Parliamentary Wine Injustice

The Parliamentary Service is doing a huge injustice to the New Zealand wine industry with its latest procurement strategy for wine. They say they want to select “some of the country’s finest wines”, to pair with the best of New Zealand cuisine served at Parliament, their restaurant Bellamys, at the Pickwicks bar, exclusively at all functions and events and to be available through the Parliament Gift Shop. ?And they want visiting foreign dignitaries to be gifted bottles to take home with them and for MPs to use as gifts when travelling on business. With some 80,000 people visiting Parliament every year, Parliamentary services says it’s a “unique opportunity to elevate New Zealand’s wine industry and individual wineries to an international audience”.

Sounds great! ?But here’s the catch: what they’re really doing is creating their own brand - which by the way, they haven’t quite decided upon as yet. However, it hasn’t stopped them producing lengthy documents and convoluted processes based on half-baked ideas of how this ‘pick and pack’ process might work.

Of course they’ve done the fun stuff, like creating their own wine label (a draft format currently) which proudly has the House of Representatives insignia, “Parliamentary Wines” clearly designated at the top, Maori motifs, a line drawing of the buildings at Parliament, and then the wine variety in a large font. At the bottom of the label, there is an indication that in perhaps an 8 point size plain font, there will be an acknowledgment of the wine brand contained within!

In wine industry terms, this is known as a ‘Buyer’s own brand’ and to be honest, it’s not something that too many in the wine industry like, and across our 700 wineries, it’s not something that too many would be involved in. The fact is ‘buyer’s own brands’ are a reality of the industry and generally part of the volume wine sector. There are plenty of supermarkets especially in our overseas markets that buy bulk New Zealand wine and put it under their various home brands. But it’s hardly a strategy “to showcase the best of New Zealand wine”, which is what the New Zealand Parliament’s catering service, has set out to do.

On further investigation of the guidelines that the Parliamentary Service has issued regarding varieties, they state they’re seeking a popular varieties for white and red wines as well as a secondary wine which would be “a less common varietal such as Chenin Blanc or a Zinfandel.”

Just to put this in some context, in terms of white wines, outside of our top three most planted white varieties, Sauvignon Blanc, Chardonnay and Pinot Gris respectively, there are seven other varieties that we produce more of than the 18 hectares of Chenin Blanc that are grown nationally, according to our National Vineyard register. ?

In terms of the red wines, after Pinot Noir, our most planted red grape, there are some 17 red varieties that we produce more of than the 2 hectares of Zinfandel – a variety that is actually more commonly known as Primitivo with Zinfandel being the name it’s more commonly known by in the USA. And in fact, in the US, in fact, it’s predominantly made into a semi-sweet rosé known as ‘white zinfandel’, rather than a red wine! Anyway, good luck to Parliamentary Services in finding those couple of small blocks of Zinfandel we have in the country. ??

As well as red and white wines, they have stated they don’t want rosé – one of the fastest growing wine styles in New Zealand, but instead they want ‘port’! ?(By the way, I wonder if any of the Parliamentary Services wine procurement team have actually walked into a wine shop or glanced at the wine shelves at the supermarket and seen the sheer number of excellent rosés we produce in New Zealand. One would assume the number of brands offered would be an indication of the popularity of the style?). Anyway, back to port, and whilst acknowledging there are port-style fortified wines produced outside of Portugal, the fact is under the European Union Protected Designation of Origin guidelines, only wines from Portugal should be called “port”.

If the Parliamentary Service really wanted to showcase some of New Zealand’s finest wines, they would have chosen one of our late harvest dessert wine styles, for which we’ve earned quite a reputation. And they’re produced with different varieties and across our various wine regions. Why would Parliament of all places choose to source a politically incorrect name of a fortified wine made in a style New Zealand isn’t known for anyway?

These examples show how ludicrous this sourcing strategy is and indicates the team at Parliament Services has an utter lack of understanding about wine but more importantly a complete lack of respect for the world class wines and wine brands on which the New Zealand industry is built. An industry which, by the way, has grown to be the 5th biggest export earner for our country.

I look at organisations like Air New Zealand who run an excellent procurement process to select some of New Zealand’s finest wines, that they really do showcase on Business Premier and in their premium lounge. They select and serve the wines in the brand’s own livery which is the way it should be! It’s an honour to have one’s wine selected by Air New Zealand to be served to our international visitors as well as domestic travellers. What a shame the Parliamentary Service didn’t consult with the New Zealand wine industry or other organisations who select and showcase New Zealand wines and perhaps learn a thing or two before embarking on this bumbling attempt to procure wines.

_ ends -

“Applications have closed for this opportunity” says the government website. ?

More info on Parliament Wine here ?https://www.parliament.nz/en/visit-and-learn/visit/parliament-wine/#msdynmkt_trackingcontext=a79d80ad-9d43-43c7-be5e-8282e3442a87