Page 632 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 20 May 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR STEVENSON: Indeed, Madam Speaker. I could say that I have addressed the chamber before and it has not really done a lot of good. Perhaps I am trying to talk to people who can make some difference to it.
Mr Humphries: They cannot vote with you, Dennis.
MR STEVENSON: Well, they can vote. People can always vote. They can vote at a referendum or they can vote at an election. Many times they have voted at referendums throughout Australia. What do they say? Again and again they say no to fluoridation. The people say no to fluoridation. The Blue Mountains is one of the last strongholds of non-fluoridated water in the Sydney metropolitan area.
Mr Berry: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. We are really testing the standing orders when it comes to this issue. It certainly is not a question of whether we should have fluoride in the water or not. It is a matter of what the level ought to be. I would like to hear Mr Stevenson's views on that, rather than something which is not up for grabs.
MADAM SPEAKER: Are you wishing to remind the chamber of the standing order which refers to relevancy, Mr Berry?
Mr Berry: Standing order 62 talks about irrelevance, and the issue of relevance has to be drawn into focus, I think. Standing order 58 talks about a member not digressing from the subject matter.
MADAM SPEAKER: I direct your attention to those two standing orders, Mr Stevenson. I am sure that you will continue appropriately.
MR STEVENSON: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. We have the situation that was just brought up by the Health Minister. We are, indeed, talking about whether or not we increase the daily dose of everybody who drinks the water, or has something that was cooked in it, or in some way cops it via the food chain, from 0.5 parts per million to one part per million. What the committee of inquiry, over a period of 14 months in the last Assembly, decided was that it was better, for health reasons - - -
Mr Berry: Not for political ones or any of that.
MR STEVENSON: They decided, for health reasons, to reduce the level of fluoride from one part to 0.5 parts. Mr Berry says, "Not for political reasons". Mr Wood voted to reduce it from one part per million to 0.5 parts per million. The Social Policy Committee was the only committee that was an all-party committee of the original Assembly. There were five members on it - a Labor member, a Liberal member, a Rally member, and so on. We decided unanimously that it should be reduced and the Assembly then reduced it. That was done after a 14-month inquiry. A lot of work by all members went into that.
So, what happened to that? The Assembly is now suggesting that we throw all that information out the window, throw that 14 months of work out the window, and increase the dosage.
Mr Berry: What did the Dennis poll say?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .