UK product safety weaknesses “not fit for challenges” of protecting consumers, says PAC report

“Weaknesses” in the UK’s overall product safety regulatory regime mean “it is not fit to address the challenges it faces” in protecting consumers from unsafe products, says the Public Accounts Committee in a report published today.

The consequences of unsafe products are serious and not to be under-estimated. The Grenfell Tower fire started from a faulty fridge freezer, and serious or even fatal injuries have been sustained by children playing with dangerous toys. The Committee says the nature of safety risks to consumers is “changing significantly and fast”, with one third of products now bought online, and 15% of products including smart technology that may be susceptible to hacking.

The Committee warns of “important gaps in the regulatory framework” including in regulators’ powers to effectively regulate goods sold online. There are serious challenges for regulators’ skills and capacity: a 39% real-terms funding reduction for local Trading Standards services in the past 10 years and new responsibilities for both national and local regulators following EU Exit, all set against the negotiation of a host of new international trading relationships. There are also additional, significant responsibilities for safety of building materials following the Grenfell fire tragedy.

Unsafe and dangerous products can cause harm in different ways. Harm can be visible, such as the estimated 3,000 house fires each year in the UK caused by appliance faults. It can also be less obvious, such as toxic or carcinogenic chemicals in products, or even disinfectant that is not as effective as it claims.

The Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) was established in 2018 to try and tackle these challenges, but the Committee says the OPSS’s “data and intelligence are limited” - for example, its response to safety problems from small high-powered magnets, which caused 40 paediatric admissions in the UK in 2020 alone, was slowed by data limitations.

Dame Meg Hillier MP, Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, said: “Weaknesses in the UK’s product safety regimes were horrifically, doubly exposed in the Grenfell tragedy, but there is also reason for serious concern about ‘everyday’ risks - in everything from toxic children’s toys to the 15% of all products that now contain some ‘smart’ technology which can open a door to hackers.

“With massive new responsibilities following exit from the EU and now including building materials, we simply cannot be confident that the UK’s product safety regime will prevent the next tragedy or widespread harm or loss of life, or even know where it’s coming from. UK consumer protection must be properly funded to get up to a speed and strength fit for the task.”

PAC report conclusions and recommendations

1. The OPSS lacks the data it needs to proactively identify and address risks to consumers from unsafe goods. Data and intelligence are key resources for every regulator to identify risks and prioritise interventions. The OPSS has so far reacted well to some known product safety issues, such as with Whirlpool appliances and with hand sanitisers and face coverings during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it acknowledges that it does not have the data it needs to be a proactive regulator. Although some useful data are available, such as fire and accident data, they are not routinely shared with regulators. The OPSS therefore must rely on manufacturers and other stakeholders to identify safety problems. This has slowed its response to some serious areas of harm, such as small high-powered magnets that can be swallowed and cause serious problems, which led to 40 paediatric admissions in the UK in 2020 alone. The OPSS collects better data in some sectors, particularly in cosmetics, but has not applied this approach more widely. It is working to improve its intelligence base, including developing a data strategy and undertaking a pilot with five NHS hospitals to explore data on product -related injuries. However, there are challenges with delivering this initiative in practice, relating to building a consistent and useful reporting mechanism in hospitals.

Recommendation: The OPSS should write to us within six months and set out the progress made in its data strategy, including its data-sharing pilot with the NHS and whether it is achievable in practice. Its response should set out what other data sources it has identified and begun to collect to improve its intelligence base.

1. The OPSS has struggled to reach some businesses and consumers to prevent harm being caused by unsafe products. Businesses are responsible for ensuring that the products they make and sell are safe. The OPSS and local regulators therefore rely on influencing businesses to ensure they comply with the rules. Despite issuing guidance and advice, the OPSS has found that 24% of businesses remain unaware of their product safety responsibilities. The OPSS struggles to reach smaller firms, such as home sellers, and to influence or support them to follow the relevant product safety regulations. The OPSS also aims to communicate directly and indirectly with consumers and make them aware of product safety risks, for example to encourage them to avoid buying unsafe goods, respond to recalls or use products correctly. However, only 17% of surveyed consumers consider product safety when making purchases. People from lower socio-economic groups may be at greater risk from unsafe products if they are more likely to purchase cheap or fake goods. The OPSS does not know which consumer groups are most at risk from unsafe products or how to reach these groups to make them aware of the potential dangers.

Recommendation: The OPSS should develop a detailed plan for proactively communicating with and influencing industry and consumers. This should set out how different industry and consumer groups, including vulnerable and hard to reach demographics, will be targeted using different approaches.

1. There is insufficient coordination between the OPSS, local authorities and other parts of government. The OPSS works with a range of organisations to protect consumers from unsafe products, but the regulatory system is not well coordinated. The OPSS does not have a full picture of investigation and enforcement activity by local Trading Standards services and is therefore unable to align its work with local intervention. The OPSS has introduced some welcome new forms of support to local authorities, such as providing training and ensuring that all services had free access to product standards from the British Standards Institution. However, there is more the OPSS can do to work with local regulators to improve the data it collects and the coordination of enforcement activities. The OPSS, the Department and other parts of government are also not sufficiently joined up in tackling cross-government issues such as staffing and capacity challenges in Trading Standards services. Looking ahead, there is also scope for the OPSS to improve its influence and effectiveness by working with international partners to take a leading role on product safety standards, and by learning from more established regulators on areas such as understanding vulnerable consumers and measuring impact.

Recommendation: The OPSS should work with the Department and other parts of government to ensure the regulatory system is better coordinated. In particular, it should engage with MHCLG and other relevant departments to address concerns around the long-term sustainability of the Trading Standards workforce. In their update to this Committee, they should explain how they intend to resolve this issue.

1. Gaps in the regulatory framework make it harder to protect consumers from new risks presented by online marketplaces and emerging technologies. People increasingly purchase goods online, including through online marketplaces such as Amazon, eBay and Etsy which are now used by nine in ten adults who use the internet. Online marketplaces are not responsible for the safety of products sold by third parties on their platforms. As many sellers are small operators working from their homes, or based abroad, regulators struggle to enforce safety regulations to the same extent as on the high street, due in part to gaps and limitations in their powers. These gaps make it harder to protect consumers, and can give online sellers an unfair competitive advantage over high street traders. Changes in product technologies present new risks but also opportunities. For example, an estimated 15% of products bought for the home now include ‘smart’ technology. Software in smart products can identify faults, prompt recalls or use updates to increase safety features, but may also be susceptible to hacking. The government faces a challenge in ensuring that regulations keep up with social and technological changes, and recently consulted on a major review of the regulatory regime that is considering how to respond to changes in product lifecycles and technologies.

Recommendation: The Department and OPSS should write to us within six months to update us on the progress of their product safety review, and how and when they will address gaps in the regulatory framework. This should include a clear assessment of the key constraints the regime faces in regulating product safety through online marketplaces and keeping regulations up to date with changes in product technologies.

1. The regulatory system is lacking capacity and skills to meet the challenges it faces. Regulators need enough resources and the right mix of capabilities to be effective. Local authority Trading Standards services are a key element of the regime, as they still conduct most investigation and enforcement of product safety regulations. But they face significant resourcing challenges. For example, in England they have had a 39% real-terms reduction in spending between 2010-11 and 2019-20. This has impacted the consistency of local product safety enforcement throughout the UK, as some services struggle to undertake any product safety regulation work which mean some consumers are at more risk of harm from dangerous products. The OPSS is a new and relatively small regulator facing multiple new challenges: EU Exit means new regulatory functions for the OPSS and additional goods to check at the border; UK regulators need to adapt to technological changes and new risks; and in 2022 the OPSS will be taking on new duties for regulating construction products on behalf of the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government. Tackling these issues, and ensuring it will be an effective product safety regulator for the future, will require new capacity and skills, particularly in software, engineering and science.

Recommendation: The Department and OPSS should evaluate the regulatory resource needed for the future of the regulatory regime. This should reflect the impacts of product checks at the UK border, the OPSS’s new duties on construction products and the loss of resource at local Trading Standards services.

1. The government has not yet set out a clear vision and detailed plan for the future of UK product safety regulation. As well as ensuring there are the right skills and resources in place, it is also important for government to have a clear strategy to ensure the regulatory regime is fit for purpose now and in the future. Developments in product technologies and consumers buying products online have resulted in new and changing risks to consumers. The UK’s exit from the EU also has implications for the wider regulatory framework – as well as repatriated regulatory functions previously carried out at EU level, the UK will no longer recognise the EU’s CE mark signifying compliance with standards, and there will be an expected increase in goods checking at the border. There are serious concerns over the sustainability of local Trading Standards services, the OPSS will need to contend with all of these issues while also taking on responsibility for regulating the safety of construction products. The government has consulted on a review of the product safety regime but has not yet set out its vision for how the OPSS, and wider regulatory system, will address these challenges, including whether and when the OPSS should become independent of the Department with its own statutory duties and powers.

Recommendation: In their update to the Committee on the product safety review, the Department and OPSS should set out a timetable for the next UK product safety regulatory strategy. This strategy should set out clearly what type of regulatory system the UK will adopt to best combat the challenges it faces, and consider at what point the OPSS would be most effective as an independent regulator.