Premier Jacinta Allan urges City of Melbourne to reconsider e-scooter ban

Jacinta Allan has urged the City of Melbourne to reconsider its decision to ban e-scooters, questioning why Lord Mayor Nick Reece went from spruiking their benefits to outlawing them in a matter of weeks.

Premier Jacinta Allan has asked the City of Melbourne to reconsider its decision to ban e-scooters. Picture: David Crosling

Premier Jacinta Allan has urged the City of Melbourne to reconsider its “interesting” decision to ban share hire e-scooters from Melbourne’s CBD.

Ms Allan on Wednesday took aim the council’s decision to tear up its contracts with e-scooter operators Lime and Neuron.

“It’s an interesting change of heart by the City of Melbourne,” Ms Allan said.

“I would hope the City of Melbourne could reconsider their decision given it was only two or three weeks ago that the Lord Mayor was pretty keen to be out talking about the benefits of e-scooters.”

Ms Allan made a thinly veiled threat to intervene and overturn the council’s ban, however it is unclear whether she would be able to do so.

The City of Melbourne will tear up its contracts with e-scooter operators Lime and Neuron. Picture: Brendan Beckett

Lord Mayor Nick Reece on Tuesday night moved an alternative motion at a Future Melbourne committee meeting to cancel the contracts, which was ultimately carried six votes to four.

According to the motion, council management will now be directed to “withdraw” from its agreements with Lime and Neuron, giving the companies 30 days to “cease operations” and retrieve all e-scooters from across the municipality.

Dozens of members of the public addressed the meeting – including the operators, residents, workers, doctors, disability advocates and environmentalists – both for and against the ban.

The state government last month announced it will allow share hire e-scooters to operate permanently from October, following a two-year trial, but it is up to councils to enter into contracts with operators.

Ms Allan said e-scooters were an important transportation method for workers, particularly nurses who use the e-scooters to get to the hospitals.

Ms Allan described the decision to ban the e-scooters as ‘interesting’. Picture: David Crosling

Earlier on Wednesday, Mr Reece defended the council’s decision.

“This was the reset that Melbourne needed around the e-scooter scheme,” he said.

“This was an opportunity to end the havoc on Melbourne footpaths and make our city safe again.

“We heard from shop traders in the city. We heard from residents. We heard from the head of the emergency department at the Royal Melbourne Hospital. We heard from a blind lady. They told us that the city’s footpaths have not been safe.”

He added: “It’s a win for Melbourne’s footpaths. It’s a win for Melbourne pedestrians.”

Mr Reece said the contracts with Lime and Neuron made it “very clear” that the council could withdraw with 30 days’ notice.

“It’s there in black and white,” he said, when asked if he believed any “legal problems” were on the horizon.

But he refused to be drawn on whether the decision was a “backflip”, saying the recent move to legalise the scheme was a “matter for the state government”.

Mr Reece says the ban was a win for the city’s footpaths. Picture: David Smith

With the contracts to be torn up, share hire e-scooters are set to be removed from the City of Melbourne by mid-September.

This means only private e-scooters will be able to be ridden within the municipality, which covers not only the Hoddle Grid but suburbs including Carlton and Southbank.

The alternative motion came days after a report to the Future Melbourne committee meeting from council management recommended a raft of new measures to crack down on unsafe and dangerous ­riding around the city.

The measures included capping the number of e-scooters allowed to operate in the city, steeper fines and new ­exclusion zones.

It is understood that the alternative motion was floated on Monday after scores of residents and business owners across the municipality contacted councillors, calling on them to simply scrap the scheme altogether.

Mr Reece encouraged people who previously relied on e-scooters to get around the city to jump on an e-bike.

“There are the share bikes and I’d encourage people to use those,” he said.

“We’re very strongly supportive of sustainable transport in Melbourne.

“And the fact is, we haven’t seen the problems with the share bikes that we’ve seen with the e-scooters.”

E-scooters will be permanently legalised across the state from October.

On Wednesday morning, a Lime spokeswoman said “election-year politics” were behind the decision.

“Unfortunately, election-year politics played a significant role in this sudden and unexpected pause of the e-scooter program in the City of Melbourne,” she said.

“This regrettable decision strands more than 800,000 riders who rely on e-scooters as a quick, convenient and sustainable way to travel.

“We do not expect this isolated decision to influence cities beyond Melbourne, as we’ve seen tremendous momentum in leaders embracing shared e-scooters globally.”

ANZ Neuron Mobility general manager Jayden Bryant said the “drastic” decision was made without any of the “necessary considerations and evaluations”.

“We are deeply disappointed that a slim majority of City of Melbourne councillors made the unexpected decision to cancel the city’s e-scooter program without conducting any of the necessary considerations and evaluations one would expect before making such a drastic decision,” he said.

“We would like to see a fair process with broad community consultations and a proper discussion of the many implications of cancelling the e-scooter program.

“The process should be inclusive, transparent and well-structured. All the relevant stakeholders affected should be allowed to have their say and all the facts and data related to the trial should be thoroughly evaluated.

“We still believe that Melbourne is an excellent city for e-scooters, and if given the opportunity, we could quickly implement a variety of measures to address many, if not all, of the councillors’ concerns.”