The Royal Mile

[OC Richard]

I think the potential trouble in enforcing a quality-based standard (rather than country of origin standard) is the difficulty of defining exactly what would be permissible.

California went through this a number of years ago when its legislature banned "assault weapons". Seems that "assault weapons" are like pornography: everyone knows it they see it, but defining it in clear legal terms is very tricky.

An article I read not too long ago said that the EU currently protects many such things. For example, no one can sell Parmesan cheese unless it's actually made in Parma, or wine called Burgundy that's made anywhere but Burgundy etc.

Maybe this name-based approach couldn't work, but to apply it to Highland Dress would mean that unless it's made in Scotland it can't use the word kilt in its title. I would think that this could apply to sporran as well, and perhaps also to Highland and Scottish.

I suppose then the Indian subcontinent stuff would be called "man skirts" and "man skirt purses" etc etc and they would continue to sell it all the same, which is why I favour a ban on the actual items being imported for resale.

[M. A. C. Newsome]

Maybe this name-based approach couldn't work, but to apply it to Highland Dress would mean that unless it's made in Scotland it can't use the word kilt in its title. I would think that this could apply to sporran as well, and perhaps also to Highland and Scottish.

I suppose then the Indian subcontinent stuff would be called "man skirts" and "man skirt purses" etc etc and they would continue to sell it all the same, which is why I favour a ban on the actual items being imported for resale.

That is just one reason why the above scheme would not work. Another is that it would needlessly punish good, quality expert kilt makers. Think about Barb Tewksbury in NY, or Kathy Lare in NM, or any other good North American kiltmaker.

I am a kilt maker myself, and even I had Barb T. make a kilt for me, because I was so impressed with the quality of her work (among other reasons). I can honestly say it is just as good as, if not better than, the bulk of Scottish-made kilts I have seen.

To suggest that a Barb Tewksbury kilt be called a "man skirt" because of what amounts to an accident of goegraphy is laughable.

You could say the same thing about sporrans. Does anyone honestly think that businesses such as L&M (in Nova Scotia), or crafters such as Ferguson Britt (In GA), would deign to call their products "man purses"?

I know your suggestion was meant somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but there are those who seriously advocate for a geography-based criteria on what is and is not a kilt. I sympathize with their reasons for wanting some form of protection, but I don't think geography could ever be a defining factor. Not without throwing the baby out with the bath water.

I do think a requirement that all garments be labelled with their country of origin is a good idea. That way the consumer has the choice as to buy a kilt, sporran, jacket, etc., made in Scotland, or Canada, USA, Pakistan or India. There would be no attempt to defraud anyone by suggestion that an item was "genuinely Scottish" when it is anything but -- which is, I believe, one of the major issues of concern.

[OC Richard]

That is just one reason why the above scheme would not work. Another is that it would needlessly punish good, quality expert kilt makers.

From the first, I stated that what I'm for is the banning of the importation of bagpipes, sporrans, and kilts of non-UK make into the UK for resale. This does not affect personal use.

How many Britt Ferguson sporrans and Barbara Tewksbury kilts are imported into Scotland for resale? I don't know, but off the top of my head I would guess very few.

In all the shops on The Royal Mile and in Glasgow I didn't see a single US-made or Canadian-made bagpipe, sporran, or kilt, but many thousands of Indian and Pakistani ones. I think the benefit to the native Scots craftspeople of a ban would far outweigh the loss of a few sales to US and Canadian craftspeople (who after all are not the people I'm trying to support, good people though they be).

[Brian K]

From the first, I stated that what I'm for is the banning of the importation of bagpipes, sporrans, and kilts of non-UK make into the UK for resale. This does not affect personal use.

How many Britt Ferguson sporrans and Barbara Tewksbury kilts are imported into Scotland for resale? I don't know, but off the top of my head I would guess very few.

Thank you for this, Richard. I tried making this point earlier, but I think you have stated it a bit more clearly. Barb Tewksbury, Kathy Lare, Matt Newsome, Lady Chrystel, et al. make one off, bespoke garments instead of off the peg garments for the retail trade. Those who buy their kilts know exactly what they are getting because they have sought them ought for exactly what they are famous for.

I don't know if I would go so far as an outright ban on importation of items for resale, but I think strong truth in labeling laws that leave no room for fudging the details with phrases like "designed in Scotland" would go a long way towards helping with the "tartan tat" problem.

Unfortunately there will always be a market for cheap trash because some people don't really care about the details. Those people will never buy the good stuff because they don't want to pay the price. Banning "tat" will just mean that that stuff is not bought, not that more of the high quality material is purchased, I'm afraid.

I think what is really needed, along with truth in labeling, is a public education campaign. Any ideas, anyone?

Regards,

Brian

[robthehiker]

Unfortunately there will always be a market for cheap trash because some people don't really care about the details. Those people will never buy the good stuff because they don't want to pay the price. Banning "tat" will just mean that that stuff is not bought, not that more of the high quality material is purchased, I'm afraid.

I'm not sure if it's "unfortunate" but this is bang on. There is a huge market for cheap souvenirs like insta-kilts, "see you Jimmy" hats and £20 kilts. If a law was enacted that prevented the import of such goods, I'm sure that entrepreneurs (local or otherwise) would rush to fill the void.

I wonder too if the goods from this store would be allowed under such a proposed law. Made in Scotland AND only £20? They must be good!

[morrison]

In all the shops on The Royal Mile and in Glasgow I didn't see a single US-made or Canadian-made bagpipe, sporran, or kilt, but many thousands of Indian and Pakistani ones. I think the benefit to the native Scots craftspeople of a ban would far outweigh the loss of a few sales to US and Canadian craftspeople (who after all are not the people I'm trying to support, good people though they be).

A local economy can be made strong by using locally grown, manufactured, imported raw, unfinished goods and supplies, then selling and exporting finished and further refined product. Buy local, sell abroad. Works for any economy. Even works for services such as financial instruments. A national economy can be strengthened or weakened by its procurement and disposals of goods, and services, Product and labor, Water in dry places and the amount of gold in a claim.
Those shop owners are taking advantage of a capital driven free enterprise economy. Never mind that they risk being taxed out of business. They resort to drastic measures to increase profitability while keeping a wary thumb close to the scale.