CE mark climbdown

[BeElBeeBub]

And like I said, CE doesn't stop accidents. The EU has nothing with the powers of the HSE, I've witnessed their regime, and it ain't pleasant. How many other countries have ground level potentially classed as working from height?

Life has got safer through time, it's evolution and education, not entirely down to legislation.

I've just finished a 4 month job near Munich: PPE consisted of safety shoes! No Hi-Vis or hard hat, even though there were FLT's, MEWP's and OHC's. No induction or request to see my safety passport, you don't get passed the gate on a U.K. site without the above. And there is always a site manager with SMSTS.

As I said, H&S was always devolved to member states, hence the variation in death rates. (along with industrial mix)

The UK has had very tight legislation, it often led the EU. . 

The result is low death rates. No mystery.

It is notable that opposition to "bloody 'elf & safety" often goes hand in hand with brexity opinions. Also notable is the fondness of brexity media outlets to run "health and safety gone mad" stories, usually involving conkers and school children. 

Anyway, that was off topic. The impact on safety or otherwise of CE marking is moot. 

In what way has brexit made product compliance better for the UK? 

CE marking is a legal requirement (in certain sectors) in the EU. The UK cannot do anything about that. It just is. 

In the UK there is the option of CE or the virtually identical UKCA.

Uk businesses cannot CE mark themselves anymore and need need an EU entity to do so for them. 

They can UKCA mark themselves, but that is only valid in the UK. 

There is no reduction in cost or red tape, if anything there is an increase.

We cannot even diverge from CE regs because that would impose even more red tape and cost, and we no longer have any meaningful say in those CE regulations. 

Exactly what was predicted 

Exactly what was called "project fear" 

Exactly what happened. 

A familiar pattern. 

[papasmurf]

Nonsense.

It was mentioned in this week's edition of the Planet Zog Gazette which came with a free tin foil hat.

Borchester stop being such a bloody idiot. (I serious think you are in need of counselling.)

[Borchester]

Another massive statement with no substance to back it up.

Nonsense.

It was mentioned in this week's edition of the Planet Zog Gazette which came with a free tin foil hat.

[papasmurf]

Another massive statement with no substance to back it up.

Nick, I suggest not being so nasty. Two of them are Lizard Lifeboat Crew, and the third the retired Lizard Lifeboat Coxswain. The ONLY reasons they are still alive is the compliant kit that is required by Health and Safety regulations, and the legally required survival at sea training and certification. 

New boat for Cadgwith fishermen in Cornwall Brett Jose Callum Hardwick | Falmouth Packet

Lone fisherman left clinging to upturned boat after it capsizes out to sea (yahoo.com)

[Nick]

Locally this year we would have lost three fishermen at sea had Health and Safety regulations, compliant kit, and training, not been in place.

Another massive statement with no substance to back it up.

[papasmurf]

Life has got safer through time, it's evolution and education, not entirely down to legislation.

Locally this year we would have lost three fishermen at sea had Health and Safety regulations, compliant kit, and training, not been in place.

[Nick]

H&S regulations enacted over the last 40 years (and before) have made a huge difference

This from the HSE report.
The historical picture is similar across other European states. The workplace has got safer.

As I said, different countries have both different levels of H&S regulation and (as importantly) different mixes of industry. Certain sectors (eg forestry) Habe fatality rates 20x higher than others. So.obviously a country with a high proportion of mining, agriculture, fishing , forestry than others will expect a higher fatality rate.

And like I said, CE doesn't stop accidents. The EU has nothing with the powers of the HSE, I've witnessed their regime, and it ain't pleasant. How many other countries have ground level potentially classed as working from height?

Life has got safer through time, it's evolution and education, not entirely down to legislation.

I've just finished a 4 month job near Munich: PPE consisted of safety shoes! No Hi-Vis or hard hat, even though there were FLT's, MEWP's and OHC's. No induction or request to see my safety passport, you don't get passed the gate on a U.K. site without the above. And there is always a site manager with SMSTS.

[BeElBeeBub]

CE is the compliance to which OEM's operate, EHSR is the mechanism for stopping injuries apparently. So like I said, CE and EHSR DOES nothing.

H&S regulations enacted over the last 40 years (and before) have made a huge difference 

This from the HSE report.

In 2021/22, 123 workers were killed in a work-related accident in Great Britain including 81 employees and 42 self-employed workers. ...A comparison of fatal injury numbers between 1974 (when the Health and Safety at Work Act was introduced) and 2021/22, adjusting to allow for the difference in industry coverage of the reporting requirements between these years, suggests that fatal injury numbers to employees have fallen by around 90% over this period, although more recently numbers have been broadly level.

The historical picture is similar across other European states. The workplace has got safer.

As I said, different countries have both different levels of H&S regulation and (as importantly) different mixes of industry. Certain sectors (eg forestry) Habe fatality rates 20x higher than others. So.obviously a country with a high proportion of mining, agriculture, fishing , forestry than others will expect a higher fatality rate.

[BeElBeeBub]

The enormous waste of resources due to red tape described by Polly Toynbee (Business is haunted by Brexit – and this safety mark fiasco is its latest nightmare, 4 August) is not just confined to British business – it has severely affected UK research in the area of medical devices.

Scientists need to partner with manufacturers in order to get these devices out of the lab and into the clinic. But we and others have experienced our industrial partners withdrawing support and pulling out of agreements because it has been simply too costly to embark on double certification of potential products.


This has been a blight on valuable further research in this area, on devices that could have saved the NHS large sums in reduction of ill health and improvement of treatment outcomes. Unfortunately, we are now faced with yet more uncertainty because we are told that it is unclear whether the U-turn applies to medical devices or not.
Roger Bayston
Professor emeritus, surgical infection, University of Nottingham

As a retired product compliance engineer for a FTSE 100 company, I read with interest Polly Toynbee's article. When the UK was a member of the EU, we had a vote in the European parliament on any new EU directives coming forward. We will now have to change UK laws to keep in step, but have no say on new EU laws.

In addition, we have no control over the EU's CE marking process; we just have to accept EU updates. Instead of "take back control" – the slogan used by the Brexiters – it should have read "let's lose control".
Ian White
Cheltenham, Gloucestershire

[Nick]

You said
the graph below was of fatal accident rates of various countries.

You linked CE marking to that graph and explicitly stated that it showed CE marking and EHSRs "do(es) nothing"

I'd say that means you linked the two together.

Of course you probably believe that "We send the EU £350 million a week let's fund our NHS instead" is actually two separate sentences that have no relationship to each other 😁.

The EU has only the most basic control over national health and safety regulations, so there will be variations. The industry mix will also make a big difference.  Agriculture is significantly more dangerous than factory work and France has twice the proportion if it's workforce in agriulture (particularly heavy agri) Vs Germany.

However, despite your, valliant attempts to deflect, there is no denying the UKs attempt to leave the CE marking scheme has been a total failure.

We have, as predicted, spent a fortune giving up control of a core part of our national regulations and put our industry at a disadvantage.

Slow clap for the leavers.

CE is the compliance to which OEM's operate, EHSR is the mechanism for stopping injuries apparently. So like I said, CE and EHSR DOES nothing. 

[BeElBeeBub]

I suggest you learn to read, I never mentioned CE being anything to do with accidents. That's why people who knew something about the subject would have picked up on my EHSR comment.

You said 

Look at the graph below, it shows that CE does nothing. France has an industrial death rate 4.5 times that of the Germany, this shows CE and EHSR does nothing and the EU is control of zilch.

the graph below was of fatal accident rates of various countries.

You linked CE marking to that graph and explicitly stated that it showed CE marking and EHSRs "do(es) nothing"

I'd say that means you linked the two together.

Of course you probably believe that "We send the EU £350 million a week let's fund our NHS instead" is actually two separate sentences that have no relationship to each other 😁.

The EU has only the most basic control over national health and safety regulations, so there will be variations. The industry mix will also make a big difference.  Agriculture is significantly more dangerous than factory work and France has twice the proportion if it's workforce in agriulture (particularly heavy agri) Vs Germany.

However, despite your, valliant attempts to deflect, there is no denying the UKs attempt to leave the CE marking scheme has been a total failure.

We have, as predicted, spent a fortune giving up control of a core part of our national regulations and put our industry at a disadvantage.

Slow clap for the leavers.

[Nick]

Yes, it is compliance - that's my point - compliance agreed minimum standards for design and process across the block.

The point is that is is the mark legally required. If you don't have it, you can't sell (or at least easily). There was no chance the UKCA mark would be accepted in the EU, especially if it diverged. If the UK insisted on the UKCA mark over the CE mark it would only increase costs and red tape for zero benefit. The UK was always going to continue to accept the CE mark (just like it continues not to enforce it's own border controls because tondo so would be too damaging), which makes the UKCA mark pointless.

I'd argue Brexiters don't live.in the real world. They see *any* regulation or red tape as an unnecessary burden slowing things down and never ask how much more complext the world would be with out that regulation. I have worked with CE marking regulations. I've seen the arse pain they can be, but also the advantages it brings. Sure CE marking is a pain, but we'd have to do some sort of process for compliance anyway so why not just once?

Your point about industrial accidents is irrelevant as CE marking is not the primary tool for preventing industrial accidents. That would be the other bogeyman of the Brexit brigade.....health and safety legislation, which is a memberstate matter, hence the differential.

The UK has very good H&S legislation, which is something many Brexiters would love to do away with as it's "red tape".  But it's red tape that works and saves hundreds of lives every year.

I suggest you learn to read, I never mentioned CE being anything to do with accidents. That's why people who knew something about the subject would have picked up on my EHSR comment. 

[BeElBeeBub]

CE is a mark of compliance, it does not guarantee quality, whereas BSI means the item meets a certain level of quality and efficiency.
Same goes for the EHSR, it basically means the stickers are in the right place. You can chop your arm off but we are not liable because there is a sticker telling you it can happen.

In essence, its all EU bollocks invented to create a cartel within the block, and the fact that you believe it to be anything different shows you have never worked in the real world outside of this utopian bubble. Look at the graph below, it shows that CE does nothing. France has an industrial death rate 4.5 times that of the Germany, this shows CE and EHSR does nothing and the EU is control of zilch.

Yes, it is compliance - that's my point - compliance agreed minimum standards for design and process across the block.

The point is that is is the mark legally required. If you don't have it, you can't sell (or at least easily). There was no chance the UKCA mark would be accepted in the EU, especially if it diverged. If the UK insisted on the UKCA mark over the CE mark it would only increase costs and red tape for zero benefit. The UK was always going to continue to accept the CE mark (just like it continues not to enforce it's own border controls because tondo so would be too damaging), which makes the UKCA mark pointless.

I'd argue Brexiters don't live.in the real world. They see *any* regulation or red tape as an unnecessary burden slowing things down and never ask how much more complext the world would be with out that regulation. I have worked with CE marking regulations. I've seen the arse pain they can be, but also the advantages it brings. Sure CE marking is a pain, but we'd have to do some sort of process for compliance anyway so why not just once?

Your point about industrial accidents is irrelevant as CE marking is not the primary tool for preventing industrial accidents. That would be the other bogeyman of the Brexit brigade.....health and safety legislation, which is a memberstate matter, hence the differential.

The UK has very good H&S legislation, which is something many Brexiters would love to do away with as it's "red tape".  But it's red tape that works and saves hundreds of lives every year.

[Nick]

That's where.you are wrong.

I used to CE mark both our own products for medical and industrial but also compiled the technical field etc for CE marking non-EU manufacturer products.  I also both audited companies for iso9001/2 and also ensures our own compliance with the above (plus a bunch of others)

You say "stuck on everything", that's the point. Orcs called self certification. They may  it realise.it, but by self certifying they were taking responsibility for the.product across the EU. If their hydraulic actuator failed in an Italian made machine working in Spain injuring someone, when they look for responsibility the Italian manufacturer can look to the CE mark and say "Nick Industries in the UK CE marked it, go sue them" and you could because the UK had agreed to cooperate legally.

Now the Italian manufacturer would be left holding the responsibility for your defective.cylinder.

It puts UK.companies.at a disadvantage when trying to sell to our biggest market.

CE is a mark of compliance, it does not guarantee quality, whereas BSI means the item meets a certain level of quality and efficiency.
Same goes for the EHSR, it basically means the stickers are in the right place. You can chop your arm off but we are not liable because there is a sticker telling you it can happen.

In essence, its all EU bollocks invented to create a cartel within the block, and the fact that you believe it to be anything different shows you have never worked in the real world outside of this utopian bubble. Look at the graph below, it shows that CE does nothing. France has an industrial death rate 4.5 times that of the Germany, this shows CE and EHSR does nothing and the EU is control of zilch.

[BeElBeeBub]

Its not really about conforming but what court overseas the conformity . But its up to manufacturers  and in what market they are selling to do whats best for them
its a free country  after all .

OMG! Twice in a.day I agree with you! One of us must be ill! 😁

But seriously, yes. At itcs core it's about jurisdiction. 

If you buy a container of random stuff from china and it catches fire and burns a house down, as the UK importer, you are on the hook. Sure the victims could try to sue the Chinese manufacturers in a.chinese court but....good luck.

The whole single market CE mark thing was about that. You could buy stuff from across the single market confident that you could enforce legal responsibility on someone. 

And for that you need some sort of jurisdictional reach. Basically the various legal systems agreeing to work together and respect decisions. (For example you could be awarded a.judgement in a UK court and that court decision would be taken as valid by the French authorities rather than having to go to a french court).

That linking was how the SM worked, it was what produced the benefits.  That is why it was impossible to get "the exact same benefits" without the various obligations. The benefits were the obligations.

And yes manufacturers can choose what is best for them, but if they want to sell in the EU they need to confirm to EU rules, which has got that little bit harder to do.