That the draft Regulations laid before the House on 1 June be approved.
Relevant document: 5th Report from the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee
My Lords, this instrument concerns machinery used every day across our economy and in our daily lives. It covers a wide range of products: from cranes and excavators used on construction sites to lawnmowers, leaf blowers and many other workplace and consumer products. The current machinery safety framework is based on legislation introduced in 2006 and 2008, which implemented the then EU machinery directive and was subsequently assimilated into UK law following our departure from the European Union.
As noble Lords will know and appreciate, machinery has evolved markedly over the past two decades. Digital technologies, automation, connected systems and software now play an increasingly important role in machinery design and operation. It is therefore right that our regulatory framework evolves alongside those technological developments to ensure it remains effective, proportionate and fit for purpose. This instrument has two distinct and complementary purposes. First, it introduces the domestic enforcement framework necessary to ensure the effective enforcement of the EU machinery regulation which applies in Northern Ireland from 20 January 2027 under the Windsor Framework. Secondly, it amends domestic legislation to ensure that machinery meeting the updated EU requirements can continue to be placed on the market in Great Britain under the CE marking. In doing so, it provides businesses with continuity and certainty while avoiding unnecessary duplication of conformity assessment procedures.
Turning first to Northern Ireland, these regulations establish a comprehensive enforcement framework to ensure that safe and compliant machinery can continue to be placed on the Northern Ireland market. They designate the existing enforcement authorities, which are the Health and Safety Executive for Northern Ireland and the district councils, and grant them appropriate investigatory and enforcement powers. They also create offences and penalties for serious non-compliance, including fines and, where appropriate, custodial sentences. I can reassure the House that these penalties are fully consistent with the wider product safety framework and proportionate to the seriousness of the offences. The Northern Ireland Department of Justice has confirmed that these provisions will not have a detrimental impact on the criminal justice system.
Importantly, enforcement is intended to be proportionate. In the overwhelming majority of cases, we expect compliance to be achieved through advice, engagement and support for businesses, rather than through criminal sanctions. Criminal penalties are rightly reserved for the most serious instances of non-compliance. The regulations also preserve the important role of UK-approved conformity assessment bodies for machinery placed on the Northern Ireland market by continuing to use the UKNI marking alongside the CE marking where required. It is equally important to emphasise that the UKNI marking is not mandatory in every case: where the relevant conditions are met, machinery bearing the CE marking alone may continue to be placed on the Northern Ireland market.
Turning to Great Britain, the regulations continue the Government’s policy of recognising machinery that complies with the specific requirements of the updated EU machinery regulation. This means manufacturers can continue placing compliant products on the GB market under the CE marking, avoiding costly duplicate conformity assessments while maintaining high standards of product safety. The regulations also ensure that qualifying goods in free circulation in Northern Ireland continue to enjoy unfettered access to the Great Britain market. The updated EU machinery regulation also reflects the considerable technological advances since the previous regime was introduced. It clarifies responsibilities across the supply chain, strengthens the obligations of importers and distributors, facilitates greater use of digital documentation, and mandates third-party conformity assessment for certain categories of higher-risk machinery.
Having carefully considered these changes and following extensive engagement with industry, the Government believe that they are sensible and proportionate and reflect the reality of a modern machinery sector. Indeed, the engagement has been extensive. My officials undertook a call for evidence, held a series of round table discussions with more than 200 stakeholders across the United Kingdom and internationally, and engaged directly with businesses in Northern Ireland, including through dedicated events in Belfast. The message from industry was consistent and clear. Stakeholders supported modernising machinery safety requirements and strongly backed the continued recognition of CE in Great Britain as a means of reducing costs, facilitating trade and maintaining competitiveness. Businesses in Northern Ireland also emphasised the need to maintain a coherent regulatory approach across the United Kingdom and to ensure that goods continue to move smoothly between Northern Ireland and Great Britain. The Government have listened carefully to those views. This instrument reflects that engagement. It supports competitiveness, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises, while maintaining robust protections for workers and consumers.
Manufacturers already certify their machinery to EU requirements because they operate across multiple international markets. Consequently, officials have not identified any significant adverse impacts arising from these regulations, and we anticipate no material disruption to trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland as a result of this instrument. The Government will continue to support businesses with clear guidance and practical assistance, including the recently announced £16.6 million UK internal market package for Northern Ireland businesses adapting to regulatory change.
I shall now briefly turn to the amendment tabled by the noble Baroness, Lady Hoey, which raises concerns about both the functioning of the United Kingdom internal market and the Government’s approach to updating machinery regulation. Northern Ireland is, of course, an integral part of our United Kingdom. While the legal framework applicable in Northern Ireland and in Great Britain will temporarily differ in some respects, the practical consequences for most businesses trading across the United Kingdom will be limited. Manufacturers have already designed and certified their products to meet EU requirements because they serve multiple international markets. The continued recognition of compliant machinery in Great Britain and the continued unfettered access enjoyed by qualifying Northern Ireland goods will enable businesses to trade across the United Kingdom with minimal disruption.
The noble Baroness also suggests that these measures merely follow the European Union’s regulatory approach. I respectfully disagree. The Government carefully considered a range of policy options and engaged extensively with manufacturers, trade associations and other stakeholders. We concluded that this approach best supports UK businesses, reduces unnecessary duplication, facilitates trade, maintains our high standards for machinery safety and provides the certainty businesses have consistently asked for. This is therefore a policy choice made in the interests of businesses, workers and consumers throughout the United Kingdom. Ultimately, these regulations aim to modernise an ageing regulatory framework, maintain high standards of product safety, support innovation, reduce unnecessary burdens where possible and provide businesses with the certainty they need to invest and grow. For these reasons, I beg to move that these regulations be approved.
My Lords, I thank all noble Lords for their contributions to this short debate. I will address briefly the concerns and questions raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Hoey, and other noble Lords. This is a time-limited debate, so I will answer as many questions as I can and, if necessary, will write to noble Lords.
I recognise, as does the House, that noble Lords have consistently raised concerns about the operation of the Windsor Framework and its application for Northern Ireland. These are legitimate matters for parliamentary scrutiny and debate, which we welcome. However, the question before the House this evening is much narrower and more practical, as was mentioned by the noble Baroness, Lady Suttie: namely, whether businesses, regulators and consumers should have a clear, modern and enforceable machinery safety framework before the new arrangements take effect on 20 January 2027.
In reaching their conclusions, the Government did not merely make assumptions; we asked those who will be directly affected by them. As I said in opening, my officials have conducted a comprehensive programme of engagement, comprising a national call for evidence, 10 round-table meetings attended by over 200 stakeholders from across the United Kingdom and internationally, and targeted engagement with businesses in Belfast and throughout Northern Ireland. We listened to manufacturers, importers, conformity assessment bodies and representative organisations before deciding on this approach. The consistent message that we received was that businesses sought certainty. They wanted a modern regulatory framework that reflected technological developments. They wanted to avoid unnecessary duplication of conformity assessment. They sought ongoing acknowledgement of CE-marked machinery within Great Britain, as it diminishes costs, bolsters competitiveness, and facilitates more straightforward trade for businesses across the United Kingdom and within the European Union.
Numerous enterprises that we interacted with in Northern Ireland informed us that retaining CE recognition within GB would facilitate trade, as manufacturers already certified their products to these standards to access international markets. They regarded certainty and continuity as essential to investment and future growth. The evidence gathered by government shows that businesses are most concerned not with ongoing uncertainty but with having clear regulations, practical trade arrangements and a solid framework that helps them succeed in the UK and on the global stage.
Noble Lords may continue to hold differing views on the Windsor Framework, but this instrument neither creates nor alters those constitutional arrangements. Its purpose is more limited and practical, and ensures that businesses have certainty. It ensures that regulators have the powers necessary to fulfil their statutory responsibilities and it upholds high standards of machinery safety. It supports innovation and competitiveness, and it enables responsible businesses to continue trading with confidence.
Various noble Lords asked about costs. The measures applying in Northern Ireland are out of scope of formal impact assessment. Nevertheless, the Government have engaged directly with businesses in Northern Ireland, and the feedback from these stakeholders has been broadly supportive of the measures. As a result, we do not expect the measures to impose additional costs or burdens on businesses in Northern Ireland relative to those elsewhere in the United Kingdom. We anticipate that most businesses operating in Great Britain will choose to meet the EU requirements. In practical terms, this means that machinery manufacturers across the United Kingdom will be subject to the same requirements. In addition, the Government have set out their intention to introduce similar reforms in Great Britain. For those reasons, we expect the requirements applying in Northern Ireland to create minimal, if any, competitive disadvantage. As I said, we recently announced £16.6 million to support Northern Ireland businesses adapting to regulatory change.
There were questions asked about whether businesses were unprepared. Through extensive stakeholder engagement, businesses are aware of these forthcoming changes. Guidance for businesses is available at GOV.UK, and this guidance will be updated to reflect the changes implemented by this SI.
The noble Baroness, Lady Hoey, asked what businesses in Great Britain need to do. This instrument does not alter the existing Windsor Framework arrangement. Machinery placed on the market in Northern Ireland must comply with the applicable Northern Ireland requirements. Machinery in Great Britain may be placed on the Northern Ireland market with the CE marking where it is either self-assessed to the EU requirements or assessed by an EU-recognised body. Where the UK-approved body carries out the conformity assessment, both the CE and the UKNI markings are required. Manufacturers may therefore continue to place machinery on the Northern Ireland market, regardless of where it is manufactured, provided it meets applicable requirements.
The noble Baroness, Lady Suttie, asked whether we will be introducing similar measures in Great Britain. My officials have already started actively developing further SIs to modernise the machinery requirements in Great Britain. This will ensure that the UK framework remains proportionate and aligned with technological developments. The announcement for implementing these similar measures has already taken place to provide businesses with certainty.
I think the noble Lord, Lord McCrea, asked a question about whether businesses are in favour. I say again that my officials have consulted with industry stakeholders across the UK and internationally in the call for evidence. The majority of businesses in Northern Ireland supported introducing the requirements under the machinery regulation, and many businesses stressed the importance of introducing similar measures in the rest of the UK as soon as possible.
I think a question was also asked about current products. Products that are placed on the market before 20 January 2027 can continue to circulate freely until the end of their lives without further requirements, including UK(NI) marking.
My time is running out, so I will conclude. Ultimately, I respectfully suggest that this House should evaluate these regulations based on the evidence presented before us, the tangible benefits they offer and the certainty they afford to businesses throughout the United Kingdom. For these reasons, I respectfully invite the House to reject the regret amendment and approve these regulations.