Third Delegated Legislation Committee
Tuesday 30th June 2026
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
(began 4 weeks, 1 day ago)
Watch LiveSkip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
14:32
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
A wide range of workplace and consumer products, such as cranes and excavators and leaf blowers and lawn mowers. The current framework for machinery safety, like many other product regulations, is based on EU rules assimilated into UK law following our departure from the European Union. The current EU directive and our UK regulations were first introduced in 2006 and 2008, respectively, as. Members will appreciate. Machinery has adapted and advanced significantly in that time. As such, it is important that we review our legislation to ensure that it is fit for purpose and accounts for potential risks from new and emerging technologies, as well as changes in supply chains and how they operate.
I now explain in more detail how the instrument meets its purpose. This instrument has two functions. Firstly, it ensures that updated EU machinery legislation can be fully enforced in Northern Ireland, as required under the Windsor framework, and secondly, it amends domestic legislation. Such machinery, which meets the updated EU requirements, can continue to be placed on the market in Great Britain. This see will introduce mechanisms to allow the EU's machinery regulation to be enforced effectively in Northern Ireland. The EU has updated its machinery rules through a new regulation, which will apply from the 20th of January 2027.
Recourse to criminal sanctions. However, it is essential that these penalties are available in serious cases of non-compliance. This instrument also provides for the continued role of UK notified bodies in certifying machinery for the Northern Ireland market, using the UK NI marking. This is a conformity marking which must be displayed alongside the CE marking when used for goods placed on the Northern Ireland market. In Great Britain. The instrument. The instrument continues CE recognition, allowing businesses to place goods which meet certain updated EU requirements on the GB market, avoiding costly duplicate conformity processes.
It achieves this by amending legislation to ensure machinery that meets relevant requirements of the EU. Regulation can still be placed on the GB market. Also includes provisions relating to Northern Ireland qualifying goods, ensuring that products in free circulation in Northern Ireland continue to benefit from unfettered access to the GB market. The EU's machinery Regulation aims to respond to new technological developments by introducing updated provisions, including clarified responsibilities across the supply chain, including clear importer and distributor obligations and. Provisions for digital documentation to reduce environmental impacts and mandatory third party assessments for certain high risk products.
And it is the government's position that these changes are beneficial, sensible and proportionate, reflecting how the machinery industry has developed since the previous regulations were introduced. As such, the government will introduce a second C in due course, which will update legislation in Great Britain in line with requirements in Northern Ireland. Approach we are taking will support economic growth by eliminating costly duplicative processes, reducing unnecessary burdens on businesses and helping maintain the UK's competitiveness with other markets. It will also support commitments in our trade strategy to reset the UK's relationship and facilitate easier trade with the EU.
It will protect the UK internal market and the free flow of goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, while also improving trade with the EU and other partners. Honourable members my officials have carried out extensive stakeholder engagement regarding the future of machinery legislation in the UK. We ran a call for evidence last year and gathered verbal feedback through a series of roundtable events held across ten locations, attended by more than 200 stakeholders. My officials engaged with businesses and trade associations across the UK and in key global markets.
Stakeholders were supportive of modernising machinery, safety requirements and continuing CE recognition to reduce costs, to support trade and to maintain competitiveness. We received several responses from businesses in Northern Ireland and held two roundtable events in Belfast, and there was broad support among stakeholders for the measures being introduced, including for modernising and strengthening safety requirements. Northern Ireland stakeholders also expressed support for continued CE recognition in Great Britain. They told us that this would ensure a clear and consistent approach to machinery regulation across the whole of the UK internal market, as the.
House are aware, we have already announced this approach to introduce similar measures to those in place in the EU and Northern Ireland, and officials have also proactively engaged with the devolved governments and enforcement authorities through the policy, development and legislative process to discuss the upcoming changes and ensure that they work for all parts of the UK. No significant issues. Have been raised with my officials and we continue to engage regularly with stakeholders. From this engagement, it is clear that this legislation is in the best interests of both industry and consumers across the UK, including in Northern Ireland.
The government is taking proactive steps to ensure that industry is well supported to. In complying with the new requirements. The approach that we are taking reflects the feedback we have received from stakeholders, and is designed to work in the best interests of business as well as consumers. The changes have widely been viewed as pragmatic solution, supporting competitiveness and particularly for SMEs and sectors with more limited resources. As this is a global sector, many businesses that manufacture and supply machinery have already begun preparing to meet these updated requirements to continue trading with Northern Ireland and the EU, and through our engagement with industry officials, have not identified significant adverse impacts arising from this instrument.
However, the government remains fully committed to supporting businesses in Northern Ireland. In the most recent budget, we announced a £16.6 million UK internal market package to help businesses adapt to the evolving regulatory landscape, and we will also provide clear and timely guidance to give businesses the support that they need to comply with these requirements, with confidence and with certainty. So chair, on that note, I will commend this draft draft instrument to the committee. And thank you.
I now explain in more detail how the instrument meets its purpose. This instrument has two functions. Firstly, it ensures that updated EU machinery legislation can be fully enforced in Northern Ireland, as required under the Windsor framework, and secondly, it amends domestic legislation. Such machinery, which meets the updated EU requirements, can continue to be placed on the market in Great Britain. This see will introduce mechanisms to allow the EU's machinery regulation to be enforced effectively in Northern Ireland. The EU has updated its machinery rules through a new regulation, which will apply from the 20th of January 2027.
Recourse to criminal sanctions. However, it is essential that these penalties are available in serious cases of non-compliance. This instrument also provides for the continued role of UK notified bodies in certifying machinery for the Northern Ireland market, using the UK NI marking. This is a conformity marking which must be displayed alongside the CE marking when used for goods placed on the Northern Ireland market. In Great Britain. The instrument. The instrument continues CE recognition, allowing businesses to place goods which meet certain updated EU requirements on the GB market, avoiding costly duplicate conformity processes.
It achieves this by amending legislation to ensure machinery that meets relevant requirements of the EU. Regulation can still be placed on the GB market. Also includes provisions relating to Northern Ireland qualifying goods, ensuring that products in free circulation in Northern Ireland continue to benefit from unfettered access to the GB market. The EU's machinery Regulation aims to respond to new technological developments by introducing updated provisions, including clarified responsibilities across the supply chain, including clear importer and distributor obligations and. Provisions for digital documentation to reduce environmental impacts and mandatory third party assessments for certain high risk products.
And it is the government's position that these changes are beneficial, sensible and proportionate, reflecting how the machinery industry has developed since the previous regulations were introduced. As such, the government will introduce a second C in due course, which will update legislation in Great Britain in line with requirements in Northern Ireland. Approach we are taking will support economic growth by eliminating costly duplicative processes, reducing unnecessary burdens on businesses and helping maintain the UK's competitiveness with other markets. It will also support commitments in our trade strategy to reset the UK's relationship and facilitate easier trade with the EU.
It will protect the UK internal market and the free flow of goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, while also improving trade with the EU and other partners. Honourable members my officials have carried out extensive stakeholder engagement regarding the future of machinery legislation in the UK. We ran a call for evidence last year and gathered verbal feedback through a series of roundtable events held across ten locations, attended by more than 200 stakeholders. My officials engaged with businesses and trade associations across the UK and in key global markets.
Stakeholders were supportive of modernising machinery, safety requirements and continuing CE recognition to reduce costs, to support trade and to maintain competitiveness. We received several responses from businesses in Northern Ireland and held two roundtable events in Belfast, and there was broad support among stakeholders for the measures being introduced, including for modernising and strengthening safety requirements. Northern Ireland stakeholders also expressed support for continued CE recognition in Great Britain. They told us that this would ensure a clear and consistent approach to machinery regulation across the whole of the UK internal market, as the.
House are aware, we have already announced this approach to introduce similar measures to those in place in the EU and Northern Ireland, and officials have also proactively engaged with the devolved governments and enforcement authorities through the policy, development and legislative process to discuss the upcoming changes and ensure that they work for all parts of the UK. No significant issues. Have been raised with my officials and we continue to engage regularly with stakeholders. From this engagement, it is clear that this legislation is in the best interests of both industry and consumers across the UK, including in Northern Ireland.
The government is taking proactive steps to ensure that industry is well supported to. In complying with the new requirements. The approach that we are taking reflects the feedback we have received from stakeholders, and is designed to work in the best interests of business as well as consumers. The changes have widely been viewed as pragmatic solution, supporting competitiveness and particularly for SMEs and sectors with more limited resources. As this is a global sector, many businesses that manufacture and supply machinery have already begun preparing to meet these updated requirements to continue trading with Northern Ireland and the EU, and through our engagement with industry officials, have not identified significant adverse impacts arising from this instrument.
However, the government remains fully committed to supporting businesses in Northern Ireland. In the most recent budget, we announced a £16.6 million UK internal market package to help businesses adapt to the evolving regulatory landscape, and we will also provide clear and timely guidance to give businesses the support that they need to comply with these requirements, with confidence and with certainty. So chair, on that note, I will commend this draft draft instrument to the committee. And thank you.
14:46
14:46
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Thank you very much, Miss Geraldine, and it is an absolute pleasure to serve under your chairmanship this afternoon. And as we've heard from the minister, this instrument makes two principal changes. It provides for the enforcement in Northern Ireland of the EU's machinery regulation, including powers for regulators and offences and penalties and mechanisms for cooperation with EU authorities. And secondly, it amends the Great Britain regime by extending recognition of CE marking beyond January next year. We heard from the Minister, the government argues that this avoids a regulatory cliff edge and supports trade.
And. While there are merits to continuity, this instrument also raises several serious concerns. Firstly, there is no impact assessment. The explanatory memorandum focuses narrowly on the cost of enforcement and not the cost of the underlying regulation once enforced, and that is a significant omission. It's impossible for this House to judge whether these measures will have a material effect on trade, as is required, without understanding the real costs imposed on Northern Ireland businesses. Secondly, what assessment has the Minister made of the comparative cost burdens?Will these measures increase costs for Northern Ireland businesses relative to those in Great Britain, and if so, to what extent?How many businesses are expected to be impacted?And the £16.6 million that she mentions in the UK Internal Market package.
How does she believe it to be sufficient to meet those costs?Thirdly, this instrument clearly deepens regulatory divergence within the United Kingdom. Northern Ireland will be subject to a new EU regulation enforced through EU aligned structures, while Great Britain offers operates under a different framework. So how does the Minister intend firms trading across both markets to navigate this fragmentation, particularly those which are small and medium sized businesses?Fourthly, the government suggests that many businesses already align with EU standards. If that is the case, why has there been no full assessment of the administrative burden of operating dual systems or.
These regulations are politically and legally significant. Effect through enforcement to legislation made outside the United Kingdom. In a legislature in which the people of Northern Ireland are not represented. Whatever your views of the wider arrangements, that is not a trivial step, and it deserves proper scrutiny. Finally, the government indicates that similar measures may in time be introduced in Great Britain. So I think the minister gave us a timetable. But can she clarify the timetable for that so that businesses can understand what timetable they're working towards, and indeed, whether this represents a long term policy of continued reliance on EU standards, because the House should not be asked to proceed on the basis of incomplete analysis.
I hope the Minister can provide clarity on costs, impacts and the government's longer term regulatory regulatory direction because while we await that clarity and until we have that clarity on these matters, we will oppose these measures today.
And. While there are merits to continuity, this instrument also raises several serious concerns. Firstly, there is no impact assessment. The explanatory memorandum focuses narrowly on the cost of enforcement and not the cost of the underlying regulation once enforced, and that is a significant omission. It's impossible for this House to judge whether these measures will have a material effect on trade, as is required, without understanding the real costs imposed on Northern Ireland businesses. Secondly, what assessment has the Minister made of the comparative cost burdens?Will these measures increase costs for Northern Ireland businesses relative to those in Great Britain, and if so, to what extent?How many businesses are expected to be impacted?And the £16.6 million that she mentions in the UK Internal Market package.
How does she believe it to be sufficient to meet those costs?Thirdly, this instrument clearly deepens regulatory divergence within the United Kingdom. Northern Ireland will be subject to a new EU regulation enforced through EU aligned structures, while Great Britain offers operates under a different framework. So how does the Minister intend firms trading across both markets to navigate this fragmentation, particularly those which are small and medium sized businesses?Fourthly, the government suggests that many businesses already align with EU standards. If that is the case, why has there been no full assessment of the administrative burden of operating dual systems or.
These regulations are politically and legally significant. Effect through enforcement to legislation made outside the United Kingdom. In a legislature in which the people of Northern Ireland are not represented. Whatever your views of the wider arrangements, that is not a trivial step, and it deserves proper scrutiny. Finally, the government indicates that similar measures may in time be introduced in Great Britain. So I think the minister gave us a timetable. But can she clarify the timetable for that so that businesses can understand what timetable they're working towards, and indeed, whether this represents a long term policy of continued reliance on EU standards, because the House should not be asked to proceed on the basis of incomplete analysis.
I hope the Minister can provide clarity on costs, impacts and the government's longer term regulatory regulatory direction because while we await that clarity and until we have that clarity on these matters, we will oppose these measures today.
14:54
14:54
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Oh. Thank you very much indeed. I don't want to entertain the the committee too long, but I did have some points of clarification just for the minister, if I may. First of all, could you just confirm that these. As I understand it, these regulations just concern the enforcement of machinery standards which flow into Northern Ireland by dint of the Windsor framework, without any parliamentary scrutiny whatsoever in the UK, that these are regulations which Northern Ireland is forced to comply with without necessarily having any say in them whatsoever.
And on that note, did the UK government have any influence over the EU production of these regulations, which might be to our benefit, or are we just in a situation where we get what we given?She will understand that the you know, one of the doubts about the the arrangement with Northern Ireland of the Windsor framework was this kind of demographic, demographic, democratic deficit. That we were going to be rule takers rather than rule makers. And this looks like an example of that. So if she could just confirm that's the case, that would be great.
The second question I had then flows from that is how much now will there be reverse engineering of wider GB machinery safety regulations to conform with that which has been handed down in Northern Ireland?Obviously, we want to maintain a free flow of goods across the whole of the United Kingdom. But as I read it, in order for that to happen, for the convenience of business, UK businesses as a whole will have to conform to that which has been handed down to Northern Ireland by the EU. And if we've had no say in that, it will be helpful to have an assessment from the Minister as to whether she thinks these regulations are satisfactory for the whole of the United Kingdom or not, whether they increase the burden, and I, too, was disappointed that the impact assessment or the the lack of any impact assessment that was in the.
In the explanatory notes that looked at this wider domino effect into the whole of. Of the United Kingdom. So I'd be grateful for her view on that. The third question I had was that there is a implicit in in the way the structure works is that, as I understand it, and maybe I've got this wrong, businesses in Northern Ireland will now face two labelling regimes that they have to comply with. So they'll have the European CE labelling regime, and they'll have a UK NI labelling regime.
And that is an added burden, particularly for smaller manufacturing businesses. And yet we see no impact assessment in the in the explanatory notes on that either. Has she spoken to businesses about what this dual labelling is going to represent and what inconvenience and cost that will put small businesses to. And then finally, um, as she will know, the regulations actually have quite draconian penalties within them. And I'd like to know what the parliamentary accountability is for this enforcement regime. We're obviously enforcing regulations that have been imposed upon part of the United Kingdom without any democratic scrutiny.
What will be the accountability mechanism for their operation and enforcement?Now, I recognise much of this, um, comes out. Of the fact that we exited the European Union in a particular way, but it is in, in microcosm, quite an interesting example of some of the conflicts that were highlighted to us during that Brexit process and which some of us attempted to solve. And my concern is overall, um, that this might be a kind of a crack in the door to general UK required general UK alignment with EU regulations, which might not suit us overall and might put us at a disadvantage, not just for our internal market, but for a wider market in the world more generally, who look to hopefully, um, the British machinery manufacturing industry with some hope that they can buy quality goods.
You.
And on that note, did the UK government have any influence over the EU production of these regulations, which might be to our benefit, or are we just in a situation where we get what we given?She will understand that the you know, one of the doubts about the the arrangement with Northern Ireland of the Windsor framework was this kind of demographic, demographic, democratic deficit. That we were going to be rule takers rather than rule makers. And this looks like an example of that. So if she could just confirm that's the case, that would be great.
The second question I had then flows from that is how much now will there be reverse engineering of wider GB machinery safety regulations to conform with that which has been handed down in Northern Ireland?Obviously, we want to maintain a free flow of goods across the whole of the United Kingdom. But as I read it, in order for that to happen, for the convenience of business, UK businesses as a whole will have to conform to that which has been handed down to Northern Ireland by the EU. And if we've had no say in that, it will be helpful to have an assessment from the Minister as to whether she thinks these regulations are satisfactory for the whole of the United Kingdom or not, whether they increase the burden, and I, too, was disappointed that the impact assessment or the the lack of any impact assessment that was in the.
In the explanatory notes that looked at this wider domino effect into the whole of. Of the United Kingdom. So I'd be grateful for her view on that. The third question I had was that there is a implicit in in the way the structure works is that, as I understand it, and maybe I've got this wrong, businesses in Northern Ireland will now face two labelling regimes that they have to comply with. So they'll have the European CE labelling regime, and they'll have a UK NI labelling regime.
And that is an added burden, particularly for smaller manufacturing businesses. And yet we see no impact assessment in the in the explanatory notes on that either. Has she spoken to businesses about what this dual labelling is going to represent and what inconvenience and cost that will put small businesses to. And then finally, um, as she will know, the regulations actually have quite draconian penalties within them. And I'd like to know what the parliamentary accountability is for this enforcement regime. We're obviously enforcing regulations that have been imposed upon part of the United Kingdom without any democratic scrutiny.
What will be the accountability mechanism for their operation and enforcement?Now, I recognise much of this, um, comes out. Of the fact that we exited the European Union in a particular way, but it is in, in microcosm, quite an interesting example of some of the conflicts that were highlighted to us during that Brexit process and which some of us attempted to solve. And my concern is overall, um, that this might be a kind of a crack in the door to general UK required general UK alignment with EU regulations, which might not suit us overall and might put us at a disadvantage, not just for our internal market, but for a wider market in the world more generally, who look to hopefully, um, the British machinery manufacturing industry with some hope that they can buy quality goods.
You.
15:02
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Thank you. Madam chair, obviously, I am deeply concerned that these regulations will further entrench Northern Ireland's competitive disadvantage in comparison to GB. Why should machinery entering Northern Ireland be saddled with even more red tape than, uh, coming from the EU?While GB is free of such regulations?This is about fairness. If a transaction is straightforward in Birmingham or Glasgow, it should absolutely be straightforward. In Banbridge or in Belfast. Businesses in Upper Bann are constantly expected to navigate complex rules, despite having no meaningful democratic say over them, just as other members have highlighted today, our businesses are already weighed down by the bureaucracy of the Windsor framework.
The framework has always been a constitutional compromise and put simply, it is good for the EU but bad for Northern Ireland. This time last year, the Federation of Small Businesses in Northern Ireland warned that, shockingly, over one third of businesses they had surveyed stopped trading with GB altogether. The compliance burdens had already became too great to bear. These new regulations will only add insult to injury and cause further problems. On paper, this statutory instrument is supposed to avoid, and I quote, a regulatory cliff edge where products meeting the new EU requirements will not be accepted in GB without the government changing its machinery.
Legislation. In reality, these new measures may force GB suppliers to conclude that serving Northern Ireland is just too much hassle. Has has has been the case. The paperwork is not worth the profit in truth, machinery, dealers, manufacturers and contractors depend on those GP supply chains and just a number of weeks ago there was an article written after the Balmoral Show, one of the largest agricultural shows in Northern Ireland. In fact the largest by the company Grassman. Um, and he highlighted in that article just how disastrous it is.
And indeed that week alone he had problems bringing a tractor from GB to Northern Ireland. That was another show. It's absolutely ludicrous and causes major problems for our. Businesses. These new rules will cause more delay, more cost, and more uncertainty. And as a result, competitiveness is being undermined and businesses are struggling to get the equipment they need. The issue is bigger than machinery. This is about sovereignty, democracy and economic common sense. Companies in Northern Ireland should be focused on growing their businesses, not fighting their way through an ever expanding maze of red tape.
And if I just pick out a few things out of the the explanatory notes that I believe are quite telling. Uh. 5.3 this applies to both workplace machinery and consumer products, including excavators, cranes, and leaf blowers such as shows the scope of this see that it's now starting to impact workplace machinery and consumer products. We were always told consumer products would be protected, but again, this lays bare just the extent of this essay. It also talks in 5.7 about. The government has also announced that similar measures to those taking effect in Northern Ireland will be introduced in Great Britain as soon as parliamentary time allows.
Well, when would that be?We have absolutely no idea. Meanwhile, the GB Northern Ireland mismatch will continue and I thank. The Minister used the words in due course. That doesn't certainly seem like there's any, uh, push from a from a government perspective to, to, to move on with that as well, even though it's not right in the first place, but it just shows the disdain for Northern Ireland and the impact that it has on us. Uh, 5.9 it talks about in the last sentence under the Windsor framework, the EU regulation will apply directly to Northern Ireland.
So again, it just highlights that, uh, via the Windsor framework, Northern Ireland is put at a disadvantage. And it talks about the cliff edge. And you know, this will improve. Um, you know, that cliff edge effect. Well, actually it just piles on more regulation. So it's not a doing what the government is trying to claim that it's doing. So from a Northern Ireland perspective, this is bad for business in Northern Ireland. And I would ask the government to really engage with the businesses that are saying we are impacted by this and start to make the changes that is needed by getting rid of the Windsor framework and having Northern Ireland on an equal par with the rest of GB.
The framework has always been a constitutional compromise and put simply, it is good for the EU but bad for Northern Ireland. This time last year, the Federation of Small Businesses in Northern Ireland warned that, shockingly, over one third of businesses they had surveyed stopped trading with GB altogether. The compliance burdens had already became too great to bear. These new regulations will only add insult to injury and cause further problems. On paper, this statutory instrument is supposed to avoid, and I quote, a regulatory cliff edge where products meeting the new EU requirements will not be accepted in GB without the government changing its machinery.
Legislation. In reality, these new measures may force GB suppliers to conclude that serving Northern Ireland is just too much hassle. Has has has been the case. The paperwork is not worth the profit in truth, machinery, dealers, manufacturers and contractors depend on those GP supply chains and just a number of weeks ago there was an article written after the Balmoral Show, one of the largest agricultural shows in Northern Ireland. In fact the largest by the company Grassman. Um, and he highlighted in that article just how disastrous it is.
And indeed that week alone he had problems bringing a tractor from GB to Northern Ireland. That was another show. It's absolutely ludicrous and causes major problems for our. Businesses. These new rules will cause more delay, more cost, and more uncertainty. And as a result, competitiveness is being undermined and businesses are struggling to get the equipment they need. The issue is bigger than machinery. This is about sovereignty, democracy and economic common sense. Companies in Northern Ireland should be focused on growing their businesses, not fighting their way through an ever expanding maze of red tape.
And if I just pick out a few things out of the the explanatory notes that I believe are quite telling. Uh. 5.3 this applies to both workplace machinery and consumer products, including excavators, cranes, and leaf blowers such as shows the scope of this see that it's now starting to impact workplace machinery and consumer products. We were always told consumer products would be protected, but again, this lays bare just the extent of this essay. It also talks in 5.7 about. The government has also announced that similar measures to those taking effect in Northern Ireland will be introduced in Great Britain as soon as parliamentary time allows.
Well, when would that be?We have absolutely no idea. Meanwhile, the GB Northern Ireland mismatch will continue and I thank. The Minister used the words in due course. That doesn't certainly seem like there's any, uh, push from a from a government perspective to, to, to move on with that as well, even though it's not right in the first place, but it just shows the disdain for Northern Ireland and the impact that it has on us. Uh, 5.9 it talks about in the last sentence under the Windsor framework, the EU regulation will apply directly to Northern Ireland.
So again, it just highlights that, uh, via the Windsor framework, Northern Ireland is put at a disadvantage. And it talks about the cliff edge. And you know, this will improve. Um, you know, that cliff edge effect. Well, actually it just piles on more regulation. So it's not a doing what the government is trying to claim that it's doing. So from a Northern Ireland perspective, this is bad for business in Northern Ireland. And I would ask the government to really engage with the businesses that are saying we are impacted by this and start to make the changes that is needed by getting rid of the Windsor framework and having Northern Ireland on an equal par with the rest of GB.
15:11
15:11
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Um, chairman. This may seem to be a kind of an innocuous piece of legislation, but it is yet again another example of the way in which wedges are being driven between one part of the United Kingdom and another part of the United Kingdom, not just in terms of regulations, but in terms of practical effect. And, you know, leaving aside the constitutional impact of this. Just read the explanatory notes. And we are told that The S I'm ends the 2008 regulations clarifying their territorial extent is now limited to GB.
And why is that the case?To allow EU regulations to function effectively in Northern Ireland. So that's the purpose of this legislation. It removes Northern Ireland from UK, a UK wide regulation which is now limited to part of the United Kingdom only in order to facilitate the. EU regulations in Northern Ireland. EU regulations, by the way, which will not have been debated in a committee like this, will not have been discussed with any Northern Ireland representatives and will. Which not even had Northern Ireland consultation.
When they were being formed because, of course, uh, whilst we are. We remain part of the single market. We are not in any way able to feed into the regulations which would be applied to the single market and. That's the first thing is, leaving aside the practical effect, that's the first important point, which I think we all ought to note. And, you know, regardless of what people's view of Brexit is, what regardless what people's view of the EU is, I think it is UK parliamentarians.
We ought to be asking ourselves, is this the kind of legislation that should be accepted and should be voted in favor of?The second thing is, and this is what disturbs me as well, is that the explanatory notes make it quite clear why the why the government is going down this route. We're going down this route. Failure to implement this legislation would create regulatory uncertainty in Northern Ireland and risk undermining the UK's relationship with the EU. So this is part. And Northern Ireland appears as once again being sacrificed on the altar of the Great Reset that the government wishes to have with the EU.
Let's not disturb them. Let's not challenge them on any aspect of the Northern Ireland Protocol or the Windsor, even though there is apparently. And there should be a mechanism for raising concerns. Let's not raise them because the impact might be that we upset those relationships. The third thing that I want to make, and I want to ask or point out, is this the minister has said there won't be any detrimental impact. On um as a result of these.
Yet the explanatory notes make it quite clear that there wasn't any. Impact assessment done. And the reason why there isn't any impact assessment done is because since this is part of the Windsor framework and the protocol, it's outside the scope. Of the government to be able to do this. So we cannot even even when we introduce a regulation here. Because of the arrangements which we have with the EU, we can't do an assessment. And that assessment could impact in lots of different ways.
First of all, we don't know what the the costs of um the, the machinery safety regulations are in businesses. All we are told is regardless of the costs, we now have a piece of legislation which indicates. That we will enforce that legislation and we will enforce it with very high penalties. There's no impact. You thank you for giving me. And I know he is really passionate about this subject, but can he be really clear about what concerns he has about the detail of this regulation, in terms of what difference it is actually going to make to businesses?People here are speaking in very general terms.
Can you be very specific about the detail of the legislation?What difference it's actually going to make and what he would have the government negotiate if it could?
And why is that the case?To allow EU regulations to function effectively in Northern Ireland. So that's the purpose of this legislation. It removes Northern Ireland from UK, a UK wide regulation which is now limited to part of the United Kingdom only in order to facilitate the. EU regulations in Northern Ireland. EU regulations, by the way, which will not have been debated in a committee like this, will not have been discussed with any Northern Ireland representatives and will. Which not even had Northern Ireland consultation.
When they were being formed because, of course, uh, whilst we are. We remain part of the single market. We are not in any way able to feed into the regulations which would be applied to the single market and. That's the first thing is, leaving aside the practical effect, that's the first important point, which I think we all ought to note. And, you know, regardless of what people's view of Brexit is, what regardless what people's view of the EU is, I think it is UK parliamentarians.
We ought to be asking ourselves, is this the kind of legislation that should be accepted and should be voted in favor of?The second thing is, and this is what disturbs me as well, is that the explanatory notes make it quite clear why the why the government is going down this route. We're going down this route. Failure to implement this legislation would create regulatory uncertainty in Northern Ireland and risk undermining the UK's relationship with the EU. So this is part. And Northern Ireland appears as once again being sacrificed on the altar of the Great Reset that the government wishes to have with the EU.
Let's not disturb them. Let's not challenge them on any aspect of the Northern Ireland Protocol or the Windsor, even though there is apparently. And there should be a mechanism for raising concerns. Let's not raise them because the impact might be that we upset those relationships. The third thing that I want to make, and I want to ask or point out, is this the minister has said there won't be any detrimental impact. On um as a result of these.
Yet the explanatory notes make it quite clear that there wasn't any. Impact assessment done. And the reason why there isn't any impact assessment done is because since this is part of the Windsor framework and the protocol, it's outside the scope. Of the government to be able to do this. So we cannot even even when we introduce a regulation here. Because of the arrangements which we have with the EU, we can't do an assessment. And that assessment could impact in lots of different ways.
First of all, we don't know what the the costs of um the, the machinery safety regulations are in businesses. All we are told is regardless of the costs, we now have a piece of legislation which indicates. That we will enforce that legislation and we will enforce it with very high penalties. There's no impact. You thank you for giving me. And I know he is really passionate about this subject, but can he be really clear about what concerns he has about the detail of this regulation, in terms of what difference it is actually going to make to businesses?People here are speaking in very general terms.
Can you be very specific about the detail of the legislation?What difference it's actually going to make and what he would have the government negotiate if it could?
15:13
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
First of all, if we have got to apply different standards to we've got to apply different standards to machinery, which is made in Northern Ireland than applies in other parts of the United Kingdom. And the member asks, what's the detail?Very often you don't know the cost until you actually have to apply the different standard of standard, which may make a piece of machinery. I mean, for example, in Northern Ireland, we, we, um, we export a lot of agricultural machinery. If the standards which are imposed by the EU mean that there is more work, more materials required, more safety devices to be applied to that machinery than what would be in the rest of the United Kingdom.
Then there's a cost. You don't know until you actually have to see it, until you actually see the standards which are applied, and compare them with the difference in the rest of the United Kingdom. And since we export a lot of that machinery to the rest of the UK, one of the costs could be that we are that to GB um that you could, you could find that um you're at a competitive disadvantage when it comes to the cost of enforcement. This will fall on councils in.
Well yes I'm afraid.
Then there's a cost. You don't know until you actually have to see it, until you actually see the standards which are applied, and compare them with the difference in the rest of the United Kingdom. And since we export a lot of that machinery to the rest of the UK, one of the costs could be that we are that to GB um that you could, you could find that um you're at a competitive disadvantage when it comes to the cost of enforcement. This will fall on councils in.
Well yes I'm afraid.
15:14
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
The honourable gentleman and to be honest with you, the honourable gentleman opposite makes a good point. Presumably he's going to vote in favour of enforcing the underlying regulations, but none of us know if they're any good. And in fact, we've had no say in whether they're any good or not. We just have to take them as handed down. And my earlier question to the minister was, has the UK had any influence knowing that we were going to have to take them, whether we like it or not, on trying to make sure that they actually do what they're supposed to do.
And we're all voting, to a certain extent, both sides of the House, blindly on these, because we've had no hand in in putting them together.
And we're all voting, to a certain extent, both sides of the House, blindly on these, because we've had no hand in in putting them together.
15:14
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
And, and not only have we had no hand in putting them together, we have not even done an impact assessment and we haven't done an impact assessment because it's out of scope, because this is, um, part of the Windsor framework. Um, and of course, there's also the cost of implementing these on local councils in Northern Ireland. I don't know, and I suspect none of the councils have even been in consulted as to what additional staff that will require and what costs that will impose on them. So, you know, I think that when we're putting pieces, pieces of legislation through, we ought at least to be asking those questions, first of all, does it make one part of the United Kingdom different than another?It does.
The explanatory notes show that that is the case. Secondly, um, is it necessary?And given that um there's, there's been the only necessity which has been highlighted in this um explanatory explanatory note is that we have to, we don't want to upset relations with the EU. I'm not so sure that that's um a justifiable reason for putting such a piece of legislation through. And lastly, if we're putting legislation through then surely we ought to know what impact it's going to have. And we don't know what impact it has.
And for all of those reasons, I would say to members today, before we carelessly raise hands and vote in favour of this, at least let's consider those points. Thank you.
The explanatory notes show that that is the case. Secondly, um, is it necessary?And given that um there's, there's been the only necessity which has been highlighted in this um explanatory explanatory note is that we have to, we don't want to upset relations with the EU. I'm not so sure that that's um a justifiable reason for putting such a piece of legislation through. And lastly, if we're putting legislation through then surely we ought to know what impact it's going to have. And we don't know what impact it has.
And for all of those reasons, I would say to members today, before we carelessly raise hands and vote in favour of this, at least let's consider those points. Thank you.
15:15
15:15
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
These regulations. Are the latest example of the humiliation of this proclaimed sovereign United Kingdom Parliament in adopting laws. It didn't make and laws it can't change laws that are made in a foreign jurisdiction. We've already seen that in multiple examples. We've had it in the vehicle type regulations where you cannot buy. Now in new car in Northern Ireland, made to GB type regulations, you must buy one £4,000 extra expense made to EU type regulations. We've had it with tumble dryers for certain types of tumble dryers.
You can no longer buy in Northern Ireland and now we're to have it in respect of machinery. Who would have thought?That the EU's single market was so fragile that the composition of a leaf maker coming into Northern Ireland placed it in jeopardy?It really is ridiculous beyond belief. But the fundamental point is that constitutional, that democratic point that in this committee this afternoon, parliamentary. Ions are being invited to nod through laws they didn't make, didn't write, can't change. To enforce the EU regulation that's coming in in January and to enforce it in a part of this United Kingdom in respect of which this is supposed to be the sovereign Parliament.
What an insult to all of us as parliamentarians to belong to a proclaimed sovereign Parliament, to have to make laws that we don't make and can't change. And that's the very essence of what is before us today. And the government, of course, has already been referred to. They've said it themselves in order to. Produce the reset. They're in fact going to bring an S I to make the whole of the United Kingdom confined with the easy. These EU laws, not satisfied with subjecting my part of the United Kingdom to foreign jurisdiction making laws.
We can't change. They're now going to set the whole United Kingdom under identical laws made in a foreign place. I really do think it's time as parliamentarians, we woke up to what we're being asked to do. But I have one practical question for the minister. We know that under these regulations, Northern Ireland will have to bear the European CCE marking. They will have to bear the UK and high marking, and then they will be able to be sold into Great Britain.
But my question is, what about machinery made in Great Britain?How can it be sold into Northern Ireland?It won't bear the CE marking. Will it bear the UK NI marking?So how have we created a situation where we're going to cut the pipeline of supply from GB to Northern Ireland?And I really would like the Minister to address that question. What are the effect of these regulations on the sale of machinery made in Great Britain to be sold to another part of the United Kingdom?And I would like a very clear answer on that, because that I think, in significant measure, goes to the heart of the matter.
So please, Minister, answer that question.
You can no longer buy in Northern Ireland and now we're to have it in respect of machinery. Who would have thought?That the EU's single market was so fragile that the composition of a leaf maker coming into Northern Ireland placed it in jeopardy?It really is ridiculous beyond belief. But the fundamental point is that constitutional, that democratic point that in this committee this afternoon, parliamentary. Ions are being invited to nod through laws they didn't make, didn't write, can't change. To enforce the EU regulation that's coming in in January and to enforce it in a part of this United Kingdom in respect of which this is supposed to be the sovereign Parliament.
What an insult to all of us as parliamentarians to belong to a proclaimed sovereign Parliament, to have to make laws that we don't make and can't change. And that's the very essence of what is before us today. And the government, of course, has already been referred to. They've said it themselves in order to. Produce the reset. They're in fact going to bring an S I to make the whole of the United Kingdom confined with the easy. These EU laws, not satisfied with subjecting my part of the United Kingdom to foreign jurisdiction making laws.
We can't change. They're now going to set the whole United Kingdom under identical laws made in a foreign place. I really do think it's time as parliamentarians, we woke up to what we're being asked to do. But I have one practical question for the minister. We know that under these regulations, Northern Ireland will have to bear the European CCE marking. They will have to bear the UK and high marking, and then they will be able to be sold into Great Britain.
But my question is, what about machinery made in Great Britain?How can it be sold into Northern Ireland?It won't bear the CE marking. Will it bear the UK NI marking?So how have we created a situation where we're going to cut the pipeline of supply from GB to Northern Ireland?And I really would like the Minister to address that question. What are the effect of these regulations on the sale of machinery made in Great Britain to be sold to another part of the United Kingdom?And I would like a very clear answer on that, because that I think, in significant measure, goes to the heart of the matter.
So please, Minister, answer that question.
15:17
15:17
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Thank you, chair, and I want to thank honourable and Right honourable members for consideration of this instrument and contributions to the debate. There are significant number of issues that I will respond to and pick up on in my response. I'd start with in terms of our predatory product regulation legislation. Um, obviously we have legislated since getting into government. We have that flexibility to ensure that product regulation now and in the future is tailored to the needs of the UK. There will be some instances where we take our own approach, some instances where we want to take a similar approach to the EU, but we have done that and we'll continue to do that on a case by case basis where it's absolutely in the best interests of the UK, of UK businesses and of consumers, and is in our national interest.
The arrangements under the Windsor framework are a settled and important part of UK law agreed by Parliament to protect the UK internal market, and we've made that sovereign decision that is right for the whole of the UK to improve safety and modernise, particularly what we're discussing today. Machinery legislation to reduce duplicative and costly burdens on business ensure there's no friction with the UK internal market and our approach. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, is supported by the overwhelming majority of stakeholders. This s does not implement EU law in Great Britain.
It does, however, continue CE recognition in Great Britain that products meet in the new EU requirements can be placed on the GB market. This is not a new concept, but the continuation of current government policy and the policy of prior governments to the. UK and the EU are strategic partners and it is in our mutual interest to maintain trade flows and avoid trade friction while responding to emerging technologies and maintaining a commitment to product safety and consumer protection. That mutual transparency and regular discussions are an indispensable part of this.
Informed by our engagement with industry, the government has reviewed the changes introduced by the Machinery Regulation, and we believe that these changes are sensible and proportionate and will ensure safer products are available to consumers and businesses alike, which is why we are continuing to see recognition and seeking to introduce similar measures in GB and as such, where, as I've said before, where it is in our national interest to align with EU regulatory, we are prepared to do so, but we will take that pragmatic, case by case approach where it clearly advances the national interest, supports long term growth, promotes consumer interests, attracts investment and support jobs.
And where that's not the case, we will take that different approach to deliver the best outcomes for businesses and consumers in the UK and at the centre of any long term plans for the alignment between Great Britain and Northern Ireland will be maintaining the integrity of the UK internal market and Northern Ireland's rightful place within it. My officials engage with the Northern Ireland government and enforcement authorities on a regular basis to discuss any issues or concerns they may have, and of course, that close relationship will remain ongoing. The Right Honourable member mentioned the Northern Ireland businesses and dual labelling, and I thank him for raising that.
The answer is no, that they continue to they can continue to CE mark only and UK NI is optional. If conformity assessment is in the UK and the Shadow Minister turning to her comments referenced and a number of members did on the opposition benches around the impact assessment for this s I and as she knows, a de minimis assessment has been prepared for the provisions of this instrument relating to continuing CE recognition in Great Britain, and for these measures it is considered that there will be a low level of impact per business.
From the introduction of this instrument and additionally on the Northern Ireland aspects of this instrument. The measures resulting from the EU act 2018 are out of scope of the assessment. The Windsor framework has already given effect in legislation through the Withdrawal Agreement Act in 2020, which adds provisions and powers to the European Union Withdrawal Act of 2018.
The arrangements under the Windsor framework are a settled and important part of UK law agreed by Parliament to protect the UK internal market, and we've made that sovereign decision that is right for the whole of the UK to improve safety and modernise, particularly what we're discussing today. Machinery legislation to reduce duplicative and costly burdens on business ensure there's no friction with the UK internal market and our approach. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, is supported by the overwhelming majority of stakeholders. This s does not implement EU law in Great Britain.
It does, however, continue CE recognition in Great Britain that products meet in the new EU requirements can be placed on the GB market. This is not a new concept, but the continuation of current government policy and the policy of prior governments to the. UK and the EU are strategic partners and it is in our mutual interest to maintain trade flows and avoid trade friction while responding to emerging technologies and maintaining a commitment to product safety and consumer protection. That mutual transparency and regular discussions are an indispensable part of this.
Informed by our engagement with industry, the government has reviewed the changes introduced by the Machinery Regulation, and we believe that these changes are sensible and proportionate and will ensure safer products are available to consumers and businesses alike, which is why we are continuing to see recognition and seeking to introduce similar measures in GB and as such, where, as I've said before, where it is in our national interest to align with EU regulatory, we are prepared to do so, but we will take that pragmatic, case by case approach where it clearly advances the national interest, supports long term growth, promotes consumer interests, attracts investment and support jobs.
And where that's not the case, we will take that different approach to deliver the best outcomes for businesses and consumers in the UK and at the centre of any long term plans for the alignment between Great Britain and Northern Ireland will be maintaining the integrity of the UK internal market and Northern Ireland's rightful place within it. My officials engage with the Northern Ireland government and enforcement authorities on a regular basis to discuss any issues or concerns they may have, and of course, that close relationship will remain ongoing. The Right Honourable member mentioned the Northern Ireland businesses and dual labelling, and I thank him for raising that.
The answer is no, that they continue to they can continue to CE mark only and UK NI is optional. If conformity assessment is in the UK and the Shadow Minister turning to her comments referenced and a number of members did on the opposition benches around the impact assessment for this s I and as she knows, a de minimis assessment has been prepared for the provisions of this instrument relating to continuing CE recognition in Great Britain, and for these measures it is considered that there will be a low level of impact per business.
From the introduction of this instrument and additionally on the Northern Ireland aspects of this instrument. The measures resulting from the EU act 2018 are out of scope of the assessment. The Windsor framework has already given effect in legislation through the Withdrawal Agreement Act in 2020, which adds provisions and powers to the European Union Withdrawal Act of 2018.
15:19
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
20. Hard to understand how she can make the claim that there won't be any impact on businesses. If I give a practical example. So as I understand it, the new regulations around AI and cyber security require that, say, if I'm manufacturing a. Adduction line, many production lines nowadays have built in AI safety monitoring systems. At the moment. If you manufacture that, you have to certify that AI against a national standard and you can. Self-certify.
As I understand it, EU regulations would move to a notifying body certification system where I'd actually have to go out, find a recognised body that comes in and independently certifies that the software that I'm putting behind my safety system in my manufacturing line, um, complies. Right. That has to be an extra cost. How can that not be quite a significant impact going from self-certification to external certification by a certified outside body?And as far as I can see, these regulations are riddled with these kind of changes that must accumulate to quite a significant extra burden.
As I understand it, EU regulations would move to a notifying body certification system where I'd actually have to go out, find a recognised body that comes in and independently certifies that the software that I'm putting behind my safety system in my manufacturing line, um, complies. Right. That has to be an extra cost. How can that not be quite a significant impact going from self-certification to external certification by a certified outside body?And as far as I can see, these regulations are riddled with these kind of changes that must accumulate to quite a significant extra burden.
14:14
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I thank the honourable member for his intervention, and he rightly raises AI in cyber security as part of our considerations and why this is so important going forward is that we we do keep up to date in terms of technological developments and the impact on on machinery, the EU's machinery regulations, as he referenced, includes its own provisions on software, software and AI to ensure that these new technologies do not affect the functioning of machinery. And we're also working with the EU to ensure that these changes in Northern Ireland are compatible with the wider product safety and regulatory reforms, including that cross-cutting legislation on AI and cyber security.
But overall, we do expect the benefits of this instrument in Northern Ireland to be positive. We've extensively engaged with stakeholders in Northern Ireland, and they've indicated that, particularly for SMEs, they really significantly helps in terms of resources and that is engagement we have directly had with those businesses and the feedback that we have received. And that's a really key consideration for businesses that they'll be able to continue to benefit from dual access to both EU and UK markets. And as we work towards introducing similar measures in Great Britain, continuing that C recognition, ensuring that the same machinery products can be placed on the market across the whole of the UK without unnecessary duplication of testing and administrative process.
That's absolutely vital. And the Shadow Minister to. Asked about the numbers of businesses involved. So I'll touch on that point on on this. We estimate around 230 businesses in Northern Ireland are in scope of the machinery legislation, and 5380 in Great Britain. She also referenced the £16.6 million of funding that I mentioned in my opening remarks. And in terms of taking that forward in the funding that's been allocated to the budget to deliver that enhanced one stop shop service advice service for small businesses beyond what is available on gov.uk, and the new funding for Intertrade UK, that commitment will be delivered in the course of the next financial year, and the project has moved with into a sort of a more active engagement phase, with robust interest from stakeholders and a formal co-design.
Workshops are ongoing to refine the service specification and ensure that the delivery model meets a business needs. Uh. In terms of the implementation of similar measures in Great Britain, which I have touched on briefly, my officials have already begun actively developing a further s I to modernise GB machinery regulation, and that will ensure that the UK framework remains proportionate and aligned with technical, technological developments that have been raised numerous times throughout this debate this afternoon, and the announcement for implementing the similar measures have already taken place to provide businesses with a certainty that the shadow Minister asked about to.
The Right Honourable member referenced enforcement and parliamentary scrutiny and the day to day enforcement of product safety legislation is largely local, so. For machinery in Northern Ireland, this would generally be undertaken by HSE, Northern Ireland or district councils for workplace and or consumer products respectively. However, the Secretary of State has enforcement powers under legislation as ops on behalf of the Secretary of State has an active enforcement role, particularly where issues are nationally significant, complex novel, high risk or large scale. For example, Ops can intervene where a product risks affects consumers nationally or where coordinated enforcement action is needed across multiple agencies.
And I hope that reassures him and answers his question. Um, and regarding, uh, parliamentary scrutiny under the Crime Act on see recognition, we have consulted with stakeholders and rely on provisions are done as part of that Windsor framework, which I touched on right at the start of my remarks today. And as he knows, that parliamentary procedure is affirmative. Um, to conclude, uh, chair, we are using the powers, as I've mentioned, for C recognition, which requires consultation with stakeholders. Um, in terms of UK NI marketing that will only be used when using a UK notified body.
Otherwise it will be CE mark only. And through that stakeholder engagement, that's what we've heard from businesses in Northern Ireland and that's um what they have told us. And as I explained previously, this instrument that we are debating today ensures the effective enforcement of the EU machinery regulation in Northern Ireland, maintaining access to Great Britain and to the GB market for compliant products and supporting high safety standards, while minimizing unnecessary burdens on business. And this instrument also ensures our compliance with international law in relation to Northern Ireland's continuing dual access.
So I'm therefore pleased to commend this to the committee.
But overall, we do expect the benefits of this instrument in Northern Ireland to be positive. We've extensively engaged with stakeholders in Northern Ireland, and they've indicated that, particularly for SMEs, they really significantly helps in terms of resources and that is engagement we have directly had with those businesses and the feedback that we have received. And that's a really key consideration for businesses that they'll be able to continue to benefit from dual access to both EU and UK markets. And as we work towards introducing similar measures in Great Britain, continuing that C recognition, ensuring that the same machinery products can be placed on the market across the whole of the UK without unnecessary duplication of testing and administrative process.
That's absolutely vital. And the Shadow Minister to. Asked about the numbers of businesses involved. So I'll touch on that point on on this. We estimate around 230 businesses in Northern Ireland are in scope of the machinery legislation, and 5380 in Great Britain. She also referenced the £16.6 million of funding that I mentioned in my opening remarks. And in terms of taking that forward in the funding that's been allocated to the budget to deliver that enhanced one stop shop service advice service for small businesses beyond what is available on gov.uk, and the new funding for Intertrade UK, that commitment will be delivered in the course of the next financial year, and the project has moved with into a sort of a more active engagement phase, with robust interest from stakeholders and a formal co-design.
Workshops are ongoing to refine the service specification and ensure that the delivery model meets a business needs. Uh. In terms of the implementation of similar measures in Great Britain, which I have touched on briefly, my officials have already begun actively developing a further s I to modernise GB machinery regulation, and that will ensure that the UK framework remains proportionate and aligned with technical, technological developments that have been raised numerous times throughout this debate this afternoon, and the announcement for implementing the similar measures have already taken place to provide businesses with a certainty that the shadow Minister asked about to.
The Right Honourable member referenced enforcement and parliamentary scrutiny and the day to day enforcement of product safety legislation is largely local, so. For machinery in Northern Ireland, this would generally be undertaken by HSE, Northern Ireland or district councils for workplace and or consumer products respectively. However, the Secretary of State has enforcement powers under legislation as ops on behalf of the Secretary of State has an active enforcement role, particularly where issues are nationally significant, complex novel, high risk or large scale. For example, Ops can intervene where a product risks affects consumers nationally or where coordinated enforcement action is needed across multiple agencies.
And I hope that reassures him and answers his question. Um, and regarding, uh, parliamentary scrutiny under the Crime Act on see recognition, we have consulted with stakeholders and rely on provisions are done as part of that Windsor framework, which I touched on right at the start of my remarks today. And as he knows, that parliamentary procedure is affirmative. Um, to conclude, uh, chair, we are using the powers, as I've mentioned, for C recognition, which requires consultation with stakeholders. Um, in terms of UK NI marketing that will only be used when using a UK notified body.
Otherwise it will be CE mark only. And through that stakeholder engagement, that's what we've heard from businesses in Northern Ireland and that's um what they have told us. And as I explained previously, this instrument that we are debating today ensures the effective enforcement of the EU machinery regulation in Northern Ireland, maintaining access to Great Britain and to the GB market for compliant products and supporting high safety standards, while minimizing unnecessary burdens on business. And this instrument also ensures our compliance with international law in relation to Northern Ireland's continuing dual access.
So I'm therefore pleased to commend this to the committee.
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:24
14:24
14:24
14:30
14:30
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Thank you, Mr. Dean. It's a pleasure to serve under your chair this afternoon. I beg to move that the supply of machinery and the EU Machinery Regulation Regulations 2026, which were laid before this House on the 1st of June 2026, be approved. Honourable and Right Honourable members, I will begin by setting out the background to this instrument. This instrument concerns machinery, which includes a wide range of workplace and consumer products such as cranes and excavators and leaf blowers and lawn mowers.