Save Search

Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Tuesday, 4 April 2000
Page: 15199


Mr RIPOLL (10:49 PM) —My three children know what is right and what is wrong. They know the meaning of `hot' and `no' when it comes to safety in the home. My 11-month-old daughter understands when I tell her to be careful or not to touch. Whether she listens to me or not, that is part of the learning process. All the warning signs you can provide to a young child or baby may not prevent injury, but I, like all parents, have the expectation that by their little mishaps our children will learn about danger. I also understand that I cannot always be right behind my kids every hour of every day telling them to be careful or not to do something. All we can do is teach them about self-preservation and provide a safe environment. Children are very fast learners and they adapt just as quickly.

But I am now concerned that there are everyday objects in my house that could be a latent threat to the health of my children. I recently read reports that the European parliament had placed a 12-month temporary ban on the sale of polyvinyl chloride, or PVC, toys. I decided to survey the kids' playroom at home and counted no fewer than 15 plastic toys. They ranged in size and rigidity but were all some form of PVC. My crude understanding of the danger is that children can ingest hazardous chemicals from PVC toys during normal use. Stabilisers, such as lead and cadmium, are used in the manufacture of PVC, along with plasticisers, particularly phtalates, which are used to give vinyl that soft, flexible, rubber-like quality—the sort of texture that makes a child want to suck or chew the toy.

Research has linked lead, cadmium and phtalates to a range of illnesses—including kidney, liver and reproductive organ damage—behavioural problems and learning disabilities. The uncertainty of the harm from PVC toys has led to not only the European parliament placing a ban on the sale of PVC toys; large toy manufacturers, such as Mattel, Lego and Brio, have also developed a non-PVC policy. The United Kingdom has taken the matter one step further by preventing the sale of all PVC pacifiers and teething toys. I find this information quite alarming. Two of my children still use dummies—there are times when nothing else will pacify them—but I am concerned that trying to soothe a crying baby will lead to long-term illness or pain if using products made of PVC. I certainly do not want to do that to my children.

So who can set me straight on this matter? I can find a plethora of information about the dangers of PVC toys. Throughout Europe and America, there are parent groups and environmental organisations with web sites explaining in great detail the harm that I could inflict on my child. If the European Union has placed bans on PVC toys and the toy manufacturers have adapted manufacturing to satisfy new standards, what should we be doing here in Australia? Unfortunately, it seems we are doing not much at all.

In 1997, the then Minister for Customs and Consumer Affairs advised parliament that the case of PVC products, including toys, had been referred to the Therapeutic Goods Administration. In 2000, the matter is now with the National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme. It disturbs me that in a matter of four years the European Union and multinational toy producers have instigated a non-PVC manufacturing process and all that this government has done is pass the inquiry between different departments.

After some fairly extensive research and a lot of help from one of my concerned constituents, I have stumbled on a few articles denouncing this issue as just a greenies beat-up. I am cautious of the reasoning as it comes from representatives of the chemical and vinyl manufacturing industries. There are explanations of flawed experiments and inadequate research. If this is true, then the European Union scientific committee on toxicity, eco-toxicity and the environment are a bunch of mugs. Over two years ago, this committee concluded that soft PVC toys for infants release unacceptable quantities of hazardous substances.

Which group should I believe? I will give you only one guess. I would like to believe that the ears of the squeaking bear my daughter is going to chew tomorrow are perfectly safe, but it may not be. I would like to know what is the best teething device to help my baby through those early months. I would like to know when the government is going to acknowledge that there is genuine concern in Australia with PVC toys. I would like to know when the government is going to realise that consumers are sick of having debates about the safety of products a decade or so after the rest of the world has had them. Most importantly, I would like to know that my youngest daughter will not be asking these same questions in relation to the welfare of her children.