What your Councillors have said on water fluoridation
FRASER Coast Regional Councillors have reaffirmed their positions on water fluoridation 3 years after they voted to remove it from the water supply, with some indicating they were open to reconsidering their position.
Council voted 8-3 to remove fluoride in 2013, with then-mayor Gerard O'Connell, deputy mayor Trevor McDonald and Cr Rolf Light voting to keep it in.
Mayor Chris Loft voted to remove fluoride from the Fraser Coast's water supply in 2013, citing health reasons on behalf of the community.
"(I'm) quite convinced that fluoride in water in doses like that is not good for everybody," he said.
"It was quite a significant saving for Council."
Cr Loft said he would not reconsider the decision, stating his "position remains the same."
Cr James Hansen voted to remove fluoride, claiming it was "not council's responsibility or decision to provide it (fluoride) to people via water."
Despite not being on council at the time of the 2013 motion, Cr Truscott said he would be open to the discussion, "but not necessarily the reintroduction" of water fluoridation.
"My personal belief is that the decision should be up to the individual should they choose fluoride in their water," he said.
"As the decision was made by the former council in 2013, I would like to see the reason for removal previously and new information regarding the situation."
Based on the community feedback he had received, Cr Daniel Sanderson also voted to remove fluoride. He said he could reconsider his position on the matter depending on the benefits of reintroducing fluoride.
"I could possibly consider it if there are strong facts about it, but there are always two sides to the story," he said.
Cr Rolf Light was one of the three councillors who voted against the motion, stating he thought it was a good idea to keep it at the time.
"I believe there is enough evidence for the benefits, and the evidence says it stops tooth decay," he said.
He ruled out reconsidering his position, stating he "stood by the scientific evidence."
While also being unable to vote on the motion in 2013, Cr David Lewis said he could consider reintroducing the debate if there was a demand for it.
"I'd reconsider only if there was a real demand to have the debate again. Discussing it every 2-3 years isn't ideal," he said.
Cr Darren Everard said he could not recall how he voted at the 2013 motion, but mentioned there was a "consolidated push" from anti-fluoride campaigners.
"We got a lot of information and emails sent to council from anti-fluoride groups. There were members of the public who were convinced they were being poisoned by fluoride," he said.
When asked if he would reconsider his position, Cr Everard said he would follow the due process and make his decision.
"I'd follow the due process and read all the information, then put it out there and see what the community wants. I'd make my decision based on the information supplied," he said.
Cr Stuart Taylor said he couldn't see the justification for fluoridation when he voted to remove it in 2013.
"I couldn't see the justification for it on the evidence we received...there were a range of views provided," he said.
While Cr Taylor said he would "maintain his standards", he said he would reconsider "if there was more information that came to hand."
Cr George Seymour voted to remove fluoride, stating it was a matter of other people's personal choice.
"It's for other people's personal choice as to what kind of chemicals they ingest," he said.
While he stated his view had not changed, he mentioned he was open to reconsidering.
Cr Maddern and Chapman did not respond to the Chronicle before print.