Coates Barry; Tisch LindsayBARRY COATES (Green): I rise to express support for this bill for the Geographical Indicators (Wine and Spirits Registration) Amendment Bill. The Green Party strongly supports this. I must declare a family interest in winery and a personal enthusiastic consumption of New Zealand products. I think this is a fantastic example of a really savvy—excuse the expression—marketing approach for New Zealand products. We see New Zealand products earning a premium on world markets associated with not only high quality but also with production values. I think we should not forget the really strong effort of the industry in moving towards 100 percent certification according to sustainability criteria which works very well with geographic indicators so that consumers know that not only are they drinking a good product but also that the product is certified as sustainable production.My point from here is that this bill focuses on wine and spirits. We note that in Europe we have Parma ham Scotch beef Welsh lamb Stilton cheese Jersey royals. These are geographical indicators that apply to products other than wine and spirits and the question is: if we are serious about adding value to New Zealand's primary products if we are serious about diversifying away from commodity products if we are concerned about our clean green image and defending it then why are we not looking beyond wine and spirits? Certainly we would encourage a stronger move to do so so that we could celebrate Bluff oysters Morrinsville cheese Pukekohe potatoes Ōhākune carrots Waiheke olives Taupō beef and maybe Tokoroa kauri. In future I think we can hope that this extension from wine and spirits will actually provide a huge amount of benefit to the New Zealand rural sector.However there is a problem and the problem is that New Zealand's trade policy is very much aligned towards following US interests and US interests regard trademark as being the primary form of identification of products and geographical indicators as potentially getting in the way. If I look at article 23 of the Doha agenda from the World Trade Organisation (WTO) which provides the authorisation for countries to pursue this bill then we see that article 23 talks also about extending protection beyond wines and spirits. However the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement the TPPA" has provisions that focus on preventing confusion with trademark. This is a departure from the WTO approach—a departure from the trade-related intellectual property rights approach—which is primarily concerned with protecting geographical origin. We have here two systems of trade: one European Union system and one United States system.I think it is of deep concern that we are about to ratify the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement apparently—not without the opposition of a number of parties in this House and a majority of the New Zealand public—which would essentially be locking us into a trademark-dominated system and could potentially undercut the establishment of geographical indicators beyond wine and spirits. Therefore we will support the bill to this next stage but we would also request that the Government undertake research into the potential extension of geographical indicators to other products and how this may or may not be undermined by the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement ratification. We would remind the Government that there is still time for it to step back from the ratification process. We look forward to the Government response on that.We look forward to geographical indicators being potentially a far stronger way of defending New Zealand's image and reputation internationally and gaining more value for New Zealand's primary sector producers. Thank you.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Kris Faafoi—5 minutes."