UKCAF website

NHS launders fluoride fund
to patch up crumbling works.

Doug Cross
4th September 2011

A good day to hide bad news!
Our battered and bewildered MPs will tomorrow nod through the reforms of the NHS proposed in the government’s Heath and Social Care Bill. But few will really understand that this Bill will do little to eradicate the corruption that is deeply embedded within the system.

Managing the health of the nation is big business, and like all such commercial operations, undercover manipulation of government funding is essential to make sure that nothing that could threaten profits is left to chance.

Evidence has now emerged that behind the closed doors of Whitehall, the funding designed to support the government’s next round of its National Fluoridation Policy has been systematically diverted by Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) in collaboration with Primary Care Trusts (PCTs).

Labour's sick legacy.
In 2008 Labour’s genial Secretary of Health, Alan Johnson, awarded £14 million a year for three years to the SHAs. The money was to be used exclusively to fund new fluoridation schemes, or to carry out feasibility studies on any new proposals for such projects.

But SHAs are not allowed to hold capital allocations, so with the collaboration of PCTs some creative accounting allowed the money to be diverted to prop up ailing existing fluoridation schemes.

To launder Johnson’s millions, the Capital allowance is first transferred to PCTs, who convert it to Revenue. They then pass this back to the SHAs, who have then are able to switch it into repairing defective existing fluoridation equipment. This is in direct defiance of Johnson’s quite specific intention.

Freedom of information.
In an astonishingly frank reply to a Freedom of Information request on how part of the allocation has been used in the Midlands, NHS Nottinghamshire County revealed that

we can confirm that the East Midlands Strategic Health Authority are the lead for Fluoridation. However they are not permitted in law to have capital allocations. The £890k was initially allocated to Notts County as Capital allocation which we then transferred to Revenue and transferred back as Revenue to the Strategic Health Authority.

Severn Trent have been slow to get this work off the ground, so the SHA have only paid about £60k in relation to the £890k received. With regard to the funding for 2010/11, there will be funding, not sure of the amount which will work in the same way.

(Nottinghamshire County Teaching Primary Care Trust, 1 July 2010)

Common practice?
From this reply it appears that this manipulation of Central funding is common practice within the NHS, making a mockery of government’s intentions and misleading the public’s understanding of how its money is being spent.

Altogether, £19.05 million of Johnson’s £42 million has been diverted for similar purposes in five PCT areas in the North West and the Midlands. Less than £1 million has been spent on feasibility studies. and the unused part has reverted to the Treasury.

Not a single penny has been spent on new fluoridation projects, which have been delayed by legal challenges such as that over the proposal to fluoridate the water supply to the City of Southampton.

The ‘Feasibility Study’ scam.
In 2008 the North West Fluoridation Evaluation Group (NWFEG), funded directly by 24 North Western PCTs, issued an assessment of the feasibility of fluoridating Greater Manchester and the North West Region.

NWFEG’s study was a travesty. Several of the members of its Committee did not disclose that they were members of the fanatically pro-fluoride British Fluoridation Society (BFS), and the insidious influence of the BFS was obvious throughout the work.

The study denied - wrongly - that the proposal would violate European and English law on the use of unlicensed medicinal products. It also dismissed the overwhelming evidence of adverse medical damage to children caused by fluoridation.

And when it came to costing the project, these were ludicrously underestimated. The study entirely avoided all mention of the huge social and financial costs to children who would be damaged by the project. It was referred to the NHS Counter Fraud and Security Management Service Division as being grossly fraudulent - predictably, the Division declined to disclose the results of its investigation!

Clearly the NHS is reluctant to allow the defects of this misleading publication to become public, and this profoundly flawed report set the pattern for later studies, some of which were funded from Johnson’s windfall.

Concealing the real costs of fluoridation.
But even where the cash has been used, as intended, to prepare Feasibility Studies for new projects, these studies may be grossly misleading. An exception has been the recent £500,000 study for the North West SHA by water provider United Utilities, which used its experience in operating fluoridation facilities in the north West to estimate the real costs of building and maintaining new fluoridation plant.

The company found that the average cost of converting a water treatment plant, is around £2.7 million, compared with the derisory £210,00 suggested by consultants for the South Central SHA for converting those works serving Southampton.

Even by the disreputable standards of the NHS, the arrogance of attempting to persuade Councils and Parliament of the reliability of such grossly under-estimated cost implications is breathtaking!

The disinformation campaign
These defects have been repeatedly exposed, but so deeply embedded is the corruption within the NHS that they are invariably discounted as uninformed. Instead MPs are deliberately misled by fraudulent information, and coerced into supporting even the most grossly improper and wildly under-estimated proposals.

In this Bill the promoters of fluoridation are attempting to ensure that Parliament preserves the dental profession’s obscene monopoly on providing the lucrative remedial cosmetic treatment that the nation-wide enforcement of fluoridation under this Bill will guarantee.

In making Councils ‘responsible for fluoridation’ the government now plans to parachute into their hearts the pro-fluoride Directors of Public Health from SHAs, in the certain knowledge that Councils will be prevented from defending their electors against the State’s obsession with this hated practice.

In tomorrow’s debate, if they are retain any public credibility and support then our MPs must throw out the fluoridation provisions from this deeply flawed Bill . This illegal mass medication has no part in a civilised modern society.