11. Before we decide if we should do a detailed investigation of a complaint, we look at whether there are signs the organisation got something wrong. We do this by comparing what should have happened with what did happen. We have done this and have not found any signs the consultation document was not in line with either the Consultation Principles or the Civil Service Code.
Consultation questions
12. The Cabinet Office publishes Consultation Principles which government departments should follow when doing consultations. Principle B, ‘Consultations should have a purpose’, says do not ask questions about issues on which you already have a final view.
13. The Civil Service Code requires that civil servants demonstrate the behaviours of integrity, honesty, objectivity and impartiality.
14. Mr O complained the multiple-choice questions did not provide an option to keep things as they are. For example, consumers were asked if they preferred to purchase items in imperial units or in imperial units alongside a metric equivalent. There was no option to keep metric units only, as is currently the case. He said this was not in line with the Civil Service Code - specifically the principle of objectivity.
15. To behave in an objective manner, the Code requires that civil servants accurately present options and facts. Mr O said BEIS could not do this because of the way the questions were weighted towards introducing imperial measures.
16. BEIS said respondents also had the option to provide views with free text boxes or by email, and that it would consider all responses it received.
17. The consultation document and BEIS’s response to Mr O explain that the Taskforce on Innovation, Growth and Regulatory Reform recommended the government amend the Weights and Measures Act 1985, to allow traders to use imperial measures without metric equivalents. The government itself decided to review the law on imperial units following this recommendation.
18. As the government had already reached a view that it would reintroduce imperial units, the Consultation Principles say it should not consult on whether this should happen. The purpose of the consultation is to identify how, rather than whether, it should give consumers and traders more choice over the units of measurement. In other words, to consult on to what extent and how it should reintroduce imperial measures.
19. Similarly, BEIS was not advising the government on what the views of stakeholders were on whether to reintroduce imperial measures. It was advising what their views were on how they should be introduced. So it seems appropriate to try to get a view on this, rather than on whether to keep things as they were. This appears to be in line with the Civil Service Code.
20. As Mr O pointed out, the consultation attracted attention in the press, because many other members of the public felt they were not able to express their preference to keep the law on weights and measures as it is. It is likely these stakeholders used the free text options to present their views, and BEIS should include these in its advice.
21. Although Mr O is right to say the consultation is weighted towards reintroducing imperial measures, this is by design. We saw no signs that BEIS did anything wrong, given the purpose of the consultation. At this time, the government had not published its response to the consultation or changed the law. It is still open to Mr O to write to his MP, or otherwise make his views known, if he objects to a change in the law.
Consultation background
22. Mr O said the history of the introduction of metric units in the document was not honest, because it said the UK officially adopted the metric system from 1995 to 1999. In his complaint he listed Acts of Parliament and other events related to the introduction of metric units which happened before this.
23. He also said the Taskforce should not have been described by BEIS as ‘independent’ because it included Members of Parliament whose views were well known and could be predicted.
24. He pointed out the Civil Service Code requires honesty, and he said the consultation was in breach of this code.
25. BEIS said that 1995 was when the UK started to introduce legislation that required trade to be done in metric units. By 1 January 2000, with certain exemptions that are still in place today, all retail trade was to be done only in metric units. Before 1995, metric units were permitted, but not mandatory. It seems reasonable to say that metric was officially adopted between 1995 and 2000. Before that it was not required, even if some industries had adopted it many years before. BEIS could have provided more detail about the history of the metric system in the UK, but what it said does not appear to be wrong.
26. The Taskforce produced a report for government which explained, ‘in accordance with our invitation from the Prime Minister, the views expressed in this report are ours as Conservative Members of Parliament, and whilst we have framed our proposals in support of the government’s general policy aims to unlock growth, innovation, recover and ‘level-up’, this report is independent of Government’.
27. It is not for BEIS to decide if the Taskforce was not independent of government. So we did not see that there is anything further to consider here.
28. Although we understand why Mr O was not happy with aspects of the consultation background, we did not see any evidence this caused a breach of the Civil Service Code.