Page 4552 - Week 15 - Thursday, 22 November 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR PROWSE: Yes, and if we carry on in the way we are going it is no wonder. The people that have let that interim report out know full well that there is incorrect, damaging information there. I cannot understand how they were impertinent enough to report in that manner.
The other thing I will mention is the fact that it is an interim report. They just happened to cleverly put a rider on it that at this time they think this is the way they go, that there are no ill effects from fluoride. But, if you read it, it really says, "Look, we will change our minds if we are proved wrong".
That is how clever this august body is that you people keep holding up as the responsible group of people who are supposed to be directing us in our deliberations, particularly in this case, on the fluoride issue. They are a group of people like you and me. I suggest to you, from the evidence of the omission of Professor Douglas' evidence, that they have vested interests. Therefore I would ask you to consider very seriously before you push ahead and do not take into account the fact that the NHMRC have released an interim report, because they are going to revise their report and their opinion on this if this committee report that Mr Stevenson has identified proves them wrong. They have left an opening for themselves to change their mind.
I would suggest to us all that this is a very major report. We have spent a lot of money on it. We can wait the extra few months. Heaven help those who have to drink the fluoride for that much longer. I apologise to them. The point is: let us keep the inquiry open for those extra couple of months. It is not costing us money per se, other than the cost of putting the fluoride in the water. We can keep the committee going until then and, hopefully, that report will be down by then. If it is not down by then, I do not know the reason why. I suspect that we would be forced into having to make a decision one way or the other. I think an early decision at this stage is not going to gain us anything. By putting it off we may well gain something. It might well give some credibility to the members of this committee. It might give some significant credibility to this whole Assembly. That is the chance you run. You run the chance of actually getting some credibility for this Assembly. I feel for Dr Kinloch, being on that committee, when we see academic fraud produced by the NHMRC. I would expect Dr Kinloch to be able to recognise that and protect his own academic standing. If this is not an attempt to blatantly mislead this Assembly, I do not know what is.
MR DUBY (Minister for Finance and Urban Services) (5.55): I want to make a few points.
Mr Berry: The Minister responsible for water.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .