About 300 Whangārei residents will now be surveyed on what they think about the introduction of fluoride to the town’s drinking water.
The phone survey comes after intense debate around the council table over whether to stop, pause or continue fluoridation, at a meeting yesterday.
Debate flared up again after a recent High Court ruling that then director general of health Sir Ashley Bloomfield’s 2022 directive to the council to fluoridate was unlawful.
Work will continute on getting about $4 million worth of fluoridation infrastructure in place, ahead of a Ministry of Health deadline that all Whangārei’s drinking water must be fluoridated by the end of 2024.
Cr Marie Olsen yesterday sought to pause this work until the legal position could be clarified on the November 10 High Court ruling.
But her push was lost in a 7:6 vote, as both sides refused to shift in a fluoride fracture, with roughly the same number of councillors on each side.
The debate played out as the public gallery filled with anti-fluoride campaigners, who used the silent hand-waving New Zealand sign language version of noisy clapping to support politicians who spoke against the introduction of fluoride.
Whangārei District Council (WDC) general manager infrastructure Jim Sephton said the council’s legal advice was that the directive from Sir Ashley still stood.
“Until the outcome of the [February 2] relief hearing is known, council’s legal positions in relation to the directives, the funding agreement and the contract for delivery of works have not changed,” Sephton said on Thursday.
“It would appear to be premature to take any alternative actions until the outcome of the relief hearing is known.”
The costs of stopping or pausing fluoridation implementation would be about $9 million – including the $200,000 fine from the Health Ministry for not meeting the directive and ongoing $10,000 daily penalty costs.
However, Olsen said Rotorua District Council had paused its fluoridation after the High Court ruling.
She had been advised in talking with Rotorua District Council that breach of contract would not hold water for WDC if it ceased its own fluoridation implementation work.
She had also been advised that the fines that had been indicated for WDC in that situation would not hold water if brought before the High Court, as it had already found the directive unlawful,
Justice Paul Radich, after his November 10 High Court ruling, requested that the parties find a way forward. This has not happened. As a result, February 2 has been set aside as a hearing date for Radich to rule on a remedy.
Mayor Cocurullo said the council would take note of the February ruling, and the implications of any changes on fluoridation that might come through from the new Government.
Sephton said the High Court had not quashed the directive on November 10. Neither had it said that fluoridating water supplies was unlawful.
The phone survey of Whangārei residents will update community feedback from a 2002 council referendum of local residents in which 62 per cent of those polled said they did not want fluoridated drinking water.
■ Local Democracy Reporting is Public Interest Journalism funded through NZ On Air
