Letter from the Green Party to a Fluoride Free Supporter. FFNZ Comments in blue. Thank you for your email regarding fluoridation of water supplies. Like you, the Green Party value protecting our health, the environment, and living as close to nature as possible. We also believe an evidence based approach is the best way of deciding how to achieve these goals. Adding hazardous waste to the drinking water is not living as close to nature as possible. The Green Party Policy is developed by members on a consensus basis, and our current policy on fluoridation states that particular regard must be given to both the public health benefits of fluoridated community water supplies, and the potential public health risks of excessive fluoride consumption via community water supplies. The Green party still doesn’t realise there are no public health benefits from fluoridated water? Tooth decay is a preventable disease with significant health and social impacts, and is also the single most common chronic disease among New Zealanders of all ages. The Green Party has called for a tax on sugary drinks that can fund health promotion, and healthy food in schools and other public organisations, to combat both tooth decay and other chronic disease related to over-consumption of sugar. Whether or not they are calling for a tax on sugary drinks is beside the point. The Green Party has not supported mandatory fluoridation. We voted for the Health (Fluoridation of Drinking Water) Amendment Bill at first reading, so the bill can be heard at select committee. The Bill proposes to move the decision from Local Councils to the District Health Boards, a move supported by Local Government NZ. We are considering carefully the submissions that have been presented to the Health Select Committee. The Bill has support from both National and Labour. We are hoping to propose constructive amendments to improve the Bill, so that community consultation has to be undertaken by DHBs and the costs are born by the body the makes the decision. This is a step in the right direction. We absolutely need community consultation and the costs should be borne by the DHB, if they make the decision. Perhaps if they are faced with the cost they will seriously look into whether or not fluoridation will reduce dental decay, and reduce pressure on their budget. They find that it will not and then come to the realisation that introducing a NZ style CHILDMSILE programme would be the way to go. In our view, DHBs are better places than local councils to assess the health benefits and risks of fluoridation while maintaining democratic oversight from the local community. Unlike councils, DHBs have access to the necessary level of medical expertise with which to make informed judgements on whether fluoride should be added to drinking water, taking into account local health priorities and most importantly local health related information and evidence. Councils have the same access to medical expertise as DHBs. It is the DHB staff that advise the councils and it will be the DHB staff that advise the DHB board members. The DHBs have ALWAYS opposed any move to stop fluoridation. It has always been us against the DHBs. If the local community does not want fluoridated water, they are able to vote for DHB members that support this view. The majority of DHB members are elected during local body elections, with a minority being appointed by the Ministry of Health. DHBs only have seven elected members out of 11. Therefore, they are not able to provide the same level of democratic over-sight, plus DHBs are contractually obligated to carry out MoH policy. So any show of democracy will be just that – a SHOW of democracy. The Green Party Caucus will make a decision on whether to continue supporting the bill once the select committee process is complete. We do not know when the committee process will be complete. We have been expecting the Second Reading but it has been shifted down the list on the Order Paper so we are now not sure if it will be heard before the election or not. Thanks again for taking the time to share your opinion with us. Protecting our health and the environment are two of the most important things we can hope to achieve. Although this Bill is likely to pass no matter how the Green Party votes, you can rest assured that if the Greens are elected to Government this September, you will be able to have greater confidence in both Ministry of Health and DHBs to take a holistic and rigorously science-based approach to public health policy. If the Green Party thinks there is a benefit from fluoridation then we see no reason to have confidence that either the MoH or the DHBs will take a holistic or science-based approach to public health. Ngā mihi
Nā Stuart Stuart Baker, Senior Executive Assistant to Julie Anne Genter MP
Spokesperson for Health, ACC, Sport and Recreation, Transport, Auckland Issues, Youth, and Associate Finance
Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand Note : National and Labour also support this Bill. The only party currently in Parliament that opposes it is NZ First who think the decision should be made by local referendum. | 
