Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Hansard source

Whilst I recognise Senator Xenophon's well-based intention to protect the intellectual property and in fact the integrity of the wine industry, it is the view of the government that this is not the way to achieve that laudable goal. The Winemakers Federation of Australia does not support the amendment that Senator Xenophon has proposed. It is concerned about the precedent that would be established by having a member of parliament dictate the activities and functions of an industry funded body beyond that set out in the enabling legislation for the statutory nature of the organisation. In the view of the federation, the governance and the autonomy of the corporation board could be compromised. It is an unnecessary interference in the role of the corporation.

It is a statutory corporation with the power to manage its own affairs. The corporation's corporate plans and annual operational plans are developed by the corporation, approved by its board and agreed by the minister. The board is accountable to industry levy payers through the publication and distribution of its annual report and at the industry annual general meeting. Levy payers have not used this mechanism to indicate discontent with or request changes to the activities and priorities of the corporation to date.

The corporation is funded by a mixture of levies and user-pays funding. The levies are collected for marketing and promotional activities, while the user-pays elements fund the export approval and label enforcement aspects of the corporation's work. The federation has advised that, in its view, there is not a sufficiently compelling case for the industry at large to fund the protection and prosecution of individual companies from counterfeiting activity in other nations. Intellectual property rights are private rights and breaches should be handled by businesses themselves. Not all companies affected by counterfeiting want government involvement and would prefer to deal with protection of their intellectual property rights themselves. We are aware of instances where the private rights holders have actively discouraged government or corporation involvement in investigating and enforcing their rights.

Once wine is exported from Australia, it becomes subject to the importing countries' rules and regulations and is outside the control of Australian authorities. This includes wine labelled as Australian wine when it is not Australian wine. If a wine is produced and bottled overseas, Australian authorities have no means to prevent that product being incorrectly labelled. There­fore, we are not sure how Wine Australia would prevent the counterfeiting of Aust­ralian wines outside of Australia and are cautious about recommending the corpora­tion be given or appear to be given a responsibility that it has no means of carrying out.

I reiterate that we do recognise the issue that Senator Xenophon has raised as being legitimate. I note that Senator Xenophon is undertaking ongoing discussions with Minister Ludwig that, hopefully, will reach a point that addresses the issue he has raised. But, on the basis of my contribution, we cannot support your amendment today.