QLDC 'no intention' of voluntarily fluoridating drinking water, WDC fluoridation mandate re-issued.

Drinking water in Queenstown and Wānaka will remain un-fluoridated, despite a legal review re-confirming a Government mandate on some drinking water supplies elsewhere.

The Director-General of Health has just reconfirmed directions issued to 14 local authorities to fluoridate one or more of their water supplies. This followed the recent completion of a court-ordered Bill of Rights Act assessment.

Unlike Waitaki District Council, QLDC is not one of the 14 local authorities directed to fluoridate water supplies by the Director-General of Health. 

However, a spokesperson for the council  says whilst the water supply in the district is not currently fluoridated, and “we have no intention to voluntarily fluoridate at this time”, QLDC will continue to factor possible investment into its long-term planning in case further decisions are made by the government relating to QLDC.

As of Wednesday, seven of the 14 local authorities started fluoridating their water supplies. 

For the remaining water supplies, the compliance dates to fluoridate range from December 2024 to June 2026. Currently, approximately half of New Zealanders have access to fluoridated water. Once these water supplies are fluoridated, around 60 percent of New Zealanders will receive fluoridated drinking-water.

The issue was re-examined in 2023, when a High Court judgment found the former Director-General of Health Ashley Bloomfield made an error of law in the process for considering July 2022 directions ordering 14 local authorities (which were not already fluoridating water) to fluoridate 19 drinking water supplies.

The process error was made by not explicitly considering the rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 in making a decision on each direction.

In the judgement, Justice Radich found: “The answer to the preliminary legal question in this proceeding is: yes, the Director-General was required to turn his mind to whether the directions given to the 14 local authorities under s 116E of the Health Act were in each case a reasonable limit on the right to refuse medical treatment, he needed to be satisfied that they were and, if satisfied, he needed to say why that was so.”

The Court did not quash the directions.

In February 2024, a High Court judgement directed the Director-General of Health to assess whether each of the 14 directions issued in July 2022 was a justified limit on the right of persons in those districts to refuse medical treatment. That right is provided for in section 11 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

That assessment has now been completed and the current Director-General, Dr Diana Sarfati, has written to the 14 local authorities confirming she has reconsidered the directions in light of section 11 of the Act and considers that each is a justified limitation on that right.

“This decision confirms that local authorities under directions continue to be legally required to fluoridate their water supplies. We continue also to work with these local authorities to support them to comply with their directions,” Dr Sarfati says.

To support the Director-General’s decision making, the Ministry also carried out a new review of the scientific evidence relating to community water fluoridation.

"This review concurs with the conclusion of earlier reviews that found water fluoridation is a safe and effective method of preventing tooth decay,” Dr Sarfati says.

The Ministry of Heath confirmed to crux that it had assessed a recent study from the United States that resulted in a District Court Judge order the US Environmental Protection Agency to investigate safety of fluoridation, after the study suggested high levels of fluoride were linked to lower IQ in children.

New Zealand Deputy Director of Public Health Dr Richard Jaine said the Ministry of Health published its latest review of the scientific evidence yesterday. 

The review states that while the National Institute of Health (NIH) publication ‘US National Toxicology Program Monograph on the State of the Science Concerning Fluoride Exposure and Neurodevelopmental and Cognition: A Systematic Review’, raised imortant questions about fluoride exposure above 1.5mg/L, “there is no reliable, robust evidence that this applies to levels of fluoride exposure used in community water fluoridation”.

“The Ministry does not consider that this publication alters the conclusions reached regarding the health benefits and safety aspects of community water fluoridation in New Zealand," Dr Jaine says.

A statement on the NIH website states “the NTP monograph concluded, with moderate confidence, that higher levels of fluoride exposure, such as drinking water containing more than 1.5 milligrams of fluoride per litre, are associated with lower IQ in children” but points out the review was designed to evaluate total fluoride exposure from all sources and was not designed to evaluate the health effects of fluoridated drinking water alone. 

“It is important to note that there were insufficient data to determine if the low fluoride level of 0.7 mg/L currently recommended for US community water supplies has a negative effect on children’s IQ. The NTP found no evidence that fluoride exposure had adverse effects on adult cognition.”

Responding to enquiries from Crux today, the US Environmental Protection Agency said it is still in the process of reviewing the district court’s decision. 

“While the decision finds a risk sufficient to trigger regulation under the Toxic Substances Control Act, it is important to note that the court does not conclude with certainty that fluoridated water is injurious to public health, and defers to EPA’s expertise as to how to evaluate and regulate fluoride appropriately moving forward. 

“The agency, in coordination with the Department of Justice, will consider all options going forward to determine next steps. From day one, this Administration has taken actions to protect people’s health that follow the science and the law. 

“EPA staff includes some of the best experts and scientists in the world and they will be crucial to whatever next steps the agency takes.”