EU under mounting global pressure to rethink planned 'green' labels on natural fibres

The European Union has outlined controversial plans to require "environment footprint" labels on garments.

The EU's proposed approach would disadvantage natural products like wool over synthetic fibres.

Canadian wool producers have joined a growing number of wool producing countries, led by Australia the biggest grower, to ask for the methodology to be recalculated.

This single issue is seen as critically important to the Australian industry which dispatched former Australian Wool Innovation boss Stuart McCullough to Europe last year.

Mr McCullough has been charged with addressing the proposed European labelling laws which AWI identified as "severely disadvantaging the fibre".

"Most immediately, we need to resist damaging changes to EU labelling laws that would fail to recognise wool's natural, sustainable and renewable benefits," AWI chairman Jock Laurie said at the time.

Wool production is continuing to decline in Canada which hosts about a million sheep and imports most of its wool and sheepmeat but the country has importantly added its voice to a growing coalition opposing the EU's proposed new green laws.

Canada and has joined the Make the Label Count campaign which is gathering a coalition of supporters including Cotton Australia.

The campaign wants the EU to factor into its proposed product environmental footprint the creation of microplastics, plastic waste and the non-biodegradability of man-made fabrics.

Norway has already challenged the planned changes to the classification of textiles..

The historic move calls into question the current environmental method for classifying textiles which threatened to downgrade wool and even cotton in favour of man-made polyester and acrylics.

Campaign for Wool in Canada chief executive officer Matthew Rowe said natural fabric producers want a level playing field, pointing out the renewability and degradability of wool products versus synthetics, which largely use petrochemicals in their production.

"If you're going to have a system that's going to make recommendations on what's more sustainable, it should be accounting for the full picture of the production of the fibre," he said.

"The point of us getting involved is to ensure that this doesn't get implemented without having that level playing field because we'd rather it didn't exist at all than be incorrect."

MORE READING: New campaign for wool recognises unsung heroes.

Mr Rowe said wool is a biodegradable material produced in a renewable manner using sheep which can contribute fertiliser for soil, as well as be a food source.

No final decision has been made by the EU on the proposed changes, but Australian wool leaders says it could happen next year.

The Canadian wool industry may be small but Mr Rowe said limitations such as the EU proposals will not help grow domestic production.

"At the moment, the way things are positioned for wool and other natural fibres, but particularly wool because it is an animal based fibre, they are measuring the carbon footprint and they are measuring methane output.

"The European people who set these standards, once they put them into play, largely the rest of the world follows suit. Particularly in fashion and garments."

AWI director Don Macdonald said co-partnerships are already in place with South Africa and the cotton industry.

"We are now lobbying the EU Council not to be swayed by the technical secretariat who advises the EU Council," Mr Macdonald said.

"But the technical secretariat has in its constituency people like H&M, the largest fast fashion company in the world, Nike, C&A and other global fashion outlets that largely trade in plastic."