Rotorua Councillors Vote To Receive Funding For Fluoridation Infrastructure

Friday, 28 June 2024, 8:30 pm
Article: Laura Smith - Local Democracy Reporter

A Rotorua councillor who referenced Nazi experimentation during a fluoridation infrastructure funding debate has been criticised for then failing to stay in the meeting and vote.

Councillor Robert Lee argued Rotorua Lakes Council should act to defend medical rights by deferring a decision on funding for work needed to comply with a Government directive to fluoridate drinking water supplies, then left Wednesday’s meeting before the council voted on the matter.

His decision to leave was criticised by Rotorua Mayor Tania Tapsell, who said taking a vote for his community was, in her view, Lee’s “sole role as an elected member”.

The decision on whether public drinking water supplies should be fluoridated was removed from local government jurisdiction in 2021, with the goal of improving poor dental health.

In 2022, 14 councils, including Rotorua, were directed to fluoridate supplies. Rotorua was given until April 30 this year to fluoridate its central and eastern water supplies or risk significant fines. It was later given an extension to March 2025.

Meanwhile, the fluoride mandate has faced several legal challenges.

The council paused its work on this late last year while it waited on advice after a preliminary High Court judgment ruled the mandate was unlawful because it failed to consider the Bill of Rights Act. The directives remained.

A February High Court judgment told the director-general of health to assess whether the 2022 directives were a justified limit on the right to refuse medical treatment provided for within the act.

An appeal against this judgment will be heard next June.

An attempt to prevent local authorities from implementing the directives was dismissed by the court in May.

At Wednesday’s council meeting, staff sought approval to make a funding agreement with the Ministry of Health to install capital works needed to comply with the directive.

Infrastructure and environmental solutions director Russell George said it needed to sign by the end of June, or this funding became “uncertain”.

Without it, ratepayers may be left with a $3 million bill.

Work needed to start by July or August to allow “reasonable time” to meet the March 28 deadline.

Chief executive Andrew Moraes said it was an agreement to complete the physical works, not to activate them.

“The funding agreement does not bind us to commence fluoridation.”

Lee said it would put the council on a “conveyor belt to fluoridating”.

He said the council would be fluoridating before the court heard the appeal on the Bill of Rights challenge next June.

In his view: “By then we’ll be fluoridating … We’ve already got the directive, which is valid while unlawful at the same time.”

The right to refuse medical treatment “comes from Nuremberg, my parents’ generation. When the Nazis were conducting experiments … [inaudible on meeting livestream recording]”.

The Nuremberg Code came from war crimes trials of Nazi doctors and sets out 10 medical research ethical principles.

Lee said it was the council’s duty to defend people’s medical rights and claimed fluoride impacted children’s IQs.

He said the council should defer the debate for a month, but Cr Conan O’Brien’s motion calling for this failed.

With one speaker left, Lee excused himself from the council table.

As he stood, Tapsell asked him if he did not wish to take a vote for his community.

She said, in her view: ”That is your sole role as an elected member.

”Nope? Okay.”

Lee walked out.

Tapsell said before the vote, in her view: “It is very unfortunate Councillor Lee has discharged himself from his duties as a councillor … it is the expectation from us and also our community that our elected members are here for the vote”.

During the debate, Tapsell stressed the decision was not about whether to fluoridate, but about accepting funding.

She said given the risk of an unexpected cost to ratepayers and the tight timeframe to start work, it would be “unwise” not to accept.

The council would observe what happened with the legal challenges.

Cr Gregg Brown said he did not “see the wriggle room” and the council needed to “get on with it”.

Cr Lani Kereopa said financial costs must not outweigh “health costs to our communities and environments”.

She believed the Government could have introduced a sugar tax or added fluoride to sugary drinks.

She said agreeing to receive funding to build infrastructure only to not fluoridate with it was a “ridiculous avenue to suggest”.

“We all have a vote, and if we listen to our community the vote needs to be no.”

Cr Don Paterson said people had a right to refuse medical treatment.

“Our water is the best water in Aotearoa. It is fantastic, we do not need to muck around with it.”

Councillor Trevor Maxwell said fluoridation should be the responsibility of health authorities.

The vote to sign the agreement passed, with councillors Karen Barker, Kereopa, Paterson and O’Brien voting against and Lee absent.

This article has been updated to include rural ward councillor Karen Barker's vote. She voted against signing the agreement.

- LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.

© Scoop Media

Local Democracy Reporting

Content from the Local Democracy Reporting (LDR) service is published by Scoop as a registered New Zealand Media Outlet LDR Partner.