Initially published in the Alliston Herald on April 29, 2009

The Good: Several weeks ago I had the opportunity to attend the graduation ceremony of the OPP's D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) program for the Grade 6 class at Alliston Union Public School. It quickly became apparent that the instructor for the program, OPP officer Harry Lawrenson, has a remarkable chemistry with this impressionable age group. The passion and conviction with which several of the students spoke, together with the conduct and behaviour of the class as a whole, seemed compelling evidence that the message got through.

The Good - Part II: A friend recently inquired whether I was upset by letters to the editor that are critical of this column. The answer: "absolutely not". The fact that someone has taken the time to express their opinion is hardly a reason to sulk. Dialogue and debate should always be encouraged. When a person is motivated to sit down and put his/her thoughts to paper, whether they be positive or negative, they should be commended. It shows they care. Our biggest enemy is apathy - when no one can be bothered we have a problem.

The Sad: One of the letter writers referred to above took issue with a recent column (Guergis says one thing and does another, April 9, 2009) where I was critical of the failure of our MP to honour her commitment to pay the costs of a newsletter that was delivered after the start of the election campaign.

The writer was apparently upset by the column and referred to my criticism as being about "some chicken-crap issue". It is sad to see an individual whose expectations of politicians has apparently sunk so low that an issue which goes to the very root of a person's character (namely, keeping your word) is described as "chicken crap".

In the same manner that apathy is a danger, so too are such low expectations of our elected representatives.

The Curious: At the most recent committee of the whole meeting, New Tecumseth town council was deluged by a dental/medical lobby urging council to reverse its earlier decision to remove flouride from Tottenham's water supply. The fervour and intensity exhibited by this group might have led some to wonder whether they were in the midst of an Elmer Gantry revival meeting.

The decision was portrayed as so critical, and the health issues so important, that I was tempted to question (tongue in cheek) whether the streets of Tottenham might soon be lined with hundreds of corpses (with bad teeth) if the decision was not reversed.

I do not feel as though I possess enough information to be either "pro" or "con" on the issue. There are, however, a couple of facts that I believe merit attention.

First, Tottenham is the only community in Simcoe County that adds fluoride to its water supply. Second, there is a body of credible medical opinion, including the head of Preventative Dentistry at the University of Toronto (Dr. Hardy Limeback), that oppose the use of fluoride in public water systems.

The issue that left me scratching my head following the several deputations was this: If fluoride in our water is so critical, where have all of these medical professionals been the past decade? They certainly haven't been lobbying for fluoride to be added to Alliston's water.

From my perspective, if the professionals can say with absolutely certainty that there are no significant health risks associated with the use of fluoride in our drinking water then it is hard to object. However, if there is the slightest bit of doubt, if there is the slightest bit of evidence that fluoride could harm our children, then surely the benefits of its use do not outweigh the risks.