China Esquire

An article that was sitting in my mailbox that was just waiting for comment was entitled “EU and US team up on Chinese toys” from BBC News. It’s a little old, but since the news was not covered on any of the blogs I frequent, I thought I would talk about it:

The EU and the United States have agreed to work closely to persuade Chinese toy-makers to improve the safety of their products.

Millions of Chinese-made toys were recalled in 2007 after safety concerns about lead paint or detachable magnets.

EU commissioner Meglena Kuneva said, after talks with her US counterpart, Nancy Nord, that the world’s two major economies had to speak with one voice.

“We are pro-open markets, [but] not compromising on safety,” she said.

China has pledged to step up the way it monitors products.

Ms Nord, chair of the US Consumer Product Safety Commission, said she wanted the EU to agree to a global set of product safety standards.

Bringing the two systems together would be “for the benefit of consumers; it is certainly for the benefit of product manufacturers”, she said.

Currently, the EU uses a CE mark but European consumer groups have called for a stricter standard awarded by an independent regulator.

First off, how will the EU and the US “persuade” Chinese toy makers to improve their safety? They won’t. That is more or less an impossibility. Chinese toy makers are in this business because they want to make money, and because they sell to larger multinational companies, I don’t see how western governments are going to persuade anyone in China to do anything. So this is actually a mislabeling in my mind.

That’s not to say the EU and the US have no power. They have power on businesses sourcing from China but based in the U.S. or other countries in the west. In other words, your business. In the U.S., civil and criminal liability are already deterrences against harmful products. Add regulatory penalties to the list. That’s not too much of a threat, but just having to deal with government inspections, the time wasted on such a process, and sheer nuisance value does make this a possibility.

And so I will continue to preach quality control and due diligence. Especially quality control because quality fade is still very real. (think Greek Olympians)

My other thought is regarding a “global” standard. Who determines this? I have a hard time seeing a real consensus here. And of course, what effect can it have on consumers? A lot. If other countries raise the ceiling ridiculously high (which is desirable), then imagine the increase in costs for products worldwide. Do you think China as the world’s manufacturer will help the pinched consumer in America who fears a recession? No. I like the independent regulator idea. But I just can’t see this working out in a beneficial way for most people.

And of course, we go back to the quality fade problem.  You have a regulator certify a product.  You have some random, but not-too-often type of inspections.  You are asking for quality fade.  And Chinese suppliers will give you in a heartbeat.  QC and due diligence can only do so much against economic realities.  So watch out.

Ultimately, it’s probably so that the EU and America can wring their hands when problems arise and say “I am innocent”.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS