A far from fond farewell

Or maybe signs were there all the time. Originally due to become mandatory for industrial products from 1 January 2022, in August 2021 the deadline was postponed until 1 January 2023 and, again in November 2022 until January 2025 – with blame being apportioned to difficult economic conditions following the pandemic and the war in Ukraine. And, although Downing Street distanced itself at the time, at the beginning of last year there were rumours flying around that even Jacob Rees-Mogg was happy to entertain abandoning the UKCA requirement.

The very concept of the UKCA mark has always been somewhat conflicted. On the one hand, Brexit – which is why the UKCA mark even exists, conceived as a solution of last resort in the event of a no-deal situation – was about ’taking back control’, and what better way to achieve that than cutting ties with CE marking? On the other, Brexit was also supposed to reduce ‘red tape’ and bureaucracy - but introducing the UKCA mark had the opposite effect. And while there will always be a tiny but vocal ‘health and safety gone mad’ fraternity, most would agree that certification to help ensure quality and encourage an even playing field is a good thing, as evidenced by UKCA’s lack of divergence from the CE marking it was meant to supersede in the UK.

Unsurprisingly, the ‘indefinite extension’ whereby British firms will be able to continue the use of CE marking alongside UKCA has been widely welcomed. Stephen Phipson, CEO of Make UK, the manufacturers’ organisation said: “This is a pragmatic and common sense decision that manufacturers will very much welcome and support. This announcement will help safeguard the competitiveness of manufacturers and aid the UK as a destination for investment.

“It should bring more confidence about doing business in the UK and recognises the need to work with the reality of doing business. Make UK has worked extensively with UK Government pushing hard for this decision and we are pleased the ongoing engagement has delivered this positive outcome."

But what of all the time, effort and money that has been wasted working towards compliance that, as it turns out, was doomed from the start? Anecdotally, many firms have spent tens of thousands of pounds working towards UKCA, and it is nigh on impossible to calculate the opportunity cost. There must be plenty out there who rue the day they ever even heard of UKCA.

There are upsides though; at least in this case the government can claim to be, in the words of Business Minister Kevin Hollinrake, "tackling red tape, cutting burdens for business, and creating certainty for firms". It's just a shame that the red tape, burdens and uncertainty in question were caused by the government's own supposedly sovereignty-boosting policy in the first place.

Charlotte Stonestreet

Editor