Browning Steffan: Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrowning Steffan: Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9910. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]STEFFAN BROWNING (Green): I rise to speak to the Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Amendment Bill. I come from Marlborough. I am pleased to hear that there are wine industry people in the gallery above me who are very very keen to see this bill passed. It is an interesting one however that although we acknowledge the provenance that is behind this bill which is the absolute issue of markets recognising where stuff comes from—the paddock-to-plate - type scenario—we actually need to support this all the way. So we need to be sure that the product that we are going to put a name to actually will not negatively impact on the reputation of the regions that we will be using the names of. What I am referring to is the issue of big pesticide use labour issues and other social aspects that go with the industrialisation of the wine industry in my region.When we are having eels or tuna killed in a stream—200 of them recently—probably by glyphosate spraying is it the council or is it from adjacent overseas-owned vineyards? If we are going—and we must go—down this track then we must clean up the act of the wine industry around it. There is some really good news stuff from the wine industry too and that is that it wants to be 20 percent organic by 2020. That is a step in the direction of cleaning up some of the reputation that it has had before.Stuart Smith may chortle but this spring—and I have said it in the House before and I have said it to the industry before—just as in 2007 the member over there who is chortling had 100 percent vineyard herbicide coverage in spring to crank up his soil temperatures using a non-sustainable method. But that can get a sustainable wine-growing tick. It is nuts. There is nothing sustainable about having 100 percent of your surface area sprayed with herbicide every spring and of course we know that we have got herbicide resistance with ryegrass in Marlborough from repeated spraying. So I support this bill and our party is going to support this bill but the reputation in our markets is not through having bulk pesticide and herbicide spraying.I know that there is work done to make sure that there is little if any residue of pesticides in the sprays and it is important that we make sure that products going to market are as clean as possible. They can be cleaner and so can the environment in my region where we have tuna dying from pesticides where we are getting spray resistance from herbicides and where we have a lot of people getting sick but we cannot quite put the finger on why. The pesticides invariably used are carcinogenic or probable carcinogens as the World Health Organization says for glyphosate. Others are endocrine disrupters or neurotoxins.We can improve the health of my region Hawke’s Bay and the other regions where we are growing a lot of grapes. It is a fantastic industry—it is doing us proud at the moment in terms of economic benefit—but it needs to convert to doing a lot better than the so-called sustainable wine-growing that is actually almost a crock of the proverbial. Yes it is integrated pest management and it is not spraying every 2 calendar weeks or whatever—there is a certain level of monitoring and decision making around it—but it is a choice of what products are used when there is a pest outbreak. It is an issue of what systems are being used.