Greens Condemn Mass-Medication decision

The Green Party today called South Central SHA's decision to fluoridate Southampton's tap water "dangerous, undemocratic and potentially illegal."

Stuart Jeffery, the party's health spokesperson, described fluoridation as a "sticking plaster with side effects solution."

The Greens further criticised the Southampton Primary Care Trust for "failing to provide adequate NHS dentistry for its residents."

A recent Freedom of Information request (1) revealed that 76% of Southampton's NHS dentists are not taking new patients.

And the controversial Southampton decision came on the very day that new dentistry data was released, which showed that less than half of adults are using NHS dentists and the proportion of children accessing NHS dentistry in Southampton has fallen by 2.4% over the past two years (2).

Stuart Jeffery continued "Trying to fix NHS dentistry problems by unethical and potentially illegal mass medication is simply wrong. Southampton needs to fix its access to dentistry.

"Having less than a quarter of its dental practices taking on new patients means that many poorer people are forced to go without dental care. The new statistics have also shown the proportion of children accessing NHS dental care is falling.

"The Green Party wants a proper dental health strategy founded on education, good diet and access to free dental health care. Southampton has failed to provide this, and is now resorting to a technofix that won't solve the problem but will breach everyone's universally-acknowledged human right not to be medicated without their consent."

Mr Jeffery, a health service manager, explained: "The European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine distinctly states that individuals have the right not to be medicated without their consent. Fluoride has well documented and dangerous side effects, and it is clearly wrong to expose people to these against their will.

"This appalling decision also seems to have been taken without any regard for the voice of local people, the majority of whom were opposed to mass medication with fluoride."

Notes:

1. FOI response to the Green Party dated 3rd Feb 2009 showed that of
Southampton PCT's 25 NHS dental practices only 6 were accepting new
patients in December 2008.

2. See [http://www.ic.nhs.uk/statistics-and-data-collections/primary-care/dentistry/nhs-dental-statistics-for-england-quarter-2:-30-september-2008][1].

[1]: http://www.ic.nhs.uk/statistics-and-data-collections/primary-care/dentistry/nhs-dental-statistics-for-england-quarter-2:-30-september-2008

URL: http://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2009-02-27-fluoridation.html

Published and promoted by Tracy Dighton-Brown for the Green Party of England & Wales, both at 1a Waterlow Road, London N19 5NJ.

Trio of Own Election Winning Laws Broken by Government

The government made it a trio today and broke the third of its own laws passed over the last 11 years it has been in power. These aren't small laws by the way but whopping great election winning laws that brought the present government to office.

1. National Minimum Wage - foreign contractors working on the Olympic project for £50 per day, reported earlier in the week.

2. Human Rights Act 1998, Article 3 Prohibition of Torture - Binyam Mohamed, the repatriated detainee from Guantanamo Bay reported yesterday.

and now...

3. Freedom of Information Act 2000.

This third law has been trampled upon twice in fact. The first time was over the recent MP expense claims row, but the real biggie, the slap in the face and spit in the eye if you like for the British public is the refusal via the use of veto by the Justice Minister Jack Straw to release the minutes of the cabinet meeting during which it was decided to go to war with Iraq. The reason for this is that the potential damage caused by their publication according to Straw "far outweighs" any potential public benefit and because they would cause too much "damage" to democracy!

How?...Why?

It should be remembered that the war in Iraq and the "war on Terror" was and is being waged in the name of democracy. This being the case, how is it that discussions held during the cabinet meeting in which the big decision was made could be capable of this? If these people who we put in power are capable of causing "too much damage" to democracy, what the bloody hell are they doing in power in the first place, let alone now after the event? This is a ludicrous situation we are in where our government is in a position to act in the name of this country in ways that are deemed by itself to be too damaging (perhaps destructive) to democracy and fundamental human rights and freedoms to disclose to the public. They do this without any accountability other than on polling day and with total impunity.

Even the opposition, whose job it is supposed to be to hold the government to account has taken what can only be described as a sissy half-hearted position on the matter. Now maybe I'm nuts, but this isn't good enough. The only reason I can think that the Tories failed to do their job on this one is because either they will come under some scrutiny too if the minutes are released or they know that they will be inheriting a situation at the next election in which they too will have to lie and break the rules.

This way of doing things has to come to an end...I would say, "before someone gets hurt"...but that's just the point, someone already has. In fact, thousands and thousands of people already have been hurt and that includes people who were not only born and lived in this country but died for it; for democracy. If the papers from this cabinet meeting are too damaging for democracy then I regret with all my heart that our soldiers have died in vain. I'd even go so far as to say that the refusal of the government to publish the papers is a downright insult to them.......and that my friends is a conclusion for which you better send the men in white coats after me!!!