COMMONS AMENDMENTS (Hansard, 18 November 1976)

Lord ORAM
My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 2 and 3, and on this Motion I will also speak to Amendments Nos. 6 and 16. These Amendments make two changes limiting the Secretary of State's power to amend Schedule lA which lists those units which may lawfully be used for trade. Amendments Nos. 2 and 3 prevent the Secretary of State from removing certain specified units from that Schedule. However the Amendment makes it quite clear that this restriction is without prejudice to the powers contained in subsection (3) (c) to allow restrictions to be imposed on the particular use of any units of measurement. I should add, however, that any use of these restricting powers would be subject to consultation and the Affirmative Resolution procedure.
Amendments Nos. 6 and 16 are intended to prevent the powers in Section 21 of the Weights and Measures Act 1963—powers which allow the Secretary of State to regulate transactions in particular goods—from being used so as to make the sale of those goods illegal in Imperial prescribed quantities before April 1978. In other words, the Government cannot outlaw the sale in Imperial quantities of those goods which include many basic shopping basket items—for example, flour, sugar, tea, salt, et cetera which are currently allowed to be sold in Imperial prescribed quantities. The Government will, however, be continuing to make orders introducing metric prescribed quantities as an alternative to the Imperial quantities.
The date of 21st April 1978 has been chosen because that is the date after which, because of our obligations under the EEC Directive on Units of Measurement, metric packs may be freely imported into the United Kingdom.

§ Lord REDESDALE
My Lords, we are grateful for the explanation which has been given to us by the noble Lord, Lord Oram. We on these Benches shall not disagree with any of these Amendments. However, we do not like compulsion. Our opinion is that there is far too much legislation as a whole and we should like an opportunity to see how the Bill operates. The noble Lord has said that Statutory Instruments will be made from time to time. I cannot say that we are at all enthusiastic about the powers of compulsion which are laid down in the Bill unless an overwhelming case is made out that their use will be in the interests of the consumer—who would not believe it. That will also apply when we are in power again, which I am sure is not too far away. As I have said, we do not disagree with the Bill but we should like to see how it operates. I am most grateful for the explanation which the noble Lord has given to the House.

§ Baroness SEEAR
My Lords, we on these Benches will not disagree with the Amendments moved by the noble Lord, but for reasons which are slightly different from those given by the noble Lord, Lord Redesdale. Because this is largely a non-Party matter it is very much my view, speaking as much with my hat on as President of the British Standards Institution as from these Benches, that the sooner we get on with the introduction of metrication the better. There is great exasperation in many circles, and much wider circles than is generally realised, at the delay over a matter which has been under discussion now for months and months.
While we accept the need for double marking that we are going to have for a period of time, we hope that before very long—indeed, as soon as possible and practicable—we shall all become accustomed to metric measures and that they will be used, and will be expected to be used, singly. It is quite ridiculous at the present time, when we need every possible aid to get overseas markets and when over 90 per cent. of the people to whom we sell our exports deal in metricated 1577 standards, that we should still be considering producing goods in Imperial standards. There is waste in doing it doubly.
Also, it is said frequently that consumers do not want metrication to happen. It is only three weeks ago that the British Standards Institution's Consumers' Advisory Service, which represents a large number of consumer organisations and leading women's organisations and which covers 4 million consumers, expressed the very strongest hope that metrication will come about very quickly indeed.

§ Lord MONSON
My Lords, may I say how much I welcome Amendments Nos. 2 and 3 and, indeed, many of the later Commons Amendments. Latterly, particularly during the past few weeks, there has been little doubt that your Lordships' House has reflected public opinion far more accurately than has the Commons. At last we have an issue where the Commons are indisputably more in tune with the deepest instincts and wishes of the people than are the Lords. I wish only that the Commons had gone further in retaining Imperial units of measurement.

Lord ORAM
My Lords, I am glad to learn from the noble Lord, Lord Redes-dale, and the noble Baroness, Lady Seear, that they are not likely to seek to get the House to reject any of these Commons Amendments. We are returning to something akin to the spirit which we had during the various stages of the Bill here. I believe that this was not entirely the spirit in another place, which was more in line with the sentiments of the noble Lord, Lord Monson. But the noble Lord referred to the Commons having "held up" or some such expression—removed certain units—

§ Lord MONSON
My Lords, I simply expressed the wish that they had gone even further in retaining Imperial units of measurement. I was essentially praising the Commons for what they had done.

Lord ORAM
My Lords, I do not object to the noble Lord doing that, but I would point out that what we are doing with these Amendments is in effect to change procedure. The power to move along the path of metrication still remains 1578 when these Amendments have been accepted.