PHYLLOXERA COPS: RIPPING UP RULEBOOK?

THE HENSCHKE FAMILY'S HILL OF GRACE VINEYARD; A PRIME EXAMPLE OF THE HISTORIC VINES AUSTRALIA WILL LOSE WHEN PHYLLOXERA COMES TO SOUTH AUSTRALIA - CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO VISIT PHOTOGRAPHER MILTON WORDLEY'S WEBSITE

Bug Boards Buggered In Clear Language Stakes
Conspiracy Or Confederacy Of Dunces?
by PHILIP WHITE

In May, I wrote the following story in The Independent Weekly:

As you enter the national Wine Centre from the Botanic Gardens, you’ll find signs on its big automatic glass doors saying “Be careful when entering building”.

This must be a warning about the sniffing machine inside. I pushed the cabernet button, and out squirted a stink that brought bad coffee and woodsap to mind. To counteract this, our National Wine Centre seems now to be staffed largely by shiny bright young Indians, all chatting crisply to each other by walkie-talkie. Shut your eyes, and you can be on a sort of sub-continental space shuttle.

I’d been invited to address the Wine Press Club about the 2009 vintage.

But first up was Stephen Strachan, Chief Executive of the Winemakers’ Federation of Australia. To paraphrase him, perhaps too crudely, Strachan suggested that in spite of the heatwave, the crop of 2009 was about the same size as 2008, meaning there’s still the little matter of Australia needing to cut its vineyard by twenty per cent.

Stuart McNab, Executive General Manager, Viticulture and Grape Resources, Fosters, was next. He spoke about the quality being better than many thought it would be, about Victoria’s smoke taint being nowhere near as bad as many claimed, and agreed about the tonnages, suggesting there was still the little matter of Australia needing to cut its vineyard by, well, about twenty per cent.

I agreed about the quantity and the quality, and the smoke and the heat, but said there was already a foolproof plan in place which would inevitably reduce Australia’s vineyard by at least twenty per cent. This, I explained, was the nasty little matter of the Vine Industry Nursery Assocation, the body representing the nurseries who propagate and sell vines, secretly lobbying to pull most of the sharp teeth out of the anti-phylloxera regulations so that vine material can be shipped around Australia without heat treatment. Heat treatment involves sanitising baby vines with hot water to kill phylloxera. There’s a three per cent loss incurred in this procedure, which the nurserymen would prefer to avoid.

The big grape buyers, like Fosters, Pernod-Ricard-Jacob’s Creek-Orlando, Constellation, Australian Vintage (formerly known as McGuigan) and Yellowtail, all exert huge pressure on nurseries and vignerons to grow new varieties to supply a thirsty but bored market with new flavours, which means new varieties. Relaxing the anti-phylloxera laws would facilitate much faster access to these new varieties.

There’s also the little matter of the enormous profits the vine nurserymen stand to make when phylloxera spreads, as they would then be mobbed with orders for vines grafted to phylloxera-resistant rootstock to replace the vineyards killed by the relentless phylloxera.

Wayne Farqhuar, vice chairman and member of the management committee of the Vine Industry Nursery Association, recently revealed his concerns that this relaxation of the laws would lead to the spread of phylloxera. Farquhar is a Barossa nurseryman AND an owner of an old vineyard. Old vineyards, the sorts of ancient treasures that South Australia has many of, and the rest of the world bugger all, are what makes South Australian wines special. This is what he wrote to an elite group of key players and viticulturers on May 8th:

“I would like to comment on the abysmal draft protocols put forward by Vine Industry Nursery Association as listed in the document attached (Protocols movement of vine material Phylloxera Exclusion Zone to Phylloxera Exclusion Zone). These protocols make no sense as the nurseries are required to do no treatments at all, and will completely undermine the current border security which will surely lead to Phylloxera continuing to spread throughout Australia and ultimately undermine the only marketable thing Australia has going for it that is OLD VINES.”

PRICELESS OLD VINEYARDS OF PRE-PHYLLOXERA CLONES, LIKE GREENOCK CREEK'S WORLD-FAMOUS ROENNFELDT ROAD, ABOVE, WILL BE THE FIRST TO GO WHEN PHYLLOXER CROSSES THE BORDER - photo: LEO DAVIS

On May 26th, Paul Wright, Chairman of the Vine Industry Nursery Association, advised Farquhar that he was fired, for “bringing the association into disrepute and damaging its ability to carry out its objectives”.

Prue Henschke, an ardent anti-phylloxera campaigner, told me that “when it becomes possible to move vines, from one jurisdiction to another, in the hope that the supplying nursery has kept within the law, we are at great risk of spreading this deadly pest. The whole process must be improved, and speeded up, but the regulations need also to be tighter, and there is no single existing body which can be relied upon to facilitate these seemingly contradictory changes.”

Dudley Brown, chairman of the McLaren Vale Grape Wine And Tourism Association put it more succinctly.

“It’s one thing to make a faster car”, he said. “But it’ll need better brakes.”

As I left the National Wine Centre, and its happy background chatter of Bollywood English on the walkie-talkies, I encountered more signs on the inside of those big glass doors. Yep, same message: “Be careful when entering building”. So I stepped out into that beautiful garden, very, very carefully.

In response to this publication, Paul Wright, Chairman of the Vine Industry Nursery Association wrote a letter to Daily Wine News, which was published there on 16th June 2009:

“The Vine Industry Nursery Association is an invited participant to the National Vine Health Steering Committee, an advisory body to the Federal Government on biosecurity matters. The National Phylloxera Management Protocol has been developed by National Vine Health Steering Committee to prevent the spread of phylloxera. The National Vine Health Steering Committee recognises that with the growth in viticulture-based industries across Australia there comes an increased risk of phylloxera infestation through the movement of grapevines and grapevine material or associated contaminated items. The national protocol will raise awareness of the risks and provide those in the industry with consistent guidelines for their risk prevention or management.

“Companies with interstate connections will welcome the national protocol and an end to ‘border confusion’.

“The national protocol does not replace existing State Government legislation and it is important that the relevant detail of legislative and regulatory requirement are obtained from the department of Agriculture or Primary Industries in each state, or the Phylloxera and Grape Industry Board of South Australia.

“The Technical Reference Group of the National Vine Health Steering Committee has reviewed the national protocols and has suggested some draft amendments. As part of their industry consultative process, some draft amendments relevant to vine nurseries were passed to the Vine Industry Nursery Association representative for comment by Vine Industry Nursery Association members. Issues were raised by Vine Industry Nursery Association members. On 20 May 2009 the Vine Industry Nursery Association representative reported back to the National Vine Health Steering Committee that Vine Industry Nursery Association could not endorse the draft amendments and that they should be returned to the Technical Reference Group for further review.

“Recently there has been published some editorial in e-news media, presenting this matter in an entirely different and incorrect way. The wine journalist, Philip White of Independent Weekly, was apparently misinformed. The resultant article was sensationalist, inaccurate and damaging to genuine debate on biosecurity. It is disappointing that this journalist did not verify the accuracy of what he published.

“Vine Industry Nursery Association is a responsible member of the viticulture community. Vine Industry Nursery Association would never propose a change to the phylloxera protocols that could increase the risk of a phylloxera incursion into non-infected regions.

“For further information about Vine Industry Nursery Association or phylloxera protocols, contact Paul Wright on plwright@vinewright.com.au .”

To determine the accuracy of my story, I had gone straight to the top, to Alan Nankivell, the Chief Executive Officer of the Phylloxera And Grape Industry Board Of South Australia. I asked him to supply me copies of the existing protocols and the draft of the proposed new ones. On Wednesday 13th May he responded thus:

Dear Mr White,

The current endorsed National Phylloxera Management Protocols are located at http://www.gwrdc.com.au/rtopics.asp?ID=25

Unfortunately I have no authority to release the draft protocols to you, as I am not a member of the National Vine Health Steering Committee and the National Vine Health Steering Committee are yet to discuss them.

Yours faithfully,

Alan Nankivell

Mr. Nankivell had sent me this e-mail on 13th May at 6:28PM. But at 4:54PM on the same afternoon, he’d sent the very draft protocols I’d requested to a list of concerned winemakers in McLaren Vale, who had been alerted to the proposed changes by Drew and Rae Noon. In an attached letter, Mr. Nankivell wrote the following response to these people:

Thank you for your correspondence expressing concerns about the Draft changes to the National Phylloxera Management Protocols.

As I understand it, the National Vine Health Steering Committee was requested by Vine Industry Nursery Association at its meeting held on 17th May 2007 to have the National Protocols revisited to consider the movement of material [from] Phylloxera Exclusion Zone [to] Phylloxera Exclusion Zone. According to the Vine Industry Nursery Association document circulated with the National Vine Health Steering Committee papers, dated the 2nd May 2007 “Re: Vine Industry Nursery Association Proposal to vary the movement of Vine Plant Material into NSW” where the issues for the Nursery industry were highlighted due to the changes in New South Wales’ Phylloxera Exclusion Zone status.

The National Vine Health Steering Committee requested that the National Phylloxera Technical Reference Group note the request by Vine Industry Nursery Association when it reviewed the National Protocols subsequent to the 17th May 2007 meeting. The draft protocol was put to the National Vine Health Steering Committee in November 2008 for consideration, however discussion was deferred at the request of the Vine Industry Nursery Association representative at that meeting so further discussion could take place within Vine Industry Nursery Association. It is my understanding that Vine Industry Nursery Association is seeking comment from its membership.

Discussion

When Mr Wright claimed that “Vine Industry Nursery Association is a responsible member of the viticulture community ... Vine Industry Nursery Association would never propose a change to the phylloxera protocols that could increase the risk of a phylloxera incursion into non-infected regions” he was ignoring the fact that his association had already had the New South Wales law changed, to permit transfer of vine plant material from one place to another without heat treatment. This writer has yet to discover one grapegrower or winemaker who was consulted about this new legislation.

When Mr. Farquhar blew the whistle, the Vine Industry Nursery Association was quietly working to have the same relaxation instituted to allow movement of grapevine planting material from New South Wales and Victoria into South Australia without hot water treatment. Victoria is the home of most of Australia’s Phylloxera. As I have made clear, the draft was already written.

When Mr. Wright said “Companies with interstate connections will welcome the national protocol and an end to ‘border confusion’,” he was, of course quite right, and this isn’t completely to do with the transport of cuttings and rootlings. By dramatically reducing the paperwork, the new regulations could also mean that Fosters, for example, could now more easily bring must and juice directly from, say, the Yarra Valley, which has phylloxera infected zones, to its gigantic Bilyara refinery at Nuriootpa in the Barossa for winemaking, eventually saving untold millions of dollars. Great Western; Karadoc: enormous savings could be made by closing these wineries and trucking must and juice to the Barossa.

Richard Hamilton, a senior employee of Fosters, where he answers to Stuart McNab, is chairman of the National Phylloxera Technical Reference Group. He is also chairman of the Phylloxera And Grape Industry Board of South Australia. So this Fosters man, to whom Mr. Nankivell answers, reviewed the protocols as Chairman of the National Phylloxera Technical Reference Group, as required by the National Vine Health Steering Committee in response to the Vine Industry Nursery Association’s request to have the protocols changed.

Weirdly, as chairman of the Phylloxera And Grape Industry Board of South Australia, Mr. Hamilton now says he wouldn’t admit green vine material into South Australia without hot water treatment, contradicting his own recommendation.

How could this be so? Could it be in page five of the new protocols, where it says “Movement of phylloxera risk vectors (also described as ‘hosts’ within government legislation) across state borders or between defined quarantine zones or phylloxera exclusion zones must comply with the relevant state legislation. State legislation is generally based on the National Protocol.” The italics are theirs!

Some of the fascinating legal possibilities inherent include the notion that they’re drafting regulations nationally, which due to the free trade laws between the states since federation, will eventually outweigh any South Australian legislation anyway. Fosters, for example, could easily be the first major complainant to have the state of South Australia comply to the national protocol in the name of free trade.

Thanks largely to the diligence of the Phylloxera And Grape Industry Board Of South Australia, this state remains Phylloxera-free.

Associate Professor Peter Dry, University of Adelaide, is a member of the board of Phylloxera And Grape Industry Board Of South Australia and is a member of the National Phylloxera Technical Reference Group which endorsed the proposed Vine Industry Nursery Association protocols. He is consultant to several vineyard development and management companies, and associate editor of the Winetitles’ Australian And New Zealand Wine Industry Journal, publisher of the Daily Wine News. His son Nick works at the Yalumba grapevine nursery with Robin Nettlebeck.

Sandy Hathaway, secretary of the National Phylloxera Technical Reference Group, also works for the Phylloxera And Grape Industry Board of South Australia and assisted the Vine Industry Nursery Association draft the proposed protocols.

Robin Nettelbeck is deputy Chairman of the Phylloxera And Grape Industry Board Of South Australia and runs the largest grapevine nursery in Australia for Yalumba.

Bruce Baker is government Manager of Plant Health Compliance and Surveillance at Primary Industry And Resources South Australia. He supported the proposed protocols at the National Vine Health Steering Committee. David Cartwright, Chief Inspector of Plant Standards at Primary Industry And Resources South Australia is on the board of the Phylloxera And grape Industry Board Of South Australia.

So contrary to Mr. Wright’s claim that I am “misinformed, sensationalist, inaccurate, damaging and disappointing” I suggest that I’ve done a lot of diligent investigation of this story, and that if I am in any way misled, this is solely due to the arcane and impenetrable wall of confounding acronyms and duplicatory/conflicting bodies, boards and committees which seem incapable of supplying information of any clarity, and instead rely on impenetrable acronyms, obfuscation and pettifoggery to conceal their ambitions.

This is an unfolding story. But put most simply, it seems members of the Phylloxera And Grape Industry Board Of South Australia are involved in committees that are suggesting changes to the protocols which relax the current requirements, and make green vine material movements, and the shipping of must and juice much easier. I would be very happy if this theory was wrong, and would welcome documentary evidence to prove this. But I’d like to know what due diligence has been undertaken by committee members who have been entrusted with the approval of these changes.

Have the objectives of the Phylloxera And Grape Industry Board Of South Australia changed without any levy payer knowing? Where’s the consultation?

Remember Prue Henschke’s comment in my original article?

“When it becomes possible to move vines, from one jurisdiction to another, in the hope that the supplying nursery has kept within the law, we are at great risk of spreading this deadly pest. The whole process must be improved, and speeded up, but the regulations need also to be tighter, and there is no single existing body which can be relied upon to facilitate these seemingly contradictory changes.”

And the riposte of Dudley Brown, chairman of the McLaren Vale Grape Wine And Tourism Association?

“It’s one thing to make a faster car”, he said. “But it’ll need better brakes.”

Leon Bignell, the vigilant Member for Mawson, which includes the Mclaren Vale wine region, is forming a small parliamentary committee which will meet later this week to attempt to unravel this confounding mess.

DRINKSTER eagerly anticipates the findings and recommendations of this committee.