When news happens, text SDE and your photos or videos to 80360. Or contact us by email and phone.
7:30pm Monday 7th September 2009 in
THE controversial decision to add fluoride to Hampshire’s tap water WILL be examined by a high court judge, the Daily Echo can reveal.
An application for a judicial review into the plans to fluoridate almost 200,000 homes has been approved because of claims that health chiefs ignored public opinion.
If the legal challenge succeeds, it could ultimately mean the contentious scheme has to be scrapped.
Plans to move towards fluoridation in other parts of the country have already been put on hold while health bosses wait to see the outcome of the judicial review.
The case could now be heard at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, before the end of the year.
And Health Secretary Andy Burnham, who was forced to quit as vice-president of the pro-fluoride British Fluoridation Society after being promoted in a Cabinet reshuffle, could be called as an “interested party”.
Anti-fluoride campaigners have heralded the decision as a vital step in safeguarding individuals’ rights.
The court bid has been lodged by a Southampton woman Geraldine Milner who is angry because she believes South Central Strategic Health Authority went against the views of residents when it approved the plans earlier this year.
More than 10,000 people submitted their opinions during a public consultation, with 72 per cent of those from people living in the affected area – covering parts of Southampton, Eastleigh, Totton, Netley and Rownhams – saying they were against fluoridation.
In a separate phone survey of 2,000 residents, 38 per cent of people questioned opposed the scheme, compared to 32 per cent in favour of it.
Ms Milner’s lawyers argue that the SHA’s board ignored those views when it unanimously approved fluoridation, which had been requested by Southampton health chiefs as a way to improve the dental health of the city’s youngsters.
Since the decision was made, campaign group Hampshire Against Fluoridation has handed over a petition of more than 15,000 names calling for the government to step in and stop the plans.
The group’s chairman, John Spottiswoode, said the judicial review is not just key for those fighting fluoride in Southampton, but is essential for the future of the right of the individual to choose how they are medicated.
“It’s extremely important, because it addresses a major issue of law for the whole country that has to be resolved,” he said.
“It’s something we must win, because if we lose we lose this fundamental right to control what goes into our bodies.”
Sean Humber, a partner at Leigh Day and Co Solicitors, who are representing Ms Milner, said the challenge is a serious one.
Cuttings from the Daily Echo, quoting Prime Minister Gordon Brown on the issue when he said the decision must rest with local people, will be used as part of the evidence.
Mr Humber said: “The judge has said it raises, in stark form, a significant public law question,” he said.
“We’re pleased by the judge’s comments – he has basically said there are questions to answer, and it will be interesting to know what they will say. It proves this is not a frivolous or vexatious claim, as has been suggested.”
The second part of Ms Milner’s application, which argued the SHA had not paid full attention to the arguments against fluoridation, was rejected. The judge said the rest of the process was “unimpeachable”, but Leigh Day have lodged an appeal against that decision, that will be held in October.
● The Daily Echo has backed calls for the 200,000 Hampshire residents affected by the fluoridation plans to be given a referendum on the subject.
Campaigners, including several of the county's MPs, have argued that the public must be given a straight choice on the issue.
The move comes because many feel that the majority voice was ignored when South Central Strategic Health Authority gave fluoridation the green light, and a referendum is the simplest way to ensure the public will is upheld.
SOUTH Central Strategic Health Authority has always insisted it did everything it was legally required to during the public consultation into the fluoridation of Hampshire water supplies.
The body says it met or exceeded all of its statutory requirements by sending out leaflets to most affected areas, holding drop-in information sessions, and three Question Timestyle debate sessions where experts from both sides gave arguments for and against.
The SHA was unavailable to comment on the judicial review application being approved, but it has previously said it has set aside £400,000 to fight the legal challenge to its decision.
It is not known if the SHA will appeal against the judge’s move to accept the application, but it argues that the legislation it followed required it to canvass public opinion and have regard to it, but ultimately to look at the scientific evidence and what people’s views were based on.
Comments(26)
dballadon
says...
12:11pm Mon 7 Sep 09
southy
says...
12:30pm Mon 7 Sep 09
dballadon wrote:that it is, but you need to take into account that water from here comes from a chalk river, with a mix of acid river from the new forest, and is classed has a semi hard water area. its taste different from water taken from a hard water area ( lime ) or water from a soft water area ( hard rock like granite )
Has anyone actually tasted the water in this city? its DISGUSTING..so now they decide to add more crap to the water, I guess they just want us not to drink the water at all! idiots!
Ozmosis
says...
12:31pm Mon 7 Sep 09
Jerry Parsons
says...
12:39pm Mon 7 Sep 09
goard
says...
12:46pm Mon 7 Sep 09
Oracle1
says...
1:16pm Mon 7 Sep 09
southy
says...
1:43pm Mon 7 Sep 09
Jerry Parsons wrote:well no they cant they need to add a type of chlorine to kill the water born germs that causes illness like cholera, and to keep the water fresh and not go stale.
We've just come back from a farm in Wales where their water is pumped out of the ground...great tasting, so we brought back some bottles of it. What a difference to the tap water here.
I accept Southy's argument about sources, but please... couldn't they just clean the water & then leave it alone?
bumblysaint
says...
2:11pm Mon 7 Sep 09
southy
says...
2:36pm Mon 7 Sep 09
bumblysaint wrote:the socialist party will bumblysaint, they are a party by the people, for the people, and they will listen to the people. and are working with the people now and helping out, thats why the socialist party is gaining ground very fast, its all so why you been seeing a lot of false propaganda about the socialist party from the capitalist partys and its true blue supporters.
It won't matter what we the public want,no one will accept our point of view,they will just go ahead and do exactly what they want.
We'll see just how good our local M.Ps.are now.
Andy Locks Heath
says...
3:41pm Mon 7 Sep 09
bumblysaint
says...
3:45pm Mon 7 Sep 09
freemantlegirl2
says...
4:33pm Mon 7 Sep 09
southy
says...
4:54pm Mon 7 Sep 09
bumblysaint wrote:it is it part of the cnwp campaign, there are other groups that use to support the labour party, a part from the socialist party, like socialist workers, workers liberty, socialist labour party, they all use to be part of the labour party pre-80's, they still have one or two mp.s in the labour party who will be leaving the labour party at the end of term of office. people like mp dave nellist have all ready left.
Southy, i'm gonna try and find out things about the
Socialist Party you're on about.
If what you say is fact and i'm not doubting you,this could be the party we're looking for.
Thanks Southy.
southy
says...
4:58pm Mon 7 Sep 09
freemantlegirl2 wrote:dont get sp mix up with the swp they are 2 difference socialist groups.
I'm lost here? how have the SWP been involved in Hampshire Against Fluoridation ? We could all promise things 'if we were elected'.... in reality, that just isn't going to happen....
Andy Locks Heath
says...
5:25pm Mon 7 Sep 09
southy
says...
8:16pm Mon 7 Sep 09
southy
says...
8:26pm Mon 7 Sep 09
Andy Locks Heath
says...
10:58pm Mon 7 Sep 09
southy
says...
11:35pm Mon 7 Sep 09
Andy Locks Heath
says...
7:18am Tue 8 Sep 09
freemantlegirl2
says...
7:31am Tue 8 Sep 09
southy wrote:My answer would still be... 'spot the difference'! I'm left of centre myself but am totally with Andy on this one, you seem to think we are all idiots with no perception. I feel annoyed actually that someone is using these columns to push an agenda and their own propaganda and promise the earth knowing that they will never be in a position to do what they claim. I look forward to reading reports of the SP doing 'very well' but I won't hold my breath!
freemantlegirl2 wrote:dont get sp mix up with the swp they are 2 difference socialist groups.
I'm lost here? how have the SWP been involved in Hampshire Against Fluoridation ? We could all promise things 'if we were elected'.... in reality, that just isn't going to happen....
southy
says...
1:21pm Tue 8 Sep 09
Andy Locks Heath
says...
3:25pm Tue 8 Sep 09
southy
says...
4:08pm Tue 8 Sep 09
goard
says...
3:27pm Wed 9 Sep 09
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Search for jobs with the Daily Echo
Search Now »
Find the right person for you with the Daily Echo
Search Now »
Search for homes with the Daily Echo
Search Now »
Search for cars with the Daily Echo
Search Now »
goard says...
11:05am Mon 7 Sep 09
goard