Page 1556 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 27 September 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Of course, the anti-fluoride people have jumped on this particular bandwagon. The matter of mottled teeth due to fluoride has also been raised. This is not at all common. Most cases are very mild, and only rarely is recapping needed. Certainly it is not a reason for dentists to be wanting fluoridation, which is sometimes suggested. If there were no fluoridation, any subsequent increases in dental fillings would have a beneficial financial effect for the dentists, who pride themselves on preferring preventive dentistry.
Also in his speech Mr Prowse referred to the National Health and Medical Research Council and he stated in his earlier speech that this is a group of six people who have hung their academic hats on fluoride. This is a bit unfair to the people concerned. The council consists of some 25 members with representatives from the Australian Council of Trade Unions, the Confederation of Australian Industry, the Australian Federation of Consumer Organisations, the Australian Council of Social Services, representatives at the highest level from each State and territory, the Commonwealth Department of Community Services and Health, the Australian Vice-Chancellors Committee, and representatives from its principal committees which themselves have similar representation as well as expert committees and working parties reporting to them.
Mr Duby: I raise a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. The matter to be debated is whether this matter should be referred to a committee, not a rehash of this morning's debate on the efficacy of the taking of fluoride in the water. Please ask the speaker to stick to the point.
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes. Minister, please stick to the point.
MR WHALAN: Mr Deputy Speaker, I do not think that we can overexaggerate the right of community views in relation to this matter to be raised here today in this chamber because we do know that there is an irresponsible move to bulldoze this draconian legislation through and to deny the rights of people to be consulted in relation to it. We know that this is being supported by the Residents Rally party, contrary to all their mouthings about being supportive of the consultative process. It is for that reason, I think - the prospect that I am unable to persuade Dr Kinloch to reconsider his position - that every opportunity should be taken to air these issues.
That is the point of raising the technical aspects and emphasising them, so that the members of the Assembly can have reinforced the fact that the only way, and the only proper way, that this matter can be resolved is by going to an Assembly committee where that Assembly committee has the opportunity to place advertisements in newspapers, maybe even national advertisements, to invite submissions to discuss this issue, then to receive representations from
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .