Page 938 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 17 March 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
called type 1. Other major features of the updated standards include cutting the UV intensity on sun beds by 40 per cent; banning unsupervised operations; ensuring staff are trained in using equipment and assessing skin photo types; ensuring clients complete a skin assessment and consent form; ensuring protective eyewear is always worn; making no claims of non-cosmetic health benefits or that solarium use is safe; and keeping client records for at least two years.
These standards are voluntary in the ACT, and studies have shown that where the standards are voluntary about 50 per cent of the industry ignores some of the important sections of the guidelines.
As such, voluntary application clearly does not work. So to leave the industry unregulated is not going to do us much good, because we cannot rely on them to implement the rules by themselves. We acknowledge that some operators out there are responsible; however, others cannot resist the urge to profit from high-risk clients. We believe that by banning dangerous behaviour that is conducted in only some locations there will be benefit to those who have chosen to be responsible.
Shortly after the solaria standards were updated in January last year, the New South Wales government introduced regulations that made those guidelines compulsory. The ACT Chief Minister was asked by the media at the time if the ACT government was also committed to introducing solaria regulations. The Chief Minister said that the ACT government was committed to this, but was waiting for the COAG process and that, if that did not bring change soon enough, the ACT would go ahead as New South Wales and Victoria have done.
In August last year the Cancer Council released research which showed that the number of tanning solaria had declined in all capital cities except Canberra. The number had dropped by an average of 32 per cent, with the most dramatic falls in Melbourne, Hobart, Adelaide, Perth and Sydney, but Canberra had seen an increase in solarium listings. Canberra also featured a much higher proportion or ratio of solaria to people than anywhere else in the country. We cannot help but assume that the voluntary self-regulation regime in place in Canberra contributes to this statistic.
Melbourne had the largest drop in solarium numbers, potentially because they have a properly regulated and licensed system in place. When faced with the news that the number of solaria in Canberra was growing, the ACT government was again approached by the media, and the Minister for Health responded to them by saying that the ACT government still supported a national approach to solarium regulations and there were no plans as yet for the ACT government to introduce regulations.
When it became apparent in February this year that the ACT government was still yet to move on solaria, the Greens felt that the ACT had waited long enough, and we announced our intention to introduce legislation. And so today I present to the Assembly the Greens’ Radiation Protection (Tanning Units) Amendment Bill 2010.
Similar to the Victorian model, our bill proposes that businesses which operate solaria need to acquire a licence, and I anticipate this to occur through the Office of Regulatory Services. The licence conditions we have prescribed are based on the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video