Dr Hood is co-convener of the Dunedin Pedestrian Action Network and a trustee of the Visual Impairment Charitable Trust Aotearoa (Victa).
She said the process of legalising e-scooters had been rushed, and allowing their use on footpaths had already led to "significant injuries" and very young and very old people were "obviously highly vulnerable" to serious injury.
Dr Hood has criticised the NZ Transport Agency’s handling of a recent regulation change, on September 18, which declared that electric scooters were not motor vehicles, and therefore could be ridden on footpaths.
NZTA had "blundered" by not notifying Parliament of the new regulation within the due period of 16 parliamentary sitting days after it was gazetted, she said. Notification occurred on December 7, but should have happened by November 7.
She aims to raise the e-scooter regulation issue with the parliamentary committee early this year.
Dr Hood emphasises that the committee plays a key role for democracy, and the rule of law.
"It’s really important that this aspect of NZTA conduct get examined" by the committee.
"There’s strong evidence that the NZTA has grossly misapplied Parliament’s intention for section 168A"[of the Land Transport Act 1998] to "reclassify low-powered motor vehicles such as e-scooters as non-motor vehicles".
The late NZTA notice had breached its "statutory duty" and was "certainly sloppy practice".
She had studied Hansard, and believed the e-scooter regulation was also not in keeping with "the footpath users our legislators had in mind" in preparing the earlier law.
The committee ensures that the delegated law-making powers are used appropriately.
The parliamentary internet site says the committee "investigates complaints" and "examines proposed regulation-making powers in bills for consistency with good legislative practice".
The committee reports to Parliament, which can "disallow" a regulation, meaning it no longer has force.
Dr Hood said she was "a 76-year-old with failing eyesight who no longer has the reflexes to leap out of the way of fast-moving vehicles".
She had a "hard-earned reputation for meticulous research" and wanted to know how e-scooters, that were being "banned around the globe", had been approved for use on our footpaths.
Asked for comment, NZTA general manager, customer design and delivery, Charles Ronaldson said that presenting copies of the "gazette notice" to parliament was "not required in order to validate the notice".
It was valid on publication in the Gazette as per section 168A of the Land Transport Act 1998.
"In this case, an internal oversight meant the Gazette notice to clarify the status of e-scooters was not presented to the House of Representatives within our usual timeframes," he said.
"We urge people using e-scooters to be mindful of the need to have safety - their own and others - as their guiding principle.
"Good and safe behaviour remains the priority when people ride e-scooters," he said.
Related Stories
Comments
Skateboarders have to use roads, not footpaths. Presumably not cycle lanes either. This was brought in because they are a risk to pedestrians and iirc "because they have wheels". It's well past time for a revision, with joined up thinking, of who belongs in what lane. This could include "who has priority?" since cyclists often (in my opinion sensibly) often use footpaths that are have few pedestrians, however when there are any the cyclists should be obliged to give way, even dismount and walk till out of range. I cannot see any logic in allowing powered e-scooters capable of speed close to town-legal on footpaths, even less in not requiring users to wear helmet Are they - no kidding - at less risk than cyclists? Joined-up thinking about rights and obligations of ALL road users in built-up areas asap please.
Separate cycle and e-scooter lanes for all....
I know there are many who think that e-scooters are a fun alternative form of transport and that those raising the (obvious) issues with their widespread introduction by Lime, and others, are simply killjoys. I am with Dr Dodd on this issue, though. A near silent 28 kph missile, potentially guided by a novice rider (and don't pretend those under 18 won't be using them, they already are elsewhere), possibly inebriated too, zooming down a Dunedin hill will take an unsuspecting pedestrian out, or hit a car as it backs out of a driveway, or simply fall off and severely injure themselves. It's not a case of "if", simply "when".