SpeechSUNSCREEN (PRODUCT SAFETY STANDARD) BILLThird ReadingTODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty): I move That the Sunscreen (Product Safety Standard) Bill be now read a third time.If I may just before I begin because it's quite an unusual time to be about to start a final reading of a member's bill when we've got the extraordinary scenes outside. I just want to make a short acknowledgment in particular of the police efforts. And there are a number who have come down from the Bay of Plenty. I actually met them in the last 48 hours and I just want to pass on to them my personal thanks and I'm sure the thanks of the Bay of Plenty community for their service this afternoon.This bill is really personal for me. When I was a young fella we used to go to the Mount Maunganui beach for the summer holidays. We'd take 45 minutes to drive from Te Puna across to the Mount and I would spend most of that week enjoying myself playing cricket and swimming in the Mount beach. And really I can recall like yesterday actually the sunscreen that we used: it was Coppertone sun protection factor (SPF) 4 possibly even Coppertone SPF 6 if we were really wanting to protect ourselves. You know there was the coconut oil option but my father always used to seek refuge from the sun under a beach umbrella. He was a redhead which is why when I married a beautiful red-headed lady we have two red-headed daughters—actually it's because of my dad. But anyway he avoided the sun quite a lot but it still managed to chase him through his life. He had a melanoma cut out from him. So I can always remember him hiding under the shade of the umbrella and me being less worried about the sun and if I was really up for it putting Coppertone SPF 6 on.Fast forward to when I was 18. And again I can remember this like yesterday it was the America's Cup challenge our first. It was Fremantle. We were in Taupō again a summer holiday. I had moved from about six to the age of 18 where I had decided it was time for me to get a tan. And so I laid out on the gravel of Lake Taupō seaside and managed to get second-degree burns the next day. And I am still paying for that: that lack of judgment of a young fella has seen a number of basal and squamous cells cut out of my face; in fact I've got another one planned in a few weeks' time. Skin cancer has been a front-of-mind consequence for me because of my particular skin type and some of the challenges that I had when I was younger some of the choices that I made. But I'm fully accountable for that and have to own it.But who is accountable for the very well-informed mum who goes to the supermarket or any of our chemist outlets and buys an SPF 50 on the assumption that it is an SPF 50 only to find that it's not? Who's accountable for those in our country who want even greater protection and find that the label doesn't stand up to scrutiny whether it is 30-plus 40-plus 50-plus SPF? Frankly that situation is unacceptable and this bill that we have the last reading of tonight is a small step to try and remedy that on behalf of New Zealand consumers. For it is absolutely critical in 2022 that if you need as we all do to protect ourselves from the sun that if you purchase a product that has a claim of protection that that claim can be matched by testing and actually has an efficacy that can be defended. And too often in this country we have products that are being sold that do not meet that standard.So this bill as has been well traversed in this House through a very good select committee provides a strengthening of the consumer position because what it does is it takes the joint Australian/New Zealand Sunscreen Standard which is voluntary in this country but compulsory in Australia and it lists that standard as a deemed product safety standard under the Fair Trading Act which then triggers the Fair Trading Act regime—including the Commerce Commission potential prosecution and exposure to $600000 corporate fine—if you are found to have been misleading consumers with the claims about your product not matching the reality for people who use it. It's a relatively simple bill. It seeks to strengthen the consumer experience and I've been delighted with the support that it has had as it has gone through the House. I do want to acknowledge of course my parliamentary colleagues on the National side who are very supportive of this right from the first genesis. But also across the House including obviously with the makeup of this Parliament the Labour Party who has decided to support this bill knowing of course that the ultimate solution is the natural products or therapeutic and natural products bill which is in its own gestation; in fact it has been now for successive Governments that is pending and may well—Hon Member: It's always pending.TODD MULLER: It's always pending and it may well provide a more comprehensive regulatory solution for this issue. But I do acknowledge I have heard through the grapevine that it did get quite a debate at the Labour Party caucus. It was the Celtic stock the red heads of the Labour Party that swung in behind me to ensure this bill got supported. So I call out in support—we don't do this often on this side of the House—but I do want to acknowledge Chris Hipkins who I'm sure it must have played a fundamental part in swinging that debate.Hon Member: We all supported it mate.TODD MULLER: I mean you know a man as suave as you you know with your hair I'm sure you would have supported it in here anyway. But seriously it's a bill that I have a lot of personal stake in you know pride to have actually brought it to the House for it to be supported as I understand it will be and I just want to acknowledge the House for their support.One final comment we did debate as a select committee when it should come into effect its commencement date and then some stock and trade provisions. Now we got some pushback from elements of the sector saying that there should be a three-year transition. It is only 18 months from Royal assent. Frankly I think that's quite generous. But I think in its own way signals that despite some of the sector's positioning and potentially even protestation around the need or otherwise for this bill there is an acknowledgment that frankly there still is too much in this New Zealand supply chain of product that doesn't actually meet the joint standard with Australia. There is an updated standard it's 2021 it's coming down the track. This bill enables and assumes that the Minister will make the requisite adjustments to the regulations when both Australia and New Zealand have landed agreed transitional arrangements. But it's a good first step it protects New Zealanders and I have great pride in being able to put it forward this evening. Thank you.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question is that the motion be agreed to.