New Zealand Dental Association president Amanda Johnston – a practising dentist in Whangārei – said the council’s hesitance to fluoridate was frustrating, given its proven health benefits.
“There’s really clear evidence that adding fluoride to the water is really beneficial to the teeth across all age groups, so we just wish they’d get on with it, really,” she said.
“The dental practitioners of Northland really want to do the best for their patients, and this would be a really, really good preventative move to help cut down on dental disease.”
Whangārei Mayor Vince Cocurullo cast a deciding vote to refuse fluoridation in February.
It came after a federal judge in the US ruled that fluoride presented “unreasonable” risks in September 2024.
“This all stems from the recent court case in the US. What’s actually been proven is anything over 1.5 parts per million is actually unsafe,” he said.
Although the judge determined fluoridated presented some risk, he noted the ruling could not “conclude with certainty that fluoridated water is injurious to public health”.
Johnston advocated for a lower dosage, 0.7 parts per million, which she said was perfectly safe.
“The level that we’re talking about with water fluoridation is 0.7 parts per million. It’s a very, very low dose. You couldn’t ever drink too much water to get too much fluoride. The water would kill you first,” she said.
Cocurullo argued that was still too high, but he was calling for a High Court ruling to eliminate all doubt.
“From an elected member’s point of view, I need to have a very clear ruling from the High Court so I can get it very clearly, because at the end of the day, as a council, we are legally responsible to make sure that the water is safe,” he said.
Councillor Scott McKenzie said it was not the council’s place to debate the merits of fluoridation.
He said the council was legally obliged to follow the Government’s directive.
“I’ve stayed clear of the science on it because I’m not a scientist. It really is the legal aspect that I’m more concerned with,” he explained.
“That’s the area that’s relevant to the council and determines whether we have the remit to have a say in this space or not. And the reality is that we don’t.”
McKenzie said the confidentiality of Tuesday’s meeting made him uncomfortable.
“It’s a surprise that the meeting is confidential. You know, some of us are feeling some concern around that because there seems to be a lack of transparency and integrity and accountability in the process.”
Cocurullo said it had come at the request of his council’s legal team.
“What I can tell you is that there is information that we’ve received from our legal office and they have asked for us to have this discussion about it.”
Sign up to The Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
