Home

About us

Action

Civil Rights - Minorities

Dental health

FAQs

Fluoride-free water

health risks

Important developments

New Zealand Information

Our objections to fluoridation

Science and Reviews

Stop fluoridation campaigns

Videos books and links

Warning - do not use fluoridated tap water for babies

What the Ministry of Health says

What's wrong with fluoridation?

Dunedin City Council

COUNCILLORS

Councillor	Fluoridation	Position statement
Dave Cull (Mayor)	For	1. Do you support fluoridation? Yes/ As the weight of evidence stands at the moment I believe the risks are outweighed by the benefits. 3. If you do support fluoridation, do you believe that it is acceptable for councillors to rely on the advice by the Ministry of Health and disregard the opinion of the people who pay for and drink the water? Yes 4. If you are not sure, would you support a referendum or some sort of consultative process? No
Fliss Butcher	Against	I would try and get it debated again and have a referendum.
Paul Hudson	Against	Definitely not. I would continue to work to educate people about the dangers of fluoridation and push for a public referendum.
Jinty MacTavish	For	To the best of my current knowledge I support fluoridation. As I am not a trained health professional, I believe the most responsible course of action for Councillors without any background in the area is to present to the public the information provided by the Ministry of Health. This information tells us that, in choosing to fluoridate, we are making the best decision we can in terms of social equality. I believe that referenda are a dangerous way of making decisions on health matters, and therefore would not support that as a decision-making vehicle. I would and do, however, encourage meaningful engagement with community members on all issues that are important to them, so would support a consultative approach to the issue if it was raised as a matter of significant concern by members of the Dunedin community.
Richard Thomson	For	We should use the information provided by the Ministry and put that in front of the public. I note that this is exactly what occurred at the last local body elections in Otago. Central Otago, Tapanui, Milton and Kaitangata all voted in a referendum to support fluoridation. The other area that does not fluoridate at present that was polled was Waitaki and they voted against fluoridation.
Colin Weatherall	For	I support Council's current position for all reasons as publicly indicated.
Lee Vandervis	Against	I do not support any mass-medication via the Dunedin water supply. Mass-medication is not justifiable on moral or medical grounds when e.g. options for fluoride in toothpaste/pills etc. are cheaply available for those who do want to take fluoride. I would like to see referendums going out with rates bills to canvas a number of issues. If there was a very strong referendum vote against fluoride, its removal from our water supply would then be easy.

OTHER CANDIDATES 2010 ELECTIONS

Councillor	Fluoridation	Position statement
Bill Allen	Against	I agree that flouridation should be a personal choice. When we lived in Canada we used to collect drops from City Hall every couple of months (or tablets were also available) which parents then added to the children's water, orange juice etc. The amount of medication was related to the child's age rather than a one size fits all. Mass medication means that there is flouride in everything that has had water added (e.g. bread, biscuits) and is at the same level for all people who consume these products.
Malcolm Anngow	Not sure, uncommitted	While I have no personal view on what you wish to achieve, I think it would be wrong at this point to commit to a direction without having the benefit in the future of looking at all the evidence and considering all sides.
Teresa Christie	For	As a child I only had access to rain water to drink but my mother (whom I regard as a responsible and caring parent) gave me fluoride tablets to chew. I believe that my teeth are good, strong and healthy as a result. So… I support fluoridation with the knowledge that not all parents are financially able to, or even want to make sure their children’s teeth are healthy and strong. It’s the same with immunizations… I do it for the good of the community. Fluoridation is for the good of the whole community. Their will always be arguments ‘for’ and ‘against’ fluoridation but I think that there are so many other things in our lives that prove more as a health risk that fluoridation. If you do support fluoridation, do you believe that it is acceptable for councillors to rely on the advice by the Ministry of Health and disregard the opinion of the people who pay for and drink the water? Yes, Councillors do not know everything and can only go on the advice they are given by health professionals. They should take into account the opinions of people but like I said above, it’s for the whole community. If people are so concerned about not drinking fluoridated water then they can buy water to drink. The people voted in the councilors and as a result entrust them to make the right decisions for the good of the majority of people. Council will never please everybody.
Dave Cull	For	1. Do you support fluoridation? Yes/ As the weight of evidence stands at the moment I believe the risks are outweighed by the benefits. 3. If you do support fluoridation, do you believe that it is acceptable for councillors to rely on the advice by the Ministry of Health and disregard the opinion of the people who pay for and drink the water? Yes 4. If you are not sure, would you support a referendum or some sort of consultative process? No
Paul Douglas (candidate for Southern DHB, Dunedin Central Ward)	For	Do you support fluoridation? Yes, with some reservations/concerns though I would never disregard, but always consider the opinion of the people. I would look at the advice of the Ministry of Health, and I would like to see any research done by our own Otago University researchers/academics, and Water Treatment station staff such as at Gount Grand, (above Brockville) and any documentation they have. My personal opinion is that fluoridation works, especially for keeping the young and older peoples teeth healthy. (especially those less well-off) I have doubts that the health of their teeth would improve if you removed fluoridation. I don’t think people, especially the young would want to take a supplementary fluoride tablet, if the water wasn’t treated. I would support adequate consultation with rankable and different options. And should be of at least a month, and not in December when everyones busy, but preferably between Feb-Nov. My concerns relate to my own experience, whereby I lived at the top of Brockville. Since about the age of 4 to 15, (up to Aug1980) which is around the time when Mt Grand came into operation. I used to drink heaps of water (being asthmatic avoiding milk) and when I was 16, and 17, I broke both legs in consecutive years (1981, 1982). I often worried about fluoridation and whether or not it can be detrimental to bone strength (since it is a poison- after all) or detrimental to some other body organ. I see a lot of our sportspeople in NZ getting injured, and I wonder, is their rate of injury greater than areas/places that don’t fluoridate? Are we in one big experiment? I would like to see a study/Research answer the questions: Is Fluoridation in Dunedin having a detrimental affect on our organs? Is Fluoridation in Dunedin weakening our bone structure?
Keith Duncan	For referendum	I do not feel strongly one way or the other about fluoridation, However, I strongly oppose compulsion, and therefore believe a referendum would be a valuable exercise.   I believe "leadership" is about leading, not pushing and bullying people into something they might not want, whether it be fluoridation, a stadium or a draconian car-parking regime.
Duncan Eddy (Chalmers Community Board)	Against	I'm opposed to fluoridation. I would actively support a public awareness campaign and referendum on the issue. It is unacceptable for elected representatives to ignore public opinion.
Shane Gallagher	For	As a councillor we have to look after the health of all the members of our community, especially those who do not have a voice and who would benefit most from fluoridation of water - children from deprived families. They seldom have anyone to advocate for them and it would be my responsibility as a councillor to look after those who are most vulnerable in our society. Does these childrens' lack of financial clout or their lack of ability to advocate for themselves mean that their needs and health outcomes are to be treated with disdain? I try to base my decisions on science and epidemiological evidence where appropriate and to date fluoridation has been found to be beneficial for everyone and there have been no credible studies to show otherwise. There are minor problems with dental fluorosis, but the benefits in decay prevention outweighs this largely aesthetic concern. I value people who raise issues for our community and allow for these matters to be debated in an open and respectful manner and I trust that you take my response in this manner. I believe that if there is a concern raised by the community then we are obliged as your democratic representatives to explain how such decisions have been reached and to help educate the community about the concerns and the science behind such things as fluoridation. So I would agree to a consulative process, however I do not believe that health matters are issues that are amenable to referenda.
Michael Guest	For	I support fluoridation. So do the Medical and Dental Officers of Health. We must have manifest evidence before we could reject their advice. I have read almost all of the antifluoridation literature and believe it is tragically misquoted. Public health is a leadership issue and should not be decided by the exigencies of a public referendum. If it were not the support of the Medical and Dental Officers of Health, and the other public health officials around the country, then I could be persuaded that a public referendum was the right way to go because my personal view would have no greater weight than the personal view of other citizens. But when the medical and dental professions are simply overwhelmingly in favour of fluoridation, a referendum is not appropriate.
Bob Gillanders	Against/needs more information	I must say I am uncomfortable with the idea of putting chemicals in the towns drinking water.In the unlikely event that I am elected I can only say I would be looking very hard at the quality of the evidence with which we would no doubt be presented.As it is easier to simply take flouride pills than it is to arrange an alternative water source, I have a lot of sympathy for your opinion.
Hendrik Koch	Against	I do not support fluoridation! I believe it is a toxin and it does not respect individual choice. Also it is more effective to use fluoridated tooth paste if you are concerned about tooth decay. I support removal. If required, I will support another referendum but I would want it to be binding.
Olivier Lequeux	Against	I am a firm believer that, as a by product of copper/iron and aluminium, fluoride SHOULD NOT be in our drinking water!
Chris Marlow	Not sure	I do not have a fluoridation policy for Dunedin and no fixed views on it at this stage.I am happy to listen to all the arguments for and against. I would support a consultative process.
Olive McRae  (Central Ward)	Against	Dunedin's water supply is currently medicated with silico-fluoride, a dangerous industrial waste product that we import from Belgium. I do not believe that our water should be a vessel for any type of medication under ANY circumstances. Council members are not qualified doctors, and therefore should not prescribe medication to Dunedin residents. I have been a strong supporter for safe, clean, unmedicated water for some time. If I am elected, I will do everything in my power to stop fluoridation in Dunedin.
Steve O'Connor	For	I fully support the fluoridation of water. I've not seen anything to convince me that fluoridation should be withdrawn. I do understand that there are some side affects such as making bones more brittle.
Maurice Prendergast	Against	No to fluoride thanks. I harvest rain water for that reason.
Les Pullar	For	My response to your 4 questions are as follows' 1.Yes 2.N/A 3. I believe the greater numbers of the people who pay for and drink the water agree with fluoridation. 4. No
Randall Ratana	Not sure	I am unsure. As part of my campaign a policy of mine is more consultation and binding referendum for high cost DCC projects. I believe we should let the majority decide so I am in favour of a referendum.
Lindsay Smith	For	I have to say that I am not widely read on the detail of the concerns you raise but do see the positive results on my children’s teeth. I do have a degree of faith in the Ministry of Health and other international scientific bodies to have tested the concerns you raise, given that the debate has been going on for some time. I appreciate the passion behind your concerns but would have to say I don’t share them.
Geraldine Tate	Against	I do not support fluoridation of city water supplies. I would be happy to move a motion for removal of medication added to our city water which allows no chice for people who live here. I would work with other councillors who oppose fluoridation to try to influence the rest of council. I think education and consultation of the community is very important. Fluoride is easily available for those who want it, in most toothpastes. Many people are not aware that it has been banned in many places in the world, if they did their attitudes might change.
Lyn Tozer	Not sure	I need to research this issue much more carefully.As a Council we need to seek information and advice from all credible sources and, based on a thorough and objective analysis of that information, make decisions in the best interests of the greatest number of people. If there are community concerns it is critical that these are listened to. However not all matters, including those related to public health, can be taken to a referendum.

Back to main elections page