Product Regulation and Metrology Bill [Lords] 2025-06-04

The clause would require an assessment on the benefits of introducing country of origin markings for ceramic products sold in the UK, and a report must be published within six months after this Act is passed.

This new clause requires the Government to undertake reviews into the feasibility of requiring food businesses to disclose the country of origin of meat products on menus, considering public health, environmental, and animal welfare concerns.

The new clause would require the Government to introduce a voluntary labelling system indicating when a product has been produced or manufactured in the UK, promoting informed consumer choices and supporting domestic producers.

This new clause would ensure that guidance for SMEs on compliance with regulations under this Act is available 60 days before implementation, including a summary of key provisions and practical advice.

This new clause would require the Government to undertake a review into the accessibility and affordability of independent product testing and certification for SMEs, with a report published within 12 months.

This new clause allows the Secretary of State to make regulations providing for liability of online marketplaces for defective and unsafe products, ensuring redress for consumers suffering harm from such products.

This new clause provides greater regulatory certainty for UK businesses by requiring scrutiny of all decisions to diverge or align with EU regulations, with statements made in Parliament on the benefits at least 14 days before regulations are laid.

This new clause requires the Secretary of State to make regulations within three months to include lithium-ion batteries as a specified product category, with provisions for safety and performance standards, labelling requirements, and enforcement actions.

Mr. Snell discussed the proliferation of counterfeit products in the UK ceramics market, citing specific examples such as backstamps on ceramic goods that are misleadingly labelled 'Made in England' despite being partially manufactured abroad. He stressed the importance of protecting genuine British products like those from Stoke-on-Trent and advocated for an investigation into whether country-of-origin stamps should be legally protected to ensure transparency.

Mr. Jogee confirmed that the city of Newcastle-under-Lyme is located in Staffordshire, clarifying Mr. Snell's reference to ceramics manufacturing locations within England. He did not elaborate on his stance regarding the proposed amendments but provided geographical context for the debate.

Mr. Jogee agreed with Mr. Snell, emphasising that this is about national pride and the importance of supporting local industries by buying British-made goods.

Former MP and now CEO of Ceramics UK, Rob Flello informed Gareth Snell that people in Stoke-on-Trent believe they have 'slip' in their veins due to the deep connection between the city and the ceramics industry. This underlines how intrinsic the ceramics sector is to the local community.

Mr. Allister supported new clause 1 but raised concerns about the broader implications of the Bill, particularly regarding its potential misuse by future governments to realign UK regulations with EU standards without proper oversight from this House.

Mr. Holden supported amendments aimed at ensuring proper scrutiny of the Bill, agreeing with Mr. Allister that the lack of oversight is democratically dangerous.

Supports the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill as it ensures UK's position at the forefront of science. Argues that amendments by Opposition would hinder progress. Emphasises the importance of precision engineering and metrology in creating modern infrastructure.

Expresses concern over international alignment issues with the Bill, stating it is more about EU realignment than general international regulation.

Questions if Adam Thompson is comfortable with the Henry VIII powers in the Bill, suggesting they could lead to criminal offences without parliamentary scrutiny. Expresses concern over potential risk to constituents' liberty.

Supports UK labelling for manufactured products, including new clause 4 which is broader in scope than the ceramics-specific new clause 1 proposed by Dr Gardner.

Echos support for new clause 1 and highlights the importance of protecting skilled workers, such as those at Moorcroft pottery in his constituency, who have collectively over 800 years of experience.

Sees the Bill as important for dealing with regulatory changes post-Brexit, arguing that alignment reduces administrative burdens and costs for small businesses compared to maintaining separate standards. She emphasises the importance of high standards in product safety, such as ensuring toxic toys like the Glo Worm are no longer available.

The right hon. Member seems to believe the regulatory regimes we had were a ceiling rather than a floor... Let’s be honest: many of these things are beyond our individual pay grades and we will want some expert assistance.

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak briefly in this debate; I was not sure that I would, depending on timings of the business of the House... New clause 1 is a step in the right direction and it has my support.

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I just want to make sure that all five Members from north Staffordshire make their voice known on the record... I support him wholeheartedly in his speech.

It is an honour to speak in this debate on the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill, and in particular the amendments tabled by the Public Bill Committee. I was not on the Committee—some might say I did not measure up... My parliamentary assistant has asked me to point out that I wrote that joke, not her.

Supports the Product Regulation Bill and calls for enforcement details and cost recovery. Acknowledges the ceramics industry's importance in Stoke-on-Trent Central, stating that businesses claiming false origins damage local industries.

Intervenes to emphasise the need for more scrutiny of regulations and criticises the economic climate set by the Labour Government. Suggests measures like new clause 13 would make the regulatory climate better for businesses.

Highlights the work done at the National Physical Laboratory and supports the Product Regulation Bill with amendments to level the playing field between online and high street businesses. She raises concerns about secondary legislation and Henry VIII powers, advocating for proper parliamentary scrutiny and support for small businesses.

Pays tribute to Sarah Olney's work at the National Physical Laboratory and emphasises the importance of metrology. Supports new clauses that would require large supermarkets to inform customers when product quantities have decreased, resulting in price increases per unit measurement.

Supports Sarah Olney's position on labelling requirements for meat products and the importance of informing consumers about product quantity changes and pricing.

The hon. Gentleman clarified the concerns about new clause 4, arguing that the final paragraph under subsection (7) of the amendment would allow labelling where the final significant production process occurred in the UK, which could mislead consumers by passing off products as being made entirely in the UK.

The hon. Member supported the need to update regulatory frameworks to reduce trade friction and give businesses and consumers confidence in their products, expressing concern about excessive ministerial discretion and reliance on secondary legislation. She called for stronger scrutiny mechanisms and urged the Government to support new clause 4.

The hon. Lady argued that the Product Standards Bill was a 'Trojan horse' limiting British innovators with over-burdensome regulations, reducing industry competitiveness internationally. She raised concerns about sweeping Henry VIII powers and dynamic alignment by back door with EU red tape.

The hon. Member for Harlow admits that dynamic alignment with EU regulation is the purpose of the Bill, but argues that such decisions should be made by UK courts.

Minister supports the Product Regulation Bill, arguing it allows the UK to update product regulations and protect consumers from new risks. He reassures that the powers do not grant jurisdiction to foreign courts and are subject to parliamentary oversight.

Asks the Minister to support a clause making consumers aware when product sizes decrease but prices remain the same (shrinkflation).

Questions whether online marketplaces should have greater responsibility for ensuring product safety, akin to high street retailers.

Emphasises the practical reality of technical regulations and suggests that primary legislation for product safety would overwhelm parliamentary time. Proposes publishing a code of conduct to ensure transparency in regulation-making processes.

Expresses reassurance following Minister's assurances about the impact of regulations and suggests that wider calls for scrutiny should be heard by Business Ministers.

Acknowledges the important points made during the debate and expresses confidence in government ministers hearing them.

Addresses amendments concerning product safety, consumer protection, small businesses, economic growth, online marketplaces, supply chains, and recalls. Provides assurances about regulatory frameworks, consultations, and the necessity of regulations under scrutiny.

Withdraws new clause 4 related to labelling for UK-produced or manufactured products following ministerial response.

Moves the Product Regulation Bill, emphasising its role in supporting businesses, protecting consumers, ensuring a fair playing field, and future-proofing product regulation. Acknowledges that while many laws stem from EU legislation, leaving the EU provides an opportunity to tailor rules for UK needs.

Claims the Opposition's arguments are unfounded myths and suggests they are trying to promote a dead horse. Accuses the Bill of being some mysterious route back into the EU.

Questions the myth that the Bill will see the end of the great British pint, supporting the Minister's argument that it secures it.

Asks about the role of the Bill in keeping the UK at the forefront of science internationally and emphasises his contribution to debates on product regulation.

Questions the Minister regarding conversations happening across Government to ensure that enforcement agencies are properly resourced to enforce new regulations.

Mr Griffith expressed gratitude towards colleagues who held the Government accountable on this Bill but criticised it as an example of everything wrong with Westminster. He argued that giving up control over shaping regulations is absurd, undermining agility and dynamism in adapting to events. The dynamic alignment clauses mean Britain would have to follow EU standard changes, potentially stifling innovation and bespoke trade deals. Mr Griffith cited the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee’s scathing rebuke of the Bill for shifting legislative power from Parliament to Ministers.