6561 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL Wednesday 13 November 2002 ______ The President (The Hon. Dr Meredith Burgmann) took the chair at 11.00 a.m. The President offered the Prayers. WATER MANAGEMENT AMENDMENT BILL PAWNBROKERS AND SECOND-HAND DEALERS AMENDMENT BILL BUSINESS NAMES BILL STRATA SCHEMES MANAGEMENT AMENDMENT BILL ELECTION FUNDING AMENDMENT BILL CRIMES AMENDMENT (SCHOOL PROTECTION) BILL Bills received. Leave granted for procedural matters to be dealt with on one motion without formality. Motion by the Hon. Michael Egan agreed to: That these bills be read a first time and printed, standing orders be suspended on contingent notice for remaining stages and the second readings of the bills be set down as orders of the day for a later hour of the sitting. Bills read a first time. BILLS UNPROCLAIMED The Hon. Michael Costa, pursuant to sessional orders, tabled a list of all legislation not proclaimed 90 calendar days after assent as at 12 November 2002. TABLING OF PAPERS The Hon. Michael Costa tabled the following papers: (1) Annual Reports (Departments) Act 1985—Attorney General's Department report for year ended 30 June 2002 (2) Annual Reports (Statutory Bodies) Act 1984— (a) Reports for year ended 30 June 2002: Resource NSW Public Trustee Jenolan Caves Reserve Trust (3) Legal Profession Act 1987— (a) Reports for year ended 30 June 2002: Bar Association Law Society of New South Wales Professional Standards Department of the Law Society of New South Wales Report of Committees of the Law Society of New South Wales (4) Listening Devices Act 1984—Report of Attorney General under section 23 of the Act for year ended 31 December 2001 (5) Professional Standards Act 1994—Report of Professional Standards Council for year ended 30 June 2002 Ordered to be printed. 6562 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 13 November 2002 STANDING COMMITTEE ON LAW AND JUSTICE Report: Child Sexual Assault Prosecutions The Hon. Ron Dyer, as Chairman, tabled report No. 22 of the committee, entitled "Report on Child Sexual Assault Prosecutions", dated November 2002. Ordered to be printed. The Hon. RON DYER [11.08 a.m.]: I move: That the House take note of the report. Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Ron Dyer. PETITIONS Genetic Engineering Freeze Petition praying that the Government will legislate for a five-year freeze on the release into the environment of genetically engineered organisms and imports of genetically engineered foods, received from Ms Lee Rhiannon. WORKERS COMPENSATION LEGISLATION COMPLIANCE FUNDING The PRESIDENT: I report the receipt of the following message from the Legislative Assembly: MADAM PRESIDENT The Legislative Assembly desires to inform the Legislative Council that it has this day agreed to the following resolution: That in accordance with section 42B (4) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1988, this House approves funds being provided for an additional period of 2 years to fund the provision of claims assistance by organisations representing employers or employees to help them assist their members understand and comply with the new workers compensation and occupational health and safety legislation. Legislative Assembly JOHN MURRAY 13 November 2002 Speaker FOOD ACT 1989: DISALLOWANCE OF FOOD AMENDMENT (MSG) REGULATION 2002 The PRESIDENT: Pursuant to sessional orders the question is: That the motion proceed forthwith. The House divided. Ayes, 21 Mr Breen Mr R. S. L. Jones Mr Samios Dr Chesterfield-Evans Mr Lynn Mrs Sham-Ho Mr Cohen Reverend Nile Dr Wong Mr Corbett Mrs Pavey Mrs Forsythe Mr Pearce Miss Gardiner Dr Pezzutti Tellers, Mr Gay Ms Rhiannon Mr Colless Mr M. I. Jones Mr Ryan Mr Jobling Noes, 15 Ms Burnswoods Mr Kelly Mr West Mr Costa Mr Obeid Mr Della Bosca Mr Oldfield Mr Dyer Ms Tebbutt Tellers, Mr Egan Mr Tingle Ms Fazio Mr Hatzistergos Mr Tsang Mr Primrose 13 November 2002 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6563 Pairs Mr Gallacher Mr Macdonald Mr Harwin Ms Saffin Question resolved in the affirmative. Precedence agreed to. The Hon. Dr PETER WONG [11.25 a.m.]: I move: That under section 41 (1) of the Interpretation Act 1987, this House disallows the Food Amendment (MSG) Regulation 2002 published in Government Gazette No. 201, dated 1 November 2002, page 9312, and tabled in this House on 12 November 2002. About two weeks ago this House debated the Food Bill 2002. Honourable members also debated an amendment to clause 141, which, interestingly, gives the Premier and the Minister for Health the power to modify the food code. Half the time during that debate members—including the Parliamentary Secretary, the Hon. Ian Macdonald, who is not in the Chamber—spoke about MSG. I believe that the Premier has an incurable obsession with MSG, even after being presented with unanimous scientific facts. Scientists are funny people— no doubt the Hon. Dr Arthur Chesterfield-Evans and the Hon. Dr Brian Pezzutti would agree with me on this point—in the sense that they often try to prove each other wrong, and they often succeed. But not on the issue of MSG. Scientists think MSG is safe and need not be regulated. At most, MSG causes minor flushing in some people, and even then the symptoms are subjective and may not be true. Double-blind studies conducted throughout the world reaffirm that MSG does not cause any severe reactions—contrary to what was claimed in the Government's media release. During debate in this place Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile referred to the amendment that I had foreshadowed to clause 141, and said: In principle, we support the amendment foreshadowed by the Hon. Dr Peter Wong. The amendment will put the onus on the Commonwealth food authority to make a decision about MSG or any similar ingredient … Surely MSG should not be banned in New South Wales and restaurant owners in this State should not face heavy fines for using it without notification, when similar restrictive policies do not apply in Victoria or Queensland. Uniform policies are needed. If the Commonwealth food authority or Food Standards Australia New Zealand, the official body, decided MSG should be restricted, that decision would become a uniform policy and we would have to accept it. But I do not believe it would be helpful to have a policy for New South Wales alone that contradicts the position in the other States. I thank Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile for those comments. The Government even threatened that night that if honourable members passed my amendment small charities would have to pay to run little food stalls. On this point, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said: The scare campaign from the Government is just unbelievable. If these amendments are passed and this Government does not regulate to forgo the $55 from those charity groups, it is because it is being bloody-minded and spiteful: there would be no other reason. They would be paying back because the Premier did not get his way. How right he was. The Premier did not get his way that night: a division was called and the Government lost by 22 votes to 15. This House has spoken: upper House members support good laws and we will not tolerate bad laws. That is our duty, and to do anything else would mean that we are just as intolerant and irrational as Bob Carr. Within days the Government gazetted the Food Amendment (MSG) Regulation 2002 under the Food Act 1989. I draw the attention of honourable members to that point. Why? Will someone tell me the answers? The Government issued a media release against scaremongering, which stated: A minority of people can react severely to the cumulative effect of MSG in their food. That is totally untrue. It does not cause a severe reaction, as mentioned by Food Standards Australia and New Zealand [FSANZ]. MSG does not have a cumulative effect. Furthermore, the media release stated: The Government is committed to working with the restaurant industry and other industry groups, including the Chinese Cooking Fraternity Association and Chinatown Chamber of Commerce, to ensure this new requirement is implemented smoothly. Subsequently, the Chinese Australian Forum, the president of the Chinatown Chamber of Commerce and the president of the Chinese Cooking Fraternity Association organised a seminar at Parramatta Tingha Restaurant. The Premier's Department and the office of Craig Knowles were contacted but they would not attend. That is the degree of consultation with the Chinese community and Chinese restaurant owners. Furthermore, Mr Ricky Char, a prominent Chinese restaurateur, was invited to Parliament House on the pretext of a luncheon with the Minister. He did not know why he was invited. He was upset that he had been ambushed. Mr Ricky Char agreed on a statement as follows: 6564 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 13 November 2002 I support them to seek advice and to take actions to redress a discrimination and bias against us in the regulation of MSG by the NSW Government. I assert to the following points: • The Food Standards Australia and New Zealand has rejected the NSW Government's submission to regulate MSG. • Scientific advice is clear that MSG is safe and does not need to be regulated. • The NSW Government has blatantly breached an inter-government agreement, which Bob Carr has signed on our behalf. • International experts have confirmed MSG does not cause severe reactions. • Labels such as "MSG May Have Been Added" does not exclude any other MSG in food served by restaurants and therefore both deceiving and meaningless. • "No Added MSG" labels can be misleading and subject restaurant owners to legal action by customers. • The Regulation is unscientific, illogical, irrational and discriminatory. As a good citizen, I am obliged to obey the laws of this State. However, I believe this is a bad law targeted mostly on Asian restaurants, because many sauces and food enhancing agents, such as tomato sauce, cheese products, pre-mixed flavoured powders, which contained high amount of MSG, but were added at manufacturing, need not be declared.