(1)       The Penola Wine Region.

The initial concept and creation of the Penola Wine Region by the Australian Wine and Brandy (AWBC) Geographical Indications Committee (GIC) and the present declaration by the GIC to delete and dispose of the Penola Wine Region in the conduct of the process of the application of geographical indications (GI) for wine regions in the Penola Coonawarra community

This is not about the Coonawarra Region process.

 

It is about the Penola Wine Region and its creation in the corrupted Coonawarra process.

 

Very few people are aware of the existence of the Penola Wine Region.  (Penola Data)

 

Or the Penola wine region’s relationship with the Coonawarra wine region.

 

To see a map of the Penola Wine Region click on     ( Penola Wine Region Map )

 

Keep it on hand.

 

Even though the interim determination for the Penola Wine Region was made by the GIC 7 years ago, it is the only map of the Interim Penola Wine Region we know exists.

 

Note the Penola region’s relationship with the Coonawarra region.

 

It depicts what is now happening to the Penola region and Penola grape growers in it.

The Penola Community is being shafted by the Australian Wine Industry Establishment.

 

* Please note - regarding the CD files and documentation relating to the conduct of the GI process in the Penola Coonawarra community accumulated over the period from  1990 to 2007.

 

 

 

The enclosed CD contains files and documentation relating to the conduct of the process of the application of geographical indications for both the Penola Wine region and the Coonawarra wine region in the one ‘Penola’ community. ( Penola Wine Region Map )

 

The files depict roles played and actions taken by industry representatives, elected, nominated or appointed in this Legislated Industry Process conducted under the corporate governance of the Australian wine industry and the AWBC’s GIC.

 

The word ‘corruption’ is used in these files in the context of the abuse of the process, the failure to apply the law and regulations of the Australian Wine and Brandy Act by the Geographical Indications Committee, and the resulting manner in which the Conduct of the Process has impacted on the Penola/Coonawarra community.

 

The files on the CD have been accumulated over 17 years of the interlinked Coonawarra and Penola processes.

 

The information in the files is considerable.

 

It is only a part of what is available and in the public arena.

 

Most of the files on the CD can be read as (links) on the following pages.

 

 

(2)          The Conduct of the Process of the Penola Region

 

·         The unilateral creation of the Penola Wine Region by the GIC  9^th May 2000        

·         The Coonawarra establishment’s role in the creation and the deletion of the Penola region.

·         The GIC’s  declaration on the 26^th November 2006 to now delete and dispose of the Penola Wine Region.

·         The resulting impact on CPWIA members and their families.

 

 

The Coonawarra/Penola Wine Industries Association (CPWIA) grape growers did not ask the GIC for a Penola wine region.            (5A)       (5b)

 

At the 2 Feb 1999 meeting in Coonawarra the GIC suggested that they form a group and send in an application for a Coonawarra region.  (2a)      (3143)

 

The CPWIA was formed and applied to the GIC in June 1999 for an ‘inclusive’ Coonawarra Region.  (1a)                 (1b)                 (Penola Wine Region Map)

 

The GIC ‘unilaterally’ changed it to an Interim Determination for the Penola Wine Region on 10^th May 2000.  ( GIC 9 May 2000)    Page 9, 10, 11.

 

The Penola region was in effect a ‘basket’ to dump Penola grape growers that the ‘establishment’ didn’t want and remove them from further consideration in the Coonawarra regional process.   (Lee Castine Statement AAT)    Para 14  &  11/11/1999

 

The Penola region was created by the GIC at the same time as and during the same process that the Coonawarra region was declared.    ( GIC 9 May 2000 )    

 

The GIC got the Coonawarra process wrong.  (Federal Court Ruling)         

 

Then the AAT got it wrong as well.           (Federal Court Ruling)   Page 31.

 

The outcome of the Coonawarra region process was ‘affected’ by misconstructions of regulations’ by the GIC and ‘errors in law’ in the AAT.  ( Federal Court Ruling)

 

*  The Penola region was declared by the GIC during this ‘corrupted’ process - with the apparent approval of the Coonawarra associations.          (Minutes 11/11/1999)

 

*  Now the GIC plans to delete and dispose of the Penola region - on the basis of objections from the Coonawarra associations and with the pedantic application of the Act from a line of convenience drawn in the sand somewhere after the Federal Court Ruling on Coonawarra..  (14a)          (25)

 

The conduct of the Coonawarra process has been reviewed by just about everyone.

 

The conduct of the process of the Penola wine region has been examined by no-one.

 

The Australian Wine Industry Establishment doesn’t want to know about Penola.

 

They have been asked to address and correct the situation. ( File 15a) Page 5

 

The Australian Wine Establishment referred us back to the GIC. ( File 3145 ) 

 

The GIC got Coonawarra wrong.  (Federal Court Ruling)

 

The GIC is largely responsible for the Penola mess.

 

We believe that the GIC is a part of the problem.

 

We don’t believe the GIC is able to provide the solution… without a push.  ( File  13f )

 

After the AAT’s ‘errors in law’ in the Coonawarra review  (Federal Court Ruling) CPWIA members don’t have much faith in their ability to correct the mess either.

 

*    This is now academic as the GIC made the decision to make NO DECISION for the final Penola and because NO DECISION was made, the affected Penola grape growers and winemakers are left with NO RIGHT OF APPEAL to the AAT under the AWBC Act as it now stands.

 

Cute one?

 

The Federal Minister has been asked to address the situation.   ( File  1AA )  Page 8+

 

The Federal Minister advised the CPWIA to contact the Australian Commonwealth Ombudsman who investigates complaints against Federal committees such as the GIC.

 

The CPWIA have lodged a complaint with the Ombudsman regarding the GIC’s actions in the Penola Region Process.   (3141)

 

The corruption of the conduct of the process of the Coonawarra region has been partially exposed to the world.

 

It needs to be fully exposed.

 

The role, motives and actions of the GIC and the Australian (Coonawarra) Wine Establishment in firstly conceiving and creating the Penola Wine Region during the corrupted Coonawarra process needs to be openly examined.  ( File  3143 )   ( File  6a ) 

 

The role, motives and actions of the GIC and the Australian (Coonawarra) Wine Establishment in now aborting and disposing of the Penola Wine Region also needs to be openly examined.     ( File  14a )     (25)

 

CPWIA members lost the use of the name Coonawarra at the end of a corrupted Legislated Industry ‘Coonawarra’ GI process.

 

The CVA, CGGA and the AWBC GIC have now taken the name ‘Penola’ from us as well in the ‘Pedantic Penola’ stage of the GI process.

 

The CPWIA ‘Penola’ growers will fight this callous division of the Penola Community by the CVA, CGGA and the AWBC GIC.

 

The CPWIA ‘Penola’ grape growers and their families will fight to remain a part of the Penola community.

 

We have no where else to go.

 

This is where we live.

 

 

(3)          Summary of:

 

• The Original Intent of the Act,
• Exclusionary tactics of the Coonawarra ‘establishment’,
• Resulting consequences to CPWIA members,
• Request to Federal Minister for review of corrupted conduct of the process of the application of GI’s for Wine in the Penola/ Coonawarra community.

The initial compilation and reading of the Act in Parliament, the Act itself and all commentary was that the process of the application of GI’s for wine Regions in Australia was to be inclusive.  ( File 15ba)

 

In the Penola/Coonawarra community this has not happened.

 

The politics of exclusion by the Australian Wine Establishment prevailed in the Coonawarra region process.

 

The politics of exclusion by the Australian Wine Establishment continues in the Penola region process.

 

At a ‘Joint’ industry meeting in Penola on the 26^th November 2006 the Coonawarra Vignerons Association (CVA) and Coonawarra Grape Growers Association (CGGA) confirmed their objection to the CPWIA continuing to use of the name ‘Penola’ as it had been applied to the Interim Determination for Penola.   ( File 14a )

 

At the same meeting, the GIC then declared it’s intention to now unilaterally strip the name ‘Penola’ from the ‘Penola’ Wine Region, unilaterally create a ‘new region’ to the ‘west of Coonawarra’ and without any further consultation with the CPWIA give it a ‘new name’ that they (the GIC alone) think appropriate.  ( File  14a )

 

On the 22^nd August 2007 the GIC declared that it had decided “not to proceed with the making of a final determination of the Penola interim determination”

 

This has created a situation where having lost the right to associate with Coonawarra at the end of the ‘corrupted’ Coonawarra stage of the process it is now illegal for grape grower and winemaking families in the balance of the Coonawarra /Penola community, excluded from the ‘corrupted Coonawarra’ region, to relate to, or associate with, the Penola community in any way when selling their grapes or marketing their wine at the end of the ‘pedantically correct’ conduct of the Penola stage of the process.

 

*These families have now been legislated into the status of outcasts in their own community where they and their families have lived and been a part of for 60, 80 and up to 150 years with no right of appeal under the AWBC Act.

 

They now, at the end of a corrupted Legislated Industry Process, have imposed on them by law, the status of second class citizens in their own community.

 

This is wrong. It is outside of the intent of the AWBC Act.

 

• It was not, and is not the intention of the legislation that the AWBC Act be applied or be allowed to be applied by elected or nominated industry representatives at local, regional, state and national levels in such a manner as to separate, isolate and disenfranchise fellow grape growers as is happening in the Penola/Coonawarra community.

 

• It was not, and is not the intention of the Act that the GI application process be conducted or allowed to be conducted in such a manner as to lead to absolute and total personal, industry and community isolation that some grape growers, wine makers and their families in the Penola/Coonawarra community are presently threatened with.

 

• It was not, and is not the intention of the Act that grape growers who’s families have been a part of communities such as the Penola/Coonawarra community for 60, 80 and 100+ years should be forced into the legal system to justify their right to continue to freely and openly and legally relate to, be a part of, and associate with their community.

 

 

The CPWIA has asked the Federal Minister of Agriculture to address and correct the situation before the results of this corrupted Legislated Industry Process are fully cemented in law.     ( File 1AA  )  Page 10 & 11

 

The CPWIA has asked the Federal Minister to review the relevant sections of the Act under which families in the Penola/Coonawarra community are being stripped of their rights and take the necessary action to change the Act to prevent  this from happening in the future to families in other Australian communities. 

 ( File 1AA ) Page 10 & 11

 

*   The CPWIA propose to the Federal Minister that the Act should be amended to disband the GIC as it is currently structured and introduce legislation to replace it with a committee of qualified professionals appointed by the Minister and independent of the Australian Wine Industry.

 

(4)             Correspondence between the CPWIA and:       

 

·         The GIC re objections to ‘Penola’   from the Coonawarra ‘establishment’ – CVA and CGGA

·         The Australian Wine Industry – notification of problems and request for assistance.

·         The Federal Minister re: (1) corruption of the conduct of the processes of the Penola Wine Region and the Coonawarra Wine Region and   (2) requesting the Minister’s assistance in correcting the effects of the impact of the corrupted process.

 

Suggested order of reading.

File:         10                    18^th May 2004 - GIC to CPWIA:

• Advising of CVA objection to CPWIA use the name Penola as a GI for wine.
• Advising of Rymill objection to use of Penola by CPWIA.
• Alternative names.

 

File:         29A     14^th December 2004- CPWIA reply to GIC re:

• Rymill objection to CPWIA use of the name Penola as a GI based on 1995 trade mark.
• Prior use of the name Penola as a GI on labels by St Mary’s Wines since 1992.
• Coonawarra association’s objection to CPWIA use of the name Penola
• ‘Alternate’ names.

 

File:         15a     16^th February 2005 – Letter from St Mary’s Wines to Mr Sam Tolley.

·         Notifying him of lack of representation in the GI process at the local level.

·         Advice given to local Industry Representatives in May and June 1993.

·         Closing of doors by ‘Coonawarra’ groups at the local level– August 1993

·         Control and use of local industry body by Coonawarra groups in Coonawarra Process to exclude ‘Penola’ growers from input into GI process.

·         Attempts by those ‘shut out’ to gain some ‘real’ input into the process.

·         Formation of CPWIA

·         Further attempts by CPWIA to have input into process.

·         Requests to industry for assistance in opening up the conduct of the process.

 

File         3144               Trade Mark Objection Notice 18 May 2005.

·         Rymill objection to CPWIA use of the name Penola as a GI lodged with IP Australia posted 18^th May 2005. Rymill Trade Mark Objection ( No: 2) lodged after passage of US Free Trade Bill in January 2005.

·         Objection withdrawn by Rymill 21^st November 2005 after notified of St Mary’s use of Penola as a GI since 1992, prior to Rymill’s 1995 registration of trademark.

File:         1AA The Hon PETER McGAURAN MP  1^st March 2007 - Letter from

The CPWIA to the Federal Minister.

• Informing him of the extraordinary situation in the Penola community. Page 1
• Corruption of the Conduct of the Process.   Page 2 & 3
• Difficulties in communications with the GIC.   Page 4.
• Examples.   Page 4 & 5.
• Collapse of local ‘Joint’ discussions re Penola GI  – 26^th October 2006. Page 6
• Declaration of intent by GIC to abort Penola GI.  Page 6
• Impact of GIC declaration on Penola families.  Page 6
• ‘Intent’ of Act.  Page 7
• Query GIC’s actions and motives in the conception, creation and now aborting disposing of ‘Penola.’  Page 7.
• Query CVA and CGGA associations’ motives in objecting to Penola Region.. Page 8
• Notifying Minister of CPWIA intent to approach ACCC re actions of Elected Industry Representatives in Conduct of Process.  Page 8 & 9.
• Request of Minister for review of the Corruption of the Conduct of the process of the Application of Geographical Indications for Wine in the Penola Coonawarra Community.  Page 9 & 10 & 11.

(5)  * Independent overview and comment on the conduct of the process and outcome.

Folder:       10     Paper by Gary Edmond titled:-      

‘Disorder with Law’: Determining the geographical indication for the Coonawarra wine region.’

 

We point to:

1.            Federal Court ruling that the GIC and AAT misconstrued the AWBC Act and regulations in the Coonawarra region process.     (Pages 41 – 45)

2.            Federal Court – ‘highly critical of the AAT decision’  (Page 41)

3.            The Federal Court found that the AAT ‘fell into error of law in it’s construction of regulations 24 and 25.’      (Page 44)

4.            Federal Court – implied - Riddoch Estate, Koppamurra and St Mary’s might also have held ‘overwhelming countervailing reasons’ for inclusion into Coonawarra. (Page 44)

5.            The inability or unwillingness of the parties involved at the Federal Court level to allow the Federal Court rulings to benefit the other parties that were co-appellants in the AAT.   Pages 44 and 45)

6.             ‘Successful tactical maneuver’ by the Coonawarra Associations. Control of the conduct of the process of the application of wine regions at the Penola community level.     (Page 46)

7.            The ‘lack of independence’ of the GIC from the Australian wine industry establishment.     ( Pages 48, 49, 50 and 54)

8.            Consensus regulation.    ( Pages 58, 67, 68, 69)

9.            Prejudice       ( Page 46 & 68)

10.         Institutional Conservatism.   (Page 44)

11.         A legal failure.    (Page  45 & 69)

12.         The final Coonawarra Region Boundary:-    unprincipled, irrational and consequently unfair   (Page 45)

13.         The final Coonawarra Region Boundary:-    devoid of statuary integrity    (Page 66)

(6)       Two of the most significant files on the CD regarding the GIC and the ‘Penola’ region:

* Files:      8a & 8b    ( December 2003 meeting CPWIA and GIC)

The entry in the CPWIA diary at this meeting records the sentiments of the newly appointed members of the GIC (the ‘old’ members that held office during the Coonawarra process and the unilateral GIC creation of the Penola region having stepped down) at the meeting that we - CPWIA members - had been ‘shafted’ in the Coonawarra process, that the name Penola was available to use and that our members should be ‘positive’ in using the name Penola - ASAP.

*  File:      14a     (27 November 2006 - Letter from CPWIA to GIC )

The question arises as to what happened between the 3rd December 2003 and the ‘Joint’ meeting of the 26^th November 2006 to change the attitude of the new members of the   GIC to the point that they now declared their intention to (unilaterally) strip us of the use of the name Penola and delete and dispose of the Penola  Wine Region.

A direct answer to this question could clear the way to resolving the regional mess in Penola.

(7)        The situation as of 30^th June 2007.

• The CPWIA has asked the Federal Minister to address the AWBC Act under which corruption of the conduct of the process has occurred in the establishment of GI’s for wine in the Penola community.
• The CPWIA lodged a complaint with the Commonwealth Ombudsman regarding the GIC’s actions in the conduct of the process of the application of GI’s for wine in the Penola community.
• The CPWIA is presenting documentation relating to the actions of elected industry representatives in the conduct of the Coonawarra and Penola processes to the Australian Competition and Consumers Commission for review of compliance with the Act.

A solution : 

Looking at the mess that was created by the establishment and the attempts by the establishment to get rid of Penola and cover up the ‘Penola embarrassment’, there is only one fair, just and valid course of action from here.

Delete both the existing ‘corrupted Coonawarra’ region and what is left of the Interim Penola region and start again.

We have been informed by the WFA that it can be done and that the legislation is now in place- as of January 2005- in the AWBC Act to fix the mess.          ( File   13f )

All that is needed is for the Australian Wine Industry to have the integrity to take the step.

Or be pushed.

Most Recent Correspondence:

21 Aug 2007:                        GIC Press release – abortion of  ‘Penola’ region           (File 3146)

                                    GIC letter to CPWIA – abortion of ‘Penola’ region         (File3147)

21 Aug 2007:            CPWIA reply to GIC                                                 (File3148)

10 September 2007:            CPWIA letter to Australian Wine Industry.                      (File3149)  

For any queries or comment please contact the following.

Barry Mulligan.

Secretary

PO Box 14. Penola. SA. 5277

Coonawarra/Penola Wine Industries Association.

PENOLA WINE REGION ABORTED
By the Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation Geographical Indications Committee 22 August 2007