The idea itself is as simple as a rake. At a meeting of state secretaries, officials concluded that traders could be relieved of the tedious and costly obligation of labeling every foreign product with explanatory Latvian labels. Currently, the law requires this. Every imported product must have detailed labeling in the Latvian language. Even for those products where the consumer can understand everything at first glance. Why write "rum" on rum? Duplicating such inscriptions in the state language does not provide additional information, but it does create a significant administrative burden for traders, who are forced to manually label up to 16 million units of products per year. And, of course, it increases the final price of the product, which ultimately affects the consumer. So the idea of getting rid of such bureaucracy is sound. It would allow traders to save, by preliminary estimates, at least 800,000 euros a year. But there is a catch. Now, before the elections, the "National Alliance" has especially fervently taken up its favorite hobby — maximizing the role of the state language. Allowing the omission of the Latvian name on labels could be seen within the "NA" as a concession. And it doesn’t matter that this would support domestic business. What matters is that it could be a good opportunity for publicity. Someone like Langa and her ilk would immediately embark on a crusade through stores, aiming to tackle the de-anglicization of the country following the derussification. Especially since they always have the State Language Center on their side, which has repeatedly called English a competitor to Latvian...