Minister, may we have your guarantee on that?

The Qld Natural Resources Minister, Mr Robertson, is quoted in the Border Mail on 13 July 2005 as citing "its [I-PU!] use in Singapore and its upcoming introduction in Toowoomba as two examples where it would be used for drinking purposes with no adverse consequences".

See - Border Mail.

The paper said he was the Natural Resources Minister but now it seems he's the Health Minister. The Health Ministry is such a revolving door at the moment, it's hard to keep track.

See - Ministerial directory.

Is the Minister of Health prepared to give a written guarantee to the residents of Toowoomba that there will be no adverse consequences? Perhaps a long-term guarantee which his children or grandchildren can honour if it turns out he's wrong. Maybe a bank guarantee from the Minister for future potential medical costs?

Politicians are quick to claim things will be rosy but they'll be long gone if things go wrong.

Mr Robertson goes on to say "Recycled water can be made quite safe to drink through indirect potable recycling”. He apparently told this to a parliamentary estimates committee hearing. "The technology of reclaimed water treatment is quite straightforward using off-the-shelf technology."

So, in 2001, the Qld Government was relying on reports from the USA which state that the existing data on obvious adverse health effects [and that's just the obvious ones!] is sparse and of a limited nature. And in 2005, suddenly I-PU! is quite safe to drink?

Sorry, but somehow I am unable to make the same leap of faith that the Minister can. Has he somehow come up with the results of long-term studies which weren't around in 2001? Was the State Government wrong in 2001? Why the backflip Minister?

We think we might take that bank guarantee now, thanks.