Page 2842 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 14 August 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Jensen, are you talking to this amendment moved by Mr Collaery?
MR JENSEN: Yes, I am, Mr Deputy Speaker. All will be revealed. The statement responding to the report tabled by the Government this week by Mr Berry provided a response to the recommendation by the committee that the concentration of fluoride in the ACT water supply be reduced to 0.5 parts per million. Let me read, for the record, what that response says. I quote:
The Government will retain the present level of one milligram per litre (1 part per million) on the basis that:
the National Health and Medical Research Council recommendation to retain fluoridation at the level of 1 part per million was developed in a scientific study that is Australian based and takes into consideration conditions that are current to Australia generally; and
it is supported by a similar national scientific study in the United States, which although less specific in level recommendations, endorses a range of approved levels within which the NHMRC recommended level is midway.
I pause because one would think, in view of the statement made by Mr Berry yesterday, that there may have been another comment in response to that particular issue. Where was the comment? Where was the response about the problems being identified with the machinery, with putting it into the water? Where was that particular comment?
Mr Deputy Speaker, a person less cynical than I may well ask the following question: Did the Government seek to obtain a way out when it saw which way the votes and numbers were going, in an attempt to confuse the issue and set up a smokescreen to try to frighten members to step away from the recommendations of the committee and the clear wish of the Assembly?
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Jensen, would you make your speech relevant to proposed new clause 6.
MR JENSEN: Mr Deputy Speaker, it is very relevant to the amendment that we are talking about today.
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am having difficulty seeing that. It seems to be relevant to Dr Kinloch's amendment and the Bill.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .