Should the EU market be more open or more protected? Are anti-dumping measures and new trade defence instruments the right way forward? We ask two MEPs.

Talking point: Protectionism v. free trade

https://api.multimedia.europarl.europa.eu/documents/20125/16316596/n001-130527-002-en.srt

Plans to introduce anti-dumping  measures against China

while further trade defence instruments  could be on the way.

We asked Henri Weber from  the Socialists and Democrats

and Syed Kamall from the Conservatives  and Reformists for their opinions.

The Commission has set up anti-dumping  measures against Chinese solar panels.

We are dealing with China in a fragmented  manner, competing against each other.

And the Chinese  make the most of this rivalry,

when we should pool together our  resources, our energies, our efforts

to obtain a regulation  that’s effective vis-à-vis China.

And, especially,  to fight against dumping,

because the Chinese are practicing  all forms of dumping at the same time.

If it's true they're dumping,  then there may be something there.

But all too often anti-dumping measures  are used against cheaper competition.

And there's nothing wrong with cheaper  competition in itself, as long as it's fair.

Do we need reciprocity in public markets?

It's important that our markets  are open anyway, even if unilaterally,

because it gives our consumers  a wider choice.

The public markets  must be open in the same way.

Are trade defence instruments  good enough?

Quite often we see trade defence  instruments being evoked

in order to prevent competition  from a cheaper producer.

If that producer is genuinely cheaper, for  example their labour is genuinely cheaper,

then it's quite often protectionism.  So we have to be very careful,

because all too often we confuse  trade defence and protectionism,

The WTO offers a whole arsenal  of defence instruments.

There are anti-dumping clauses, safeguard  clauses and anti-subvention clauses

We must defend ourselves,  there’s no shame in that.