The “Made in” logo for goods imported into the EU has been the subject of debate for years.
Supporters say it will help protect European industry from counterfeiters and give shoppers clear information.
However, countries like the UK and Germany have blocked it fearing it will place burdens on industry and stifle trade. The Treaty of Lisbon gives the EP more say on trade and as the Italian Vice-Chair of the Trade Committee, Cristiana Muscardini (EPP) explains, she wants to press the issue.
This Wednesday (25 November) MEPs in Strasbourg voted in favour of a resolution calling for the issues to be reopened and for the legislative co-decision procedure to be put into effect between the Parliament and the Council of Ministers to try and find agreement. This is likely to start early in 2010.
In many countries in the world, like the United States, Canada, China and Japan, imports are subject to country-of-origin marking. Why not in Europe?
Muscardini: Europe has not managed to find agreement in the Council of Ministers. In 2005 the European Commission came up with a proposal to make the origin marking compulsory and the Parliament backed this Regulation with several resolutions, debates in plenary and declarations.
Unfortunately in the Council there are some Members who are not convinced – probably they have suffered from lobbying pressures. However, the lack of Regulation is causing serious damage both to European consumers, who cannot be sure of the origin and the quality of the products they buy, and to European industries who are suffering unfair competition from competitors who have adopted rules of origin marking. This loophole has to be filled soon if we want the market to be really free.
But most products today already have a “made in” label. What would this proposed Regulation change?
Muscardini: Today it’s not compulsory and you don’t find it on all the categories of products. In addition, as it is not compulsory, it is not subject to checks. There are many falsifications, manipulations and counterfeiting which results in less transparency for consumers and undermines industry.
With the Treaty of Lisbon, the Parliament gets equal say with the Council on international trade. What will you do to relaunch the “made in” initiative from 1 December?
Muscardini: This is exactly the point raised by the resolution which was broadly approved yesterday. All the political groups in the Parliament agree on the need to fill this gap by approving the Regulation quickly.
The longer we wait, the more harm to our consumers and producers. We will stick to the 2005 proposal of the Commission and begin the co-decision procedure with the Council. The Parliament will play the role of mediator to reach a satisfactory solution.
We would like to add some categories of goods to the proposal of the Commission, for example screws and bolts. This is a category where the security standards for production in the EU are higher than in the rest of the world. Therefore I’m convinced that, when a bridge is built the constructor has the right to choose which kind of screws he wants bearing in mind that the European ones contain twice the amount of nickel as Indian ones.
But of course we’re ready to negotiate on the inclusion of some categories and the exclusion of others, bearing in mind that the most important ones, like textile, footwear, jewellery and ceramics cannot be excluded.
Topics: Britain, burdens, economic development, economic growth, Economy, England, EU, Europe, European Industry, European Parliament, Germany, Governance, industry, international trade, Lisbon Treaty, Made In EU, MEP's, politics, stifle trade, UK, United Kingdom
Print This Article in Plain Text
|
|