Product Regulation and Metrology Bill [Lords] 2025-04-01

Question

He questioned the use of 'metrology' and whether it is an attempt to disguise a power grab.

Question

He agreed with international alignment in standards for advanced manufacturing.

Question

He expressed concerns about dynamic alignment with EU regulations.

Question

He inquired about the Government's intention regarding UK standards.

Question

He asked about enhancing the UK's position as a leader in setting global standards.

Question

He questioned how EU laws are referenced in the Bill without taking the UK back to EU regulations.

Question

He stated that the House can regulate without this Bill and asked about dynamic realignment with EU regulations.

Question

He emphasised the need to avoid EU standards becoming a default.

Question

He referenced a previous statement about delegated powers carrying risks.

Question

The Minister is right to praise the House of Lords for making sure that the great British pint is in this Bill as an exclusion from the metrology regulations. However, why are there no provisions included for food items and what entreaties has he received regarding imperial measurements?

Question

Does the Bill give the Secretary of State power to ban any product for whatever reason? What is the justification if this House cannot provide similar powers?

Question

Why do we need a wide-sweeping Bill if existing processes in the House could achieve similar results?

Question

Does the Minister accept that he has failed to persuade both Opposition Members and the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee in the Lords? Why does the committee remain against his view?

Question

How does the Bill need improvement given that Lord Leong said it was not right?

Question

Will the hon. Member give way?

Question

Will he tell the House what possible motive he thinks a Labour Government would have for scrapping the pint?

Question

Will the hon. Member give way?

Question

My hon. Friend was asked just now whether the previous Government were likely to have introduced this legislation... May I set the record straight? Had we done so, the Secretary of State would have voted against it.

Question

Does my hon. Friend agree that this is yet another hammer blow to British businesses? We have had the Labour Government introducing £25 billion of tax with the employers’ national insurance contribution, £5 billion of costs with workers’ rights and a never-ending increase in energy bills as they drive forward on their net zero fantasy...

Question

Does the hon. Gentleman not agree that someone sitting at home watching this will be worried by the argument that it is more important to stick to some anti-EU dogma than it is to protect their children from dangerous products, or to keep dangerous electric bikes off the market and regulate for their safety?

Question

The challenge for many of us who were here during the previous Parliament, when the hon. Member was in office and had the power to diverge, is that we watched what happened and we saw the cost to British business...

Question

This is all very important. There has been some merriment about the pint, but in the novel “Nineteen Eighty-Four” by George Orwell, the hero goes into a pub, and somebody there laments the fact that the despotic regime has just abolished the pint and forced people to drink litres... By the way, when I was Minister for consumer affairs many years ago, we regularly banned things. We did not need this Bill.

Question

Clarification was sought on the alignment with European standards versus other international standards such as US and Commonwealth. The concern is that regulations are moving at pace to default to a European set of standards, which may not be beneficial.

Question

The point was made that regulations are moving at pace and will default to a European set of standards. The concern is over whether there would be no rules or regulations if this does not happen.

Question

Opposition Members believe that there is an ambiguity in the Bill which needs to be cleared up regarding dynamic alignment with the EU.

Question

This is a little off-topic, but concerns were raised about tariffs imposed by the US on British exporters.

Question

My hon. Friend is making a powerful speech, hoping that the Liberal Democrats do not allow the EU flavouring of the Bill to blind them to its illiberal aspects.

Question

The official Opposition do not seem to recognise that if they had legislated properly when we left the European Union, this legislation would not be necessary.

Question

I welcome this essential and timely Bill, which upgrades our product safety, regulation and metrology framework, delivering a much-needed boost to protections for consumers.

Question

I am interested in the hon. Gentleman’s argument; there has never been a Government who have failed to get regulation through when they feel it is necessary.

Question

My hon. Friend mentions AI. There are three major systems around the world being proposed for artificial intelligence regulation: those in China, the EU and the United States.

Question

The hon. Gentleman makes a fair point about product regulation, but is the issue not actually about enforcement? The standards already exist, so should we focus on enforcing them rather than creating new legislation?

Question

First, on the point of the customs union, which was skillfully woven into his speech, that would preclude us from reaching any arrangements with the United States, India, the Gulf states or other countries. For my money, if we wish to be part of something without a say in how it would affect our trade policy, that would be a very difficult position to take.

Question

The use of hazardous chemical flame retardants in domestic furniture has been criticised by the Association of Master Upholsterers and Soft Furnishers and in a 2019 Environmental Audit Committee report. Does my hon. Friend agree that Ministers should outline how the Government plan to address the dangers associated with CFRs?

Question

Online marketplaces are rapidly expanding in number and popularity, competing with high streets across the nation. However, there is no level playing field on which those two competitors can battle it out for consumers’ cash. That is what the Bill should be addressing.

Question

I note that the hon. Member has described many of these toys as “illegal”. In other words, the law is there already. This Bill is therefore not necessary to deal with children choking on toys and all the other things he has outlined.

Question

My constituents would be forgiven for thinking that the clock had turned back, so I will focus on the issues that they have asked me to raise. They spoke to me about the danger of fires caused by lithium-ion batteries in e-scooters and e-bikes and in everyday products.

Question

Is it the hon. Lady’s understanding that the existing regulations on lithium-ion batteries are insufficient? There is a British standard, and there are environmental and disposal regulations.

Question

I have deep concerns about this Orwellian Bill because of what it does not explicitly say and its ambiguity regarding EU dynamic realignment. The Henry VIII powers the Bill gives Ministers will have serious consequences for businesses, consumers and our ability to trade.

Question

Today I am postponing 29 local elections affecting 3.7 million voters...

Question

In the ceramics sector, the food contact materials regulations set by the European Union are essential to enabling the export of the products we create and make. They are product regulations for safety, but she seems to be suggesting that any regulatory alignment is a bad thing. Is that her party’s message about alignment for the purposes of export?

Question

Does the hon. Lady also accept that the Bill is not necessary to promote exports? If a company wants to export its products to Japan or Timbuktu, it will have to align with the regulations that exist in those countries anyway. It does not need a Government Bill, and—far worse—it does not need a Minister to have the power to make regulations without coming to this place.

Question

As a fellow member of the Procedure Committee, I do enjoy a good procedural debate, but I wonder whether she will get to the meat of the Bill at any point. Will we be talking about Brexit bogeymen, or will we be talking about consumer safety, representing those we are here to represent, looking after their interests and making them safer?

Question

Is my hon. Friend aware of any other piece of legislation on which the DPRRC in the other place has reported three times with exactly the same conclusions?

No extracted contribution text available for this contributor yet.

Question

I wonder whether the Member has read the schedule to the Bill. Agri-food products are not covered.

Question

I am so pleased to have eventually got through to the hon. Lady. She heard the Minister at the Dispatch Box say that this was not about dynamic realignment. Am I right in understanding that her view of this legislation is that it is 100% about EU dynamic realignment?

Question

There are three fundamental points to be made about the Bill: a constitutional issue, issues of scrutiny, and the assumption of harmonisation with EU regulations. These points raise concerns about the balance between executive power and parliamentary oversight... [MP's full question would continue here]

Question

Good regulation is essential for protecting public safety, maintaining a fair competitive environment, and safeguarding British industries. The Bill aims to provide agility in response to new threats but requires robust enforcement... [MP's full question would continue here]

Question

The right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings proposes jointly sponsoring a 'Made in Britain' Bill with Mr Snell, questioning the necessity of the current legislative approach to achieve similar goals.

Question

The hon. Member for Erewash introduces himself as the first metrologist elected to Parliament and expresses pride in discussing a Bill featuring metrology issues, highlighting its relevance under Labour's tenure.

Question

Asked the hon. Member for Bury St Edmunds about peculiarly British measurements like pecks, perches, rods and bushels that informed his childhood.

Question

Asked how the hon. Member for Bury St Edmunds can inspire the next generation of metrologists.

Question

Having heard these comments several times, I wonder whether the hon. Member will accept that wisdom is not necessarily proportional to the amount of time spent in the Chamber.

Question

I have been following the hon. Member’s arguments closely. It is certainly the case that, with or without wisdom, the House is capable of making poor decisions. However, it is much more likely that the House will get it right rather than a delegated legislation Committee dealing with a statutory instrument where a Minister comes along and reads out a brief that she or he often does not understand.

Question

My hon. Friend is making an excellent point. Many constituents around the country will appreciate the specific points he makes about the changing product environment, and the way that product design and development is moving very quickly.

Question

Why does he think those arguments have not persuaded, in three different attempts in three different reports, the cross-party Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee?

Question

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the conclusions of the fourth report by the expert Committee

Question

Does he agree it would be sensible for the UK Government to ensure that, where powers are devolved to the Scottish Parliament, they seek consent from Scottish Ministers rather than just legislating?

Question

I welcome this Bill, which will address the alarming proliferation of unsafe products in online marketplaces. I would like to talk particularly about the hazards of unsafe toys, which are increasingly being sold online.

Question

Does the hon. Member agree that there should be a mechanism to recognise and regulate high-risk products so that we can protect consumers?

Question

We have also heard many good speeches, including the last one, about issues of product safety and the need to have a system that can keep up. The speech that addressed both that issue and whether the Bill is appropriate—it was the outstanding speech by a Government Member—was made by the hon. Member for Birmingham Northfield (Laurence Turner). He did not like my praise of his speech in so far as it disparaged in any way anybody else’s, but he faced up to the issues directly.

Question

Following our departure from the European Union, the UK established its independent regulatory system, which must be flexible enough to accommodate emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence, and address changes in consumer purchasing behaviours. Will the Minister confirm that discussions are happening with the EU, including the resetting of discussions on trade, to ensure that UKCA markings and any products regulated here in the UK are mutually recognised?

Question

Does the Minister agree that if a UK manufacturer wants to produce a product for the UK market, it should produce it to UK regulations, and if it wants to export it to Europe, it is sensible to produce that product to EU regulations, which will open up a massive market on our doorstep? Keeping up with EU regulations will generally be good for the British business economy and help economic growth.

Question

The MP asked about unsafe toys, button batteries, and the fact that investigations have discovered up to 90% of products purchased in online marketplaces are unsafe.

Question

Spoke with his customary passion about the ceramics industry in the Potteries and suggested ideas for protecting the industry.

No extracted contribution text available for this contributor yet.