Geographical indications are defined under the TRIPS Agreement 1994 as “indications which identify a good as originating in the territory of a Member, or a region or locality in that territory, where a given quality, reputation or other characteristic of the good is essentially attributable to its geographical origin”. Geographical indications involve a consideration of intellectual property law, international trade law, and agricultural policy. This submission will consider the intersection between these fields of regulation.

This submission is a personal response to the Agreement between Australia and the European Community on Trade in Wine 2009; and a more impersonal effort to give the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties a better appreciation of the rich, detailed, and multi-disciplinary literature, which exists in respect of the contentious issue of geographical indications, intellectual property, and international trade. In the submission, I make the following arguments:

1. The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties should consider the origin and evolution of European geographical indications – and take note of recent efforts to extend the boundaries of the ‘Champagne’ wine region.

2. The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties should scrutinise the full range of economic, social, political, and cultural justifications for the expanded protection of geographical indications.

3. It is puzzling that the Australian Government is so keen to enter into a bilateral agreement with the European Community on geographical indications, given the recent history of bitter and contentious disputation over geographical indications at a multilateral level.

4. There is a need for the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties to conduct a proper evaluation of the European Community-Australia Wine Agreement 1994, before contemplating the adoption of the much more extensive Agreement between Australia and the European Community on Trade in Wine 2009.

5. There is a need for a detailed econometric assessment of the Agreement between Australia and the European Community on Trade in Wine 2009, to evaluate impacts on Australia’s economic well-being; to identify any structural 5 or institutional adjustments that might be required by such an agreement; and to evaluate the social, regulatory, cultural and political impacts of the agreement.

6. The Australian Government should review the interaction between the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) and geographical indications.

7. The legal disputes over the boundaries of the geographical indications for Coonawarra and King Valley highlight the need for a review of the provisions of the Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation Act 1980 (Cth), and the Australian Wine and Brand Corporation Regulations 1981 (Cth), dealing with geographical indications.

8. The Australian Government should resist the expansionist agenda of the European Union to extend the protection of geographical indications to foodstuffs.

9. It is curious that the Australian Government is signing a 221-page treaty to protect French, German, Spanish and other European traditional expressions, but is yet to support the protection of the traditional knowledge of Indigenous Australians.