ACCC is not an authority on safety - a must read!!

What if you are in the market for a new car. You've done the research, you've thought about it and came up with a decision on a particular car. What if you read an article from an authority you believe is an expert on all things car related. This authority, this car expert steers you away from your decision, saying it's a bad choice, don't go near it. You decide on another type of car from the findings of this expert. What if, a few months down the track you discover that this expert doesn't know the difference between a motorcycle, a truck or even a station wagon. How would you feel? ripped off? angry perhaps? annoyed about being lied too? steaming at the ears because your original choice would have been perfect to suit your needs. What would you do? speak up?

I spent over an hour 2 weeks ago speaking with Tony Mintura from the ACCC, who released to the media that cloth slings are dangerous and shouldn't be used. A sort of Armageddon type statement that smacked of innuendo that if you put your baby in a sling it will die, it will suffocate instantly.
Yet no baby actually has. The first one last year was the famous 'hang the baby on the door knob' case.

OK I warrant that it was a 'bag style sling' that had 2 layers, elasticised opening and the baby was strapped to the bottom of the sling and hung off the door knob so the parents dogs couldn't get at the baby. It might have sounded like a good idea at the time but it became a fatal one. The elasticised opening closed up as a natural reaction, the dual layers of fabric stopped airflow and the baby was at the bottom of the bag carrier breathing in stale air. A mistake that can never be repaired.
Infantino recalled all of it's bag style carriers for review, while most of the industry had again repeated what they all thought when it first appeared on the market.....WTF! We all still do.

The ACCC went into fight mode and the newspapers said that if the ACCC have their way, all slings will be banned. Shock waves hit the industry, contacting the ACCC was harder than a needle in a hay stack, so emails were written, phones calls - all unanswered.

I saw more than 15 years of hard work, research, study, testing, go running out the door faster than my family when I offer Brussels Sprout Pie is for dinner.

Only those who are fans, didn't read the article, or tish-toshed the ACCC antics away that we are still here today.

Looking at the photo's in this blog, it looks nearly impossible on how a baby can suffocate. Rule of thumb with any product, you must be able to see baby's mouth at all times.

With the death of a 2 day old newborn baby in SA worn under the mother's jumper, the ACCC is at it again, trying to blame the death on slings. Most people will agree carrying a baby under a jumper without visible access to baby's mouth is never a clever idea, regardless of being in a sling or not.

The coroner handed down the judgement that the death was indeterminable, but the ACCC once again tried to focus the blame on a sling. The point is that with any type of suffocation, there is clear forensic evidence, such as cell & tissue damage, explaining it simply. This was not evident in the baby's autopsy.
Again we approached the ACCC with a 'please explain & why are you scaremongering the public!"

No answer again until I decided to follow protocol and make a complaint about the ACCC as a jeopardising monopoly, which by the way is illegal. The only government body who can approach in times like this is the ACCC. So the ACCC had to follow mandatory protocol and investigate itself.
My outcome - result! A phone call from the man himself, Tony Mintura, the expert on sling safety, except he doesn't know the difference between any of the different types of carriers on the market.

I'm not joking!!!!!!!! this man who made the statements, the press releases, doesn't even know the difference between a hammock style carrier, a parachute style, a wrap style or the dreaded bag style (ok most of us in the industry want to see this style go, because we are all in the know). I had to spend some time explaining how the different styles operate, the benefits, the whole kit & caboodle. I also asked him if he had ever used one, though I suspected the answer - no, "I just doesn't like them" he said.
This is the man that is trying to govern what you are allowed to use, like the car expert who knows nothing of cars.
Our industry was ever grateful to Kidsafe who immediately got on TV to feature how safe slings are.


What or who is the ACCC anyway? What do they do?
The ACCC was formed as a watchdog to protect businesses and consumers from pricing & practise monopolies.
They are not an authority on product safety.

Mostly this organisation was established as an outcome from the insidious dealings of the building industry, then became a protective blanket for all industries.
As one example, in our industry, some years ago, a private organization called INPAA, aka Industry Nursery Products Australia Association was formed as a regulatory group to list safe products that had undergone or met high safety standards, including legislative, such as car seats or non-legislative products, such as baby carriers etc.
Initially this non-government body was an ethical group determined to make Australian babies & children's products safe, but with a changing of the board of directors over the years, an insidious practise started to emerge.
Around 5 years ago, Bubba Moe Slings was the first to achieve product liability for soft baby carriers within Australia. I approached INPAA to become 'certified', and was rejected without any comment. Numerous phone calls were never returned and we at Bubba Moe were left scratching our heads as to why?
It wasn't till we were at a baby expo in Melbourne we were told the truth by another sling competitor who also had trouble gaining any entry into this elusive organisation. Having done some research herself, she found that another competitor of ours was one of the board of directors of INPAA, therefore any other soft baby carrier company would not be allowed a certificate of approval. Of course INPAA approached retailers to become a part of their group (retailers paying a hefty annual fee to display a sticker in the window) and then telling the retailers to clear their shelves of any non-INPAA products. A monopoly formed.
Many retailers bucked at the cost and the loss of some of their favourite products. It was a pram manufacturer (who wishes to remain anonymous) who found that another board member was also a pram manufacturer, that contacted the ACCC. This is were the ACCC is an authority. The board members were sacked, a new practice protocol was put into place under the guidance of ACCC, and we in the industry sighed a hefty sigh of relief.

For the record, Australian Standards & Kidsafe have never been in any association with the ill-fated INPAA. Though INPAA is still trading (eyebrows raised) it doesn't have any clout or bearing and most people don't even know of its existence. The former board members who eagerly wished the demise of their competitors all went out of business themselves (karma always bites back)

The strange thing is that why is ACCC getting involved? They along with the ABA (Australian Breast Feeding Association) are trying to set a standard on baby carriers personally. I feel that this is INPAA revisited all over again. ABA themselves don't have a breastfeeding carrier except for their 'apron' style carrier that has been rated the worst carrier in history for it's tiny shoe string straps and no infant head support. They approached me around 2 years ago to redesign this carrier to be more supportive, user friendly and most importantly breast feeding friendly! I was eager until a change of staff (there's a lot of staff changes) left me dealing with their project manger........ in short -  I quit!!!!!!!!!!!
I, like all their previous staff wanted to hide on the Sahara side of Timbuktu.

In the Media industry, they are often referred to as the 'WHO', but these people have some clout.
Do you know why you never or very rarely see advertisements on bottles or dummies? The ABA is responsible for that. Whether you are a member or not, all new parents are under the wrath of the ABA, who themselves are creating a monopoly - which is illegal.



New parents are being denied access to knowledge of an item that they might or have to use. No parent should be made to feel ashamed for using a bottle, after all what is a bottle really? It's a drinking vessel, like a cup, glass, pop top etc, its just something to drink out of.

Our caricature (mascot) is a derivative of a photo of my 2nd son 'the Chef' & me when he was 5 months old. In the photo he is sitting in the sling chomping at the side of his mouth a dummy (great for teething instead of me) with me looking at him with motherly love. We cant use our mascot because of the dummy.
For me it's a homage to my son who made me start the business of Bubba Moe.

We were incredibly poor, faced with a moral dilemma when he sold his 4 rabbits to produce $20. Do I use the money to buy food or buy fabric to make some more money maybe? when I had my first non-family customer. It was he who said "If you do this, our lives will change"
The next week, when she paid for the sling, we bought something that we hadn't had in a very long while - ice cream.