Page 628 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 20 May 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Detail Stage
Clause 1 agreed to.
Clause 2
Debate (on motion by Mr Berry) adjourned.
ELECTRICITY AND WATER (AMENDMENT) BILL 1992
Debate resumed from 13 May 1992, on motion by Mrs Carnell:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
MR BERRY (Minister for Health, Minister for Industrial Relations and Minister for Sport) (11.46): So ends, perhaps, part of a saga in relation to a piece of legislation which has been the subject of much media interest and community interest around the ACT, and scorn, I suggest, from various quarters. It strikes me that it is an appropriate ending for such legislation. I suspect that there will still be some discord in this place about the changes which are being proposed, unless there has been another Dennis poll which shows that the majority of people in the ACT support the moves that have been taken up by Mrs Carnell.
The Government, by the way, supports a return to the recommendation of the National Health and Medical Research Council. The return of the level of fluoride in the water supply to one milligram per litre in accord with that recommendation is, in our view, a sensible move. Mind you, if the National Health and Medical Research Council at some point in the future take a different view, we would want to consider our position in the context of what they might say. The review of fluoride benefits and risks produced by the United States Department of Health and Human Services in 1991 recommended a range of 0.7 to 1.2 parts per million. I think it is sensible to adopt the NHMRC recommendation, which stands at one part per million. The Labor Government is satisfied with that. Our position has always been that we would support NHMRC recommendations.
What we have to ensure is that the procedure by which the fluoride is introduced into the water is implemented in such a way as to ensure that we can properly measure the concentration and that the authority is not outside the law when it comes to the introduction of fluoride into the water supply. It is our view that the clause which provides for that introduction of fluoride into the water supply has to be framed in a way which looks at an average concentration of fluoride over a 24-hour period, to ensure that we can remain within the law with the equipment which is in place now.
There have been some discussions between the lawyers and the engineers about how we might achieve this. Mr Connolly will be speaking on the matter later and he will be introducing some amendments which will tidy up the Bill, to ensure that the fluoride is added in a way which is consistent with the law as it stands. They are only minor amendments, Madam Speaker; but I think they will tidy the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .