Page 1773 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 18 October 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR PROWSE (10.47): There is no urgency. It is rubbish. Fluoride is a toxic, cumulative poison and it has been taken out of the water supply. If we were putting it in, it would be a different story. We have taken it out. Those who have made these statements do not understand, nor do they wish to understand, the fact that fluoride is a cumulative toxin. It takes up to eight years for the body to eliminate the toxin once it is stored in the long bones. Where is your urgency? That is rubbish. There is a complete lack of understanding by those who have moved this Bill. The only urgency that is presented to this house is that they cannot stand the heat. They took a decision because they had not read the Bill and did not investigate the facts before the event.
The Bill lay on the table for a month. That was the time when the Government should have moved to have a public inquiry, and if it had so started this inquiry the Bill would have been delayed. It would not have been put before the house. But they did nothing - not a thing. They did not appreciate the significance of this Bill. I put it to you that it was the other party, the Liberal Party, that vacillated in the first place. They did not know the facts, they are not prepared to listen to the facts and now they cannot stand the heat. There is urgency all right, because they are frying.
The point is that you need to look carefully at this issue because you cannot please everybody. Of course there is debate. The community has always divided on this issue. It is a world-renowned fact that the community will be divided. Unfortunately, the Liberal Party, which moved this motion, is going to lose by both sides of this 50 per cent. Those for and against will now see Liberal members as not being able to stand the heat. It was a brave decision that was taken by this Assembly. It is a duty incumbent on a new government to right the wrong of a previous government as soon as practicable, and that is what happened here. We did it, and it was taken out of the water. If you want to put it back in, you must have a referendum first; there must be a referendum. You cannot drug the people without every responsible voter having a chance to have his say. Therein lies the issue.
This Assembly will now have to accept total legal responsibility for putting fluoride in the water if it so happens as a result of this debate today. I put it to you that there is no urgency. Let the committee establish the rights and wrongs of the fluoride debate in the time allocated to it and as a result of that we can make a decision.
I would comment further that today I heard, on a particular program, that the chairman of this committee is worried that he will not be able to be objective and that the members of this Assembly will not be objective. I was offended by that statement. Every committee of this house has members on it who have preconceived ideas; they have a
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .