Meager James; Smith StuartJAMES MEAGER (National—Rangitata): Oh Mr Chair 13th time's the charm! Thank you Mr Chair. Look as the chair of the Justice Committee which considered this bill it gives me great pleasure to stand in support of it. I actually was looking forward to our clause-by-clause debate for the night. I had all my clauses lined up. I was going to crack on with the definition of the title adding winery" into the title of the bill. Then all of a sudden we're debating the amendments right from the get-go. So if we're talking about snack food it's a sandwich of a debate. We should be debating it from the start rather than the end and then we're going to fill it in in the middle.But I will start off by congratulating the member for bringing this bill to the House and by starting off with making a few comments in relation to the definition of "winery" and "winery cellar door" because that's what we've been focused on for the first part of this debate and on Dr Duncan Webb's amendments. I won't be supporting the amendments at this stage because I haven't been convinced by Dr Webb and his arguments yet. So if he wants to convince me and perhaps my colleagues on my side he may need to rise to his feet many more times and make many more lengthy studious academic contributions to convince the committee that his amendments are worthwhile and are worth supporting because of course tonight we are in a personal vote situation and every single member has the choice whether or not they support particular amendments. So if Dr Webb feels passionately about putting a 10-kilometre barrier in place then I'm happy to be convinced but I would need a lot more energy and enthusiasm and rigour in the arguments I think to be convinced at this stage.I did want to pose a question to the member in the chair. It's a question that my colleague Tom Rutherford the wonderful member for Bay of Plenty the second-best electorate in the country—and I wanted to ask the member Stuart Smith if he was aware of what a vegetable wine is—what an example is of a vegetable wine. As someone who has never I don't think drunk a vegetable wine in my life I would just like a couple of examples that the member as an experienced connoisseur of all things wine may have come across in his life. Of course it's actually somewhat ironic that I speak on a bill which is looking at the alcohol restrictions as someone who doesn't actually drink. Coming up in July it will have been about four years since I last drank wine or beer or any kind of alcohol. But in saying that I do support those who are working in this sector and working in this industry to make common-sense changes.If I can distil what the bill is actually about at the end of the day it is to make a very simple straightforward practical change so that the law then reflects what happens in practice. Obviously what happens at cellar doors and vineyards is that we have a lot of instances where people are essentially as a member opposite mentioned buying flights of wine and paying for an experience and not paying for the particular sample and that's generally how it's done. Then they go into the off-licence part of the vineyard where they can sell bottles of wine and they can purchase bottles of wine. But of course at the moment they cannot provide samples in the part of the premises which sells the bottles of wine—or they can actually provide samples; they cannot charge to recover the cost of those samples. So all it does is it makes a pretty simple straightforward change to allow a tiny bit of cost recovery in a time where there is a lot of pressure on cost of living. So I wanted to put that on the table straight away when we're talking about the definition of "winery" and "winery cellar door". I think the submissions in the select committee were well made. I think when you're talking about—there's an amendment from Helen White the member for Mt Albert as well—trying to require the retail premises to be on the same land as I think the produce is harvested well that creates a couple of issues. One of which may be that the premises might be on the other side of the road or on a slightly different title. It could be incredibly close to the cellar door but on a different bit of land. Or you could go the other way; you could say "Well the South Island—Te Wai Pounamu—is one piece of land so under the definition of the bill you could have a cellar door in Bluff and a vineyard up in Marlborough and the retail premises would be strictly under this definition on the same piece of land."So I wondered if the member wanted to elaborate on those two particular amendments while we're still discussing issues around the definition of "celery" and "winery celery door".Hon Member: Winery celery door?JAMES MEAGER: But just in general I just wanted to thank the contributions of all—winery celery door—sorry; winery cellar door! Maybe that's the vegetable wine we're all looking for. Maybe at the end of the night we all want a zero percent beautifully crisp celery wine to enjoy at the end of the night.But I'll ask the member if he can address some of those points and then I'd love to move on the next two three four five clauses of the bill over the remainder of the night.STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura): I have to sadly inform the member that I have never tried a vegetable wine. Given the "celery" definition I'm unlikely to. I will put my body on the line for some things but that wouldn't be one of them! But no I think the definition of where a winery could and should be is adequately covered in the bill. I think I've covered that already so I don't need to go any further."