THE BRITISH HALLMARKING COUNCIL (Hansard, 20 July 1973)

§ Mr. Wiggin
I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the House of Lords in the said amendment.

§ Mr. Loveridge
There seems to be more to this than meets the eye at first glance. Amendment No. 36 omits the word "precious" before metal. That is not important on page 12, because it 1033 there relates only to advice that the council can give. But something appears to have crept into the Clause—as it is a deletion of a word, perhaps I should say that something has crept out!
The clause stated that the Secretary of State may at any time, after consultation with the council, apply the Bill to any other precious metal. But with the amendment it will say that the Secretary of State may at any time, after consultation with the council, apply the Bill to any other metal.
Surely that is not what we are here about. I thought that it was a hall-marking Bill relating to precious metals. In the preamble we were told about precious metals. Now we come to the point that the Secretary of State, in consultation with a council that deals with gold, silver and platinum, is able to make provisions relating to all other kinds of metals, which he chooses to determine virtually at his own volition without any consultation with other trades. What will happen in that case about lead, tin, copper and so on? Why is the word to be deleted?

§ Mr. Wiggin
With his usual perspicacity, my hon. Friend has put his finger on a slightly soft spot. This point has been the subject of debate by lawyers who, after the highest possible legal consideration, decided to leave matters as they were. The expression "precious metal" is defined in line 22 on page 19 and includes any metal prescribed in that clause. Without the amendment, the reference to "precious metal" in Clause 16(1) becomes tautological.
I accept that there is a conceivable element of doubt as to whether it might be possible to imagine the assay offices taking upon themselves the task of hall-marking brass. But I am told that it is unlikely that any court would consider the Bill to intend that.
I hope that my hon. Friend will not over pursue this matter, which has been considered by lawyers far better than I.

§ Mr. Loveridge
In the light of what has been said, we can perhaps place our trust on these high authorities that my hon. Friend has consulted. I hope so, because it would be unsatisfactory to find later that the power was being used to deal with other metals for which it was never intended.

§ Mr. Osborn
The assay offices are financed by the industry and their expenditure is closely looked at by those who have to fund that expenditure. Those sponsors would not be encouraged to see those assay offices go beyond the activities for which they are financed and for which they have authority to proceed.
It is a reasonable assurance that in terms of economy and finance those who have to pay for it will discourage this development, even if my hon. Friend's assurances are vague. They are business concerns and are not going into handling these other metals.