USA - Editorial comment
Editorial comment December 18 2006
By Grant Shimmin
Perhaps the measure of local satisfaction with the decision by the district council to conduct a public referendum on the fluoridation of Ashburton’s water supply is that no correspondence has been received by the Guardian at time of writing.
At its height, earlier this year, the debate about fluoride generated a huge number of letters and it was clear there was a deep, almost passionate level of concern in the community about the issue.
Many of those letters expressed concern about the “mass medication” of the public and called for a referendum to decide the issue.
That’s what we’ve got now, by a pretty overwhelming majority, with councillors voting 10-2 in favour of the referendum option.
Those charged with making the decision for us clearly decided there was such a depth of public feeling on the issue that it was simply inappropriate to try to make a determination on behalf of the people of our community. So what we have is the most democratic means available for deciding the issue. The silence so far on the letter, e-mail and text front seems to signal that as a community we’re pretty happy with the decision, though that’s surely the calm before the storm.
No doubt the decision sets the scene for a second, possibly even more intense round of public lobbying than in the lead-up to the initial determination by council of whether the issue needed to be given serious consideration or not.
We all have a responsibility now to cast our vote for the option we believe represents the best way forward for ourselves, our families and our communities as a whole. Interesting times surely lie ahead.
No referendum needed just don't put medicine in everybody's drinking and bathing water.
By Grant Shimmin
Perhaps the measure of local satisfaction with the decision by the district council to conduct a public referendum on the fluoridation of Ashburton’s water supply is that no correspondence has been received by the Guardian at time of writing.
At its height, earlier this year, the debate about fluoride generated a huge number of letters and it was clear there was a deep, almost passionate level of concern in the community about the issue.
Many of those letters expressed concern about the “mass medication” of the public and called for a referendum to decide the issue.
That’s what we’ve got now, by a pretty overwhelming majority, with councillors voting 10-2 in favour of the referendum option.
Those charged with making the decision for us clearly decided there was such a depth of public feeling on the issue that it was simply inappropriate to try to make a determination on behalf of the people of our community. So what we have is the most democratic means available for deciding the issue. The silence so far on the letter, e-mail and text front seems to signal that as a community we’re pretty happy with the decision, though that’s surely the calm before the storm.
No doubt the decision sets the scene for a second, possibly even more intense round of public lobbying than in the lead-up to the initial determination by council of whether the issue needed to be given serious consideration or not.
We all have a responsibility now to cast our vote for the option we believe represents the best way forward for ourselves, our families and our communities as a whole. Interesting times surely lie ahead.
No referendum needed just don't put medicine in everybody's drinking and bathing water.
posted by Bill at
9:56 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home