Wine industry starts unbottling its trouble

DITA DE BONI reports the wine industry is outgrowing its present master - the laws that once ruled a highly protected industry.


Labelling anomalies, inefficiencies and regulatory gaps are to be thrashed out in a series of meetings between the wine industry and the Government next week.

A discussion paper has been produced by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF), which has called for opinions from New Zealand's 350-plus winemakers before February next year on a new set of all-encompassing rules for the industry.

The Business Herald understands some in the industry have been pushing for a clear, simple and uniform set of rules to cover the industry since the early 1990s, but it seemed to break through to Government officials only in December last year with a submission to revamp the rules.

There are two specific laws covering the wine industry - the Wine Makers Act (1981) and the Wine Makers Levy Act (1976).

Both were written when domestic sales of sweet wine constituted the bulk of the market, whereas exports of premium whites and reds are now the sector's primary focus.

Some feel the high-profile labelling fracas which has rocked the industry in the late 1990s has been symptomatic of some of the gaps left open by the ageing legislation.

Those incidents include a 1995 finding that exported wine from Cooper's Creek was not true to label; a Lintz Estate shiraz product discrepancy in 1998 and problems with Marlborough's Cairnbrae Vineyards' sauvignon blanc in early 1999.

But gaps in labelling law are set to widen further when New Zealand and Australia adopt a unified Food Standards Code, which will not cover vintage or varietal labelling at all.

MAF did not attribute the review to any specific mis-labelling incidents, saying only that the debate would determine the most effective and efficient regulatory regime.

Agriculture Minister Jim Sutton says the industry has thrived since liberalising out of its highly protected regime of the 1970s.

"Laws relating to the consumption and sale of alcohol have been progressively liberalised as well ... Unfortunately we've ended up with an unwieldy web of acts governing different parts of the wine industry."

Four options are presented in the Review of Wine Legislation document.

The first is to keep the status quo; the second, championed by the industry's national body the Wine Institute, suggests a self-regulatory system backed up by legislation, the third, a Government enforcement of standards, and the last, abandoning all rules except those concerning food safety.

The Wine Institute's Philip Gregan says the discussions are a one-in-20-year chance to address gaps between legislation and between the four Government departments which oversee the industry.

The Wine Institute has mooted a new act, tentatively known as the Wine Act, which would cover the two existing acts as well as any additional provisions such as labelling and record-keeping requirements.

It has also suggested a separate body be formed to enforce the new standards.

Another idea is that the institute stop receiving a compulsory levy from winemakers, something it opposes.