Trade Marks Law: EC Directive (Hansard, 8 December 1992)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Baroness Denton of Wakefield)
My Lords, we have prepared a comprehensive Bill which fully implements all the proposals in the White Paper and enables the United Kingdom to comply with the EC directive. We shall bring this forward as soon as parliamentary time is available.

§ Baroness Hooper
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply. Is she aware that it will be disappointing to some people not to have a firm date for the proposed legislation given that a large number of people, firms and organisations participated in the consultation process following publication of the White Paper? Is she aware that they did so in the belief that, as a result, the legislation would be widely accepted and would not require a long and controversial passage through Parliament?

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, I am pleased to assure my noble friend that the 89 Government are aware of the value of the legislation. However, she will appreciate that parliamentary time is a matter for others more senior than I.

§ Lord Clark of Kempston
My Lords, can my noble friend say how many other countries in the EC have implemented the directive?

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, two countries have done so: France and Denmark.

§ Lord Peston
My Lords, I fully appreciate that others take decisions on these matters but the Answer is very disappointing precisely because there is no controversy here. The Bill would certainly pass through your Lordships' House with its usual efficiency. More to the point, industry is crying out for this important piece of its intellectual property to be regularised. Perhaps the Minister can enlighten us on a technical matter relating to the Community. As I understand it, we were given until last December to pass this directive into legislation. We were then allowed to wait until this December, which is now upon us. Can the Minister clarify what happens now so far as the Community is concerned? We have not done what we were obliged to do. Do matters just drift along as if the requirement did not exist? For how long can that go on?

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, let me first thank the noble Lord for assuring us of the view of the whole House on this matter. I am grateful for that. The UK has a good record on timely implementation of directives and it is one that stands very well. It is hoped that the Commission would have some sympathy for the UK position, having regard to the fact that drafting has been completed and to the pressure on parliamentary time from the enormous amount of legislation that we have introduced in connection with the creation of a single market.

§ Lord Peston
My Lords, in case I have not understood, can the Minister clarify that answer? If the Commission does not press us on this, or presumably any other directive, does that mean it does not matter and that provided the Commission agrees that we do not have to do it, we need not do so? Is that the way the relationship with the Community works?

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, the noble Lord knows well that that is not the way matters work. As I said to my noble friend, we are well aware of the importance of this matter. We have to implement directives and as soon as parliamentary time is available we do so.

§ Lord Campbell of Alloway
My Lords, can the Minister tell us whether this directive takes into account the registration of service marks, a matter which was initiated some time ago by your Lordships' House?

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, I must confess that I do not know the answer to that question. Perhaps I may write to the noble Lord.

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, the noble Baroness will be aware that I should prefer not to see 90 any EC directives brought to Parliament at all. However, I must query her excuse that we are short of time. As I understand the present position, there is all the time in the world. This House has so little to do that it does not return from the Recess until seven days after the House of Commons. Under those circumstances, how can she say that there is no parliamentary time for this particular measure?

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, I remind the noble Lord that there are two Houses to Parliament.

§ Lord Williams of Elvel
My Lords, the noble Baroness will recognise that the Department of Trade and Industry has issued a series of White Papers on a number of subjects. Will she confirm that in 1989 the department issued a White Paper on restrictive trade practices, which was widely welcomed? Does the 1990 White Paper on the reform of trade marks now under discussion take precedence over the desirable legislation in the 1989 White Paper?

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, as I said, the preference or non-preference for parliamentary time is not a matter for me.

§ Baroness Hooper
My Lords, can my noble friend kindly confirm that this proposed legislation is not just about implementation of the European Community directive? Does she agree that it is also about incorporating important provisions of the Madrid Protocol and generally updating the very out-of-date trade mark law in this country? That will be extremely helpful to the whole of industry and perhaps particularly to her special interest of small businesses.

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, I wholeheartedly agree with my noble friend. That is why we have listened to industry and not taken the route of secondary legislation on this matter.

§ Baroness Seear
My Lords, is there any reason why this legislation should not start here in your Lordships' House if there is pressure on time in another place?

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, again I have to tell the noble Baroness that that is not a matter for me.