Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2010-06-30 Daily Xml

Contents

BABY BOTTLES

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (15:19): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Consumer Affairs a question about the safety of baby bottles containing the chemical bisphenol A.

Leave granted.

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD: Approximately half of the baby bottles sold in South Australia are made of plastic that contains the chemical known as bisphenol A, commonly called BPA. In January this year, the US Food and Drug Administration reversed its long-held stance that BPA is safe for food contact applications, noting recent research to conclude that it now has, and I quote from the report:

...some concern about the potential effects of BPA on the brain, behaviour, and prostate gland in foetuses, infants, and young children.

Bans on the sale of baby bottles that contain BPA have now been imposed in Washington, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota and Maryland, as well as Denmark and Canada. Since the FDA determination, the US Senate is now considering a ban across the United States, and urgent consideration of bans on this type of bottle is now before the parliament in Belgium and France. Due to overseas bans, Family First is concerned that baby bottles containing BPA are now being dumped in South Australia and other Australian states. My questions are:

1. Will the minister look into this issue and immediately remove these baby bottles from sale in South Australia if there is even the slightest risk?

2. Will the minister draw parents' attention to the availability of alternatives such as BPA-free plastic bottles and glass bottles?

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for State/Local Government Relations, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister for Government Enterprises, Minister for the City of Adelaide) (15:20): I believe that we have looked into the prevalence of these products here in South Australia in terms of baby bottles and that I was advised at the time that these products were uncommon here in South Australia. However, I am happy to take those questions on notice and bring back a response. If my memory serves me correctly, I believe that it was, in fact, considered very low risk here in South Australia, but I will double-check those details and report back to the council.