Wall Louisa: Health (Protection) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWall Louisa: Health (Protection) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 11 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:11041. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]LOUISA WALL (Labour—Manurewa): Just to finish my contribution I want to say that this bill is called the Health (Protection) Amendment Bill and that word “protection” is really interesting. When you look at the definition if you google it online it says “the act of protecting or the state of being protected”. So in Part 2 we are saying that only people under the age of 18 deserve to be protected by the State. If you are over 18 then you get no protection. You are on your own it is up to you and you make a choice and I just find that not to be a philosophical debate. It is actually one that is based not on evidence and not on what makes sense but obviously on a philosophical perspective that those members on the other side of the Chamber just cannot see past. They cannot see past that philosophy and cannot be guided by clinicians and other people who are incredibly passionate about this particular issue.I have had a quick look just for people’s interest and in Australia the campaign to ban sunbeds actually started in 2007. It was started by a young woman called Clare Oliver who was diagnosed with melanoma. She died at the age of 26. She had melanoma for 4 years so essentially during the last 4 years of her life she campaigned to ban sunbeds. It was picked up by agencies—the Cancer Society and the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre. A really interesting fact is that the Federal Government health Minister at the time was Tony Abbott. His contribution at the time was that we needed to regulate and there are no finer regulations across Australia. Actually Western Australia was the last state to ban sunbeds. That came into effect on 1 January 2016.We can make law when we have leaders who are passionate about issues. It seems to me that we have no leadership on this issue on the other side of the House. We have people who have had melanoma who through the Cancer Society have advocated—in fact the Palmerston North City Council changed its law because one of its young women constituents got cancer. People who have power get moved by real stories real lives; it just seems that here in New Zealand this Government is not moved. It is not moved by the—and I will repeat it—354 New Zealanders who have died from melanoma each year. It is not moved by the over 2300 New Zealanders who are diagnosed with melanoma each year. It just makes no sense to me and I think makes no sense to us on this side of the House that the Government would not act to ban sunbeds. Kia ora.The question was put that the following amendments in the name of Ria Bond to the proposed amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 80 in the name of the Hon Annette King to Part 2 be agreed to:to insert in new Part 5 new section 113 “UV nail lamps” after “sunbeds”; andin new section 114:insert “UV nails” after the word “tanning” and before the word “services” in the heading;insert in subsection (1) “or artificial nail services using UV” after “tanning services”; andinsert in subsection (2) “or artificial UV nail services” after “tanning services”.