Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES [5.17 p.m.]: There was a great deal of media attention on solaria in the past year or two due to the death of some high profile young people from melanoma triggered by the cosmetic use of sun beds. Therefore, I was surprised when the Radiation Control Amendment (Sun-tanning Units) Regulation 2009 was drafted without what I considered to be sufficient safeguards in place. It was obvious to me that the health promotion campaigns highlighting the dangers of solaria were clearly not reaching those who needed to hear the message: That is, the young users who want to be more attractive and politicians who may be well past all that but who draft the legislation that should be designed to protect the public.
It has already been thoroughly proven that the use of sun-tanning units increases the risk of skin cancer. Therefore, I do not understand why they have been allowed to even continue to operate. The Cancer Council of Australia in its book Dangers of Solariums—a major report in August 2008—outlines the risk of skin cancer. Solaria emit high levels of UVA in UVB radiation, which dramatically increases an individual’s risk of developing melanoma, and Australia already has the highest melanoma rates in the world because of our fierce sunlight. Without any exposure to solaria, two out of every three Australians will develop some sort of skin cancer before the age of 70. There are over 1,600 deaths from skin cancer every year—that is, 30 people dying from skin cancer every week—40 per annum attributable directly to sun beds.
If you are under the age of 35, the exposure to radiation in solaria is even more harmful, as the young person’s skin is more vulnerable. The Cancer Council has long defined its stand as being against cosmetic tanning with radiation emitting solaria under any circumstances, for any person. These are legal killing machines, in the words of some who seem to know.
Since they are allowed, it is surely incumbent upon the Government to protect the public by having clear safety standards; competency training and certification requirements for all operators; mechanisms in place for monitoring, with enforcement and penalties for those found in breach, including fines and revocation of licences; and the licensing of premises that have radiation equipment. In short, I believe that the radiation tanning industry needs to come under the control of a regulatory authority. I no longer believe that is the best option, because every industry that has been allowed to self-regulate over the past decade or so has failed to do so. That experiment reminds us again of human folly and greed, and why human beings needed laws in the first place.
We cannot allow a cancer-causing industry to self-regulate because it will not. Would we have considered giving James Hardie the right to self-regulate the issues of asbestos? We cannot sit by and talk about choice when young people are fooled into thinking that solaria must be safe if the Government allows them. They are not safe. A large study in 2003 undertaken by the Centre for Health Research and Psycho-oncology showed there was a low level of compliance with the national standard across the tanning industry. Seven years later nothing has improved in that complacent, unregulated industry, which reports to no-one. Any spa, salon, beautician or any person wanting to rent a shop can have tanning beds and operate them on an unsuspecting public.
I congratulate Lee Rhiannon on moving the motion, which Family First fully supports, to ban solaria outright. Radiation energy is not something that should be left in the hands of amateurs to inflict upon an unwary public for profit. If Mr Frank Sartor, who does such a good job as Minister Assisting the Minister for Health (Cancer) would only believe what the New South Wales Government advises on television, “There is nothing healthy about a tan”.