Brooking RachelRACHEL BROOKING (Labour): Thank you Madam Speaker for this call on the Sunscreen (Product Safety Standard) Bill. As we've heard already tonight we know that there is a problem in New Zealand with the standards for sunscreen being voluntary as opposed to our friends across the Ditch where it's compulsory.We also have heard a little bit in this House in fact just with the previous speaker Dr Elizabeth Kerekere about the consequence of sunburn or sun damage. We've heard from my colleague Jo Luxton earlier that not using sunblock perhaps made her go very red as a teenager. We've heard stories in this House tonight from the similarly named Christopher Luxon about also similar problems of being burnt. That of course is not nice—to get burnt—we all know that. But in fact New Zealand is the melanoma capital of the world. There are over 3000 cases per annum and over 300 deaths per annum. It's a huge amount of people. Melanoma can affect the young as well and it can start off as some very very small melanoma that can then result in death. I've had a friend—well my friend's brother—who as a young man with two young children died very quickly of this horrible disease. Then of course there are many other skin cancers that are not melanoma. There are estimated—because there's so many there's estimates only—to be between 70000 and 90000 people per annum treated for these other skin cancers. This is an enormous cost to both the health system and to those 70000 to 90000 people.We've heard a lot of people here talking about their relations. My grandmother had a basal cell carcinoma and that resulted in a lot of radiation treatment for her which would have been an enormous cost and burden on the health system. It was a cost for her because she did bring many boxes of chocolates to the people treating her. And more seriously it took a real toll on her health.It's also very relevant to me because I think I may be speaking on this bill because I am the whitest person in the House or close to it.Hon Member: Oh I don't know about that.RACHEL BROOKING: Oh there's some competition—I don't dye my hair!—for that title. So obviously I burn very quickly but I do—and I have to say this; and I'm nervous actually speaking on this bill because my husband is an oncologist and he does specialise in skin cancer melanomas in particular and I know that he will be watching this. And he frequently tells me off for not applying the correct amount of sunscreen that we heard about from Sarah Pallett before—it was six or so teaspoons and you've got to lather it on and in fact that you need to if you're my skin type wear it really all the time. And so of course I do. I wear not only the sunblock that is provided in our household from my husband which is the good Cancer Society brand all around the house—whenever you're near a door there's a jar of the stuff—but I also use it in my cosmetic products to make sure that I've got some on my face every day and I really don't know what the testing of that is so this bill would be very helpful for me.Now it's an interesting mechanism that this bill uses. I haven't had the privilege of being on the Health Committee but I've been looking at the bill and it's a very short bill. What it is is it's an interim solution as we've heard. We're really waiting for this Therapeutic Products Bill but in the meantime what this very simple bill does is it uses a deeming provision to make a standard under the Fair Trading Act. It's useful to have a look at that Fair Trading Act because while it doesn't insert a provision into the Fair Trading Act it says that there is to be a product safety standard as if it was made under section 29 of the Fair Trading Act. The purpose of the Fair Trading Act in section 1A is to contribute to a trading environment in which the interests of consumers are protected;" some other things and "(2) To this end the Act— … (c) provides for the disclosure of consumer information relating to the supply of goods and services; and (d) promotes safety in respect of goods and services." So I can see why Todd Muller chose this Act as a vehicle to do what he's trying to do and that we all agree in the House today to make that voluntary standard a mandatory one.Section 29 of the Fair Trading Act is the one in Part 3 and it's around product safety. That is what Part 3 of the Act is "Product safety" and section 29 tells us about those product safety standards. That enables the Governor-General "from time to time on the recommendation of the Minister" to "make regulations in respect of goods of any description" including "prescribing for the purpose of preventing or reducing the risk of injury to … the following matters—" including "(a) the performance composition contents manufacture processing design construction finish or packaging of the goods; (b) the testing of the goods during or after manufacture or processing:" and "(c) the form and content of markings warnings or instructions to accompany the goods." Now we've heard and it's set out in the report from the Health Committee that there was advice that perhaps the wording of that section didn't include products that are trying to prevent harm. It's not the product itself that will cause the harm; it's what happens if the product doesn't work. It's an interesting interpretation of section 29. So this is why there's gone ahead and been this deeming provision to make sure that it's very clear that in fact we can have a product safety standard for sunscreen.There are six product standards currently. They are for pedal bikes baby walkers children's nightwear children's toys household cots and cigarette lighters. And now we'll have this one. There are also a lot of standards New Zealand—NZ—standards. I'm very lucky to be a member of the Regulations Review Committee. We were just meeting this evening and the Regulations Review Committee wrote to the Health Committee and said "We are a little bit concerned that this standard is referenced as something that you can't see in the law." It's referred to but we can't see it. You've got to go into the Standards New Zealand (NZS) website and download it for a fee." So the Health Committee thought about this and said "Well the fee for getting the PDF of the standard is only $107 and the people that will be most interested in this standard are those people who are developing these products so they'll be interested enough to pay that $107." And that's a fair argument. I think it's interesting to look at the website and it does give you a little précis of all the different standards which you don't have to pay for. So that gives you an idea of what's in there. I didn't pay the $107 so I just looked at that and I could see the index and it looks like quite a complicated way that you go about testing in a lab to determine the SPF.But it's also useful to note that NZS has a lot of standards for a lot of different things that won't always be found in regulation. This includes helmets for bikes; how you go about EV-charging stations electric vehicle - charging stations; procedures for determining wind speed for structural design; methods for sampling road aggregate—I can see that the House is very excited about these—and specification for protective legwear for chainsaw users. That one was interesting. And another one: specification for preservative treatment of glued laminated timber products. So there's a lot of different standards there that people can have a peruse on the website and see what they might be about. What I was able to gleam about this Australia - New Zealand standard is that it really doesn't like the term "waterproof"—it says it's misleading as is "sweat-proof"—and it really refers to primary and secondary sunscreen products is how it works. I think it'll be an interesting standard to look at in more detail and we don't have time for that now so I commend this bill to the House."