Salesa JennyBUILDING (POOLS) AMENDMENT BILLThird ReadingDebate resumed from 18 October.JENNY SALESA (Labour—Manukau East): Thank you for this opportunity to speak on the Building (Pools) Amendment Bill. This legislation was designed to reduce the compliance burden currently imposed on pool owners and territorial authorities in relation to residential pools while maintaining child safety. We are surrounded by water here in Aotearoa New Zealand. However unfortunately our rate of drowning is one of the highest in the developed world. One of the things that we try to do as parents is teach our young children to be able to learn how to swim. For many of us in this House who are parents we can afford swimming lessons but many other parents especially those who are from lower-income families cannot afford swimming lessons. Many of their children attend schools that no longer have swimming pools at the schools. We now have NGOs that donate swimming togs because many of our kids do not even have swimming togs. It is no wonder when parents cannot afford to pay for swimming lessons and when their children cannot learn how to swim at schools that we have so many of our children in Aotearoa New Zealand who cannot swim. It is crucial I believe that we as members of this House do as much as possible to protect our children from the dangers of drowning. When this bill had its first reading we on this side of the House found it somewhat disappointing to see that the Government made some of its proposals to amend the relevant law focus largely on cost savings rather than on the prevention of harm and injury for our kids. At the first reading Labour actually supported this bill's referral to a select committee in good faith because when we read the regulatory impact statement we were told that the bill would save more lives than the current pool fencing legislation. However having read some of the submissions that were given to the Local Government and Environment Committee we know now that for instance the Paediatric Society of New Zealand which submitted said that the only thing that would improve our record on pool drownings would be compliance—actual compliance with the pool fencing statute. Water Safety New Zealand supported the society in its submission. The vast majority of the 19 or so preschool children who unfortunately died in home pools in the last 10 years passed away because of non-compliant fencing gates or doors. The number of children suffering serious or permanent injury due to near-death drownings in non-compliant pools is unfortunately so much higher. One of the biggest changes however that was made to this bill at the select committee was a recommendation—which the Labour Party had argued for strongly and can I say that we really appreciate that this is actually now part of the current legislation—that councils be required to inspect on a 3-yearly cycle instead of on a 5-yearly cycle. We had pushed hard for this and we are glad to see it supported in the current bill. Our parliamentary process has been robust and it has enabled the general public to have some impact on this current bill. For instance changes made after the select committee stage include that the purpose of the bill is now more broad. It included the prevention of drowning before but it now includes the prevention of injury. Second it provides that information should be provided to buyers regarding spa pools and other small pools. Third it also includes that information be provided to councils about spa pools. Last it includes rules for distinguishing between 760-millimetre walls and locked lids. However one of the main reasons why we do not support the current bill is the fact that it is proposing that alarms are adequate instead of having a door or a fence to ensure that our kids do not drown. The Fencing and Swimming Pools Act of 1987 was designed for the safety of our young children and we believe that having a fence or physical door is the right way to go. Labour does not support this bill. Thank you very much.