My Lords, like the noble Earl, Lord Baldwin, I feel that there is an improvement in the fact that fluoridation of the water supply should be determined locally. Local authorities are democratically accountable bodies, and surely they are the best placed to make decisions on behalf of the local population.
My concern, not just about this section of the Bill but about the amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, is around consultation and the ethical issue, which we have already heard mentioned, about the fluoridation of water and what that creates. I would appreciate hearing whether the processes by which the public are consulted about the fluoridation of water could enable communities to reject proposals to do so.
Members of the public are very cynical about consultation. They believe that, whenever their opinions are requested by any public body, no one takes action based on those opinions. It is important that communities are consulted and that the results of those consultations are taken notice of. The effect of fluoride on teeth may be a matter for dentists, just as the effect of fluorides on the rest of the anatomy may be a matter for scientists or doctors, but the question of whether it is right to use public water supplies to convey to the entire population a medication that is intended to influence the bodily development of 0.4 per cent of the population—that is, children whose teeth are forming—is surely an ethical question. The views of water consumers should carry just as much weight on this matter as the views of dentists and scientists.
I would be grateful if the Minister could reassure the House that consultation as referred to will actually have meaning and that local authorities, consulting on the matter of water fluoride with the residents, should be bound by the results of such consultations. It appears that the Bill allows the Secretary of State to ignore the results of consultation. Would the Minister explain this and give examples of where she envisages the Secretary of State taking decisions that disregard the results of the consultation?
Health and Social Care Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Eaton
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 5 December 2011.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Health and Social Care Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
733 c567-8 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 14:11:05 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_791929
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_791929
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_791929