THE Scotch whisky sector is calling for a clearer direction of travel from the Government as the UK prepares to leave the EU.
The message was raised by Lindesay Low, deputy legal director of the scotch whisky Association (SWA), speaking at an event hosted by Lawrie IP, an independent Scottish firm of patent and trade mark attorneys.
Lawrie IP has estimated that, In the case of a No-Deal Brexit, the action that may need to be taken to ensure businesses across all sectors continue to have UK coverage for their EU trademarks could cost more than £500 million – about £50m for UK companies. That is because pending EU trademarks – of which there are almost 340,000 – will not have legal effect in the UK, and applicants will have to reapply, which is expected to cost more than £35m for UK businesses.
On the evening, Low discussed the need for legal protection of Scotland’s national drink. He covered the possible impact of Brexit on intellectual property (IP) and emphasised the need to maintain the status of Scotch whisky as a geographical indication (GI) – a product that must be made in Scotland from water, cereals and yeast and matured in oak barrels for at least three years.
He explained: “With the EU being the largest trading bloc for Scotch whisky, Brexit is a matter for concern.”
Low says the Scotch whisky industry has been assured by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) that it has a UK system of GIs ready to go as soon as the UK leaves the EU which will guarantee protection.
He added: “In the EU, we have to remember that Scotch Whisky and other food products already have a registered right that protects EU consumers from fraud.
“The European Commission would have to actively take away that right and we feel that is very unlikely.
“The possible slight complication is that, in many overseas markets around the world, we gain access and protection through agreements between the EU and those countries. If we drop out of the EU, we’ll also drop out of those agreements.
"We urge politicians to find a way forward and give the industry certainty.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel