MEP QUIZZES BRUSSELS ON THREAT TO ANCIENT UK HALLMARKING INDUSTRY

12.30.44pm BST (GMT +0100) Wed 16th Jul 2003

Nick Clegg, Liberal Democrat Trade and Industry Spokesman in the European Parliament, has this week tabled a Parliamentary Question to the European Commission demanding to know why the EU is persisting with an unnecessary Directive which will threaten ancient UK hallmarks.

Nick Clegg MEP said: "Occasionally it is necessary for MEPs to rein in the European Commission when it puts forward unnecessary proposals."

"Having looked closely at the EC proposals to change our ancient hallmarking system for jewellery, I am convinced the Commission has simply got it wrong."

"Hallmarking in the UK has a 700 year history and the four Assay Offices in Sheffield, London, Birmingham and Edinburgh have an unrivalled reputation in guaranteeing the high quality of jewellery sold to British consumers."

"I see no reason why we should tinker with a system that has proved its worth for so long, especially as a harmonised EU approach to hallmarking would most likely weaken the quality guarantees we are rightly proud of in this country."

"I very much hope my Parliamentary Question will prompt the Commission to think again."

Ashley Carson, Assay Master of the Sheffield Assay Office, also voiced his concerns: "Hallmarking has been protecting the consumer for over 700 years."

"Any EU Directive will lead to a dilution of the well-established British Hallmarking system."

"There will be no protection for the manufacturer, importer or the

consumer. We need to fight to keep this vital safeguard."

ENDS

Notes to Editors:

1. There has been legislation governing hallmarking in the UK since the year 1300.

2. The UK operates a system of compulsory testing and hallmarking of articles of precious metal (gold, silver and platinum) by independent Assay Offices in London, Birmingham, Sheffield and Edinburgh, providing a very high level of consumer protection.

3. Elsewhere in the EU, manufacturers are allowed to test and mark their own goods under a much less regulated system, lessening consumer protection.

4. The Hallmarking Directive as currently drafted proposes three methods of certifying precious metals reflecting the different ways in which hallmarking is dealt with in various Member States:

• marking by manufacturers to standards regulated by an accredited Quality Assurance Scheme

• marking by manufacturers making a declaration of conformity

• third party marking by an independent body ie the current system in the UK

5. Under the Directive articles marked by manufacturers or importers in other Member States could be put on sale in the UK without independent testing and with no guarantees of quality.

6. The UK recognises items of precious metal hallmarked on a similar independent basis outside the UK, either under the Vienna Convention or in line with a European Court of Justice judgement, the Houtwipper Judgement. Such items do not require testing and remarking in the UK.

7. Italy, which currently holds the Presidency of the EU, is keen to push this measure on precious metals because Italy currently has no hallmarking system of its own, yet is one of the EUs largest jewellery manufacturers.

8. Text of Nick Clegg's Parliamentary Question: Is the European Commission aware that the Italian Presidency is hoping to revive the dormant EC proposal on hallmarking (COM(1993)0322, Articles made of precious metal) last discussed in the Council of Ministers in 1995?

Given the long established traditions in certain Member States

guaranteeing the quality of jewelleries sold to consumers, such as the ancient hallmarking system in the UK, is the Commission confident that the proposed Directive would not weaken quality standards?

Why should Member States with independent quality control mechanisms accept products tested under much weaker self-regulating systems by the industry itself in other Member States?