Button battery safety - Assessment of regulatory options - Consultation paper

Response 529100334

Back to Response listing

Introduction

1. What is your name?

Name
Richard Kelly Barnes

3. What is your organisation or profession?

Organisation / profession
Paediatric Anaesthetist, Monash Children's Hospital, Melbourne

Consultation Paper Questions 1 - 7

1. The ACCC considers the status quo and proposes three options to improve the safety of button batteries. Which is your preferred option and why do you prefer it to the others?

The ACCC considers the status quo and proposes three options to improve the safety of button batteries. Which is your preferred option and why do you prefer it to the others?
I strongly prefer Option 3, for the many reasons outlined in the ACCC Consultation paper of March 2020.
The battery packaging and device recommendations speak for themselves.
The third tier, ie the button battery hazard warnings are in my opinion also vital. Many consumers are simply unaware of the hazards which button batteries pose; these warnings will ensure that everyone purchasing a button battery or a device which requires one, will be exposed to suitable hazard warnings.

2. What effect do you believe each of the proposed options will have in saving lives and reducing severe injuries caused by button batteries?

What effect do you believe each of the proposed options will have in saving lives and reducing severe injuries caused by button batteries?
I cannot add to the ACCC's detailed analysis.
However, all three tiers will have important impacts, the first two in preventing serious injuries from occurring, and the third most particularly in ensuring increased community awareness of the hazard and more rapid responses when an ingestion is suspected.

3. Provide comment on the ACCC’s essential requirements for secure battery compartments, child-resistant packaging and warnings and information. Are there any additional requirements that should be included?

Provide comment on the ACCC’s essential requirements for secure battery compartments, child resistant packaging and warnings and information. Are there any additional requirements that should be included?
The recommendations are strong but not overly burdensome.
They are also clear, which is important for manufacturers and importers.
There will be costs, which will be passed on to consumers, but these will not be intolerable; and are a small price for greater safety, as outlined in the ACCC analysis.

I am not aware of any additional requirements which should be considered.

4. In relation to the requirement for secure battery compartments in which button batteries are only accessible with the use of a tool, do you consider that the use of a ‘tool’ should include the use of a coin? Why/why not?

In relation to the requirement for secure battery compartments in which button batteries are only accessible with the use of a tool, do you consider that the use of a ‘tool’ should include the use of a coin? Why/why not?
The use of a coin as a tool as the sole means of securing the battery is inadequate; such mechanisms are too easily overcome by inquisitive fingers.
The use of a coin as a tool PLUS a second mechanism seems adequate to me.

5. Do you supply products that currently meet the essential requirements for secure battery compartments, child-resistant packaging and warnings and information? If not, which requirements do your products not meet and why?

Do you supply products that currently meet the essential requirements for secure battery compartments, child resistant packaging and warnings and information? If not, which requirements do your products not meet and why?
N/A

6. Provide comment on the ACCC’s proposed information standard for warnings and information to be made available at point of sale. Are there any additional requirements that should be included for products sold online, or for unpackaged products supplied to consumers?

Provide comment on the ACCC’s proposed information standard for warnings and information to be made available at point of sale. Are there any additional requirements that should be included for products sold online, or for unpackaged products supplied to consumers?
The requirements are sound.
It might be worth ensuring that the allowances made for PRODUCTS which are sold unpackaged and/or online are not inadvertently allowed to apply to BATTERIES which are sold unpackaged or online. My view is that the law must require that batteries ARE packaged and DO come with hazard warnings, no matter how they enter Australia and no matter how they are sold.

Consultation Paper Questions 8 - 14

8. Do you agree with the proposed exemption for hearing aid devices and associated zinc air batteries? Please explain your reasons. (See section 5.2)

Do you agree with the proposed exemption for hearing aid devices and associated zinc air batteries? Why/why not? (see Section 5.3)
Yes, for all the reasons given by the ACCC: very low hazard risk versus major imposition of serious difficulties for the consumers of these products.

9. Do you consider that any other categories of consumer goods should be exempt from any of the proposed requirements? Do you have information and data you can provide to the ACCC in support of your view?

Do you consider that any other categories of consumer goods should be exempt from any of the proposed requirements? Do you have information and data you can provide to the ACCC in support of your view?
Not that I am aware of.

10 . What are the likely costs to implement each of the requirements (design changes, child resistant packaging, labelling), and what do you consider is the likely effect on prices for consumers?

What are the likely costs to implement each of the requirements (design changes, child resistant packaging, labelling), and what do you consider is the likely effect on prices for consumers?
I cannot add to the ACCC analysis.
I am convinced that the costs, which will of course be ultimately borne by consumers, are modest compared with the costs - both financial and human - of continuing with the status quo.

11. Do you think that all potential costs to business have been considered? Can you provide any further information about the likely cost and impact of each of the options?

Do you think that all potential costs to business have been considered? Can you provide any further information about the likely cost and impact of each of the options?
I have nothing to add to the ACCC analysis

12. Provide comment on the transition period for the proposed options. (See section 7)

Provide comment on the transition period for the proposed options (see Section 7).
12 months without exceptions seems reasonable and is in keeping with the usual arrangements for introducing comparable standards in other areas.

13. Provide comment on the principles-based approach to a mandatory safety standard. (See section 7.2)

Provide comment on the principles based approach to a mandatory safety standard (see Section 7.2). A principles based approach: • Sets out safety principles that need to be met rather than specifying detailed standards • Incorporates external instruments for compliance tests only • Includes administrative guidance which provides examples of relevant clauses in external standards that are considered to comply with each requirement.
Agree.

14. Provide any additional information or data that you think may be useful for informing the ACCC’s recommendation to the Minister.

Provide any additional information or data that you think may be useful for informing the ACCC’s recommendation to the Minister.
I am a paediatric anaesthetist.
I have had a strong interest in button battery injuries since a child under my care came perilously close to death as a result of a button-battery-induced tracheo-oesophageal fistula 25 years ago. I have looked after several children at Monash Children's Hospital with severe injuries from button batter ingestion, including the two Victorian case vignettes in the ACCC Consultation Paper. I am a member of a national group of concerned professionals from a variety of backgrounds, led by Dr Ruth Barker, who for several years have been working to improve the nation's prevention of, and responses to, button battery ingestion. I am a local reporter for the APSU reporting of serious button battery injuries in children. I appeared as an expert witness at the Coronial Inquest (Victoria) into the death of Isabella Rees.
For all these reasons, I believe I am able to provide a well-informed response to the ACCC's proposals. Button battery ingestion is a major public health hazard, which should be almost entirely preventable. I believe the ACCC's proposals are strong and clear, and are highly likely to be successful. I am pleased to support them.