SpeechANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour) (remote): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a great pleasure to be here. It's the first time I've had the opportunity to speak in the House this year so it feels a little odd to be doing so from Pāpāmoa—and I just would like to acknowledge that is the electorate of my colleague and friend Todd Muller and so it's a real pleasure to be here with you today Todd from home recognising that this is the third reading of the Sunscreen (Product Safety Standard) Bill. So first and foremost congratulations Todd; today was a day here back in the electorate where we needed sunscreen. And I would just like to make comment to the member Matt Doocey—I will not I repeat I will not be thinking about Todd Muller as I put my sunscreen on my body. But thank you for that enduring image.So as I say I'd like to congratulate you Todd Muller for bringing this bill and for what I understand to have been a very collegial process through the select committee. I'm not a member of the Health Committee and I've only had the opportunity to speak on this bill one time previously so I haven't had the opportunity to hear from the submitters. I understand that there was not one single submitter of the 36 who was against the bill but some made some useful suggestions to make changes. I also understand that there was oral evidence given by seven submitters. So I think while not a huge number I think probably those who did inform the select committee were entirely on point and very much able to speak directly into this bill. I would like to acknowledge the Health Committee and my colleague and friend Liz Craig who is the chairperson who unfortunately doesn't get an opportunity to speak on this bill tonight but is here with us. I would like to acknowledge Liz because of the extreme amount of work that the Health Committee has undertaken in this last term of Parliament—it is an incredibly busy time for you as a select committee. I'd like to acknowledge also the Minister the Hon David Clark for the work that he did including the work that he did in regards to working alongside Todd Muller around the Supplementary Order Paper and agreeing to that and working for a clear and clever workaround to something that unfortunately in the initial reading we hadn't picked up as not applying to Australia and New Zealand. So with that having said that I also wanted to acknowledge some of the previous speakers that I've heard today some of you have given me some opportunity to learn some more and I have paid attention to the debates throughout each of the readings—just a personal interest of mine. One of the things that people have talked about is the incidence or amount of melanoma and sun damage that we have in this country. I live at the beach; I grew up surfing; I spent many many years in the sun. Yes I was that person who had sun protection factor (SPF) 2 tropicana oil" which got me nice and tanned and as a consequence at age 50—much like my colleague Todd Muller and many of us here—I've had bits of me cut out. I'd just like to acknowledge the skin clinic Skinspots—they do a great job to keep me safe and to remove what needs to be removed at the time that it does.So this bill is an important little piece of legislation in that who knew who understood that when you went to the supermarket or the chemist and you picked up your SPF 50 and you religiously put it on your body—and you didn't think of Todd Muller at the time that you did it—that in fact it's not necessarily going to do what it says on the label? Who would have thought that we would have had a voluntary option as to whether we complied whereas Australia has a mandatory system? Who would have realised that? And I think it's really useful that the member has drawn this to our attention. And I'd just like to acknowledge Ginny Andersen and her statement we do support bills that have good value and lots and lots of use and this is one of those bills.It is universally agreed in this country that we need to ensure that we are protected from our sun. In this country we have the highest rate of melanoma in the world. In fact we have a very high death rate as well for melanoma in this country. So as a consequence when we discover that five out of 10 sunscreens weren't doing what they were supposed to be doing with Consumer NZ looking to and doing a study then it's actually quite shocking. I think about my children and how I slather them up with sunblock thinking that I was doing the right thing. And of course I was doing the right thing but perhaps the product itself wasn't doing what it said it was going to do. So I would just recognise and acknowledge that that research and those findings have perhaps fed into and led into Todd Muller's bill—and useful very useful to do so. I'd also like to without going into who failed and who passed acknowledge and recognise that—go google that information because it is actually really important that you get it right.So coming now to the bill I am really particularly interested in the stock-in-trade provisions of this bill. So it shows to me—and I am an outsider only looking at the legislation and reading the reports on it—how thoughtful the submitters have been. It also shows how the officials have given such good and sound advice on this matter. So some of the submitters talked about stock and trade. So essentially we all know and recognise that stock is sitting on the shelves in supermarkets or chemists etc. So that stock is sitting there and then that stock is essentially sitting and existing under the existing standards that we have which is a voluntary standard and may not meet the standards that we would prefer i.e. not necessarily do what it should do. And so it was felt that there needed to be a period of time in order for that stock to be used or that stock to be moved off shelf. As a consequence in direct feedback—direct feedback—from submitters that this was put in place. So members have spoken about this. Once the bill is signed there's a six-month period and then there's another 12 months while the stock is removed off the shelves. I think that it's important it's practical but like I say do go back—for those of you listening—and have a look at whether in fact what's sitting on the shelves is something that you would be happy to purchase.I am nearly at time but I do want to just acknowledge once again that this is a good bill. It is a practical bill. We have the therapeutic products bill coming so this will do in the interim. I commend this bill to the House."