Wilfred Aspinall: Patriots must stand up against Starmer’s EU subterfuge

Wilfred Aspinall is a member of Hitchin Conservative Association and  joint Eastern Regional Ambassador for the Conservative Policy Form

The amendment on the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill must be opposed in Parliament as it will have a profound impact on Britain’s ability to control our product standards. It will mean alignment with all EU Directives on standards. These Directives and future legislation will come under the authority of the EU Commission and ultimately the European Court of Justice.

If this amendment is adopted, we will become a rule taker, not a rule maker. Our right to set our product standards will evaporate.

It is important to recognise that a product standard is governed where it is marketed to protect user activity. For example if windows are being manufactured in the UK and are sold in an EU member state they have to comply with EU standards. If they are to be marketed in any other country – such as the USA – they have to comply with the standards there.

Products imported into the UK have to comply with our standards. If this amendment is eventually passed, our control over product standards will be lost.

Little attention is being given to this amendment perhaps because many on the Westminster scene do not understand how important this is. The Labour government will argue this marks no return to the Single Market but this legislative trick will make all (and especially future products regulation) align with EU legislation

It will authorise the Secretary of State to issue Statutory Instruments on product regulation without detailed parliamentary scrutiny.

Prior to the introduction of the Single Market, standards in the UK were under the control of the British Standards Institute which drew up product standards in a flexible manner. Consultation with all parties took place.

After the Single Market was established, all standards were created by legislative proposals as EU Directives drafted by European law under the authority and enforced by the European Commission. This meant the final arbiter would be the European Court of Justice.

In the UK, we have OUR “common law” which gives flexibility not absolute inflexible and bureaucratic law making.

There was a problem encountered in Brussels, as It was realised that the Single Market was restrictive, bureaucratic, and protectionist. The UK, under the majority voting system, could never win a vote in the Council of Ministers.

My last activity in Brussels was to assist in the review of the Construction Products Directive which took 6 years to complete due to hundreds of rules having to be examined.  This Product Regulation amendment in effect cuts into our sovereignty rights

The problem could be resolved by mutual recognition between competent authorities but the Commission would not run with that and still won’t as they argue that the Single Market would be compromised – as we have seen in the Northern Ireland situation.

We must remember that the UK, USA, Singapore and Hong Kong together with Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and many up and coming developing nations like India all operate under “common law”. That in itself raises the question of sovereignty.

The amendment would undermine our sovereignty and potentially scupper the flexibility in our financial services dominance – something the Commission has always wanted. The EU have attempted a number of times to bring energy under their umbrella control to influence trading of energy in the euro. This has not been successful, with the dollar remaining the trading currency

We need transparency from the Government and demanded they set out their objectives for the reset of relations with the EU

The Labour government is going to negotiate the reset of the relationship with the EU without a clear mandate and here we have a device introduced without any real scrutiny that will pave the way to control by the EU. There is a lot at stake.

Remember there was a referendum with 17 million plus voting in favour of leaving the EU. The electorate has a right to be involved.