Talks on EU-Australia free trade deal have collapsed — Australian delegation surprised negotiators with new demands, for greater market access that were fundamentally incompatible with the European Commission’s proposal
by marketrent
Talks on EU-Australia free trade deal have collapsed — Australian delegation surprised negotiators with new demands, for greater market access that were fundamentally incompatible with the European Commission’s proposal
by marketrent
6 comments
Although European and Australian versions differ on who is to blame, they point out the same two factors that were behind the collapse of negotiations — agricultural exports and the names of geographical indications:^1
>The dramatic twist of events left EU officials in a state of shock and frustration, according to their own accounting, as a team of 10 people had flown to Osaka exclusively to participate in the EU-Australia talks.
>Janusz Wojciechowski, the European Commissioner for agriculture, had also travelled overseas for the high-stakes occasion.
>But before the two teams even had a chance to sit at the table, Don Farrell, Australia’s minister for trade and tourism, put forward fresh demands to further expand market access for Australian farmers, according to senior EU officials.
>[EU officials said] Farrell surprised negotiators with new demands for greater market access that were fundamentally incompatible with the Commission’s proposal, particularly in regards to beef and sheep meat.
>Farrell’s requests were seen as excessively aligned with the ambitious interests of Australian farmers, making it impossible to find a compromise in the near term.
>
>The issue of geographical indications – a type of intellectual property rights popularised by the EU to protect unique culinary products such as Cognac, Gorgonzola, and Vinagre de Jerez – proved similarly contentious.
>Inside the bloc’s market, geographical indications are strictly monitored and can only be used to advertise food and beverages made in a specific region with a specific technique.
>In Australia, however, the rules don’t apply and names that resemble European exports can be easily found on Australia-made products.
^1 https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/10/30/once-again-talks-on-a-eu-australia-free-trade-deal-have-collapsed-this-is-why
Why? They already have a backdoor via Britain’s lax policing of the Northern Irish crossing.
Sounds like Australia has an incompetent negotiating team. Who knows if the EU will be willing to resume talks after a new Australian trade minister is appointed
Guess they got embolded after the British trade deal being so much in their favour. The EU is not that desperate, though
raucous aukus don’t need no DOP
Talks broke down because the EU deal would damage Australia’s established market in Asia.
The Feta example, if Australia changed it’s name to suit the EU naming protection it risks damaging the Australia products that already have significant brand recognition in Asia.
Australia is not going to risk damaging their trade with Asia (their largest customers) just so that they can have more access to the EU market, where most of the Australian products will directly compete with the EU ones.