Tauranga City Council will seek an extension to the November 30 deadline to fluoridate its water supply.
An extension is being sought to delay fluoridating Tauranga’s water supply because “people should have a choice”.
The decision was made at a tense Tauranga City Council meeting on Monday that was packed with more than 100 people against water fluoridation.
It was standing room only at the council chambers and the room was over capacity for health and safety reasons, so people were asked to watch the livestream from the foyer.
Initially they refused but were told the meeting couldn’t begin until there was health and safety compliance.
In July 2022, the director-general of health directed the council to fluoridate Tauranga’s water supply by November 30, 2024.
Tauranga was one of 14 councils given the directive. The city’s water has been unfluoridated since 1992. Speaking in the public forum, Robert Coe asked the council to “put a stop to the madness” and not fluoridate the water.
He had concerns about the health and safety of council staff who would be adding fluoride to the water supply. He was also concerned there could be accidental overdosing of fluoride if there was an issue at the dosing plant.
Dr Alanna Ratna from NZ Doctors Speaking Out with Science said studies from the United Kingdom showed there was evidence that topical application of fluoride offered some protection to teeth but there was “no evidence that fluoridating water has any beneficial effect on teeth at all”.
There was a safer way of getting better dental outcomes which was dental hygiene and good dietary habits said Ratna.
Council Infrastructure general manager Nic Johansson said there were three options for the council - to continue with work to fluoridate the water to meet the deadline, ask for an extension or not fluoridate the water but risk being fined.
If the council doesn’t comply with the fluoridation order it faces a potential fine of up to $200,000 and, if the non-compliance continues, it could be fined up to $10,000 per day.
Deputy mayor Jen Scoular asked the council’s chief executive, Marty Grenfell, if staff would be safe when dosing the water.
Grenfell replied that they would be. Councillor Rick Curach said his position was to follow what was recommended by the Government.
Curach didn’t like that the council would be acting unlawfully if it chose not to fluoridate.
Members of the public interjected with booing and calls of “Shame on you” and “Just kill us all.”
Mayor Mahé Drysdale told them their behaviour was disrupting the meeting and asked them to listen.
As Curach spoke the disruption continued, and Drysdale said the meeting would need to be adjourned if councillors weren’t given the respect they needed to debate the issues.
Councillor Hautapu Baker said choice was being taken away from the community and the council hadn’t been able to hear from them. He supported applying for an extension.
The extension would allow time for a judicial review to be completed in 2025. This follows New Health New Zealand Inc’s legal challenge of the director-general of health’s fluoride directive, which led to the review.
In November 2023, a High Court judgment questioned whether the direction to fluoridate water considered the Bill of Rights. The director-general of health’s analysis of this is ongoing.
The director-general of health and the Attorney General have appealed the decision, which is scheduled to be heard in June 2025.
In February this year, Justice Radich issued a High Court judgment that confirmed the existing directions to fluoridate were legal and valid unless revoked by the director-general of health.
Councillor Steve Morris said it would be appropriate for the council to wait until the judicial process had run.
He said personally he didn’t have an issue with fluoride but that was “my body, my choice”.
Drysdale said he didn’t support water being fluoridated because people should have a choice.
There were other options for people to use fluoride if they wanted to, he said.
This received applause from the crowd. There was the issue of significant fines and funding for the work the council had done to fluoridate, said Drysdale.
The council would receive $3.4 million from the Ministry of Health for the works required to fluoridate, provided it achieved one month of continuous operation of fluoridation operations by November 30.
If the council didn’t get the funding for the work and fines it would cost around $7 million in the first year, he said.
Drysdale proposed applying for an extension until the judicial process was completed and getting clarification on if the fines would be enforced.
He asked people against fluoridation to make their points heard to the director-general of health.
“The reasoning that they are putting these directives [in place] is they want to take the power out of our hands. This made sense in some ways because they should be better qualified to consider health advice,” said Drysdale.
”Whether that is actually the case or not, I’ll leave it to the people to decide.”
The council was in favour of Drysdale’s motion and it will apply for an extension to the deadline.
Staff would also continue to investigate options to provide a non-fluoridated water supply.
Fluoridation is considered safe by the Ministry of Health and the World Health Organisation and it is seen as an effective and affordable public health measure to improve oral health.
- LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.
How a resilient Kiwi village hopes to bounce back from a big drop in visitors.