Particle Detectors: (4.26) Smoke Detector: (2) Design: (2. 5) Performance Differences: In May, 2011 the Fire Protection Association of Australia's (FPAA) published a smoke alarm position statement, "Fire Prevention Association Australia considers that all residential buildings should be fitted with photoelectric smoke alarms. ". . . In November, 2011 the Northern Territory enacted Australia's first residential photoelectric legislation mandating the use of photoelectric smoke alarms in all new Northern Territory homes. In December, 2011 the Volunteer Fire Fighter's Association of Australia published a World Fire Safety Foundation report, 'Ionization Smoke Alarms are DEADLY", citing research outlining performance differences between ionization and photoelectric technology. In June, 2013 in an Australian Parliamentary speech, the question was asked, "Are ionization smoke alarms defective?" This was further to the Australian Government's scientific testing agency (the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization - CSIRO) data revealing performance problems with ionization technology in the early, smoldering stage of fire, a rise in litigation involving ionization smoke alarms, and increasing legislation mandating the installation of photoelectric smoke alarms. The speech cited a May 2013, World Fire Safety Foundation report published in the Australian Volunteer Fire Fighter Association's magazine titled, 'Can Australian and U. S. Smoke Alarm Standards be Trusted?' The speech concluded with a request for one of the world's largest ionization smoke alarm manufacturers and the CSIRO to disclose the level of visible smoke the manufacturers' ionization smoke alarms activate under CSIRO scientific testing