On Wednesday I was delighted to support a motion to the City Council, calling for a public refurendum on whether fluoride should be added to the local water.
The council debate was about fluoride but not about the merit of fluoride or the concerns of those who oppose it. It was instead about Democracy.
It is clear that an overwhelming majority of residents in Southampton do not wish to have fluoride added to their water.The NHS’ initial consultation attracted 10,000 responses, with 72 per cent against. In a separate and later phone poll of 2,000 residents, 38 per cent opposed fluoridation compared to 32 per cent in favour. Whichever way you cut it, to date, local people have made it clear that they don’t want fluoride.
In a democratic, free country we should respect the views of majority. Labour’s unelected quango, the South Central NHS are however pushing ahead with their plans.
I feel that on such an important issue you shouldn’t ride roughshod over residents’ views. On Wednesaday I called for a referendum to determine finally and without doubt the views of local people. I would expect the NHS and the Government to respect the outcome of that referendum.
I was delighted that the motion was carried, albeit without the support of Labour or the Lib Dems.
On Wednesday we voted on the motion and made our views as a council known. However it is important to note that the Conservative Party nationally support local people having their say and a referendum. David Cameron and Andrew Lansley MP have both put this view on the public record when speaking recently in Hampshire.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Dear Mr Moulton,
I am saddened to see one of our potential national representatives jump on such a blatant piece of special interest pandering.
I would have to dispute your assertion that the NHS consultation is in anyway representative of public opinion. I for one didnt even know it was happening and I suspect the strength of feeling amongst the flat-earthers who oppose this measure is much stronger than amongst the sensible majority who accept this scientifically demonstrable health measure.
I would really expect better of a well educated potential leader of our community, filtering out this ill educated knee jerk opposition is why we have a representative democracy rather than mob rule after all.
Shaw
Surely this is an issue of huge public interest. If the NHS consultation was inadequate (which it was) surely that's an argument for a refurendum. I am keen to see more direct democracy on issues such as this.
Jeremy
I just think the vote will be schewed towards those with a strong opinion i.e. those who oppose the measure.
Hi Jeremy
I find it so sad that there are still so many ignorant people out there that do not understand the implications of the industrial classified poisin floride. There has never been any long term ( I mean 10 yrs or so) study done ever on this stuff. Part of The China study even revealed how the rise of brittle bones was attributed to floride. PLus that fact that when it was introduced back in the 60s UK poeple got sick then, plus kids got brown teeth etc,.. and that is one reason why it got discontinued.
There are better ways ( like brushing your teeth) and Sweden and indonesia have proved it. Read the World health site info.The money is better spent on other things.
J.S
Jeni,
I assure you I rarely comment on any topic from the a position of ignorance.
There are plenty of long term studies on the use of *appropriate* levels of fluoride in water. The appropriate level is 1 part per 1,000,000 of water.
I would point you at a chinese study on the effects of fluoride on bone breaks as an example which clearly shows that the lowest level of bone breaks was at this appropriate level of fluoride with superior results than those consuming water with lower levels of fluoride
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12561595
The research does indeed show if fluoride is increased to higher levels prevalance of brittle bones increases but noone is proposing to increase levels to these unsafe levels.
It is an unfortunate fact that not everyone follows good dental hygiene practice including brushing with a good fluoride toothpaste and it for these people that this measure would undoubtably aid saving pain and discomfort of poor dental health and money for the state in terms of paying for NHS denistry.
Post a Comment