage, people will abuse it and use it to go at very high speeds, which is very dangerous.

Ms Victoria Springthorpe

We have the technology to limit speed and acceleration.

I will go to Mr. Moller.

Mr. Brit Moller

I echo the same point of view as my colleagues at Bird. We agree with the 25 km/h upper limit but we can, as mentioned, regulate the speed in specific areas of the city so that it is a reduced speed in a highly pedestrianised zone where a 10 km/h or 15 km/h limit is maybe more appropriate. A speed of 25 km/h should be the upper limit. In regard to the wattage, we recommend a minimum of 500 W. I am based in San Francisco and the e-scooters certainly struggle to make it up some of the hills so really a 500 W minimum level allows for riders to go on varied terrain without encountering difficulty in making it up a hill. As mentioned, there is an important distinction between the motor watt limit and speed. Those are not the same thing. Even if the wattage is 750 W, the speed can be kept at 25 km/hour or less.

Mr. Will O'Brien

Some 25 km/h is perfect and in line with international norms but a 250 W limit is too low. There has been an industry effort in getting this changed. It needs to be at a minimum of 500 W. We are looking at 1,000 W, as is the case in countries like Estonia and Finland or the French model where it is uncapped but speed is limited. It is about hills where this can be a real problem. The problem is that if it is 250 W and the e-scooter is not enjoyable to use, people simply will not use them and then we will not get the modal shift which is the reason we are here in the first place talking about reducing the number of car journeys.

In the two countries that have 250 W, Portugal and Sweden, it is openly flaunted. Other problems arise because if there is an accident and insurance is involved, although the operators all have insurance or the riders are insured, the insurer might not pay out on a claim to a user because the operator was breaking the claim. That is what happens in these markets where there is 250 W. The operators openly flaunt it. There could be exposure on insurance.

Mr. Hal Stevenson

The majority of policymakers we talk to are all in favour of e-scooter regulation. Depending on where they are coming from, it is either because they see what is happening at the moment, which is essentially unregulated usage all over towns and cities, or because there are clear sustainability benefits. Those sustainability benefits are only delivered if this is regulated as a viable transport alternative. On speeds, the current gross speed of 25 km/h is great. We would be happy with 20 km/h but we really could not live with a speed of about 12 km/h. That does not work. Being completely transparent on power, we would not want to but could live with 250 W. We would prefer it to be 500 W but between the two, the speed completely undermines the aim of the service if we get into those low teens. For us, speed is good at 25 km/h and we would still be at 20 km/h. We could live with 250 W but would prefer 500 W.

What has Mr. Padden learned? It seems he brought in e-scooters. It is now going to be firmed up in legislation. What has he learned, given that he was on the other side of the fence for a period? In terms of the roll-out of the changes in the UK, what has he learned in terms of the legislation?

Mr. James Padden

I have learned lots. I was there for 12 years, which was a long time. It is fair to say that when we brought in the trials, we did it quickly because of Covid-19. Many people were uneasy about this new mode being introduced into 52 areas across England. We found that cynicism was set aside. We saw a modal shift from the private car and taxi of a third. We saw that safety was comparable with bicycles both in terms of the inherent safety of the vehicle and how those vehicles are ridden by users. We saw that people used them for valuable journeys, and not just for joy rides and not just for fun. They were going to school, college and education. We saw that over-regulation can kill the service. If you have overly strict geofencing in an area of speed limits kicking in and no-go areas, it is confusing for the user and becomes less safe, ironically. We saw that it is crucial to have standards around the vehicles themselves. I would urge members to look at the vehicle standards that will come out in the UK and that existed for the trials in the UK. They were introduced by the German federal government. I urge members to look at batteries as a safety feature-----

What is the wattage in the UK?

Mr. James Padden

We were going to propose at least 500 W, and probably go above that. The prize here is not just for e-scooters. It is for wider micromobility. If in primary you set a speed limit and keep a broad set of choices for the future, because you have powered personal transporters, PPTs, in the secondary, then put a speed limit in, perhaps a maximum, where you do not want to go above a certain maximum. The devil is in the detail of the secondary because it allows you to be innovators in the last mile delivery space, for example, where you see people on e-cargo bikes, where you have to have pedals and have to put some effort in and it goes a 250 W maximum-----

What is the speed?

Mr. James Padden

Our ministers were keen to look at a higher speed.

What is the current speed in the UK?

Mr. James Padden

We have set it at maximum 15.5 miles per hour. We saw much differentiation across different trial areas. It did not really make a difference in terms of safety.

Has that worked?

Mr. James Padden

It has worked. By and large, the technology has certainly come on. The trials have been going for two years. At the start of the trials, the technology was not quite there. At this point, it has got better.

I thank Mr. Padden.

It has been very interesting. We have a second session with various other providers. We will deal with the Committee Stage of the legislation, which will probably be the substantive element of it. No doubt the witnesses will be watching it closely. They have fed in to the process today. I thank all the witnesses for attending today's meeting and engaging with us.

Sitting suspended at 3.27 p.m. and resumed at 3.34 p.m.

The purpose of the second session of today's meeting is to continue our discussion on the Road Traffic and Roads Bill 2021 with five more e-scooter companies. On behalf of the committee, I welcome Mr. Duncan Robertson, general manager, Ireland and the UK, Dott; Mr. Matthew Pencharz, head of public policy for the UK, Ireland and the Netherlands, Voi; Ms Aisling Dunne, head of policy, Ireland, Bolt; Ms Jean Andrews, policy director, Ireland and the UK, Superpedestrian; and Ms Jessica Hall, head of Ireland operations, TIER Mobility. I thank them for their patience.

All witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. If their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks and it is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

For witnesses attending remotely outside the Leinster House campus, there are some limitations to parliamentary privilege. As such, they may not benefit from the same level of immunity from legal proceedings as a witness physically present does. Witnesses participating in this committee session from a jurisdiction outside the State are advised that they should also be mindful that domestic law could be applied to the evidence they give.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Members are also reminded of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex in order to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate where he or she is not adhering to this constitutional requirement and any member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting. In this regard, I ask members participating via Microsoft Teams, prior to making a contribution, to confirm they are on the Leinster House campus. If attending in the committee room, they are asked to exercise personal responsibility to protect themselves and others from the risk of contracting Covid-19.

I ask the witnesses to confine their contributions to approximately three minutes because we are time limited. I call on Mr. Robertson to make his opening statement.

Mr. Duncan Robertson

Dott is very grateful for the opportunity to meet with the committee today. Dott is a European micromobility operator and safely operates shared e-scooter schemes in more than 35 European cities. We are pleased to see the legislative process moving ahead in Ireland and are excited by the possibility to bring Dott’s e-scooter technology to Dublin and beyond.

Dott is a safety first e-scooter provider. We established an Irish safety advisory board, which includes groups representing vulnerable road users, the visually impaired, the business community and transport researchers. The introduction of e-scooters on Irish roads has generated valid concerns among the disability community about the continuing safety of people with disabilities. Our safety board was established to ensure the voices of disabled pedestrians and those with mobility needs are understood by providers. Dott is happy to share any of the board’s feedback with the committee should it be helpful.

Dott has developed technology and research partnerships with companies such as See.Sense and Luna, as well as the University of Salford, which focus on improving safety for vulnerable road users. Through our partnerships, we are able to deliver first-hand data and insights about accident hot spots and the effectiveness of safety measures. Our operations across Europe enable us to draw on a broad range of experience, research and case studies to constantly help improve the safety and experiences for riders and the public.

I know the misuse of e-scooters is a concern. In managing illegal riding on footpaths and dangerous driving, we use unique e-scooter licence plates to identify individual riders and make it easier for the public to report bad driving and misuse, theft or misplaced scooters. We ban users who violate our safety policies. We understand the committee has concerns in these areas in terms of the use of private e-scooters but from the perspective of creating a shared-scooter scheme, flexible regulation is very important. Therefore, we recommend keeping the primary legislation as high level as possible.

With regard to speed, we welcome the committee’s focus on the regulation of speed. Dott previously wrote to the Minister of Transport, Deputy Eamon Ryan, to recommend a number of mandatory safety measures, which included an upper-speed limit of 25 km/h. Our e-scooters would be capped in order that they could not go above this speed. We would also create gradually-reducing speed zones and adjustable speed limits in areas with high numbers of pedestrians or where riders need to drive extra carefully, for example, near schools.

If managed well, with the right safety measures in place, e-scooter schemes can reduce congestion, increase mobility and make our cities more liveable. One of the benefits of being second movers into the micromobility and e-scooter space is that Ireland can learn from the mistakes that have been made, and resolved, in other cities throughout Europe and the world. Dott will continue to engage with all the key stakeholders as Ireland moves forward in this space and share our insights and learnings from our operations abroad.

We will now move to Mr. Pencharz from Voi. He has three minutes.

Mr. Matthew Pencharz

Voi was founded in 2018. We are Europe’s leading micromobility operator, offering shared light electric vehicles, EVs, in 70 European towns and cities in 11 countries. Voi's vision is towns and cities made for living, free from congestion, noise and pollution. Voi's founding belief is to work with towns and cities to help deliver their policy goals and deliver safe, sustainable micromobility to everyone. Every scheme in every town is delivered in partnership with our towns and cities. We have had zero rogue launches, where vehicles have appeared seemingly from nowhere without permission from the local authorities. These operators have sadly given micromobility a poor reputation. Voi is the antithesis of this. Voi has worked with EY on our life cycle carbon analysis and succeeded in driving down those emissions by some 85% in a year. Since January 2020, our service has been certified as carbon neutral. Working with our supply chain partners, we committed, at COP26, to become net climate-positive by 2030 without relying on carbon offsets. As Europe’s largest micromobility provider, Voi has experience operating in very different regulatory environments, from the more free-market Nordic approach to the highly regulated trial environment in the UK that members heard about in an earlier session. With four years' operating experience, Voi has learned the lessons of what works and what does not, and how to deliver the very best service whatever the regulatory environment.

Voi would bring these learnings to Ireland to deliver the best scheme that meets the policy outcomes of modal shift away from single occupancy cars to reduce congestion and pollution and meet the carbon mitigation targets set both locally and nationally. Voi's operational experience has made ours the most efficient service, leading the industry, ensuring maximum utilisation of our vehicles, to deliver a safe, sustainable, convenient and affordable service to lure people out of cars. We are working with visually impaired charities, such as the Thomas Pocklington Trust and the Royal National Institute of Blind People, RNIB, in the UK and the Norwegian Association of the Blind and Partially Sighted, to eliminate the impact of our service on other vulnerable road users. We have co-designed our parking racks with the RNIB in order to make them more noticeable for those who are visually impaired or blind. Voi is also working with the RNIB to be the first operator to test a sound the vehicle makes while moving. We are also working with Irish technology company Luna on a pavement riding detection system, which is currently being piloted in Stockholm and Northampton. Across all our markets, Voi has seen 14% of our rides replacing car trips. In the UK, which has similar levels of car dependency to Ireland, we have seen 39% of rides replacing car trips. The legislation currently being considered with the establishment of a new vehicle category for powered personal transporters, through the Road Traffic and Roads Bill 2021, is a huge step forward for Irish transport, helping towns and cities to vastly reduce their carbon emissions, pollution and congestion through modal shift away from car use, as well as helping to support the recovery of public transport with micromobility acting as a true first and last mile solution. We commend the Government and the committee on their work on this legislation. After listening to the previous session, we largely agree with most of our operator colleagues on the Bill and regulations. We believe it should be progressed as quickly as possible to empower towns and cities to set the finer detail in their tender, as appropriate, for the individual conditions.

Ms Aisling Dunne

On behalf of Bolt, I thank the Chairman and members for providing us with the opportunity to make a submission in advance of Committee Stage of the Road Traffic and Roads Bill 2021. Bolt's mission is to help build cities for people, not cars, with enough on-demand transport options available so that people do not need to own a private vehicle. We are currently providing sustainable mobility solutions to more than 100 million customers in 45 countries across Europe and Africa. The services available include taxis, electric bikes, scooters, car sharing, food delivery and fast grocery delivery. In Ireland, we currently operate our taxi dispatch service in Dublin and we plan to roll it out in Cork in the coming weeks. We intend to considerably expand our transport offering here, with electric bikes and car sharing both potential schemes for this year. Obviously, when this legislation is in place, we plan to offer a scooter service. Our approach works best where we can provide a multimodal offering in order that our users can access multiple forms of transport easily through one app. They might choose to cycle or scoot out, perhaps picking up public transport on their way and then perhaps to get a taxi home in the evening, all the while avoiding private vehicle car use.

Our analysis shows that there is no time to lose in developing these sustainable transport solutions. Consumer analysis that we conducted with Bounce Insights last week shows that with current alternative options, only one in ten Irish car owners see it as possible to give up their private vehicle in the next five years. Six in ten Irish car owners use their vehicle every day, and eight in ten use their vehicle for recreational journeys that are the most suitable to making the switch. There is a growing willingness to switch if options are available, with rising fuel costs, environmental concerns and concerns over parking and congestion at the forefront. The time is right to switch.

We welcome the recent decision of the Cabinet to approve a range of amendments which will soon come before the committee for its consideration. With regard to powered personal transporters, PPTs, we particularly commend the Minister on listening to the industry and advocacy groups, such as the Irish Wheelchair Association, IWA, and the NCBI, and proposing to remove the maximum power and maximum speed provisions from the Bill, as contained in section 16. We agree that these provisions are best dealt within the secondary legislation, which will allow the Minister to consider best practices at present, but also maintain the ability to have flexibility as the technology changes. I hope the committee also agrees with this approach. We are available to any questions members may have on it.

In terms of areas for further consideration, Bolt hopes to engage with all parties as the regulations are drafted to ensure that the future shared electric scooter schemes truly prioritise multimodality. We recently undertook some research with the Norwegian Institute of Transport Economics, TØI. We released research which shows that 60% more users will shift from taxis to scooters for short journeys if nudged in that direction. The implications of the findings are significant and reinforce our view that through the provision of a range of services, people easily can be encouraged to make that change. Across Ireland, nearly half of all car trips are less than 4 km, with this figure even higher in cities. Figures show that 40% of Bolt taxi trips taken in Dublin in the month of February were 4 km or less. That is an area where users can be encouraged to transition to taking a more active mode of transport, such as electric scooters and electric bikes. Ultimately, one issue unites all the operators that appear before the committee today, as well as members of the committee, namely, a desire to help transform the transport offerings in Irish cities and do so in a safe and sustainable manner. We might disagree on who can do it best but we are striving towards the same goal. I look forward to answering the members' questions.

Ms Jean Andrews

I thank the Chairman and committee members for the invitation to attend today. I wish to introduce Superpedestrian briefly and then share a few thoughts that may help this dialogue. Superpedestrian is the thoughtful mobility company. We were spun out of MIT, the world-renowned research institute in the United States nearly a decade ago. Superpedestrian now operates shared mobility fleets using our LINK e-scooter in 60 cities across ten countries. Our smallest fleet is 25 scooters; our largest is 5,000. We also hold two thirds of all the patents in the micromobility sector. We have thought a lot about safety, which is why we are pleased to participate in constructive dialogue about e-scooter safety and technology. I would like to explore three themes with the committee that will help this discussion: whether shared e-scooters help reduce car use; how we can make sure that e-scooters are safe; and what we can do about pavement riding and other dangerous rider behaviours.

Do shared e-scooters help reduce car use? The short answer is "Yes". We operate the shared e-scooter trial zone in Nottingham in the UK, which is a city similar in design to many of our Irish cities. It is the most popular programme in the UK. In January this year, our Nottingham users travelled 150,000 km on our shared e-scooters. We know from our customer surveys that at least 30% of all rides replace short car journeys. Our shared e-scooters replaced some 45,000 km of short car journeys in Nottingham in January. This demonstrates that, when given the choice, many people choose to replace short car trips with e-scooter journeys, even in the winter. If the Road Traffic and Roads Bill 2021 is enacted, Irish people will soon be able to choose to travel by e-scooter rather than by car. This will help to reduce congestion and improve air quality in our towns and cities, which benefits everyone - not just those who use e-scooters. We commend the approach in the Road Traffic and Roads Bill 2021 of introducing a proposed maximum speed of 25 km/h, which aligns with the maximum speed permitted for e-scooters in most EU states. E-scooters travel on the road alongside motor vehicles. If the speed difference between these different vehicles is not minimised, riders will be placed at serious risk. Of course, 25 km/h is a maximum permitted speed. Shared micromobility operators can control and enforce lower speeds that are set in collaboration with local councils, through no-go and go-slow zones using geofencing technology. For example, in Nottingham, our scooters can only travel at 8 km/h in the designated go-slow zones, but can travel at 25 km/h in other areas.

How can we ensure the vehicles are safe? As one of the last countries in Europe to legislate for e-scooters, Ireland can benefit from recent advancements in scooter design and technology and require the highest standards, setting a global benchmark for safety. We commend the recent proposed amendments by the Minister to the Road Traffic and Roads Bill to ensure that certain characteristics of PPTs may be varied in the future. Companies like ours are constantly investing in new technologies to enhance safe micromobility offerings and the Minister's proposed amendments should help to future-proof the legislation to ensure Ireland can benefit from these advances.

We believe safety starts with the vehicle. That is why we took two years and invested much in developing the safest electric scooter possible. One key feature is our patented vehicle intelligence system, which we call VI. This runs 1,000 vehicle health checks every second and fine-tunes performance to avoid failures. VI also helps us to avoid battery fires by constantly checking battery health, including temperature of individual cells. In more than 16 million km of operation, we have never had a battery fire, an issue that has recently affected other popular shared electric scooter models. We call VI the "seat belt" moment for e-scooters. Just as seat belts are mandatory for cars in Ireland, we recommend that all electric scooters in Ireland should be fitted with an active safety system, like VI, as standard to ensure vehicle safety.

What can we do about pavement riding and other dangerous rider behaviours? There has been huge investment and innovation by the micromobility industry to solve some of its early challenges, and Ireland is well placed to take advantage of these new methods and technologies that are proven to ensure safe shared schemes. As an example, pavement riding and associated dangerous rider behaviour remains a key area of concern for many cities, from Chicago to Paris. Superpedestrian has developed a new technology that can detect and correct pavement riding and other dangerous behaviours, such as wrong-way riding and intoxicated riding, in real time. If we imagine a rider trying to ride along the pavement on busy O’Connell Street, our system would detect this immediately and automatically bring the vehicle to a safe stop. It is the first system to do so and we call it Pedestrian Defense.

This legislation is a really exciting opportunity for Ireland to enhance its transport networks and I look forward to seeing shared e-scooters operating safely on our streets in the near future. I thank the committee for its time and I am very happy to answer any questions.

Finally, but not least, is Ms Hall from TIER Mobility.

Ms Jessica Hall

I thank the Chair and the committee for facilitating this discussion today. I am head of operations for Ireland at TIER Mobility. TIER is Europe's largest e-scooter operator, with live operations in over 180 cities, including operating Ireland’s first live electric scooter trial at Dublin City University, DCU.

My role at TIER is all about operations and how a successful e-scooter scheme is designed, devised and implemented. I have overseen the launch of e-bikes and e-scooters in York and London, and more recently our trial on the DCU campus, which has been operational for about nine months.

As head of operations, I come to the committee today grounded in the knowledge of how a successful e-scooter scheme works from an operational perspective. I know first-hand how to put in place the safest possible e-scooter operation in a practical way and how important partnerships like our Ireland safety board are to the success of any e-scooter scheme.

TIER watched the committee's previous hearing with interest, when we saw representatives of some great organisations speak with real knowledge and insight about their concerns with the current legislation, and the difficulties that e-scooters can pose if not managed correctly. We welcome such thoughtful scrutiny and the work of the Chair and the committee in highlighting these challenges. We also welcome the prospect of working together to solve these challenges. It is this drive to face such challenges that led us to partner with two organisations that have appeared before the committee previously, namely, the Irish Wheelchair Association and the NCBI. They sit on our Ireland safety board, along with the Disability Federation of Ireland, Walk21 and Age Friendly Ireland.

This safety board has been in place since the beginning of 2021 and has met six times in substantive sessions organised around themes to discuss very real challenges posed by electric scooters in an Irish context. Like the witnesses at the previous meeting, I have seen what bad e-scooter regulatory frameworks look like, and specifically cities where there is little shape on an e-scooter scheme or where unlimited operators were allowed to operate. Such schemes are chaotic, messy and overly competitive and ultimately damage the image of e-scooters for everybody. That is not the type of thing we want. We do not want e-scooters without adequate regulation and instead we want to introduce services to Ireland, provided we can do so in a safe and sustainable way, learning the lessons from these hearings, from our own safety board hearings and from other cities.

Ireland is in an advantageous position and there is potentially a second mover advantage here. This country can now see what good e-scooter schemes look like in many jurisdictions and can also see what bad practice looks like. Ireland can ultimately very much shape a safe, sustainable scheme that works for everybody in the community. Ultimately, we want Ireland to have the safest e-scooter schemes in the world from day one.

I am responsible for the operation of our live trial on the DCU campus and I am proud of our results and progress to date. We have had e-scooters operational for more than nine months now, maintaining high levels of parking compliance thanks to our camera positioning system solution, which ensures centimetre-level accuracy on parking. This means scooters stay in tightly-defined parking bays and do not pose a hazard to anyone on the campus. We have also had a 100% safety record at the university and we feel that things like our foldable helmets being included with each journey is part of the reason for this. Most of all, we feel our DCU trial and our Ireland safety board demonstrate a real commitment to Ireland, and it is one that we are keen to solidify in the years ahead with a commitment to safety always being at the core of what we do.

Once again, I thank the Chair and committee. I look forward to the questions.

Members may have five minutes or so but there will be some bit of flexibility.

That is perfect. I have just the one question for each of the groups.

I will go in the order in which the groups spoke.

I thank the witnesses for the presentations. My concern is that we will have some control and a degree of standardisation and professionalism with shared schemes but, potentially, will have chaos arising from the private market, with one having an impact on the other in respect of how this new regime hits the ground. My question is not for the shared schemes per se but what would the witnesses advise the Government to be aware of, put in place or address for the private schemes or for the market more generally? Ms Andrews spoke to the seat belt moment in respect of standards but I am sure the private market standards are not the same as those for the shared schemes.

When we speak about minimum standards for e-scooters, do we need to address education programmes or engagement? We have spoken about programmes in primary or secondary schools across the country. Is this about enforcement when both shared schemes and formal regulation for the general population go live? Should we see members of the Garda becoming more visible in enforcing rules around these vehicles?

Mr. Duncan Robertson

It is a great question and it is clearly a significant issue. I work predominantly work in the UK and we are seeing a similar issue with private scooters currently being illegal and the British Government is in a similar position in trying to work out what to do. One of the key things to note is that the standard of shared e-scooters is incredibly high and we are able to do maintenance to ensure the vehicles are safe and keep an eye on how batteries are acting. All these actions are part of a suite that makes shared scooters so good. We should ensure that some of those elements come across into private scooters, including making sure a top speed and maximum weight is legislated for. Good quality lighting must also be assured so that vehicles and people can be seen.

The other advantage of introducing shared scooters is in the training schemes we can offer on the street or in the app. That is online, as well as going into schools and bringing people to our warehouses and educating them that way. A person may be on a shared scooter but the education transfers to private scooters as well. We would bring an element of formalised training to a much wider audience.

The Deputy mentioned enforcement.

In terms of enforcement we have seen in the UK that police enforcement is useful initially to make sure the rules are understood by the general public, and that it usually tapers off. That is probably the best way to do it without consuming too much resource.

Mr. Matthew Pencharz

As members might expect, the operators are going to largely agree on this. I agree with what Mr. Robertson just said about differentiation between the shared schemes and private e-scooters. We are regulated. Local authorities or governments can control where we operate with slow speed zones and normal speed zones, where the riders may park their vehicles and so on. We believe private e-scooters are also a tool when it comes to decongesting and decarbonising our cities. It is very important that they are seen to be on a level playing field with the shared e-scooters. Some of the regulations should be very simple when it comes to standards, for example power outage, power rating and, more important, speed, so that these vehicles are essentially type approved in the same way as the shared e-scooters are. Members could look at some of our European neighbours. The Germans have type approved their vehicles and the Department for Transport in the UK has type approved the trial scooters. We believe that should be extended to private e-scooters in due course. Insurance requirements should surely be the same for private e-scooters. Registration plates for scooters in shared schemes have worked very well in the UK when it comes to enforcement and safety. There should be a similar requirement for private e-scooters. They are definitely part of the story and probably quite an important part. However, it is very important that there is a level playing field and that regulations are the same for shared and for private.

Ms Aisling Dunne

I will not repeat what my colleagues have mentioned around enforcement, which is obviously important as this is a road transport mobility and there must be enforcement procedures around it. A lot has been said on vehicle standards already. About two weeks ago one of the large supermarket chains was selling electric scooters. That is very worrying because there are potentially very low standards for the vehicles that are being sold there, putting a lot of riders and other road users around them in danger. There is a need for high standards to be imposed for private use. Awareness and education are needed for private vehicle users as well as for those using the shared scheme. A lot of the operators run education schemes as people start using their scooters. That obviously does not apply when someone is purchasing a scooter privately. We would like to see the Road Safety Authority get involved. Many scooter users will have provisional or full driving licences. If as part of the provisional driving licence process and the theory test or the full driving licence test they are required to understand how and where to use a scooter and the dangers and responsibility that come with it, this would result in a good step-change in behaviour.

One of the most dangerous behaviours I see around the place, apart from not wearing sufficient high visibility gear - something on which the Road Safety Authority could raise awareness once they become legal - is tandem riding. That often involves children, which is particularly worrying.

Does tandem riding refer to more than one person on a scooter?

Ms Aisling Dunne

Yes. We have a patent pending for new technology to detect when there is more than one person on a scooter. This is for the shared scheme. In running the pilots for that, we have found that when we alert people that we are aware there are two people on the scooter, the dangers of it and the reasons it is a bad idea, they do not do it again.

It is quite commonplace at the moment.

Ms Aisling Dunne

It is absolutely everywhere.

They are very young.

Ms Aisling Dunne

Absolutely. Just think of the danger of it. They are so close to the ground.

If I may ask one question, what are the regulations around the purchase of e-scooters in Ireland at the moment? Is there a standard that they have to meet?

Ms Aisling Dunne

There are no standards as far as I am aware. They are only supposed to be used on private land.

If I buy a scooter anywhere, does that scooter have to meet any specifications at the moment in Ireland?

Ms Aisling Dunne

As far as I am aware there are no vehicle requirements whatsoever, which is what is so worrying. That is how they can be sold in supermarkets. That awareness piece and education being led by the Road Safety Authority, notifying people of the danger of what they are doing, has really helped from what we have seen.

Ms Jean Andrews

I would like to make a brief point on the timing of the legislation and then talk about technical specification education programmes and, finally, infrastructure. The committee is considering the primary legislation; there is still secondary legislation to come which is not tabled until the end of this year. On the question of shared schemes and private e-scooters, there will potentially be another gap while local authorities introduce by-laws.

We understand the secondary legislation will deal with wattage and speed, is that correct?

Ms Jean Andrews

Yes.

The primary legislation will be more macro.

Ms Jean Andrews

Yes. While that legislation is pending, in that gap, people are rushing out in their droves to buy private e-scooters. There is policy uncertainty. There are no rules and regulations as to how people should ride e-scooters safely. There are a lot of people riding them on pavements and many examples of poor rider behaviour. The sooner we have legislation to provide that certainty so people are aware of how they should be riding the scooters, the better, for shared schemes also.

Ms Andrews's understanding is that it will be macro primary legislation followed by secondary legislation followed by the shared scheme.

Ms Jean Andrews

Correct.

Would that come through in the form of legislation or a statutory instrument? When we speak about secondary legislation are we talking about a statutory instrument?

Ms Jean Andrews

Yes.

That flows from the primary legislation as I am sure Ms Andrews is aware.

Ms Jean Andrews

Yes. The primary legislation will give the Minister powers to provide for shared schemes and vehicle specifications.

In layman's terms, the primary legislation is key because under specific sections it gives the Minister the power to implement. Will that also deal with the shared schemes?

Ms Jean Andrews

Yes. We do not know what will be in those regulations yet but we understand-----

That will come through what we know as a statutory instrument. Ms Andrews is calling it secondary legislation but to a layman it is the statutory instrument which is what the Minister can bring forward. He is required to lay it before the Dáil but it does not come through the Houses in the traditional manner of a Bill.

Ms Jean Andrews

Correct. That is currently tabled for Q4 of this year so that is another stretch.

Is Ms Andrews satisfied with that?

Ms Jean Andrews

I think it is a satisfactory approach but the timing is very long. The gap between primary and secondary legislation and then by-laws being introduced is very long.

When is Ms Andrews expecting the statutory instrument?

Ms Jean Andrews

The climate action plan says it will be published in Q4 of 2022. That could be the end of this year. After than local authorities may have to make their own by-laws, for example, to licence shared schemes. That is for the shared schemes.

Will that come through on the same statutory instrument or is Ms Andrews being told it is coming much later?

Ms Jean Andrews

That is a separate process the local authorities have to undertake. There is still quite a way to go.

When is it expected the Minister will instruct the local authorities to do the shared schemes once the statutory instruments have been published?

Ms Jean Andrews

All I am aware of at the moment is that it says Q4 in the climate action plan for the statutory instrument.

Is that in respect of the speed and wattage or is it in respect of the shared scheme?

Ms Jean Andrews

Both, I believe. We do not know what is going to be in it yet but it will grant the local authorities power, we understand, to license shared schemes.

That is a good bit off.

Ms Aisling Dunne

What we have been told is that the regulations will cover both private use and the shared schemes and that as soon as the primary legislation has been passed in both Houses, they will commence drafting of those regulations. From our perspective, when we speak to councils about their plans, they say that we are only at primary legislation at the moment, which is very macro, that they do not know the details and cannot progress with even considering how a shared scheme might look. From an operator's perspective, we would love to see the Department working with the local authorities as the regulations are being drafted, facilitating the councils to commence their deliberations and work on the by-laws.

In that way, hopefully by very early next year, the councils might at least be in a position to start considering operators.

There is real urgency to private use, an issue the Chairman raised. That is the element that is active. People are operating in a legal lacuna, without any guidance. There is also an urgency to trying to help people to make this modal shift. We would love to see both elements progress in tandem with each other in order that there is not this stop-start-----

I thank Ms Dunne. To conclude on a point Ms Andrews made, has Superpedestrian had an opportunity to look at how the law has been put in place in other jurisdictions? Are the details on wattage and speeds coming through in primary or in secondary legislation? One can call it a statutory instrument, regulations or whatever else. What is the format being used in other countries?

Ms Jean Andrews

Mr. Padden mentioned in earlier evidence that the UK approach is to have the more prescriptive elements in secondary legislation. That makes sense because there is a lot of innovation and change happening in micromobility. It is very hard to amend primary legislation; it is much easier to amend secondary legislation - a statutory instrument, for example.

I pulled Ms Andrews away, but-----

Ms Jean Andrews

I wanted to make a couple of comments in response to the Chairman's questions.

The Chairman does that.

I am slow at times to catch up.

Ms Jean Andrews

As to what should be in the legislation and technical specifications, everyone has talked about the treatment of shared scooters, standardisation and the introduction of self-diagnostic systems, for example, which can look at the various components of the scooter and make sure they are safe, prevent battery fires, etc. Education programmes are really important. The RSA could potentially introduce a countrywide education programme such that anyone operating an e-scooter would need to go through training, whether online or offline. We have done quite a lot in Nottingham, as I mentioned. In the UK we operate billboards with messaging for riders about not riding on the pavement and about wearing a helmet, parking considerately, etc. Operators can take on training to make people aware of how to ride safely.

I will make a final point about cycling infrastructure. The Government has announced €158 million in investment in cycling infrastructure in recent weeks or months, and that needs to be spent. The draft legislation envisages that e-scooters will be treated as bicycles and permitted to use cycling infrastructure. We all know that cycling infrastructure is not up to scratch not just in Ireland but in other places too. There is now a lot of money to invest in cycling infrastructure to improve and to enhance it. We talked earlier about pavement riding. Often, much of the reason people ride e-scooters and bikes on the pavement is that they just do not feel safe on the road with other traffic. Therefore, the sooner local authorities can spend that money and improve and enhance cycling infrastructure, the better and the sooner we will have a safer environment for not just e-scooter riders but also cyclists.

Ms Jessica Hall

I agree all my colleagues on the points made. I will not repeat them. The one thing I will add is that Ireland has the opportunity here to make shared scooters more attractive than private ones. If the service is in a city that has great parking and is very accessible and stretches into the rural areas, there will be no need to buy a private-use scooter. Therefore, if the Government goes properly at these shared schemes, it will reduce the requirement for people to buy private e-scooters.

I have just one more question. Are the witnesses concerned about the quality and standard of private scooters being sold widely at present?

Ms Jessica Hall

Yes.

Ms Jean Andrews

Yes.

Ms Aisling Dunne

Yes, very concerned.

We better not leave out the two gentlemen, Mr. Robertson and Mr. Pencharz.

Mr. Duncan Robertson

It is a bit of a concern, particularly battery safety and ensuring that batteries are well managed.

Mr. Matthew Pencharz

Yes. I completely agree. As I said earlier, all private e-scooters, just like shared scooters, must be type-approved and have vehicle standards, bringing the standard of the whole industry up rather than bringing everything down.

Senator Horkan will have approximately five minutes, but I will be liberal.

I do not know if any of the witnesses got the chance to see the previous session so I will not labour the points that were made then. We teased out a lot of them. There is a lot of unanimity, it seems, among the operators on geofencing, not riding on footpaths, power limits, speed limits and so on. I can see that this is a fast-moving technology that is being constantly upgraded. I assume there is, if not a kind of EC mark-type product rating in the same way there is for toys and electrical goods, something for scooters, not that they would all necessarily be to the standard of the companies represented by the witnesses. I would have thought, however, that something involving batteries, power and so on would have some basic electrical and CE-type mark. I do not know that. We should find that out. I am not saying many scooters are well below the standard of the witnesses' robust machines that get many hours' and days' use by many different users, but I would be very worried if that were the case and if private companies and supermarkets could just sell anything with no regulation.

I am interested in some things we have not talked about so much. There is the technological argument as to whether there should be a kind of black box recorder inside scooters that records information on what people are doing all the time and sends it up into the cloud. There is the issue of insurance. We are talking about hire schemes versus private use. The latter sounds like it will be the harder to regulate because the witnesses' companies have users, they are registered, the companies can see what they are doing, the technology will probably be of a higher spec and so on. Should people need licences and insurance? Is there a need for a kind of black box recorder? How can we stop the people riding scooters while intoxicated? Can alcohol be detected through people's pores? Should riders have to wear special gloves or breathe into something before they start riding their scooters? These are not the biggest issues in the world, but maybe e-scooter schemes just do not work between the more high-risk times of 11 p.m. and 4 a.m. I do not know.

The witnesses are the guys and ladies all the expertise here. In cities, what has worked best and what has worked really badly? The witnesses will all tell me there has never been a problem anywhere, but clearly there have been problems. As previous speakers have said, we are coming to this a little later than some places. What has worked particularly badly but has been resolved? What has worked well? What should we watch out for? The one question I do not think anybody has asked is this: typically, what is the optimal number of operators in an environment? Should it be two or ten? The witnesses will all say that if they get the contract, they would want it to be just them, but would it be better if there were four, six, eight or ten companies operating? I presume they are not interchangeable. Maybe some of them will buy one another up. We have heard from representatives of nine different schemes. Everybody seems very professional. Everybody seems excellent. That is all to their credit. However, I am not sure the four Dublin authorities or Limerick City and County Council will offer nine operators the opportunity to compete with one another. What are the witnesses' thoughts on that? Those questions are to any and all of the witnesses.

I will call on the witnesses in order, beginning with Mr. Pencharz. We will then go to Ms Dunne, Ms Andrews and then Ms Hall.

Mr. Matthew Pencharz

I will try to run through some of the Senator's questions as quickly as I can. Certainly, Voi does record driver behaviour: speeds, where they have gone, etc. That is on our system in the cloud, which gives lots of interesting data insights on driver behaviour to transport planners as to what the most popular routes are and where, for example, cycling infrastructure could be put in. It gives quite interesting information to the people thinking about modal shift.

As for driving licences, this will be, for once, a moment of disagreement among us because I think one of my colleagues said she quite liked the idea of driving licences. Like somebody on the earlier session, Voi does not believe that a driving licence, certainly a provisional licence, is proof of roadworthiness or road sense. However, it certainly is a block to modal shift. It gets people on the road to car ownership. Surely, the longer you delay a younger person getting a driving licence, the more you will embed the modal shift behaviours of not owning your own car and single-occupancy journeys.

As for intoxication, I do not yet know of a technology that can detect alcohol intoxication through handlebars.

What Voi can certainly do is a kind of reaction test in the app off certain hours in order to see if the rider might be intoxicated and advise on connecting him or her to other modes of transport. It is up to cities to decide the hours of operation. In the markets that I look after in the UK, some markets are 24-7 and others are not. The system is turned off at a particular time of night where there are levels of people who are more likely to be intoxicated. That is up to the cities and an important message I would like to give is that every city is different and it is really up to them as to how they design the services, including the timings of operations.

When it comes to operators, Voi is very lucky in that we have a great number of exclusive licences in the UK. What is keeping the number of operators fairly low is that these companies are going to invest to stay in that city. If we have a concession for two, three or four years, we will invest to really improve and optimise that service through putting in the racks, for example, if that is what the city wants, integrating into the other transport providers to offer that multimodal operation if that is, for example, Dublin transport or Cork transport, or whatever the city transit authority is. If one has many operators, there is inevitably going to be too much competition and a race to the bottom. What one wants to see is operators competing, like we will all be competing for the licences when they come forward in Ireland, to offer the best service and technology offering, the best integration into other transport operators and the best partnerships with some of the bodies and civil society groups in Ireland’s cities.

For that, the number of operators should be kept very low. In Voi’s view, it would be one or two. When one gets more than that number, one falls into the danger of potentially too much competition, too much confusion for users and more difficulties for the cities to manage us as a transport partner.

I now move to Ms Dunne.

Ms Aisling Dunne

I do not want to disagree with one of my colleagues but I am going to have to.

I am glad that I have finally caused a row.

Pray do.

Ms Aisling Dunne

From our perspective in Bolt, we say competition is a good thing. It is good for the users and ultimately this is about providing a good service for the users to get them to make that shift. We have seen in some of the trials in the UK where there is just one provider that there is no incentive to provide a good service at an affordable rate and that there is no motivation because they have a captive market.

In general, as is the case across business the world over, competition is a good thing. For somewhere like Dublin, especially if the councils are going to work together and do a joined-up scheme, it would be better for users there if one did not have operators for Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, Fingal County Council, South Dublin County Council and Dublin City Council, DCC. We would therefore be advocating that the councils work together and do a joint tender or process and that this would be the best for the users but probably not as good for the operators because there is less opportunity to service Dublin then.

If they do that, there needs to be three or perhaps four operators who cover Dublin. That provides that level of competition and the need to provide a strong service.

One of the things that my colleague mentioned there was that if one was the sole provider, one is more incentivised to provide infrastructure such as charging racks. Bolt provides charging racks in a number of cities and we have just launched them in recent months. They act as an incentive for parking and while they are parked, they are also being charged. This is a very efficient way to charge them without the need for an operations team to do it. These are very easily installed and removed.

The fact that one has competition should not be a reason why one could not do that in a city and make that investment. Bolt’s perspective also is that we are not just here for six months, a year, two or three years, but that this is a long-term commitment to the country to provide a range of services and we see competition as a positive.

I do not want to repeat some of the things but I do agree-----

We are caught on time, Ms Dunne.

Ms Aisling Dunne

I will just say one other thing which is that we also have that drunk recognition, which is a very important tool in the app where, if someone tries to unlock the vehicle between prescribed hours which have been decided by the council or the Department, that they must undertake this test. If they fail it, what we do in other cities is that we nudge them towards a taxi or a safer mode of transport. The value of having the services continuing to operate in the evening is that they provide an affordable way home for people who have to work shifts or must work at night and that is what we are trying to do. I thank the Chairman.

I call Ms Andrews.

Ms Jean Andrews

I will have to agree with Ms Dunne on the competition element. Competition is healthy, good and gives the best service for users and allows the councils to have a level of oversight as well. One does not want to have too many operators and perhaps three or four is probably the sweet spot in the Dublin context but that is for others to decide.

On intoxicated riding, I mentioned the Pedestrian Defense technology that we have, which detects whether a scooter is on the pavement. It builds on the global positioning system, GPS, technology and the geofencing technology that is already on the scooter. We are actually building new sensors into our scooters so that we can understand at all times not only where the scooter is but how it is being ridden.

If it is swerving unduly, it will pick up on that.

Ms Jean Andrews

Exactly, we can see patterns of behaviour and there is artificial intelligence, AI, on the scooter that detects erratic rider behaviour which can be intoxicated riding or someone messing and joking around and riding dangerously for many different reasons.

The operator can slow them down.

Ms Jean Andrews

Exactly, that should slow it down. It will detect these patterns and bring these scooter to a safe stop. It does not do the breath test but it can, through other means, detect intoxicated riding.

Ms Jessica Hall

The short answer to the operator question is two to three for somewhere like Dublin and perhaps a single operator in the smaller cities across the country but two to three is where I would like to pitch it. I will answer the question that everyone else has avoided on what could go badly.

We are interested in what Ms Hall’s thoughts are.

Ms Jessica Hall

I am either very brave or very stupid.

She is very honest, in any event.

Ms Jessica Hall

An example of where it went wrong in other markets would be Paris a few years ago. The floodgates opened with nine different operators and scooters everywhere, and there was no regulation. Paris then retracted, had a tender process, so we already are ahead of the game in terms of listening, learning and adapting in the Irish market.

One of the other kind of approaches that can lead to a lack of order in a city is when scooters can park anywhere. We promote mandatory parking bays and this could be combined with free-floating scooters in the rural areas, where there is less of a trip hazard issue. Getting that parking right means that the cities are then orderly. Another flag here is that GPS is not that accurate, especially when there are very tall buildings. Here we deploy a camera-positioning system which uses a scan of one’s surroundings to anchor one in the exact spot on which one is standing, as we have been out to that parking spot beforehand and have mapped the area and have made a 3-D model of it. If one deploys clever technologies like that in those really dense areas, one knows exactly where the scooters are parked at all times rather than the GPS signal bouncing between the tall buildings.

I thank Ms Hall very much.

I now call Senator Buttimer.

Mr. Duncan Robertson

Can I come in on this question, please?

My apologies, Mr. Robertson.

Mr. Robertson has been on the go a long time at this stage.

Mr. Duncan Robertson

Yes, I have been around micromobility in the forms of bikes and scooters for the best part of a decade and I have four key learnings that I would like to share, particularly around things that are done badly.

One is not having a joined-up approach with local authorities and that point has already been made, which to ensure that cities have good coverage across all areas and that all of those use cases can be delivered in order that people can actually do the journeys that they want, and that they do not have to finish their journeys, as far as the user is concerned, at arbitrary administrative boundaries. That is a critical one.

The second one is parking, which has just been mentioned. The chaos that we have seen before in dockless bikes and scooters in the past is something that we do not want to repeat. The technology is now out there to ensure the people can park in parking bays.

As far as I am aware, in all of the trials that have gone on the UK that started with completely free-floating, if it they have not moved to dedicated parking, they certainly are moving towards it because it is the best way to ensure orderliness and tidiness within our cities.

The third point is that competition is 100% required in a city. Having one operator breeds complacency, the price goes up and it becomes a weaker quality product.

Most cities can deal with at least two operators, so that is crucial. The third point is the long-term aspect of this enterprise. We cannot do investments that have too much of a short-term view and look at contracts that are less than a year. As has been previously mentioned, we need to be able to commit to three or four years down the line so that we can make sure we have high-quality warehouses. We often need a lease that is at least three years long. We need to make sure that we can employ staff and give people certainty. Having a longer-term contract is essential as part of doing shared scooter schemes. They are four learnings from my rather long and bruising experience in the world of dockless scooters.

I am conscious of time. I welcome all the witnesses and thank them for being here. I will start with Mr. Pencharz. In fairness to him, he is probably no stranger to parliamentary committees. To be fair to him also, e-scooter safety is something he has pioneered in the context of his company. He has an app that has been very good, which I have looked at in advance of today's meeting. I am very impressed by it. It is unique in that it tells people how to use e-scooters. First, could I ask him about making the app more widely available and how he would promote its use? Some people who might want to learn more might be a bit reticent about using the app.

Mr. Matthew Pencharz

To use one of our scooters, people have to download the app, verify themselves and set up an account. It sounds like the Senator is good to go. Before they go on their first ride, they have to go through an e-training module and every time they fire up the app there are reminders about pavement riding or twin riding and all the issues that we have raised.

I found the focus on speed and different levels of permission for payment on the app very impressive.

Mr. Matthew Pencharz

We have pretty granular geofencing of the product. One of the great things about micromobility is that we can deploy very quickly. I have visited Dublin a few times and I know that building a new tram line can take a while and is quite disruptive. Deploying micromobility can be done extremely quickly. Most of us here on this panel could deploy it within a few months, once we buy a tender and have permission to operate. The geofences can be tweaked very quickly. To echo my colleague's point, our experience in the UK is that nothing is perfect, and it can always be improved at the edges. That could mean tweaking some of the slow-ride zones and mandatory parking zones. For various reasons, there may be a need to bring in new slow-ride zones, but the truth is that some may need to be taken out because they are unsafe due to the way that the ride is attracting the traffic.

The slow-ride zones and no-ride zones are built into the app. Today, in the city of Bristol the e-scooter scheme was extended again until November. It impressed me that the operation of the scheme was suspended from a safety point of view between Christmas and New Year. What have the learnings been from Bristol? There were 90 accidents over a four-week period. We can learn from the experience in the UK in terms of safety and rider behaviour. Could Mr. Pencharz give us an insight into what he has learned from Bristol as an example of a pilot?

Mr. Matthew Pencharz

Most of the accidents the Senator mentioned were on private e-scooters. The shared schemes are quite safe. Mr. Padden stated, and it is our experience as well as an operator, that e-scooter safety on the shared schemes is broadly the same as cycling. It is a pretty safe form of transport. In fact, we have a serious accident approximately every 28,000 rides. It is essentially a safe form of transport.

Bristol is a great example of where micromobility in England and the UK has delivered a transformational experience. There was a question about where it has gone wrong for micromobility. We had the example of too many operators, too many scooters, too much clutter, too much chaos and it was not regulated enough. We could also point to examples in the UK where it is the exact opposite: where the schemes are not big enough, so we do not get the modal shift or there is not enough density of vehicles, because it needs to be convenient to get people out of their cars. People need to get their phone out and know they can get a scooter within a two-minute walk. Once it gets to four, five or six minutes, it becomes inconvenient, and people are going to get back in their car. That is another example of finding the sweet spot of not going to chaos, which has been seen in some markets, for example we heard about Paris earlier, and perhaps in some of the Nordic countries recently. If there is an overly onerous regulatory environment, you do not get the convenience for the users, which means you do not get the benefits for the service.

I thank Mr. Pencharz for his presentation. I have been watching the pilot in Bristol with interest. I congratulate him on his proactivity.

My colleagues and I have met with various people and engaged on safety, which is an issue of great concern to me. In Mr. Robertson's presentation, he mentioned case studies in London and Barcelona as part of his work in this area. It is fair to say that from a carbon-neutral point of view, a climate-change perspective and in terms of a modal shift in transportation, we are all on board and welcome this new type of public transport. Based on today's meeting, we are very much moving towards that shared model. In the context of the population bases outside Dublin, is there sufficient population to have competition in a shared e-scooter regime? I wish to ask him about his perspective in respect of the case studies in London and Barcelona and from the enforcement and safety perspective. I am focusing on safety because I have bought the argument from the point of view of sustainability and other factors. How can we take the safety perspective from the learnings from Barcelona and London and adapt it to Ireland?

Mr. Duncan Robertson

London has been a fascinating experience. We have three operators there, so it is very competitive. Some of the key learnings there include the significant engagement with stakeholders, including the police. We work very closely with the police. We have contacts with the key central police functions within the metropolitan police service but also in regional areas within London. If there are any issues from our side or vice versa then they have phone numbers and email addresses for all of our operations team who are on-call 24 hours a day, so they can come to us at any stage, and we can work with them. The kind of things that we do include dealing with cases if someone is reported for misbehaviour, for example. When we learn of the incident, we can work out who they were by the journey that they were taking based on the time report and we can call them up and either explain that they were doing something wrong or if it was appropriate we could ban them from the system. We have done that on numerous occasions. It is something that we are not afraid to do because it is essential for maintaining high standards.

Smaller scale operations are doable. We have worked on university campuses and with sports grounds as well, and large employers. We look at each market specifically. We go there, assess it and we work with either the local authority or the private landowner and establish what the service might look like and how it would best serve the people it is supposed to serve. We have got many ways of working within larger cities, but also much smaller areas.

A point was made about training. We teamed up with AA DriveTech in the UK to create an online module. While we have in-app safety quizzes and safety reminders, the point of sale is the key area where we want to encourage people to understand the safety of aspects of riding a scooter.

We also have another module, which is freely accessible to anybody. We promote it through our app. We also promote it through our website. We promote it more widely as well. That would be useful for private riders, either our own or anyone else.

On the competitive element outside of Dublin and on a population basis, is that model sustainable in Cork, Limerick, Waterford and Galway?

Mr. Duncan Robertson

For areas like that to operate, I would still maintain that unless you are operating in a very small area, you will still need at least two operators for cities like Cork and Limerick and areas that the Senator mentioned there. Two operators would be manageable. We operate multiple-operator cities. Multiple-operator environments are a necessity.

I would like to go back. I will put the same question to the witnesses that I put to previous witnesses on the two areas of the 250 W power and the 25 km speed. I would like their view on this. I will start with Ms Dunne. Then, I will go to Ms Andrews and Ms Hall. Then, I will come back to Mr. Pencharz and Mr. Robertson. Those two issues have been coming up. How does Ms Dunne view the issue of the 250 W. What does she believe should be the upper limit? I also ask her about the speed.

Ms Aisling Dunne

I know that the Chair heard from our colleagues on this. We agree with them. We wrote to the Minister and also to the committee regarding our concerns about the 250 W. This is in the current draft of the Bill, but it proposed that it will be removed on Committee Stage. We support the decision to remove it and to deal with that in regulations. We would like to see it higher. We think there is a key distinction between watt power and speed. They sometimes mistakenly get linked. However, they should not be, because of different terrain and different safety features that can come on the scooters which require watt power.

What would be the upper limit? What is the minimum that would be needed?

Ms Aisling Dunne

Many of the operators currently run scooters that are in excess of 500 W, or around 500 W. We therefore would want to see that above that so that we can provide the speed-----

What about the speed of 25 km/h?

Ms Aisling Dunne

The speed of 25 km/h is again being proposed to be removed. I think 25 km/h should be the upper limit and should be available only in streets where there are segregated cycle lanes. If bikes are to travel at a certain speed and if a scooter was prohibited from travelling at that same speed----

What does Ms Dunne think about the minimum speed?

Ms Aisling Dunne

On the minimum speed, we operate in slow zones at 5 km/h or 6 km/h in some cities where there is the potential for interaction with pedestrians. While that would not be on paths, there can be interaction. We are keen to see that at the lower end here as well, as appropriate.

Ms Jean Andrews

I agree on the 25 km/h maximum speed. We operate in Nottingham, as I mentioned, which has the same maximum speed. The scooters observe an 8 km/h per hour speed in go-slow areas that are busy with pedestrians. That works very well. That is common across European jurisdictions. If the scooter is in traffic with cars, the scooter should be able to keep up with traffic. To go any slower, or not to have the capability for that maximum speed in traffic is dangerous.

On the wattage, I would agree with previous contributions. I think the 250 W is too low for the scooters that we have today. In order to be able to get up hills and to have the degree of pick-up that is needed for a safe ascension of a hill, in excess of 500 W and up to 1,000 W-----

Can you regulate the speeds with whatever wattage? Can you operate at a lower speed?

Ms Jean Andrews

Yes. The motor output power and the speeds are not synonymous. The motor power is about having that pick-up and exhilaration, on a hill, for example. It is important to have adequate power. However, speeds can be capped.

Ms Jessica Hall

I share my colleagues’ views. An upper limit of 25 km/h enables the authorities to reduce that as a local level, if a council decides to do that. On the wattage, an upper limit of 1,000 W allows for vehicles to improve over time and to not be capped by the legislation.

Mr. Matthew Pencharz

As the Chair will probably expect, I completely agree with colleagues. VOI was also one of the companies that wrote to the Minister. It is important to disentangle power outage to speeds because they are completely separate things. We operate in two hilly cities in England. We have been talking about Bristol and also Bath. If we were to have low-wattage vehicles there, they would arguably not be able to safely and reliably pick up speed while going up these steep hills. I know that Cork is pretty hilly, so I can imagine that there would be a similar problem there if there were lower power outage machines------

We have a few hills in Limerick city as well.

I am broadly aligned with everybody else. I would suggest that there should be an upper limit on speed of 25 km/h per hour. That can be changed at a local level as per city and the operators’ requirements, particularly over time. Maybe it could be started in the city at a lower speed, as people are getting used to it, and then it can be increased. The point that has been mentioned before is around the conflation of power outage and speed and acceleration. They are not necessarily fully linked, and we need to be aware of that. We can control the speed and we can control the acceleration, almost regardless of what power is. However, we need a certain amount of power to be able to deliver on the speed and acceleration, particularly in hilly areas. Therefore, I think that an upper limit of 1,000 W, but very much at least 500 W in power is needed.

We have two more contributors. I am conscious that we are way over time, but I want to let people in. I call Deputy Ó Murchú and I ask him to keep within five minutes. Then we will move to Deputy Lahart.

I apologise if I repeat anything. I was in and out of the meeting. I imagine that a lot has been dealt with. There is a difficulty with personal versus the shared schemes. Witnesses are talking about reduced speed in certain areas. Are they talking about that being enforced by geo-fencing? I keep using the example of my son who bought one of these. Obviously, he does not have that restriction, so that is a difficulty for some from an enforcement point of view.

I imagine this has also been brought up, but if it has not could the witnesses comment on batteries and battery safety? When my son bought it, I was actually very glad that it actually broke straight away, so that no one would be coming to me complaining about him. I have not fixed it, but that is not because I am against e-scooters. I think they are here to stay as part of active living and active travel.

The witnesses have said what they have said on the speeds. I think we can all get on board with that. This is probably not quite the speeds that some of the disability groups wanted, but I suppose this has to be workable. Some of this will come down to that point I made earlier that our roads are imperfect, and our pavements are imperfect. We are starting from a bad place. Bespoke solutions will be imperfect even in places.

Insurance has been thrown up at us. I know what they witnesses will say. The logic is that if drivers have to wear a helmet, and if they need insurance, there will be too many obstacles to them. However, it is just one of those questions that have been put to us. Could I throw all of that at the witnesses?

What are witnesses views on the wearing of helmets? What is their view on the wearing of high-visibility jackets, and the practicalities of that? They might comment on insurance, helmets and high-visibility jackets.

Ms Jean Andrews

We discussed the personal versus the shared scooter a moment ago and I know this was discussed in the previous session as well. The shared scooters are much more heavily regulated where they operate in other jurisdictions and where geo-fencing technology enables reduced speeds and top speeds to be managed. That is just not there, at least currently, with the personal scooters.

Battery safety is an important point. There have been some fairly serious battery fires involving e-scooters recently. I mentioned that Superpedestrian scooters has an on-board self-diagnostics technology that checks battery temperature all the time, before the ride, during the ride and after the ride. We have never had a battery fire. That sort of technology is important in making sure that e-scooters are safe and that we do not have incidences where scooters are going on fire in warehouses, out on the streets on their own or in someone’s home.

Do we need to regulate for that?

Ms Jean Andrews

The more technical aspects of regulation e-scooters will be in the secondary legislation. We would argue that it would be really important to have a self-diagnostic system like that in order to make e-scooters safe.

On battery safety, the maintenance regime is important in terms of how often the scooters are checked, are bought into the warehouse and are examined by mechanics, etc.

It is about maintenance rating, plus having the technology and onboard diagnostic capability.

In terms of insurance in the shared schemes, for example, in the UK where we operate in Nottingham, the Department for Transport requires that the operators have insurance, and this is the same in other markets as well. That is something all operators will have for the shared schemes.

I refer to the Chairman's questions around helmets and high-visibility jackets. In terms of helmets, I know the approach taken in the draft legislation is the same as bicycles essentially in that helmets are not mandatory, and that is a sensible approach. In the scheme we operate in Nottingham, there was an integrated helmet in the previous model of scooter, in which there was a helmet attached to the scooter. We found that only 4% of people used that integrated helmet. That was potentially because of hygiene issues and they did not feel comfortable using it, as well as safety issues. It may not have fit properly. Maybe it had an impact previously. Therefore, we recommend that it is better to bring one's own helmet that fits better. We and other operators hold events at which we give away helmets.

And on high-visibility jackets?

Ms Jean Andrews

In terms of high-visibility jackets, the scooters should have lighting that makes them very visible. If people want to wear high-visibility jackets that is great, but we would not argue that it should be mandatory. It is better to invest in safer cycling infrastructure, as I mentioned earlier, and make the roads safer for people.

Ms Jessica Hall

In response to the point on battery safety, as my colleague discussed, the maintenance regime is really important here. Certain scooters use swappable batteries. This means that if the operations teams on the ground are replacing those batteries every day and putting them on charge every day, the physical handling of the batteries is the check, which is why we have no battery fires in our UK operations. On that, it is also important that the operations teams are not outsourced. It needs to be an in-house operation and they need to be trained by the operators to make sure the level of training is consistent throughout the entire team.

We make helmets available on every scooter. There is a box on our scooters with a foldable helmet inside. We have seen slightly higher helmet usage, with a peak helmet usage of 30% in our DCU trial for scooters at the university. Helmets should not be mandatory but making them available to people using the scooter is a very good approach to take. The same goes for high-visibility jackets, as was said before. The scooters are very visible, usually in bright colours - we can agree on that. The lights are always on and that is the key.

Ms Aisling Dunne

I agree with my colleagues and do not want to repeat what was said but, in terms of insurance, we have an arrangement with Allianz Insurance and across 26 European countries we have insurance in place. That is important for users.

Is it the most expensive here?

Ms Aisling Dunne

Until we are operating here, we have not yet got the quotes. However, as there are insurance problems in Ireland, the Deputy is absolutely correct.

If Bolt operates in other jurisdictions, I presume it is mandatory to have insurance for people who are using your scooters.

Ms Aisling Dunne

As far as I am aware, in different jurisdictions, some have it as mandatory and some do not, but we have it across all 26 European jurisdictions we operate in. That is in place for us-----

In those jurisdictions, does a private person need it?

Ms Aisling Dunne

No.

It is the same for bikes.

Ms Aisling Dunne

It is the same for bikes. We are trying to put in place the best, safest and most affordable service, thereby, as one of my colleagues said, motivating people away from private ownership where there are fewer controls and there is less potential for regulation. It has allowed them to see that renting a scooter to get them to the DART station or the bus allows them to leave the scooter and not have to lug it with them and bring it in and out to work. That provides a level of convenience that private ownership does not allow. We need to get to the stage where the shared scheme is affordable, easy, sustainable and well regulated.

On the question of helmets and high-visibility jackets, I agree with some of my colleagues. We do not believe making helmets mandatory in this case is the way to go, just as they are not mandatory for cycling. However, we operate with free helmets for our users. In the weeks when we launch in a new city, we tend to run engagement and educational events, teaching people how to use the scooters and providing them with free helmets. We work with the councils to structure that accordingly. The same goes for high-visibility jackets.

We now go to Mr. Pencharz followed by Mr. Robertson.

Mr. Matthew Pencharz

As one might expect, I essentially agree with my colleagues. When it comes to the mandating of helmets, there is a danger that it could become a blocker to mode shift and getting people out of cars and on to micromobility. In our user surveys, there is quite a lot of rider pushback on shared helmets. Maybe some of that is driven by Covid concerns and it may stick with us for the longer term. They are not terribly keen on using a shared helmet. However, we encourage helmet use, just like our colleagues, with the handing out of tens of thousands of helmets in the UK, for example. We have events during peak riding season in the summer, and when we launch schemes, at which we hand out helmets and educate people. We also award people with credit. If they take a selfie at the start of their ride while wearing a helmet, we give them credits to financially reward our riders to ride more safely.

When it comes to insurance, VOI has complete third party insurance in all our markets. In the UK, it is motor insurance because, legally speaking, a scooter is a motor vehicle in the UK, as it should be. That might not be the case in the longer term from what Mr. Padden has said and, similarly, in Ireland it is a third case. It is absolutely vital that we are insured. It is important to protect both the rider and third parties if there is an incident. It is also important, going back to the level playing field discussion we had earlier, that private e-scooters are insured when the legislation goes through. It is important in regard to what we are saying here, that is, to encourage the use of shared schemes.

In the schemes VOI is involved with in the UK, I assume the local authorities or some other agencies make it obligatory for operators to have insurance for people who are using their scooters.

Mr. Matthew Pencharz

Yes, as part of the temporary Covid emergency legislation that Mr. Padden was driving in his former job with the Department for Transport, we all have motor insurance. However, in our continental markets we also insure all the riders.

Are operators required to have that in the continental markets? Does each jurisdiction legally require it?

Mr. Matthew Pencharz

I am afraid I do not know the specifics of every market on the Continent to answer that. I would have to get back to the Chair on that.

Mr. Duncan Robertson

I think my colleagues have done a pretty fine job of covering everything here. In the interest of time, maybe the committee does not need to hear from me on this one.

Thank you, Mr. Robertson. We now go to Deputy Lahart.

I suppose the scandal is that we are still talking about this. Much of this has been known for three years. I have been riding the e-scooter story for four years since my time as spokesperson on Dublin when in opposition. The argument for the shared scheme is compelling. The argument is very clear in my mind that the State should start with the regulation of the shared scheme in order to build confidence in regard to personal use. That is what was done in the UK, but it was done two years ago, in part to obviate the problem created by the reduction in public transport because of Covid and to provide alternative modes. As a result, there has been a significant amount of licensing by local authorities.

As the Chair knows, the British Government did not legalise it; it regulated for it. We are here, two years later, still discussing it. That is not an issue to do with the committee. It is an issue to do with the Minister and the manner in which he has gone about this piece. He could have simplified the process and regulated it on his appointment or shortly thereafter. Regulating it for shared schemes would have been quite a radical thing to do in Dublin, and other cities and towns, while the streets were quiet. This would have allowed e-scooters to bed in. That is the first point. It was a huge missed opportunity. I am sorry, but I have said it on the record before and I am keen to put it on the record again.

Second, e-scooters would have bedded in by this stage and people would have had the chance to use them.

If that had happened, it is possible that fewer commuters would have had to resort to their cars, as many did, because they were uncomfortable using public transport during the Covid period. In the past three or four years, I have met all the providers. Indeed, almost all of the witnesses are familiar to me. There was a failure on the part of the previous Minister for Transport to make progress in this area.

The arguments are compelling for moving forward with shared schemes. The whole system can be simplified in that it is possible, to some degree, to govern how the vehicles operate under shared schemes, whereas that is not possible with personally-owned ones. The speeds can be governed, depending on whatever is agreed upon. I have been on these scooters and I am happy with the 15 mph limit for which the UK opted. When one gets up to approximately 25 mph-----

The limit in the UK is 25 km/h.

In fact, 15 mph is approximately 20 km/h; 25 km/h is quite fast. As I said, it is not possible to govern the speed limit for privately-owned vehicles. Someone will import one from somewhere that can go up to 40 km/h.

Shared schemes also allow us to govern the standard and robustness of vehicles, in which I have seen an exponential improvement over the past three or four years. The standard of kit offered and the health and safety aspects have really improved. The vehicles are much better built and a great deal more comfortable and robust, with a much greater emphasis on safety, lighting, technology and all of that. I would like to see some facility that allows for the positioning of a light on the back that is elevated rather than being lower. However, I suppose the use of a high-visibility jacket does away with the need for that. Shared schemes also allow us to govern where vehicles can be parked, which cannot be done with private scooters, although nobody is likely to leave one hanging around the place.

Last week, the Minister said he will not impose age limits on users of e-scooters. It is possible, however, to impose a minimum age limit on a public shared scheme because users need a debit or credit card to access the service, which immediately limits who can do so. I am not at all against private ownership but we need to allow the shared schemes to bed in and the public to develop some confidence in using the vehicles. There is also the question of non-standard builds. Previous speakers referred to parents buying the flimsiest models for children, which break or do not work properly. There is also concern about a free-for-all situation in which privately-owned vehicles can go anywhere, including on any footpath, street, one-way street, pedestrian zone, school or campus, and users cannot be prohibited from doing so.

I disagree with the witnesses on the commercial aspect. There is enough pie for 20 providers in this country. In the case of Dublin City University, for example, which I understand has the same population as Kilkenny city, the college is ready to do, or has done, its own deal with Blue Duck, which involves special technology for use on the campus. There will be lots of other similar schemes. Industrial estates, for instance, and colleges such as the University of Limerick can use private providers to design services for use on the their site or campus to enable workers or students to commute here and there. I see a huge amount of use for that.

I want to put on the record that I prefer the shared schemes model because it instills public confidence and gives people an idea of what they can do and the build they can expect.

Does the Deputy have a specific question for the witnesses?

No. I am sorry to disappoint the Chairman. My five minutes are up but I wanted to put that on the record.

We are glad the Deputy has done so.

The work needed in this area should already be done and we should be out there enjoying this service. With a view to the learning deriving from that experience, the question then is how we can bring in a personal scheme, make it safe and allow micromobility to play a role in it. My concern is that the Minister will launch everything, the shared scheme and private ownership, and it will be a mess, the public will not like it and we will have a Paris situation or something like what happened on university campuses in the US when Lime first introduced the schemes, with accidents happening. The anecdotal evidence is that the majority of accidents involve privately-owned vehicles. However, if it works right, it can be useful. Several constabularies in the UK are using these scooters. The added mobility they could give to An Garda Síochána is something to consider. I want this working right. It is not that I have any particular grá for private companies pushing it or anything like that, but they have invested a lot of money in the technology and in improving it. I am impressed by that.

I have a final question for the witnesses. What is the minimum age limit for users of these shared scooters? That is one aspect we have not discussed. I put that question first to Ms Hall.

Ms Jessica Hall

In the UK, the minimum age is 18.

In her view, is that the right level?

Ms Jessica Hall

I think it could be lowered to 16.

Mr. Duncan Robertson

We also have a minimum age of 18 in the UK but I agree that lowering it to 16 is doable. We have the opportunity to add checks, if necessary.

Mr. Matthew Pencharz

I agree with my colleagues. Our minimum age is currently 18 but it probably should be 16.

Ms Aisling Dunne

We operate a minimum age of 18 but it could be younger depending on whether the appropriate checks are in place.

Is a minimum age of 18 pervasive throughout Europe?

Ms Aisling Dunne

In cities across Europe, the minimum age is 16 or 17. There is a range but I understand it is likely to be 18 here.

Ms Jean Andrews

I understood it was 16 in the UK. When we took over the Nottingham scheme, that was the minimum age that applied. I understand that is the limit allowed for in the legislation in the UK covering the trials. However, many operators have chosen to operate on an 18-plus basis. In fact, we revised the age limit upwards to 18, which applies across all our markets. I understand it is much lower in some other European countries, including a minimum age of 14 or 15 in Italy. I would need to confirm that. We find that 18-plus works well.

Mr. Matthew Pencharz

Ms Andrews is correct that, legally, the minimum age is 16 but, in that case, it is necessary for users to hold a provisional or full driving licence. All of the operators have gone for a minimum age of 18 as part of the trials in the UK.

I thank all the witnesses for attending this meeting. As a committee, we will write to the Minister seeking a general outline of how he proposes to introduce the various measures, including primary legislation, the secondary provisions, including statutory instruments, and the timeframe for that, as well as his view on the question of private versus public use. The Bill is due to come before us quite shortly and we will go through it. I am sure the witnesses will look in on that and engage with us. If they have any further comments, I invite them to contact the committee individually. I thank them for their contributions and their forbearance with the timing issues.

The joint committee adjourned at 5.08 p.m. until 11 a.m. on Tuesday, 8 March 2022.
Top
Share