Page 1541 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 27 September 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
While I am on my feet talking about people's views, I point out that there are 42 per cent of the population out there who are going to be highly offended at being called cranks by the Chief Minister. Anybody who wants to remove fluoride from the water, according to the Chief Minister, is a crank.
Ms Follett: On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker; I did not.
MR KAINE: That is exactly what you said.
Ms Follett: I said that some of the people who had come to speak to me about removal of fluoride I could only describe as cranks. I would never describe the population in that way.
MR KAINE: Yes, and they were so described because they had a particular view on fluoride and 42 per cent of the population of Canberra happens to have that view.
Ms Follett: They were not from Canberra.
MR KAINE: But whether they come from Canberra or not is not the point. People out there have an opinion and they are entitled to hold that view, and to be told that they are cranks because they do not share the Chief Minister's view is quite unreasonable. I do not happen to share their view either, but I do not believe they are cranks because they hold it. Nor would I argue that the 43 per cent who are in favour of retaining fluoride in the water have necessarily got all the facts either. It is a very technical debate. People out there have their own views. People here have their own views and we are entitled to express them and to vote accordingly. I would submit, Chief Minister, that when we vote on this matter in a few minutes, that vote will accurately reflect the view of the population out there.
If that is in any way unfair or unreasonable, as the Chief Minister seems to suggest, then I do not know what course of action she would take other than conducting a full referendum to find out. If she has $800,000 in her pocket or in some of her hollow logs, then I suppose we could conduct a referendum, but I do not suggest that that is what we were elected for. We were elected to take decisions on behalf of this community, and that is what this debate is about. We will soon make that decision and I do not expect to hear later that those in this house who opted to remove fluoride from the water are cranks. I do not think they are. I think they have an informed view, perhaps even more informed than the Chief Minister's, and they are entitled to have it.
MR PROWSE, in reply (3.25): Fluoride has always been a very emotive issue, and let us hope that I can hold it to a sensible discussion.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .