Measures to Detect Non-compliant or Modified Active Mobility Devices

Mr Speaker, we adopt a multi-pronged approach in the enforcement against non-compliant active mobility devices (AMDs).

First, we work closely with Singapore Customs, and the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) to curb the inflow of non-compliant AMDs into Singapore.

Second, our enforcement officers conduct operations daily to enforce against non-compliant devices on paths, as well as retailers selling non-compliant devices. Our officers undergo regular training to be updated on the latest violation trends, and are equipped with a variety of detection tools. Most recently, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) conducted an ambush operation in Punggol and seized four non-compliant AMDs. We will continue to conduct regular and targeted enforcement operations.

Third, we require e-scooters, which are required to be registered for use, to undergo inspections every two years to ensure compliance with regulations.

Fourth, we impose significant penalties on illegal modifications of AMDs for deterrence, given the risks they pose. All offenders, including first-time offenders, will be taken to court. Individuals who are first-time offenders are liable for a fine of up to $20,000 or an imprisonment term of up to 24 months, or both, while retailers who are first-time offenders are liable for fines up to $40,000. Repeat offenders are liable for higher fines and/or imprisonment terms.

We will continue to review regulations relating to AMDs, to enhance fire safety and deter the sale, purchase and use of non-compliant devices.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his response. I have several Yio Chu Kang residents coming to me, expressing concerns about AMDs and fires related to AMDs.

Considering the role that retailers, repair shops and especially online shops play in the modification and maintenance of AMDs, how does the Ministry determine the current frequency of inspections for these establishments? What criteria are being used to assess compliance and are there plans to increase inspection frequency or implement additional measures to ensure adherence to safety standards? And lastly, what is being done to ensure compliance of safe devices being sold by online retailers?

Sir, LTA has enhanced enforcement operations. In particular, for retailer operations, the number of operations mounted over the years has increased; in fact, it has increased four-folds, in 2022 compared to 2024. So, we will continue our efforts.

The challenge is with online retailers. As the Member has rightly pointed out, it is difficult for us to go after or to track what people are selling or buying online. However, we will be introducing regulations for online marketplace platforms and shops, in respect of non-compliant devices. We will share more later this year and we hope that this would help us in our efforts against sale, purchase and use of non-compliant devices.

I thank the Ministry of Transport (MOT) for sharing that there are plans to introduce regulations to address the issue of online shops selling AMDs that are in breach and unsafe. Can I ask MOT whether as part of the regulation review, they will be looking at how liability is assigned when a device has been purchased from an online shop, and let us say subsequently, there is a fire. In short, does the Ministry agree that the liability should not be any different regardless of whether the item was bought from an online retailer or from an offline, brick and mortar real world retailer? Because the fire burns as hot and as damaging, regardless of where the defective product came from.

When we look at reviewing the regulations against online retailers, we look at how we can align the rules that we apply on brick and mortar retailers as well. If a retailer knowingly sells a non-compliant device or an illegally modified device, the retailer must be held responsible. But if the purchaser subsequently modifies the device, then the purchaser or the owner of the device must be responsible. In cases where we are able to investigate and conclude which is the party that is responsible for the illegal modifications, the relevant party will be taken to task.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his answers. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary mentioned about actions against retailers. I have two supplementary questions. One is regarding these retailers. In the past, I believe in the previous Committees of Supply or Bills, I have suggested for the Government to take action at the Customs level, when retailers import illegal AMDs. Can I ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to update the House on what efforts are being taken to stop the import of illegal AMDs at our border?

Secondly, can I ask the Government to consider allocating more budget and resources to LTA for better enforcement efforts and better public education efforts against non-compliant AMDs? Whether in terms of fire risk or when they are in use generally in the public, for example. Because we still see that there are many non-compliant devices being used on the road, for example, those using throttle or those with weight issues and also illegal speed modification, and bearing in mind that LTA will also be requiring more resources soon as they seek to enforce the new regulations on mobility scooters.

Yes, indeed, as said in my reply, we work closely with the Customs and ICA to curb the import of such devices. In fact, we have forfeited devices that were unauthorised imports, whether by companies or individuals. So, we work with our border agencies to do that.

Yes, I thank the Member for also asking for more resources for LTA to mount all these operations on the paths, in the public spaces to catch users or the use of non-compliant devices. We will do our best with our limited resources. We will tap on technology, whether speed cameras, surveillance cameras, devices, tools to be able to help our enforcement officers to do their work better and more efficiently.