Mr BRENDAN O’CONNOR (3:13 PM) —I am happy to enter this debate on the motion moved by the member for Cowper, which has been seconded by the member for Mallee. I am a late stand-in, Mr Speaker, so you could say I am a Hartsuyker proxy. It is important for us to note that in recent years a growing body of scientific evidence has indicated that the air within homes and other buildings can be more seriously polluted than the air outdoors in even the largest and most industrialised cities. As other research indicates that people spend approximately 90 per cent of their time indoors, it seems obvious that we are exposing ourselves and some of the most vulnerable groups in society to unacceptable health risks brought about by ignorance and an absence of acceptable indoor air quality standards.

Only a few weeks ago delegates to a conference in Tasmania heard from air quality expert Professor Kirk Smith from the University of California a warning that pollution within homes can be as harmful as outdoor air pollution. According to a new report by the Clean Air Society of Australia and New Zealand, the major problems are nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, environmental tobacco smoke, house dust mites, moulds and fungi. Pollution sources in the home can be as diverse as gas stoves, flueless gas heaters, new furnishings, particleboard floors, cigarette smoke—which we heard a lot about earlier today—and airconditioning ducts. People who may be exposed to outdoor air pollutants for the longest periods of time are often those most susceptible to the effects of indoor air pollution. Such groups include the young, the elderly and the chronically ill, especially those suffering from respiratory or cardiovascular disease. In Victoria in 2000 there were five deaths caused by carbon monoxide poisoning associated with gas heaters. Two of those five people were residents of a town called Kyneton, which I once represented in my old electorate of Burke.

Currently, outdoor air pollution is regulated by national standards enforced by the National Environment Protection Council. However, while we lack a set of comparable standards to govern indoor air pollution, people will continue to inhale air that is polluted significantly above healthy levels. In contrast, Canada and many European countries already have enforceable indoor air pollution standards. While our National Health and Medical Research Council has guidelines for indoor air quality, it has no power to enforce the guidelines.

Unfortunately, some of the very measures designed to improve environmental standards may have unintended health effects, which continue unexamined in the absence of detailed further information. The trend towards energy-smart housing, while obviously highly desirable in itself, has led to a tendency to seal up houses and commercial buildings, further reducing ventilation. Whereas houses used to have floorboards and vents, we are now more likely to lay concrete and particle board flooring, increasing the concentration of pollutants. It is a disturbing fact that the majority of chemicals in common use in indoor environments have not been thoroughly tested. Little is known, for example, about their effect on the human nervous system. Even less is known about the cumulative and interactive effects of chemical exposure.

While pollutant levels from individual sources may not pose a significant health risk by themselves, most homes have multiple sources of indoor air pollution which may interact. Such a phenomenon may be responsible for ‘sick building syndrome’, the term used to describe a situation in which building occupants experience acute health and discomfort effects that appear to be linked to time spent in a building but where no specific illness or cause can be identified. This is the result of exposure to toxic chemicals emitted from furniture, building materials and office equipment, particularly in buildings that use airconditioning. Typical symptoms include ear, nose and throat irritation, nausea, lethargy, asthma and allergic reactions. Long-term symptoms such as cancer and respiratory disease may be caused by long-term periodic exposure to chemicals and materials such as asbestos. Needless to say, the consequences and dangers for those working in the building industry should be very obvious to all. I therefore recognise the need for governments at all levels to establish standards in relation to products which can generate pollutants in an indoor environment. I also recognise the need for a set of national standards governing indoor air quality. I support the motion. (Time expired)