Page 1780 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 18 October 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Now, if it turns out to be the best possible thing to double the fluoride in the water, to double the level, we will recommend that. If it turns out that it should be halved or put in at some level - one-quarter, three-quarters - we will recommend that. If it turns out that it should be removed, we will recommend that.
And, please, let me stress that there may well be outcomes that we have not yet considered. I think that is particularly true in connection with the environment. We will consider all those questions fairly and objectively. I join with the Chief Minister and Mr Wood in taking it that all members of the Social Policy Committee will join in this important process. I thank the house for allowing me this rather long comment, and I ask that we deal with this question as carefully and thoughtfully as possible, not just today but over the next year.
MRS GRASSBY (Minister for Housing and Urban Services) (11.14): Mr Speaker, I would like it to be known and made very clear that five members on this side of the house voted against taking fluoride out of the water and voted to have it sent to a committee because we did not have the facts of the matter. This was not part of our platform, and thus we did not have a party line on it. So it was decided that we should have the experts from both sides of the fence tell us exactly what were the facts about fluoride. Now, I think I am smarter than the average bear, but when it comes to something as important as this I feel I need to ask the experts. I feel that I owe it to the voters to know both sides of the question.
Mr Stevenson talked about certain books. I have read those books, but I have also read Mein Kampf. Although I would not put those books in the same bookcase as I put Mein Kampf, I still think there are three sides to the question: your side, my side - - -
Mr Stevenson: That is an atrocious correlation.
MRS GRASSBY: I said I would not put it in the same class, Mr Stevenson.
Mr Stevenson: Why mention it?
MRS GRASSBY: As I say, books can also be subjected to the view that they may not be exactly right. Therefore, I want to see both sides of the question. Only by sending it to a committee would I be able to see both sides of the question, because we all know there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. It is only then, when it is put to a committee, that we are able to see both sides of the question. I voted to send the matter to a committee before we take it out. I think this is the only way to go. Then the voters of the ACT, to whom we owe this, will know the facts.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .