Conformity Assessment (Mutual Recognition Agreements) and Weights and Measures (Intoxicating Liquor) (Amendment) Regulations 2021

Lord Lennie Excerpts

Tuesday 15th June 2021 Grand Committee

[Lord Lennie (Lab) [V]]

My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister and the noble Lord, Lord Lansley, for their contributions thus far to this debate.

As we have heard, these regulations give effect to mutual recognition agreements between the UK and the USA, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Korea and Japan. The regulations also allow specific products assessed by those bodies in countries recognised under MRAs to be placed on the market in Great Britain and enable the Secretary of State to designate and monitor UK conformity assessment bodies to assess products against the other party’s requirements.

The Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee noted that these regulations are the first use of the power to implement free trade agreements under Sections 2 and 4 of the Trade Act 2021. As the noble Lord, Lord Lansley, commented, the instrument also implements Annexe 2-D of the UK-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement by allowing single-distilled Shōchū to be placed on the market in the UK in the new quantity of 900 millilitres. I recognise that this an important statutory instrument for both businesses and consumers, with continuity and certainty even more important now as we look ahead to 19 July and our hopes for the beginning of the end of the current restrictions. I would therefore be grateful if the Minister could provide some clarity on a few areas.

In relation to UK policy on conformity assessment and accreditation of the situation under EU law as it applies in NI, the regulations set out the requirements for the accreditation of market surveillance as it applies in EU law to the Northern Ireland protocol. That continues to be the basis for accreditation policy. If there are any changes to the UK policy in future, will they require an assessment of the implications of any trade barriers between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and how is that being considered?

In respect of registers of MRA bodies, the statutory instrument states:

“The Secretary of State may … compile and maintain a register of … MRA bodies … their MRA body identification numbers … the activities for which they have been designated; and … any restriction on those activities”.


Can the Minister confirm where he has outlined, or whether he will outline, the activities for which MRA bodies have been designated and what restrictions there are on those activities? The Secretary of State will also be able to designate a conformity assessment body—CAB—to assess products against other countries’ requirements. What criteria will the Minister use to consider whether the body is capable of fulfilling those functions and to ensure that it meets the requirements of a designated body? What parliamentary oversight will that body have?

The statutory instrument states:

“To the extent that these Regulations contain provision in the areas of the protection of human or animal life or health or environmental protection, the provision is consistent with maintaining UK levels of statutory protection in that area.”


However, in Section 2(7) of the Trade Act, UK statutory protection also extends to

“plant life or health … animal welfare … employment and labour”.

Do these regulations not cover those areas?

The Explanatory Memorandum states:

“The main direct cost to business will be the familiarisation cost associated with these Regulations; these are a one-off cost, estimated at £205,000.”


Does this fall equally on large companies and SMEs?

On divergence, the UK MRAs replicate the previous EU MRAs in substance, with the only substantive divergence from the EU being in the permission to allow the additional bottle size for single-distilled Shōchū. This poses the broader question of whether the UK could take a different approach to conformity assessments in future.

On 1 January 2021, the UK introduced its own product safety mark, which broadly mirrors the EU’s CE mark. According to the law firm Bird & Bird, the UK conformity assessment regime

“follows essentially the same principles as the previous CE marking regime, but with the safety and compliance standards, authorised representative/responsible person and notified body requirements all now being valid for the UK only.”

Despite being a UK ask, the EU-UK deal did not include an agreement on the mutual recognition of conformity assessments. This means that most goods produced in the UK that require certification for sale in the EU will have to go through a secondary conformity assessment in the EU in order to be eligible for export, resulting in extra costs to trade with our main trading partner. A lack of MRAs is unusual for comparable deals such as those between the EU and Japan, Canada and Switzerland, which all have MRAs. Even countries such as Australia and the US, which do not have trade deals with the EU, have MRAs. Does the Minister regret not having an MRA in the TCA? Will the UK continue to share information on CABs with the EU? I look forward to the Minister’s response.