Transport and Other Legislation (Managing E-mobility Use and Protecting Our Communities) Amendment Bill 2026
Plain English Summary
Overview
This bill is Queensland's response to a near-doubling of e-mobility injuries and a parliamentary inquiry into e-bikes, e-scooters and personal mobility devices. It introduces a minimum riding age of 16 and a driver-licence requirement, creates new offences and strong police powers to seize and destroy illegal 'prohibited bikes', brings in drink-riding offences with breath testing, and makes parents, hire companies and retailers share responsibility for keeping children and pedestrians safe.
Who it affects
It affects anyone who rides, sells or hires out e-bikes and e-scooters, parents of under-16s, and pedestrians who share footpaths with these devices. Owners of illegal or non-compliant motorbikes and high-powered devices face having them confiscated and destroyed.
Key changes
- You must be at least 16 and hold a valid driver licence (a learner licence is enough) to legally ride an e-bike or personal mobility device, and you cannot ride after drinking, with police able to breath-test riders.
- Riding a 'prohibited bike' (an illegal high-powered device or unregistered motorbike) becomes an offence, and police can seize such devices on reasonable suspicion and have them forfeited and destroyed.
- Parents can be fined the same penalty as their child when an under-16 rides one of these devices unlawfully, unless they prove they did not know or took all reasonable steps to prevent it.
- A 10 km/h speed limit applies to e-bikes and personal mobility devices on footpaths and shared paths, and a new offence covers parking a device so it obstructs people.
- Selling e-bikes, e-scooters or unregisterable motorbikes to children under 16 is banned, and hire-scooter companies must check riders' age and licence and hand over rider details for enforcement.
Bill Story
The journey of this bill through Parliament, including debate and recorded votes.
▸Committee25 Mar 2026View Hansard
Referred to State Development, Infrastructure and Works Committee
6 members · Chair: Jim McDonald
The State Development, Infrastructure and Works Committee examined the Bill, which overhauls the rules for e-bikes and personal mobility devices in Queensland by introducing a new compliance standard (EN 15194), driver-licence and minimum-age requirements, footpath speed limits, restrictions on sales to children, and new police powers to seize and destroy non-compliant 'prohibited bikes'. The inquiry drew more than 3,000 submissions and public hearings. The committee recommended that the Bill be passed, but made eight further recommendations for amendments and government action, particularly to provide exemptions for people with disability and adaptive devices, refine the EN 15194 standard, and adjust the footpath speed limit. The three Labor members issued a statement of reservation opposing the Bill and recommending it be withdrawn and redrafted.
Key findings (5)
- Many submitters supported the Bill's intent to improve safety and crack down on illegal, high-powered and non-compliant devices, including stronger police seizure powers.
- Stakeholders, disability and accessibility advocates raised serious concerns that the EN 15194 standard and the new driver-licence requirement would unfairly exclude people with disability, older people and those using adaptive devices such as e-trikes and e-cargo bikes.
- Industry and retailers warned of significant cost and practical difficulties in making previously legal devices compliant, verifying buyers' ages, and meeting the proposed obligations within the six-month transition period.
- A uniform 10km/h footpath speed limit was contested, with the Gold Coast City Council and others arguing it was not supported by evidence or the department's own guidelines, prompting the committee to recommend a more targeted approach.
- Submitters widely called for greater investment in separated cycling and walking infrastructure to support safe e-mobility use, which the Bill does not fund.
Recommendations (9)
- The committee recommends that the Bill be passed.
- That the Bill be amended to allow compliance with the version of the EN 15194 standard that was in place when an EPAC was manufactured, with the definition clear and unambiguous and allowing recognition of future versions of the standard; and that the Bill be amended to include an appropriate standard for compliant e-cargo bikes with a maximum pedal-assisted speed of 25km/h.
- That the Queensland Government investigate existing mechanisms for exemptions that could be adapted to assess e-mobility devices that do not fully meet the EN 15194 standards but meet key safety criteria, such as e-trikes and other adaptive devices that meet the 25km/h speed limit and 250 watt power limit.
- That the Queensland Government establish an assurance scheme with regulatory controls and Department of Transport and Main Roads oversight to provide a state-wide mechanism to certify and label currently compliant e-bikes; and that the Bill be amended accordingly.
- That the Bill be amended so that individuals who cannot obtain a driver licence because of disability, a medical condition, or age, but are still capable of safely riding an e-mobility device, are able to do so, and that the Department of Transport and Main Roads develop an exemption framework to verify that an individual can safely operate an e-mobility device.
- That the Bill be amended to apply a 10km/h speed limit to all footpaths in high pedestrian areas (with a clear definition to be specified), with the department to consider a 10km/h limit within 10 metres of a pedestrian on all other footpaths; and to provide that the 10km/h limit does not apply to shared paths unless signed, with riders to travel slowly around pedestrians and the department to consider a 15km/h limit within 10 metres of a pedestrian on shared paths.
- That the Department of Transport and Main Roads further investigate a mechanism where designated and controlled public access areas may be used safely by compliant e-mobility devices, with minimal restrictions.
- That the Queensland Government, through the Department of Transport and Main Roads, provide guidance material to shared e-mobility providers and other e-mobility hire companies to assist them to meet their obligations under the legislation.
- That the Department of Transport and Main Roads undertake a review of the regulatory changes implemented by the Bill 12 months from the commencement of the provisions.
Committee report tabled
▸Second Reading3 June 2026View Hansard
That the bill be now read a second time
Vote to pass the bill at second reading and advance it to consideration in detail; passed 52-35 with the LNP in favour and Labor and the Greens opposed.
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (52)
Noes (35)
That the amendment be agreed to
Vote on Mr Mellish's reasoned amendment to withdraw, redraft and refer the bill back to the State Development, Infrastructure and Works Committee; defeated 34 to 52, allowing the second reading to proceed.
The motion was defeated.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (34)
Noes (52)
That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to
Vote on a proposed amendment to Mr Mellish's reasoned amendment during the second reading debate; defeated 29 to 52.
The motion was defeated.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (29)
Noes (52)
Vote on a motion
Procedural motion moved by Mr Power that the member for Kurwongbah be now heard, during debate on Mr Mellish's reasoned amendment; defeated 35 to 52.
The motion was rejected.
A formal vote on whether to accept a proposal — this could be the bill itself, an amendment, or another motion.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (35)
Noes (52)
That the motion, as amended, be agreed to
Procedural vote, as amended, carried 52 to 29 during the second reading debate on the bill.
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (52)
Noes (29)
▸50 members spoke26 support21 oppose3 mixed
Supported the bill as a committee member, praising its medical and recreational exemptions, EN15194 compliance scheme, footpath speed limits, blood alcohol limits and offences for selling illegal devices to children.
“I am proud to be part of a committee and a government that leads the way in providing certainty in the use of e-mobility devices.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
As Minister for Transport and Main Roads, moved the second reading and championed the bill as nation-leading reform to address e-mobility safety, while flagging government amendments responding to the committee's recommendations on the European standard, footpath speed limits, and medical/age exemptions.
“This bill is a critical step to address community safety concerns associated with e-mobility devices in Queensland. The bill is nation-leading and reflects the Crisafulli government's commitment to restoring safety in our communities.”— 2026-06-03View Hansard
Criticised the government for delay and lack of consultation on the substantial amendments, while affirming Labor supports safe e-mobility use and calling for measures targeting illegal devices, infrastructure and police resourcing.
“Before I get into the body of the debate, I note that the amendments introduced are substantial and it would have been good policy for there to be consultation and scrutiny on these amendments.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Shadow transport minister opposed the bill as an 'abject failure' that punishes responsible riders while leaving illegal devices untouched, criticised the last-minute circulation of amendments, and moved a reasoned amendment to withdraw, redraft and refer the bill back to committee.
“The Queensland Labor opposition simply cannot support the bill in its current state. The bill is a mess and this is the worst panelbeating of a bill I have seen in the Queensland parliament.”— 2026-06-03View Hansard
Strongly supported the bill, tabling years of correspondence and speeches about Gold Coast e-scooter safety and accusing Labor of a decade of inaction.
“I rise to support the Transport and Other Legislation (Managing E-mobility Use and Protecting Our Communities) Amendment Bill 2026.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Deputy chair of the committee opposed the bill, arguing it misses the real problem of high-powered illegal devices while criminalising people with disability, the elderly and ordinary pedal-assist riders, and that 122 amendments were rushed through without scrutiny.
“Rather than targeting these dangerous high-powered devices it turns its attention to ordinary pedal-assist bicycles. Someone described this bill to me as swinging a sledgehammer at a mosquito, missing entirely and taking out the wall behind it.”— 2026-06-03View Hansard
Welcomed the minister listening on exemptions but argued the 122 last-minute amendments are complex and unscrutinised, calling for the amended bill to be returned to committee for proper consultation.
“However, the 122 amendments that the minister introduced yesterday are complex, convoluted, confusing and lacking in detail, particularly the licensing exemptions, compliance labelling and path speed limits.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Committee chair supported the bill, defending the committee process and arguing the government amendments directly align with the committee's recommendations on medical exemptions, EN standards and shared-path speed limits.
“The Crisafulli LNP government is doing what we said we would do: we are fixing the e-mobility problems that those opposite did not attend to while in government.”— 2026-06-03View Hansard
Supported the bill and amendments, citing local fatalities and injuries and the new police seizure, breath-testing and licensing measures with medical exemptions.
“I support the bill and the amendments before the House.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Committee member supported the bill, citing rising injury and fatality data, and detailing the bill's minimum riding age of 16, licensing requirement, prohibited bike framework, police seizure powers, 12 km/h footpath limit and drink-driving offences.
“I rise to speak in support of the Transport and Other Legislation (Managing E-mobility Use and Protecting Our Communities) Amendment Bill 2026. This is an important bill.”— 2026-06-03View Hansard
Acknowledged positive changes such as exemptions and the revised speed limit but said the bill missed the mark for many everyday Queenslanders and that the 122 amendments had not undergone proper scrutiny.
“The reality is this e-mobility legislation, while having some positive changes, has missed the mark for many everyday Queenslanders who are doing the right thing.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Committee member opposed the bill as too restrictive and rushed, arguing it fails to distinguish legal e-bikes from illegal motorbikes, discriminates against people with disability, and predicts a 'tranche 2' will be needed to fix it.
“It is too restrictive, punishing families who are doing the right thing and impacting individuals who use e-mobility devices to save money, to save the environment or because they cannot or do not want to drive a car.”— 2026-06-03View Hansard
Supported the bill, citing injuries, fatalities, battery fires and anti-social behaviour, welcoming the minimum age, licensing and police seizure powers.
“I support this bill before the House. I am sure it will deliver a better outcome right across the board for those people using these PMDs throughout Mermaid Beach.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Supported the bill, framing it as a response to community concerns first raised on the Gold Coast, and welcoming provisions allowing fines for 16-18 year olds, parental liability and police seizure and destruction of non-compliant devices.
“This bill for the first time will allow kids between 16 and 18 to finally be on the hook for fines ... There will be consequences for action. That will drive cultural change.”— 2026-06-03View Hansard
Described the bill as a 'dog's breakfast' and argued it should be sent back to committee rather than fixed by eleventh-hour amendments, indicating it should not pass in its current form.
“This bill should be sent back to a committee because it will be coming back to the House to fix the failures that are manifest within it.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Opposed the bill as a confused and poorly drafted 'dog's breakfast' that risks penalising responsible riders, citing uncertainty over licensing exemptions and compliance labelling, and argued the 122 amendments should be sent back to committee.
“What they do not support is rushed, confusing legislation that risks penalising responsible riders while failing to adequately address the real problem ... Labor cannot support the bill in its current form.”— 2026-06-03View Hansard
Supported the bill, focusing on tourism concerns and welcoming amendments for supervised child riders, rail trail and mountain bike exemptions and the revised path speed limits.
“This bill backs responsible operators, it backs responsible riders and it gives police the tools they need to deal with those who do the wrong thing.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
As Minister for Police and Emergency Services, supported the bill as giving police the tailored powers they have asked for to seize and destroy illegal devices, tackle rideouts and enforce a parental responsibility framework.
“The Crisafulli government has taken a methodical, evidence-based approach, and this bill is giving police the practical powers they need to regulate e-mobility use and make Queensland safer.”— 2026-06-03View Hansard
Condemned the bill as a botched, evidence-free debacle that fails to address illegal devices and risks severe unintended consequences, while noting Labor supports safe e-mobility use.
“This bill is not supported by the evidence, not supported by stakeholders, not supported by industry advocates and is overwhelmingly not supported by Queenslanders.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Opposed the bill as a catch-all, poorly drafted response that sweeps up ordinary legal e-bike and e-scooter users instead of targeting illegal high-powered devices, citing many constituent concerns about the speed limit and licensing requirements.
“This catch-all, poorly drafted legislation has swept up ordinary Queenslanders using safe legal e-bikes and e-scooters ... the opposition cannot support this bill in its current form and believe it should be returned to the committee for appropriate scrutiny.”— 2026-06-03View Hansard
Supported the bill, drawing on his policing experience to argue education alone is insufficient and welcoming new seizure powers and parental accountability.
“This bill is sensible and considered lawmaking and strikes the right balance to ensure safety, particularly of our children.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Committee member supported the bill, arguing it will not impact lawful bicycle, motorbike or licensed e-device riders but responds to demand to curb fatalities and antisocial behaviour by underage and unlicensed riders, and defended the parental supervision exemption for under-16s.
“What the bill will do is respond to the public demand and numerous submissions seeking to curb the avoidable fatalities and increasing antisocial behaviour involving illegal motorbikes ridden by underage and unlicensed riders.”— 2026-06-03View Hansard
Attacked the bill and the 122 amendments as botched and unworkable, dumped without consultation, arguing it targets ordinary riders and disability users instead of illegal high-powered devices.
“This bill is botched. It was botched in its drafting. It was botched in its consultation. It is botched in its enforcement framework.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Supported the bill as nation-leading action against dangerous e-mobility use, citing local damage and injuries and thanking the minister for the amendments.
“I wholeheartedly support this legislation. I thank the minister for listening to Queensland and also moving these amendments to give those people the right to have their voices heard.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Called the bill the most shambolic she had seen in 14 years and urged the government to withdraw it and send the bill and 122 amendments back to committee.
“The development of this bill ... would have to be the most shambolic, the most haphazard, the most chaotic, the most mismanaged, the most disorganised and the most irresponsible I have ever seen.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Supported the bill, citing local collisions and the death of Hudson Gagg, and welcoming seizure powers, tougher penalties, age and licensing rules with parental-supervision exemptions.
“This bill delivers action. I commend it to the House.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Described the bill as a shambles that fails to address illegal devices and condemned the government for refusing to send the 122 amendments back to committee and limiting consideration in detail to 20 minutes.
“This bill is an absolute shambles that has been brought forward to this parliament by a shambolic minister who is in the shambolic cabinet of a shambolic government.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Proudly supported the bill, citing constituent survey support and arguing it targets dangerous behaviour and illegal devices while protecting responsible riders.
“I am very proud to rise in support of this bill, as are all members of the Crisafulli government, because more than anything this debate is about one thing, and that is safety.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Stated Labor cannot support the bill in its current form, attacking the licensing requirement, speed limits and the late 122 amendments while affirming Labor supports targeted action on illegal devices.
“Labor cannot support the Transport and Other Legislation (Managing E-mobility Use and Protecting Our Communities) Amendment Bill in its current form.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Supported the bill as nation-leading reform giving police seizure and breath-testing powers, contrasting it with Labor's record and subsidy scheme.
“This legislation reverses that 10 years of failure, provides police with seizure and disposal powers for noncompliant e-mobility devices and other illegal motorbikes and creates new rider offences for these devices. I commend the bill to the House.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Argued the bill is a regressive, car-centric policy failure that punishes responsible riders, threatens tourism and businesses and was not properly consulted on.
“This bill is not evidence-based reform. It is not smart regulation. It is a rushed, reactionary and deeply car-centric response from a government that simply does not understand the role micromobility now plays.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Supported the bill, citing injury and death data, AMA calls for reform, new police seizure and breath-testing powers and stronger pedestrian protections.
“I rise today to speak in support of the Transport and Other Legislation (Managing E-mobility Use and Protecting Our Communities) Amendment Bill 2026.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Called the bill a rushed, half-baked attempt with 122 amendments that fails to address illegal devices and unfairly impacts seniors, disabled people and students who rely on e-mobility.
“This bill is a rushed and, quite honestly, half-baked attempt to regulate e-mobility. It still fails to address the fundamental issues of illegal devices in the community.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Supported the bill as a carefully crafted, evidence-based response with sensible exemptions, stronger penalties, random breath testing and device confiscation.
“This bill is a carefully crafted response to a serious problem facing our community: the harm and disruption caused by the misuse of e-bikes and e-scooters.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Spoke strongly against the bill as absurd and discriminatory, attacking the age limits, driver-licence requirement, speed limits and the failure to stop the sale of illegal e-motorbikes.
“I rise to speak against the Transport and Other Legislation (Managing E-mobility Use and Protecting Our Communities) Amendment Bill. ... this is perhaps one of the most absurd and poorly cobbled together bills I have seen during my time in this place.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Supported the bill as striking the right balance between active transport and safety, citing injury data, AMAQ concerns and the amendments providing exemptions and compliance pathways.
“This is an important public policy matter and this legislation strikes the right balance. I commend the minister for his work ... With those words, I commend the bill to the House.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Argued the bill has become a mess that fails to address illegal devices, raising unanswered questions about supervision definitions, the age of 12, speed limits and disability licensing, and supporting referral of amendments back to committee.
“This has become a mess, with more questions needing to be answered and more clarification needed before this becomes law.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Supported the bill, citing local dangerous riding, and argued it targets illegal devices and dangerous behaviour while changing little for responsible riders.
“I rise in support of the Crisafulli LNP government's Transport and Other Legislation (Managing E-mobility Use and Protecting Our Communities) Amendment Bill 2026.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Argued the bill is not supported by Queenslanders, evidence or stakeholders, unjustly punishes law-abiding citizens and disability users, and the 122 amendments need to go back to committee.
“This bill is not supported by Queenslanders—the public nor stakeholders. It does not address the underlying issue of illegal devices in our community.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Supported the bill, citing Gold Coast hospital injury data and illegal high-powered devices, and commended the committee and minister for listening and responding with amendments.
“I rise today in support of the Transport and Other Legislation (Managing E-mobility Use and Protecting Our Communities) Amendment Bill 2026.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Stated Labor cannot support the bill in its current form, arguing it was rushed, not properly consulted on, fails to target illegal devices and unfairly burdens older people, disabled riders and commuters; called for it to be withdrawn and redrafted.
“This bill should be withdrawn and redrafted following genuine consultation with stakeholders, experts and the broader community. ... The Queensland Labor opposition cannot support this bill in its current form.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Supported the bill as a practical, evidence-based response delivering new police seizure powers, breath testing, age and licensing rules with exemptions and a 12 km/h footpath limit.
“I rise to speak in support of the Transport and Other Legislation (Managing E-mobility Use and Protecting Our Communities) Amendment Bill 2026.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Argued the bill cannot deliver on its title, that the 122 amendments prove it was botched, and that the government confused notification with genuine consultation; supported sending it back for proper process.
“This Crisafulli LNP government is ... a government now scrambling to fix a policy they should have got right in the first place.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Supported the bill as delivering the government's commitment to restore safety, citing local injury stories and welcoming amendments on EN15194 standards, exemptions and the revised speed limit.
“I rise to support the Transport and Other Legislation (Managing E-mobility Use and Protecting Our Communities) Amendment Bill 2026.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Argued the bill outraged every cohort, was not tested with real people, and that the 122 last-minute amendments raise more questions than answers on exemptions, speed limits and enforcement.
“This is another example of bad legislation by a bad government. ... this bill is one mighty failure.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Supported the bill, describing the inquiry, bill and committee process as a textbook example of lawmaking and arguing every concern raised had been addressed.
“Now we have come up with balanced legislation which will ensure ... the police have the necessary powers ... Once again, it is left to the LNP government to solve the issue. I commend the bill to the House.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Argued the bill remains fundamentally flawed and drags Queensland backwards, particularly for people with disability, and that the 122 amendments were not properly scrutinised or consulted on.
“What we have before us, unfortunately, is an absolute dog's breakfast of a bill. The minister has messed this up, and he knows it.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Supported the bill, citing his community survey showing strong support for stronger e-mobility laws and accusing Labor of running a scare campaign.
“That is why I support the bill and commend it to the House.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Argued the bill wrongly catches legal pedal-assist bikes alongside illegal e-motorbikes and imposes unnecessary licensing and unclear speed limits that harm families, students and disabled riders.
“In the words of Chris from Western Suburbs BUG, 'E-bikes are bikes!' Along with my community, I am confused even now that pedal-assist bikes have been caught up in the legislation alongside these dangerous illegal devices.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
In reply, defended the bill as nation-leading reform giving police seizure, destruction and breath-testing powers, with age and licensing rules and disability exemptions, and rejected Labor's claims of inadequate consultation.
“The Crisafulli government said that we would make the tough decisions to deliver nation-leading reforms and get dangerous e-scooters and e-bikes off Queensland streets, and that is exactly what this bill does.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
▸In Detail3 June 2026 – 4 June 2026View Hansard
Opposition amendment to clause 1 to change the short title of the bill to the 'Transport and Other Legislation (Reducing Mobility Options and Increasing Road Congestion) Amendment Act 2026', as a political statement that the bill reduces mobility options and increases congestion.
Government amendment to clause 2 (Commencement) to provide a phased commencement: most provisions on 1 July 2026, licensing and age requirements and related provisions on 31 August 2026, and certain provisions on 1 March 2027, supported by education campaigns and further consultation.
Government amendments Nos 2 to 122 moved en bloc, making sweeping changes including: a new prohibited-bike seizure, forfeiture and destruction framework with review rights; an EPAC compliance and verification scheme recognising the EN 15194 standard and legacy/special-purpose EPACs; exemptions by regulation for supervised children aged 12 and over, people with disability/medical conditions and prescribed places such as rail trails and mountain bike areas; parental liability provisions; compliance labelling offences; and replacement of the footpath/shared-path speed limit with a 12 km/h limit (down from 10 km/h) applying on footpaths and when passing pedestrians on shared paths.
That the member for Aspley’s amendment No. 1 be agreed to
The motion was defeated.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (35)
Noes (52)
That the minister’s amendment No. 1 be agreed to
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (52)
Noes (35)
That the minister’s amendments Nos 2 to 122, as circulated, be agreed
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (52)
Noes (34)
▸2 clause votes (all passed)
Vote on clause 1
Vote to keep clause 1 (the short title) unamended after the opposition's renaming amendment was defeated; passed 53-34.
The clause was kept in the bill.
A vote on whether a specific clause should remain in the bill as written.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (53)
Noes (34)
That clauses 2 to 67 and schedule 1, as amended, stand part of the bill
Vote to approve the remainder of the bill and schedule as amended; passed 52-35.
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (52)
Noes (35)
▸2 procedural votes
Vote to grant leave
Procedural vote to grant leave for the minister's amendments Nos 50, 93, 101, 102, 103 and 116, which fell outside the long title of the bill; granted 52-35.
Permission was granted.
A vote on whether to grant permission — for example, to introduce an amendment or vary normal procedure.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (52)
Noes (35)
Vote to end debate
Government motion to end the second reading debate and force an immediate vote (the gag/guillotine).
Debate was ended and a vote was forced.
A procedural vote to end debate and force an immediate decision. Sometimes called a “gag motion”.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (52)
Noes (34)
As shadow minister, moved an amendment to rename the bill and argued it does little to reduce illegal devices, pushes riders back onto roads and was given only 20 minutes for consideration in detail.
“This bill is an absolute dog's breakfast. The reality is this bill will do little to reduce the use of already illegal devices in our communities.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
Supported the shadow minister's amendment to rename the bill, arguing it will drive up congestion and reduce active transport while doing nothing to stop already-illegal devices.
“What this bill will do is actually drive up congestion and reduce active transport in Queensland.”— 2026-06-04View Hansard
▸Third Reading4 June 2026View Hansard
That the bill, as amended, be read a third time
Final passage vote on the amended bill; passed 52-35 with the LNP in favour and Labor and the Greens opposed.
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (52)
Noes (35)
That the long title of the bill be agreed to
Vote to agree the long title, completing passage of the bill; passed 52-35.
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (52)
Noes (35)
Referenced Entities
Legislation
Organisations
Roles & Offices
Sectors Affected
Classified using AGIFT/ANZSIC Australian government standards
Source Documents
Spotted an error on this page? Send feedback
Tell us about anything that looks wrong with this bill’s summary, topics, or data. Your message is sent to the OpenQueensland team.