Ms LEE RHIANNON [5.03 p.m.]: I move:

1. That this House notes that:

(a) melanoma, which is responsible for 30 per cent of all cancers in young people aged 15 to 30 in New South Wales, is entirely preventable,

(b) research by the Queensland Institute of Medical Research suggests in Australia 43 deaths a year from melanoma can be attributed to sun beds,

(c) the International Agency for Research on Cancer concludes that using a sun bed just once before the age of 35 significantly increases the risk of developing melanoma and using a solarium regularly before the age of 30 boosts the risk of developing melanoma by 75 per cent,

(d) on 30 July 2009 the World Health Organisation elevated sun beds to the highest cancer risk category and sun beds are now classed as "carcinogenic to humans" by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, matching asbestos, arsenic and cigarette smoke,

(e) approximately one quarter of people in New South Wales aged 13 to 44 years mistakenly believe tanning in a solarium is safer than the sun,

(f) increased regulation by the Government of the solarium industry, under the Radiation Control Amendment (Tanning Units) Regulation, announced in May 2009 has been poorly complied with as evidenced by the results of compliance audits conducted by the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water,

(g) the first compliance audit under these new regulations in 2009 showed a very high rate of non-compliance, with 87 of 89 solariums failing to comply, and the second conducted in February/March 2010 also revealed a high rate of non-compliance,

(h) the NSW State Plan aims to reduce the number of potentially avoidable deaths of people under 75 to 150 per 100,000 people by 2016, and

(i) a petition is soon to be tabled in the Parliament from over 1,000 people calling for a ban on sun beds.

2. That this House calls on the Government to:

(a) release comprehensive information on the extent of compliance with the Radiation Control Amendment (Tanning Units) Regulation since its introduction,

(b) release information on the action taken as a result of non-compliance with this regulation, and

(c) take the lead and ban the use of sun beds in New South Wales.

This motion is inspired by Clare Oliver, a young woman who lost her life because of melanoma attributed to her use of sun beds. I have also been inspired by Jay Allen, a melanoma survivor and a no sun bed campaigner who is in the gallery today. Jay is a 34-year-old truck driver and father of three from Campbelltown. His life could be cut short because of his use of sun beds. His story is compelling and I have been inspired by the effort he is making and work he is doing to ensure that other people, particularly young people, do not suffer melanomas as a result of using sun beds and their lack of knowledge about the dangers involved in doing so. He is running the sun bed ban campaign and has collected more than 1,000 signatures on a petition. He also has more than 2,000 followers on Facebook and regularly twitters messages—and there have been many today.

There should be no question about the importance of debating this motion and I thank members for agreeing to debate it now as a matter of urgency. I hope that that will manifest itself in support for the passage of the motion. The evidence is clear. In 1992 the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified solariums as a probable cancer agent. Since then scientists have found evidence that both the more rare UVB light and the more common UVA light in solar radiation can cause skin cancer. The results of an important study were published in the Lancet in July last year. Scientists with the World Health Organisation [WHO] re-examined the evidence on sun beds and decided to put them in the highest cancer risk category—that is, carcinogenic to humans. Solar radiation, tobacco smoking and chimney sweeping are also in that category.

University of Sydney Professor of Public Health, Bruce Armstrong, who contributed to the study, has said that new evidence has found that UV-emitting tanning devices increase a person's risk of developing skin melanomas by about 15 per cent overall and by about 75 per cent in those who use them before the age of 30. Professor Armstrong also said when the report was published in the Lancet that the International Agency for Research on Cancer has confirmed what many Australians have long suspected—that is, that tanning devices emitting ultraviolet rays are dangerous and can cause cancer. The Chief Executive Officer of the Cancer Council of Australia, Professor Ian Olver, when commenting on the World Health Organisation study stated that the findings were a positive step in eradicating the use of sun beds altogether. He further stated:

We don't believe solariums should exist at all. This report proves there is no safe way to go brown.

Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology Associate Professor Terry Piva said that the danger from an ultraviolet light bed was much greater than from sunbaking, but that that also carried risks. I emphasise that the evidence is clear and there should be no argument about banning solariums. The motion before the House sets out the case for banning sun beds and calls on the Government to:

(a) release comprehensive information on the extent of compliance with the Radiation Control Amendment (Tanning Units) Regulation since its introduction,

(b) release information on the action taken as a result of non-compliance with this regulation, and

(c) take the lead and ban the use of sun beds in New South Wales.

The first two aspects of the second half of this motion call for the release of information that would help to inform us about the regulation, how it is being applied and whether it is being abided by. So far there has been much evidence that compliance is appalling and that many people using solariums have no awareness of the dangers involved. Lisa McFadyen is the chief executive officer of Melanoma Patients Australia. She was speaking in Sydney today in support of this motion, and said:

Some may argue that it is people's choice to use solariums, but when you develop metastatic melanoma your choice is taken away.

Skin cancer is not just skin deep or an old person's disease. Young people are big users of sun beds and skin cancer is the most common cancer of 15 to 44 year olds.

Ms McFadyen also said:

Australia has the highest skin cancer incidence in the world and the World Health Organisation has elevated sun beds to the highest cancer risk category. This in itself justifies a ban.

Ms McFadyen, like Jay Allen, is also a melanoma survivor. Tragically, melanoma is on the increase in our society, with the Cancer Institute of New South Wales expecting melanoma incidence rates to rise by an average of 12 per cent in this State by next year. In 2003, 3,239 new cases were reported, and this will jump to 4,184 new cases by next year. Melanoma is responsible for 30 per cent of all cancers in young people aged 15 to 30 in this State, and melanoma is largely preventable. Those figures come from the Cancer Institute.

I urge those who may still be thinking that should just go with the regulatory regime to consider closely how compliance is working in this State. The lack of compliance is rife, and I put it to members that it underlines the need for a complete ban. Until May 2009 the only regulation in Australia was an Australian and New Zealand standard for the use of sun beds for cosmetic purposes, and it was only a voluntary code. A 2003 study showed there was very low compliance with this code.

There was a long delay in meeting promises by the then health Minister, Morris Iemma, to improve regulation of the industry. He made the promises in 2003 but it was not until May 2009 that the New South Wales Government announced new regulations, and they very much lag behind those of other States. The new regulations in 2009 showed a very high rate of non-compliance, with 87 of 89 solariums failing to comply. The Minister Assisting the Minister the Health (Cancer), Mr Frank Sartor, has revealed that further audits are to be carried out this year, but I understand he has decided these will be trial audits and no prosecutions will result.

I understand that Mr Sartor has a clear understanding of the issue, and I urge him to get behind this ban. As the Minister responsible for managing cancer studies, cancer research and cancer health issues in this State, surely this should be at the top of his list. The link between the use of sun beds and melanomas is so clear-cut. The Greens call on Minister Sartor to take the lead and ban sun beds. We need the ban in New South Wales and we need to take the lead for the whole country. I reiterate some of the figures because they are alarming. With over 40 deaths a year from melanoma attributable to sun beds, one would have to say that a ban is a no-brainer. The link is so clear, so many people are dying and so many of them are young people. The Government's State Plan has targets for reducing the number of potential avoidable deaths by 2015, and melanoma from sun bed use clearly falls into this category. That is another reason why members of this House should have no trouble supporting the motion calling for the Government to ban sun beds—from the figures, from the breaking of the compliance regime and from the Government's State Plan with regard to reducing the number of potential avoidable deaths.

One would have to say that for too long this Government has stood by and watched what I would call a cowboy industry thumb its nose at regulation. That is how it is working at the moment. I urge members not to say that we just have to make sure those in the industry comply properly. They have not complied. We know they are not going to comply and it is just ridiculous that they are allowed to continue to risk young people's lives—any lives—with a machine that produces a tan. I recognise that Minister Sartor makes a great contribution towards preventing cancer through his government work, but the evidence is indisputable. Many people are waiting for him to act to ban sun beds. They are really looking to him. Mr Frank Sartor has a personal empathy with this issue as well as being in a key position as a powerful Minister.

It is clear we need to clean up this industry, because at the moment the regulatory regime is not working. I urge members, when they make their contributions, to consider the people taking a stand on this issue—melanoma survivors who are giving up their time and making an effort. As I mentioned before, Jay Allen is a melanoma survivor, and I pay tribute to his family—his wife and children—who would obviously miss him while he is on the road doing this tough campaigning. We should give the last word to Mr Allen. Today, supporting the Greens' motion, he said:

Premier Kristina Keneally needs to do the right thing and get behind this ban.

I have been on a scary journey and I do not want anyone else to suffer what my family and I have to endure every time my three monthly check ups come around.

Clare Oliver died seeking an end to sun bed use.

What's clear is that it is never worth dying for a tan.

They are powerful words. Action is needed and that action has to be a ban. I commend the motion to the House.

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 more than 1,600 deaths from skin cancer every year—that is, 30 people die 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".

The Hon. JENNIFER GARDINER [5.22 p.m.]: The Opposition shares concerns about the incidence of melanoma and the use of sun beds increasing the risk of developing that insidious form of cancer, melanoma. As other speakers have stated, there has been a great deal of concern in the community about the use of sun beds and their use as an actual or possible trigger in the development of melanoma, which can be fatal. One year ago there was a change in the regulatory regime surrounding suntan businesses with the gazettal of the Radiation Control Amendment (Tanning Units) Regulation. Since then there have been revelations about the degree of compliance with the regulation that, on the face of it, are concerning because of the apparent high rate of non-compliance, which poses a danger to those using sun beds to gain a tan.

I do not know why anyone would use a sun bed, but those who do are possibly putting themselves at risk. Governments across Australia have put many resources into the diagnosis and treatment of all cancers. Indeed, only last week I inspected the new integrated cancer care centre at Lismore Base Hospital, which will commence taking patients in the next few days. Nevertheless, if we can deter people from an activity that increases the incidence of an avoidable disease such as melanoma it is incumbent on us to pursue that avenue vigorously. Although the Opposition supports the spirit of the motion, I move the following amendment:

That the motion be amended by omitting paragraph 2 (c).

With that amendment, the Opposition supports the motion.

Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [5.25 p.m.]: The Christian Democratic Party supports the motion on sun beds. We have all read reports of the tragic deaths, particularly that of the young lady, resulting from the use of sun beds. Sun beds can cause melanoma, which is a serious skin cancer that spreads from the skin into other parts of the body. Melanoma is responsible for 30 per cent of all cancers in young people aged 15 to 30 years and is entirely preventable. Research by the Queensland Institute of Medical Research suggests that 43 deaths a year from melanoma in Australia can be attributed to sun beds.

We know that young Australian men and women have the desire to have a beautiful tan. They are prepared to even endure pain to get a tan: there have been reports of people being severely burnt in sun beds. They do this so that they will look attractive to the opposite sex on the beach. Indeed, they are almost brainwashed that having a tan is essential to their physical presentation and attractiveness. The International Agency for Research on Cancer concludes that using a sun bed just once before the age of 35 significantly increases the risk of developing melanoma and using a solarium regularly before the age of 30 boosts the risk of developing melanoma by 75 per cent.

This motion has an important punchline in paragraph (2):

That this House calls on the Government to:

(a) release comprehensive information on the extent of compliance with the Radiation Control Amendment (Tanning Units) Regulation since its introduction.

It is quite clear that there is very little compliance—

(b) release information on the action taken as a result of non-compliance with this regulation.

They are two general matters. The third one, which is the most important part of the motion, is:

(c) take the lead and ban the use of sun beds in New South Wales.

Therefore, I was surprised that the Coalition, having stated that it will support the motion, has moved an amendment to delete paragraph (c), which is the whole point of the motion. I will vote for the motion but not for the amendment.

The Hon. PENNY SHARPE (Parliamentary Secretary) [5.28 p.m.]: The New South Wales Government is strongly committed to addressing the skin cancer risks associated with the use of solariums. I put on record some of the actions we have taken to prove this. The Radiation Control Amendment (Tanning Units) Regulation 2009 was introduced in May last year based on a national model. After allowing solarium operators a brief period to comply with the new regulations an audit of metropolitan solaria was conducted by the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water in late 2009. That audit identified that very few solarium operators were fully complying with our new safety regulations.

The non-compliance issues that were discovered ranged from allowing clients to use a tanning unit without completing an appropriate consent form or a complying form; not conducting proper skin assessments before allowing clients to use a tanning unit; allowing clients to use a tanning unit more frequently than permitted; failure to adjust output to exposure limits for different skin types; the use of eye protection that the Government considers does not meet the proper standard; inadequate supervision of tanning sessions; incorrect signage; and incomplete record keeping.

The Government declared after this audit that it would not tolerate solarium operators failing to comply with new solarium regulations. Businesses were put on notice that they needed to comply or face fines. Under the new Minister for Climate Change and the Environment, and Minister Assisting the Minister for Health with responsibility for Cancer, follow-up audits have been conducted, most recently in February and March this year.
The audit results show that the Government's crackdown is achieving the right outcomes with 41 out of 75 solaria businesses inspected in the recent campaign now substantially meeting their obligations under the law.

Specific outcomes from the most recent audit include: five operators received penalty notices of $1,000 for failing to maintain proper records or complete consent forms and skin type assessments; seven operators received penalty notices of $500 for not properly monitoring the frequency of tanning bed usage; 16 operators have received formal warnings, requiring non-compliances to be fixed; four solaria businesses remain under investigation; and there is anecdotal evidence that patronage of solaria businesses is falling and the audit found that six of the premises inspected in 2009 have either closed or no longer offer ultraviolet tanning beds. Operators who received a warning letter have 28 days from the date of issue to correct their non-compliance, or in the case of a fine, 28 days to pay or elect to have the matter heard in court.

In the coming months the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water will conduct further audits, including inspections of regional solaria operators. In addition to overhauling the solarium industry, the New South Wales Government is undertaking actions including education and awareness campaigns to reduce the incidence of melanoma. The Government's $5 million Dark Side of Tanning melanoma campaign—now in its third year—is contributing to a change in behaviour. Based on a recent survey of more than 7,500 children aged between 12 and 17, the New South Wales School Students Health Behaviours Survey showed that 35 per cent of school students in 2008 preferred to have no tan at all, up from 25 per cent just four years earlier. It also showed a reduction from 79 per cent to 75 per cent in high school students who were sunburnt at least once the previous summer. Attitudes of teenagers towards getting burnt and having a tan are starting to change, but of course we need to be vigilant.

Almost 500 people in New South Wales died from melanoma cancer last year, and Australians have the highest incidence of this cancer in the world. The encouraging trend from this survey is that as awareness of the dangers associated with sun tanning grows, young people are becoming more sun smart and less likely to desire a tan. However, the figures also tell us we need to keep working with all schoolchildren, particularly teenage girls, to make sure the message is getting across. While fewer students were burnt last summer than 10 years ago, three in four students still were spending too much time in the sun. The high school survey shows increases in the number of students seeking shade, wearing protective clothing, and using sunglasses and sunscreen over the past six years. However, there has been a continued decline in those who are wearing hats or staying indoors during peak ultraviolet periods.

There are currently a number of cancer education programs specifically designed for children, including the following. Teaching and learning about sun protection in New South Wales Government schools occurs as part of the Personal Development, Health and Physical Education key learning area, which all students study from kindergarten to year 10. Primary schools can choose to implement the Cancer Council SunSmart program in response to community needs as a part of their individual school practices and procedures for sun protection. The Department of Education and Training encourages schools to take sun safety seriously, and to implement a range of strategies and provisions to increase awareness about sun protection and to encourage sun protective behaviours. The department promotes a whole-of-school approach to sun safety in schools through its "Protection from the Sun—Guidelines to Assist in Implementing the Student Welfare Policy".

Schools reinforce messages about sun protection in sports lessons, outdoor excursions, and at whole-of-school events such as swimming and athletics carnivals. Positive role modelling of good sun protection behaviours by all members of the school community can help to encourage students to take responsibility for their own sun protection. The provision of shade in New South Wales Government schools has been included in the facility standards for a number of years. Examples are covered outdoor learning areas, outdoor learning spaces, and the inclusion of seating in shaded areas of the school such as along verandahs. On a personal note, at my children's school the students are given a simple message: No hat, no play. The Government is committed to continuing measures to reduce the incidence of melanoma with effective regulation and high-impact education campaigns.

With regard to the motion before the House, the Government is already releasing information on the extent of compliance with the Radiation Control Amendment (Tanning Units) Regulation since its introduction, and will continue to do so. The Government has also released information on the action taken with regard to non-compliance with this regulation, as I have referred to in some detail. The Government is already playing a serious role in the regulation of sun beds; indeed, we take the matter very seriously. The motion calls for the use of solariums to be banned. However, the Government does not support such action. The Government believes it is appropriate that the regulatory authority continues to closely monitor compliance with the obligation imposed by the 2009 regulation, with a view to again increasing the compliance by industry operations. The regulation includes powers to warn and fine operators who are flouting the rules, and the Government will take the action needed against operators who refuse to comply. They are on notice.

The Hon. CHRISTINE ROBERTSON [5.35 p.m.]: New South Wales Cancer Institute data shows that Australia has the highest rate of melanoma in the world, as we have heard. One-third of all cancer cases in 15- to 30-year-olds in New South Wales were melanoma. It is the fourth most common cancer in New South Wales, and the number one cancer amongst men aged 25 to 54 and women aged 15 to 29. There will be an estimated 4,200 new cases of melanoma each year by 2011, compared with 3,900 cases in 2009.

Given figures such as these it is important to acknowledge the hard work that has been done by some people to bring this issue to the fore, so that action can be taken in the interests of public health. Other cancer issues are brought to the fore much more readily. I congratulate those who are working hard to ensure that more action is taken with regard to melanoma cancer.

The Government takes melanoma seriously, and that is why we have introduced a range of measures to reduce its incidence. It is recognised that the use of sun beds carries risks, especially to those with fair skin types. Indeed, a World Health Organisation study carried out last year placed solariums in the same cancer risk category as tobacco smoking. That followed a 2007 Queensland Institute for Medical Research study that found solarium users under 35 increase their risk of developing melanoma by 98 per cent.

In May last year the Government introduced tough new measures to regulate solariums, to better protect our community. These include the following: clients must be 18 years or over; a second tanning session must not be undertaken within 48 hours of a previous session; skin assessments must be conducted in accordance with the Fitzpatrick Skin Photo Type Classification System; exposure times must be set in accordance with skin type; eye protection must be used, consistent with the Australian Standard; tanning sessions must be supervised by someone with appropriate training; and businesses must display current warning notices and keep good records including a signed consent form.

The Government will continue to focus on the solarium industry and ensure that compliance with the regulation is being met or regulatory action will be taken. Furthermore, whereas before people were not fully informed of the risk, the introduction of the regulation in May 2009 has increased awareness combined with audits, educational campaigns, and advertising in trade papers. Solarium users have been advised of their risks and are in a position to make informed choices.

Education campaigns such as the Government's $5 million Dark Side of Tanning melanoma campaign—now in its third year—are contributing to a change in behaviour. In fact, our campaigns have been internationally recognised for their high impact nature, which is leading to better sun smart behaviours. In March this year the Cancer Institute's graphic anti-tanning campaign There's nothing healthy about a tan won an international Sulzberger Institute sun safety award. The announcement came as part of the sixty-eighth annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology.

The Sulzberger Institute sun safety video contest is judged by an expert panel based on delivery of the message, marketing savvy and production quality. The contest was created by a group of dermatologists dedicated to promoting sun safety education, particularly to teenagers. The Australian Secondary School Alcohol and Drug survey is one of the most extensive ways of finding out about issues for young persons in secondary schools. When the 2005 survey revealed a picture of widespread complacency about the risks associated with unprotected exposure to ultraviolet radiation—be it from the sun or artificial tanning devices such as solariums—the need for challenging the desirability for a tan was clear. The Cancer Institute's campaign There's nothing healthy about a tan challenges the misconception that a tan is healthy, by showing the damage that can happen to the skin even before signs of burning. This Government is committed to reducing the incidence of melanoma with effective regulation of industry and high-impact awareness campaigns to change behaviour.

Dr JOHN KAYE [5.40 p.m.]: This motion invites the House to examine the sun bed industry and to come to the conclusion that this is an industry that entices young people to die for a fashion statement. This is a cowboy industry, an industry that peddles death and disfigurement to unsuspecting young people. This is an industry that has organised for itself a set of weak and meaningless regulations that it has set about to systematically ignore. This is an industry that delivers no therapeutic benefit to its clients beyond satisfying a desire to conform to a fashion statement for a darker skin.

This motion invites the House to explore the proposition that the time has come to protect young people from those who would turn a profit from the ignorance of young people of the dangers that the wares of that industry peddles. It is very clear from the figures quoted by the Parliamentary Secretary that this is an industry for which regulation has failed. It is an industry for which regulation has completely failed to change its behaviour. The Parliamentary Secretary mentioned audits and said that 41 out of 75 sun bed businesses had substantially met the regulatory requirements. That is all very well and good, but that means that 34 out of 75, or 45 per cent, were substantially flouting the regulations when the second audit was conducted. It would seem that for some of these operators a fine is purely a cost of operation and their industry is so profitable that they can wear the fines and move on.

The Greens fully support the education and awareness campaigns, which should be continued, but they are not sufficiently potent to protect the young people who continue to expose themselves to risk by attending tanning studios. All members have one thing in common—we were all young once and we all know how ineffective education campaigns can be. The Parliamentary Secretary quoted the extraordinary statistic that 75 per cent of young people get sunburnt at least once, with full knowledge of the risks involved in exposure. The reality is that young human beings take risks for relatively small rewards. The tanning industry is creating opportunities for young people to take risks for what is a relatively small and short-lived reward.

We cannot rely on self-regulation. We cannot even rely on the regulatory authority to produce outcomes that will protect young people. We cannot rely on the decency of the industry. We cannot rely on education programs, important as they are, to protect young people from this predatory industry. Where regulation, education, and all else fail, there is only one cure and that is to ban an industry that produces no therapeutic outcome. This industry produces no benefit beyond satisfying the simple desire for a tan. The Parliamentary Secretary suggested that the regulatory authority continue to monitor what is happening in this industry and its rate of compliance. Effectively she is saying that we should let the regulatory authority monitor this industry while it continues to kill scores of young people each year. That would be an unacceptable outcome.

Every speaker to this motion, and Lee Rhiannon is to be congratulated on introducing it, has acknowledged the dangers posed by this industry and the fact that it is killing people. It is absolutely incomprehensible how any politician in this Chamber can say they accept the data that is presented in the first part of the motion and will call for the release of more information, but they will not support a ban. How can anyone accept the melanoma mortality statistics, the pain and suffering of victims and their loved ones, and their uncertainty and anxiety, when we know that banning solariums and tanning beds will remove that risk? How can we say that we know the situation is bad, we need more information on it, but we are not going to take any concrete action?

I cannot understand the position taken by the Opposition. How can the Opposition say on the one hand that there are real dangers associated with tanning beds, that it is not so much a risk but more of a certainty that people will die if tanning beds continue to be used, that regulation has failed, but the Government should not be asked to get rid of the tanning industry? How can a party say it is committed to public health and then act in this fashion? The Government's position is equally incomprehensible.

The Government has a responsibility. Perhaps it is hiding behind the fact that the existing regulations are not working and it does not have the courage to admit it. But this is the very time for the Government to have the courage to admit its mistake. The community would welcome a ban on tanning beds. This is the time for the Government to admit its mistake in choosing to regulate, and it can do that by following the example and good work of people such as Clare Oliver and Jay Ellen, people who have put their private lives on public display, people who had the courage to say they made a mistake as young people but please help stop other young people from making the same mistake. Now is the time to clamp down hard on this industry. Now is the time to say we can stop the 30 melanoma deaths that occur in Australia each year. Now is the time to decide that 30 young people each year will go on to have lives that they otherwise would not have had. How many others can we help to live their lives without this sword of Damocles hanging over their heads?

In conclusion, I congratulate those who have campaigned for a ban on tanning beds. The Cancer Council of New South Wales has said it wants an outright ban, if a very high level of compliance cannot be achieved. Just a high level of compliance in this industry would be inadequate. A high level of compliance would mean that a significant number of tanning beds are being operated in a way that is inflicting life-ending cancers on young people. I also congratulate Jay Allen for the excellent work he has done in keeping this issue going. When a public issue flares up it is often accompanied by tut-tutting in the editorial pages, followed by lots of letters to the editor, and then the issue dies down. The real hard work in campaigning to make our society safer is in keeping the campaign going. Clare Oliver was not able to do that because she died before she had the chance to do so. Let Clare's death not be in vain, let Jay Allen's hard work not be in vain, and let us not allow the advice of the Cancer Council of New South Wales go unheeded. Let us overcome what has happened in the past and move forward to a ban of the tanning bed industry—a ban that will prevent avoidable deaths, protect all people, and make our society safer.

Ms LEE RHIANNON [5.48 p.m.]: I thank all speakers for their contributions to this debate and for their acknowledgement of the shocking impacts of the use of sun beds, especially on young people, many of whom are losing their lives to melanoma. However, a troubling and serious divergence occurred during the debate. Members of the Australian Labor Party, the Liberal Party and The Nationals are about to vote together—and they have the numbers—to delete the key point of the motion, in paragraph 2 (c), which sets out the need for a ban on sun beds. That is shocking.

As I said in my opening remarks, the World Health Organisation, in a study released last year and reported in the Lancet journal, described the sun beds as "carcinogenic to humans". That sums up what we are dealing with. On what basis can members justify that such machines should be allowed to continue to operate? They do not add any worth to society. There is no balance that can be brought into this debate that they do some good even if people suffer. The outcome is that people will suffer and die. The way that this issue has been handled echoes the asbestos saga. It is embarrassing to be a member of this House when the Labor Party, the Liberal Party and The Nationals unite to vote down a key aspect of the motion. The Government and the Opposition, knowing the problem, still decide that a ban is not warranted.

I was embarrassed and disturbed by the speech of the Parliamentary Secretary, Penny Sharpe. In relation to compliance, she set out what she believed was a good case. Her speech underlined how bankrupt the case is. She set out the low level of the compliance system. Even if the compliance system were satisfactory and the industry were more proficient at warning those who should not use sun beds, we know that people will still end up with melanomas. We also know that not all the operators in the industry will comply. If just one operator does not comply, people will get melanomas. That highlights the problem in this industry, an industry that has no worth. Although I do not want people to spray themselves with tanning lotions, there are other ways for people to get a tan that are not as deadly as sun beds. I repeat: sun beds are carcinogenic to humans. That phrase alone should be a wake-up call to Minister Sartor and every member of this Chamber. When the Minister saw that report, he should have led the charge to ban sun beds. It should not be up to the melanoma survivors to continue with this campaign.

The Parliamentary Secretary, Penny Sharpe, when speaking about compliance, said that the operators substantially meet their obligations. That is an extraordinary phrase. Substantially is not good enough, but that is as good as it is going to get. She referred to a regulatory role. That will not deliver protection. Protection will only come with a ban. I urge Minister Sartor to read Ms Penny Sharpe's speech. It highlights a weak regime, which he tries to argue provides protection. The industry has been described a number of times as being run by cowboys. The Government and the Opposition are allowing this wild west show to continue. If we fail to put pressure on the Minister by passing this motion, I have no doubt that people will die from melanoma caused by sun beds in New South Wales. Suffering and deaths could be prevented if sun beds were banned. The debate on this motion has shown that Labor has forgotten the job of government. The job of government is to protect public health from dangerous products. Evidence from studies conducted by top authorities over many years shows that that this unnecessary product is highly dangerous. The evidence is in; a ban is required. I again urge all members to support the motion in its entirety. The amendment is a disgrace.

Question—That the amendment of the Hon. Jennifer Gardiner be agreed to—put.

The House divided.

Mr Ajaka Mr Catanzariti Mr Clarke Mr Colless Mr Della Bosca Ms Ficarra Miss Gardiner Mr Gay

Ms Griffin Mr Khan Mr Mason-Cox Mr Moselmane Mr Pearce Ms Robertson Ms Sharpe Mr Veitch

Ms Voltz Mr West Ms Westwood Tellers, Mr Donnelly Mr Harwin

Mr Cohen Reverend Dr Moyes Reverend Nile Ms Rhiannon Tellers, Ms Hale Dr Kaye

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment agreed to.

Question—That the motion as amended be agreed to—put and resolved in the affirmative.

Motion as amended agreed to.