Williams Poto: Health (Protection) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilliams Poto: Health (Protection) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 09 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11901. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]POTO WILLIAMS (Labour—Christchurch East): I rise to take a call on this third reading of the Health (Protection) Amendment Bill. I guess I have the prime spot of the last call on a Thursday afternoon—Grant Robertson: Sought after.POTO WILLIAMS: Yes highly sought after.Even though I had the pleasure of speaking on the first reading of this bill I was not a member of the Health Committee that deliberated on the bill at the select committee stage so I do want to commend the members of the Health Committee and the officials for the passage of the bill and the amendments that were made during the course of that discussion at the select committee.The bill that returns to us really concentrates on two main areas. The first is around infectious diseases and notifiable diseases and of course the second which we have had much discussion on is with regard to sunbeds that are used for cosmetic purposes. One of the elements that I do not think has been discussed fully throughout this first reading that I want to pay particular attention to is that the bill was returned to the House with the inclusion of some key principles as part of Part 3A Subpart 1.I want to discuss some of those key principles. The first one is paramountcy. This principle ensures that the protection of public health is given paramountcy when you are dealing in matters where there are infectious or notifiable diseases at hand. So what that says is that public health interest must be the most important interest when dealing with issues of infectious and notifiable diseases.The second key principle is that of respect where in performing any duties the dignity of the individuals must be protected. Often we are talking about fairly sensitive areas and sensitive discussions and it ensures that when we are having those discussions we treat that person with the utmost dignity. There have been cases where people with certain notifiable diseases particularly if they are sexually transmitted diseases may have been treated with some disrespect.The third principle is that the individual must be given the opportunity to comply voluntarily before any compulsion is placed upon that person. I think it is really important that we give people every opportunity to comply with medical officers when the issue of public health is at risk.Individuals taking responsibility for their own health is principle No. 4 and No. 5 is that consideration is given when an individual has taken the opportunity to do what they can to minimise risk but they may still be at risk of being contagious or at risk to the public but they have done everything they can in order to minimise risk.The next principle is that the individuals be fully informed. The principle of informed consent is one that is well traversed across the health sector and it is important that in this bill it continues to be an important part of the discussion. Next is the principle of proportionality which is with regard to minimising or preventing health risk and also the principle of applying least-restrictive measures which means you ensure that you provide public health and public safety but you do it using the least restrictive measures. So for example you would not go to the extreme of ensuring somebody was quarantined if all they really needed was to ensure that if they were infectious perhaps they wore a mask and gloves.The final principle is that when measures are no longer necessary they are discontinued as soon as possible. That was part of Part 3A—that was Subpart 1. There are another two parts within that piece of legislation: Subpart 2 which looks at the directions given by and to the medical officer and Subpart 3 which was about public health orders.But in my final time I do want to refer back to the issue that has been considered quite a bit in this House in this third reading and that is the matter of sunbeds. The evidence was heard that we should have been looking at banning sunbeds altogether and I concur with my colleague the Hon Annette King. On that note I commend the bill to the House.