Trade Minister Don Farrell has confirmed Australia and the European Union will restart negotiations for a free trade agreement immediately. Two years ago, Australia walked away over a disappointing market access offer for our beef, sheep, dairy and sugar exporters.
Authors
- Hazel Moir
Honarary Associate Professor; economics of patents, geographical indications and other "IP"; trade treaties, Australian National University
- John Power
Visiting Fellow, Centre for European Studies, Australian National University
But with US President Donald Trump's unilateral tariff increases, the world has changed. The chances of successfully completing the negotiations with the EU on increasing access for some agricultural products and cutting red tape now seem good.
Australia wants improved access for its beef and lamb exports to Europe, but European farmers have significant political influence . The 2023 offer from the EU would have accounted for just 0.3% of its agricultural imports. It was also less than that offered to other trading partners.
Another major stumbling block was the EU's demand that Australia give up naming rights for hundreds of food and drink products.
The EU wants Australia to adopt its system of regulating names for regional food and spirit specialties. If accepted, this could negatively impact on consumers, Australian dairies and boutique spirit makers.
What is the EU asking for?
The EU wants Australia to adopt its so-called " geographical indications " approach to protect the names of European products. It has listed 170 food names and 236 spirit names for Australia to give up.
The EU argues Australia should allow only Greek feta to be sold here; currently Australian, Greek, Danish and Bulgarian feta are all sold in our shops. It also wants the names prosecco and parmesan reserved for European producers.
Australia approaches food product labels differently, mainly through consumer protection laws. Further, there is little culture of fraud here, while the European system was originally introduced for wines because of widespread fraud , before it spread to food products.
Problems arise with the specific food and spirit names the EU wants reserved for their producers. Australia argues these are common names for the food items and we shouldn't lose access to them.
Intellectual property privileges limit what other producers can do. So there is always a process to allow other parties to object. Our trade agreements also provide for objections processes.
In 2019, the Australian government called for producers to raise any objections, but provided no follow-up and no process for the resolution of objections. Producers have received no feedback. This denies those affected by the European naming demands access to due process of law.
The problem with parmesan
The worst problems are with the common names that, in Australia, are recognised as generic product names.
The EU does recognise many food names as common names , such as gouda, brie, edam and camembert cheese. But they want Australia to declare that feta, parmesan and prosecco are not common names in Australia. Australian producers, retailers and consumers would disagree.
The Europeans argue parmesan is a translation of its geographical indication , Parmigiano Reggiano. It refuses to accept that in Australia consumers recognise parmesan as the common name for a hard cheese while Parmigiano Reggiano is an Italian cheese.
In 2024, the Singapore Court of Appeal ruled parmesan is not a translation of Parmigiano Reggiano in Singapore and is available for use in Singapore as a common name. It is also clearly recognised as a common name in the EU-Korea trade agreement.
Carve-outs for feta producers
Feta is not a place name (it means slice). Canada solved the feta problem in its trade deal with Europe by accepting feta as a geographical indication, but grandfathered the right of all existing Canadian producers to continue to produce and sell feta. Vietnam achieved similar safeguards.
Australia could ask for the same deal as provided to Canada, and this would ensure no negative impacts on producers or Australian consumers. To protect Australian consumers, who are currently also able to buy Danish and Bulgarian feta, Australia should ensure this exception includes companies exporting into Australia.
Who can make prosecco?
Prosecco is specified as a grape variety in the 1994 Australia-Europe bilateral wine treaty, and in Italy until 2009.
Since then the Italian government took action to privatise the name prosecco and the EU endorsed prosecco as a proprietary name.
However, all treaties with geographical indications provisions recognise that animal breed and plant variety names should remain free for common use. Our prosecco producers make wine with the prosecco grape, and should be allowed to label it as such. Just like pinot noir is labelled as pinot noir, the grape variety, and not Burgundy, the region.
If the EU does not provide better access to its agricultural markets, and demands naming provisions which hurt Australian dairies and consumers, and our boutique spirits industry, we would be better to walk away from the proposed treaty.
Hazel Moir is affiliated with the Centre for European Studies in the Research School of Social Sciences at the Australian National University. From 2017-2019 she was lead researcher in a co-funded ANU and EU's Erasmus+ Programme study which involved a meta-analysis of the available empirical evidence on the impact of GIs on farmers and regional development. The project funding was purely for research costs and involved no personal remuneration.
John Power worked for the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry from 2003 to 2019. He contributed to negotiations of the 2010 Australia-EU Trade in Wine Agreement and Australia's FTAs. John led the amendments of the Wine Australia Act 2013 that introduced an objections process for wine GIs. In 2020 he joined the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade as a GI specialist negotiator.
