Restore Britain leader Rupert Lowe has vowed to crack down on e-bike delivery riders by introducing mandatory licencing and insurance, safety checks, and tougher penalties, which he believes will – alongside a “programme of mass deportations” – deliver “cleaner and safer streets for law-abiding British pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists”.
This proposed crackdown is the centrepiece of a bizarre and confusing new policy which fails to properly distinguish between legal electric bikes and their high-speed illegal counterparts, despite quoting directly from the government’s electric bike laws.
Instead, Restore Britain’s new ‘regulatory framework for commercial e-bikes’, published this week, focuses solely on the activity for which the bike is used, not the bike itself, drawing a distinction between ‘leisure’ cycling and ‘commercial’ riding.
According to the policy, “commercial e-bike delivery” – regardless of the bike ridden during the delivery process, it appears – is “not simply another form of leisure cycling”, which Restore claims generally takes place “during daylight hours and in conditions of higher visibility”.
The party argues it is in fact “a distinct commercial activity that not only creates serious and unique public safety hazards, but is fast becoming a scourge of modern life that continues to reduce our streets, pedestrian areas, and thoroughfares to little more than unruly third-world traffic intersections”.
“Britain’s streets and pavements should be safe for everyone,” Restore Britain says in its policy paper. “Yet the rapid growth of commercial e-bike delivery services has brought dangerous riding, illegally modified vehicles, obstructed pavements, and a proliferation of illegal working.”
To tackle this apparent scourge, Restore has proposed “a comprehensive new regulatory framework requiring commercial e-bike riders to be trained, licensed, insured and identifiable, with tougher enforcement against reckless behaviour, and a new public reporting system”.
The use of illegal, high-powered, unsafe bikes has long been linked to delivery riders, whose income is intrinsically tied to their ability to make deliveries as quickly as possible. Last year, a Deliveroo rider was handed a community service order and banned from driving for four years after he crashed into a cyclist on the pavement, killing her, while riding an illegally modified bike and looking at his sat nav.
In recent years, several police forces across the UK have vowed to target “dangerous” delivery riders on illegal, high-speed machines, with the number of e-bikes seized by police officers soaring by 83 per cent this year.
In August, the Labour government said that illegal bikes endanger pedestrians and motorists and “have no place” on the UK’s roads and pavements.
Earlier this month, Deliveroo, one of the largest food delivery companies in the country, announced its own crackdown on modified, dangerous bikes as part of its new Ride Safe campaign. The company also called on the government to prohibit the sale of unsafe e-bike conversion kits, while tracking its riders and banning them from the platform if they consistently register high speeds during deliveries.
Deliveroo also announced that it will partner with e-bike companies including Port, Zoomo, Otto Scooters, and Eskuta to provide riders with a legal alternative. Riders will receive onboarding guidance, and the company will run rider engagement events with councils, police, and fire services to highlight concerns from both sides.
What does Restore Britain’s new policy say?
At the same time illegally powered delivery riders have become a common sight on British streets, e-bikes have also been the subject of widespread confusion and misinformation, with national newspapers as well as flagship BBC programmes such as Panorama erroneously referring to illegally modified electric-powered machines as e-bikes on numerous occasions.
Under UK law, the term ‘e-bike’ refers to an electrically assisted pedal cycle (EAPC), legal electric cycles that can be treated the same as a conventional pedal cycle, provided the user is age 14 or over.
They must have pedals that can propel the bicycle, have an electric motor with a maximum continuous rated power not exceeding 250 watts, and cut off electrical assistance when it reaches 15.5mph. Riders of these compliant e-bikes do not need to register or insure their bicycle.
However, the use of modified bikes, which do not cut off assistance at 15.5mph and can reach high speeds without pedalling, has become an increasing issue on the UK’s streets, leading to widespread confusion with their legal counterparts.
Last June, the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Cycling and Walking warned that dangerous “fake” e-bikes are undermining the UK’s cycling efforts and putting the bike industry at risk.
Interestingly, Restore Britain’s new policy quotes directly from the government’s rules on e-bikes. However, on the very next page, the party criticises past and present governments for making “no formal attempt to distinguish between e-bikes used for leisure and those used for commercial activity”.
“For them, it is principally the e-bike itself that should be regulated, rather than its use or its user,” Restore said.
“However, there are clear differences between leisure and commercial cycling. While most leisure riders travel during daylight hours and in conditions of higher visibility, commercial e-bike riders often operate late into the night, particularly in busy urban areas when evening food demand is highest and visibility is reduced.”
The party argued that “if taxi and private hire vehicles are subject to specific regulations based on their use, it should be little different for the commercial activity of e-bikes”.
Restore then listed what it regards as the risks and dangers posed by commercial e-bike use, including “risky, time-saving riding”, illegal working, the threat posed to vulnerable pedestrians, and the use of the bikes for criminal activity, such as transporting drugs.
The policy notes that the “defining characteristic of food delivery e-bike services is not necessarily the e-bike itself, but instead a rapid-fulfilment business model designed to make as many deliveries as possible, as fast as possible”.
Once again, the party fails to distinguish between legal e-bikes and their illegal counterparts, claiming that there is “no legal requirement for e-bikes to be fitted with a bell or an audible warning device, or for the rider to wear a helmet”.
While cyclists in the UK are not legally required to wear a helmet, the illegal, high-speed bikes in question are in fact classed as electric motorbikes and mopeds, which do require the rider to wear an approved motorcycle helmet.
Nevertheless, the policy continues: “Nor is there a requirement for e-bikes to be registered or insured. There is no requirement for e-bikes to undergo regular testing, equivalent to motor vehicle MOTs. Owners of e-bikes do not have to pay Vehicle Excise Duty. There are no requirements for e-bike riders to undertake formal training, pass a competency test, or demonstrate knowledge of the Highway Code.”
Again, the illegal, high-speed machines commonly associated with delivery riders in do, despite Restore’s claims, require a licence, registration, and Vehicle Excise Duty. While electric bikes and components that propel a bike beyond the EAPC limits are not illegal to buy – and can be used on private land – they cannot be used on the road without being licensed and registered.
Nevertheless, the policy states that a Restore Britain government would “make mandatory the registration, licensing, and taxation of all e-bikes that are used for commercial purposes, while introducing extra safety measures to keep the wider public safe, including a reporting system for reckless riders”.
If a bicycle is fitted “with a motor of any sort, and its rider is delivering consumable from a provider to a customer”, Restore says the rider should, among other things, be forced to wear high-visibility clothing and a helmet (which will feature a rider identification number) and fit the bike with high-vis markings, lights, a bell, and registration plates.
They would also be required to pass an ‘e-bike for commercial use’ training programme and carry proof they have a licence and that their e-bike has passed regular safety tests. Riders would also be barred from taking their e-bike on the pavement for riding or parking purposes.
There is no indication that this policy refers solely to illegal bikes, so it must be assumed that it would also apply to delivery cyclists riding legal e-bikes where the electrical assistance cuts off at 15.5mph.
This move would inevitably put more strain on an e-cargo bike courier sector, based entirely on the use of legal electric bikes, that is already under strain thanks to competition from multinational firms where faster, illegal bikes are the norm.
That confusion is compounded by the policy paper’s criticism of dockless hire bikes and e-scooters, which it says are “generating other significant challenges, which are also too often accepted as mere collateral in the wider green revolution”.
So, it appears that any form of electric bike, regardless of whether it is illegal or not, would be targeted by a hypothetical Restore Britain government. Especially it seems, if it is ridden by an immigrant.
“It’s unsafe, looks awful and generally feeds into the relentless societal decline we all hate so much”
Restore Britain is led by Great Yarmouth MP Rupert Lowe, the former Southampton Football Club chairman who founded the party following his suspension from Reform UK due to allegations of bullying, which Lowe denied.
Among the party’s other policies are the mass deportation of approximately two million people from the country that Restore estimates are illegal immigrants, “abolishing the asylum system”, and “rooting out subversive and anti-British ideology” from schools and universities.
In a statement published on X on Wednesday, announcing the party’s new commercial e-bike policy, Lowe said: “Our pavements are not racetracks for young foreign men on e-bikes or mopeds delivering pizza, or at least it shouldn’t be like that.
“Mounting pavements, jumping red lights and tearing around pedestrians on illegally modified e-bikes or whatever else. Our towns and cities have been turned into the wild west.
“And who pays the price? The elderly. Parents pushing prams. Disabled people. Blind pedestrians who should be able to walk down the pavement as unobstructed as possible.
“Today, Restore Britain has published our plan to take back our streets. Mandatory licensing. Registration plates. Insurance. Safety checks. Tough penalties for dangerous riding. Public reporting system. And commercial e-bikes OFF our pavements. No longer will the footways of London or wherever else be strewn with these vehicles.
“It’s unsafe, looks awful and generally feeds into the relentless societal decline we all hate so much. Alongside our programme of mass deportations, this will deliver cleaner and safer streets for law-abiding British pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists.”
This isn’t the first time Lowe has weighed in on a cycling issue. Earlier this year, Lowe criticised Norfolk County Council over the £500,000 it reportedly spent on a new cycle lane in Gorleston-on-Sea, using the government’s Active Travel Fund.
In a social media video, Lowe can be seen jabbing his finger at the infrastructure, claiming it “has ruined a perfectly good road”.
“This is an example of central planning lunacy by Norfolk County Council,” Lowe says in the video. “A bicycle lane that’s very rarely used. I’ve declared bicyclists a rare breed here.”
Under a Restore Britain government, they may very well become extinct.
5 thoughts on ““Our pavements are not racetracks for young foreign men,” declares Rupert Lowe as Restore Britain leader vows to “take back our streets” in bizarre new e-bike policy… that doesn’t make any sense and targets legal electric bikes”
Ryan, this is entirely too many words.
The TLDR; is “Racist continues to spout racist and regressive views as ‘fact’, despite evidence”
Also, he’s repeatedly written “party” where he meant “assembly of loons”.
@mdavidford in fairness, that was pretty much the case with No10 covid parties.
The headline picture says it all ‘Planning lunacy’.
For people who think that Reform is far too left wing and sensible, Restore Britain is an ideal home. Idiotic policies made up on the hoof, in response to whatever story is in the news, especially if Reform has just said something about it.
Politics in this country, and others, was never nice, but now it’s abysmal, with ‘leaders’ trying to outdo each other in outrage on relatively minor matters, while ignoring the herd of elephants in the room. Pathetic really.
Rupert makes excellent points here. It is high time that the streets were reclaimed for the unimpaired use of drivers in their often uninsured, MOT free vehicles.