Water vote explained
After the decision by council last week to give $150,000 to the Pambula Merimbula Golf Club (PMGC) for its irrigation system, we thought it appropriate to explain to the ratepayers of the shire why we voted against this motion.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Council delivers water to each ratepayer and they pay for this water. What the ratepayer does with that water is up to them – it is their choice and, importantly, their cost.
In relation to the PMGC (and many other golf clubs and the turf club), council delivers recycled water to the clubs for free. In the case of PMGC this saves it roughly $400,000 per year. This helps the clubs and also ensures less recycled water is heading out into the beautiful waters of Merimbula and Pambula. It’s all free water. In the long term, council needs to put in a new ocean outfall with the cost being around $30million.
This decision needs to be seen in context.
The Bega Valley has a large number of sporting and recreational clubs that were formed and operate on the basis of maintaining their own facilities without ratepayer support, including PMGC. In our view, the ratepayers of the shire should not be asked to financially contribute to this process and, particularly, not be responsible for “picking winners”.
After much consideration we decided it was not appropriate to put ratepayers’ funds into an asset they themselves are duty bound to maintain. If we do this for PMGC we would be duty bound to do it for all – and there lies the problem. We decided it was not in the interest of the ratepayers and it set a dangerous precedent. Now council’s just spent $150,000 and opened Pandora’s Box.
Councillors Robyn Bain, Tony Allen, Russell Fitzpatrick
Why and what of fluoride
Fluoride was introduced in the late 1950s to bring social equity to the poor – a cheap and efficient way to strengthen the teeth of babies and children.
In the bulk of Australia fluoride occurs naturally in water at levels around 0.4ppm. Is it an essential mineral for human and plant life? No.
Dentists are trained to apply pharmaceutical grade, sodium fluoride topically to teeth. Do they receive comprehensive training in the mechanism and benefits of fluoridated water? Are they even told this sodium fluoride is the heavy metal laden waste from the fertiliser, aluminium and uranium industries?
Workers administering fluoride to the water must use hazmat suits. It is also a neurotoxin – neurotoxins damage, destroy and impair the nerves of the body and brain. If it is so dangerous, why does our Health Department say it is safe to use?
I keep reading conflicting information. The NSW Health Department and government bodies list fluoride as a “chemical” not a medication or health therapy, therefore, they say this is not forced medication. Yet, it is being used as a medication and therapy for the teeth, is it not? In lieu of the above I think it is fair to say it is forced medication and an infringement of our Constitutional rights to personalised, individual treatment?
The fairest, cheapest, safest and most effective method of dental protection is the topical application of toothpaste with brush.
Connie Crawford, Millingandi
Surgeon decision dismay
I wish to register my dismay at Dr Phoon's dismissal. I have already been waiting for knee surgery for eight months and finding it hard to get about even now. I understood that it would be another 2-4 months before I could expect the surgery.
Now how long will it be? And will I now be operated on by just anyone, instead of a reputable, skilled, caring surgeon, a campaigner for patient and staff rights?
Surely it is hard enough to get skilled surgeons to come live here, why sack one who has a settled life here, with a doctor wife contributing to the well being of the Valley, and children growing up here? Madness.