The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 980/2005 of 27 June 2005 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences,

–  having regard to Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market,

–  having regard to Article IX and Article XXIV:5 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) (1994),

–  having regard to the European Parliament report on 'Prospects for trade relations between the EU and China',

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code and to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2453/93 of 2 July 1993 setting up, inter alia, the European Community’s non-preferential rules of origin system,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 of 28 March 1983 setting up a Community system of relief from customs duty,

–  having regard to the Commission Communication on 'The future of the textiles and clothing sector in the enlarged EU' (COM(2003) 649),

–  having regard to Rule 108(5) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas, at present, the European Union does not have harmonized provisions or uniform practices on origin marking in the EU, except for some specific cases in the agricultural sector; whereas disparities between the regulations in force in Member States as well as the absence of clear Community rules in this area result in a fragmentary legal framework,

B.  whereas the results of the European Commission’s general stakeholder consultation (industry, importers, consumer associations, trade unions) on the possible development of an EU regulation on origin marking indicate that European consumers’ perception of the relevance of origin marking for their information on social and environmental concerns is generally high,

C.  whereas national measures imposing compulsory origin marking on goods imported from other Member States are prohibited (as measures having equivalent effect, inconsistent with Article 28 of the EC Treaty and not justifiable on consumer protection grounds) as a result of a ruling by the European Court of Justice (Case 207/83), while there is no such limitation on compulsory origin marking on goods imported from third countries,

D.  whereas an origin marking scheme would allow European consumers to be fully aware of the country of origin of the products they purchase; whereas consumers would thus be able to identify those products with the social, environmental and safety standards generally associated with that country,

E.  whereas a number of the EU's major trading partners, such as the United States, China, Japan and Canada, have enacted mandatory origin marking requirements; whereas EU exporters are therefore asked to comply with those requirements and have to mark the origin of their products if they intend to export to those markets,

F.  whereas, albeit not decisively, the 'made in' requirement would contribute to reducing counterfeiting and unfair competition; whereas the effectiveness of Regulation (EC) No 1383/2003 (on 'anti-counterfeiting') would effectively be enhanced by the mandatory origin marking of imported products,

G.  whereas the https://intracomm.cec.eu.int/home/dgserv/sg/manupro/docs/framework_EP_en.pdfFramework Agreement which came into force on 26 May 2005 and is intended to strengthen constructive dialogue and political cooperation between the two institutions, as well as to improve the flow of information between them, obliges the Commission to keep the Parliament fully and promptly informed on its legislative proposals,

1.  Notes the proposal for a Council Regulation (2005/0254 (ACC)) introducing compulsory indication of the country of origin of certain products imported from third countries in the European Union ('origin marking');

2.  Deplores the fact that, despite the Commission and the Council being fully aware of the importance that Parliament attaches to origin marking, the Commission did not even send the proposed regulation to Parliament for information; asks the Commission to give Parliament the opportunity to express its views regarding this proposal;

3.  Recalls the Commission's obligation to ensure the involvement of Parliament, in accordance with the Interinstitutional https://intracomm.cec.eu.int/home/dgserv/sg/manupro/docs/framework_EP_en.pdfFramework Agreement of 26 May 2005, in such a way as to take Parliament's views into account as far as possible;

4.  Calls on the Commission and the Council to inform Parliament without delay on the results of any further impact assessment and legal analysis carried out in particular with respect to the alleged inconsistencies of the proposed regulation with existing Community legislation and WTO rules;

5.  Calls on the Commission and the Council to take all necessary steps to ensure a level playing field with trading partners having implemented origin marking requirements;

6.  Calls on the Commission and the Council to set up proper customs surveillance and enforcement mechanisms;

7.  Urges Member States to maintain a consistent Community approach to this issue which would enable European consumers to receive more complete and accurate information and would promote in addition the image and attractiveness of high-value European industrial products with little or no added costs for importers;

8.  Encourages the Commission to intervene strongly, together with the Member States, to defend consumers' legitimate rights and expectations whenever there is evidence of use of fraudulent or misleading origin markings by foreign producers and importers;

9.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission and the Council.