Code of Conduct Complaint Against Peel Regional Chair and Council
August 8, 2107 update: Robert Swayze, Integrity Commissioner, Region of Peel acknowledged the complaint below, and stated that it would be dealt with accordingly.
Complaint sent via email, August 4, 2017:
Dear Integrity Commissioner Swayze,
Welcome to Peel Region. I hope you are enjoying your new position so far.
The following is a complaint against the Peel Regional Chair and Members of Council.
Regional BY- LAW NUMBER 1-2017 (“A by-law to govern the Regional Council Code of Conduct”) states that:
- The Regional Chair and Members of Council will serve their communities so that the public interest is upheld and is the Member’s primary consideration.
- All members of the public interacting with Council are entitled to a clear, transparent and accountable decision- making process.
- The Regional Chair and Members of Council will serve their communities with transparency…
- The Regional Chair and Members of Council will be open to receiving reasonable representations and information from municipal staff, interested persons and the broader community.
- The Regional Chair and Members of Council will not have matters dealt with in closed session (in camera) in cases where Council is unauthorized to do so.
- The Regional Chair is responsible to … promote public involvement in the municipality’s activities, … foster activities that enhance the economic, social and environmental well -being of the municipality and its residents.
The Region has also a duty to provide residents with municipal drinking water that is safe for all members of our community.
I am a livelong resident of Brampton, and spokesperson for a grassroots movement to end the artificial fluoridation of the Region of Peel’s municipal drinking water (Fluoride Free Peel).
I, along with many other residents, have objected to the fluoridation of our drinking water for years now, mainly due to concerns regarding the adverse health effects of fluoride (a neurotoxic, endocrine-disrupting, enzyme-inhibiting, mitochondrial-poisoning, bone and tooth-damaging, regulated water contaminant), and more specifically, the adverse effects of the highly corrosive industrial waste chemical called hydrofluorosilicic acid, aka HFSA, that is used by the Region to fluoridate our water.
HFSA is a toxic chemical that requires handlers to wear full protective gear, wrecked havoc on the 401 this past winter with dozens of victims requiring medical attention, and has nothing to do with actual “water treatment” (the process of making water potable by eliminating and neutralizing toxins already present in the water), but rather is added for the stated purpose of reducing tooth decay (mass medication of residents, one of the reasons cited by some European countries for rejecting water fluoridation, illegal in Canada).
An MSDS for HFSA from one of Peel’s former suppliers contains the following warning for children (many Peel children are affected by dental fluorosis):
“Prolonged or repeated overexposure to fluoride compounds may cause fluorosis. Fluorosis is characterized by skeletal changes, consisting of osteosclerosis (hardening or abnormal density of bone) and osteomalacia (softening of bones) and by mottled discoloration of the enamel of teeth (if exposure occurs during enamel formation). Symptoms may include bone and joint pain and limited range of motion. Conditions aggravated by exposure may include skin and respiratory (asthma like) disorders.” — Pg. 3: http://www.mosaicco.com/documents/Hydrofluosilicic_Acid_MSDS_03Jan14.pdf
Various MSDSs warn not to allow HFSA to contaminate local waterways or domestic water supplies.
Since June of 2014, the Region has been under threat of a lawsuit over this issue (see the linked legal opinion, which includes an affidavit from a highly regarded PhD fluoride toxicity expert: http://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/peel.june2014.pdf). I am not involved in this lawsuit, but point it out to help you understand the seriousness of this issue, and why the Region appears to be in “damage control mode” and quite desperate to silence their critics on this topic and cover-up harm they have caused.
In 2016, as per my right under the Municipal Act, I requested an investigation into a closed meeting on the topic of water fluoridation held by Council in January of that year which I believed had been illegally closed to the public. I had warned Councillors and the Regional Clerk prior to the meeting that closing this meeting would be a blatant violation of the Municipal Act. The resulting investigation report affirmed that the meeting had been illegally closed: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Report-on-Investigation-into-Peels-Illegally-Closed-Door-Fluoridation-Propaganda-Session.pdf
[This violation of the Municipal Act was reported by the local media, along with some other damning articles, such as “‘Fluoride is a deadly poison’ Peel’s water fluoridation committee has heard” (https://www.mississauga.com/news-story/6912754–fluoride-is-a-deadly-poison-peel-s-water-fluoridation-committee-has-heard/.]
No randomized controlled studies have been carried out anywhere, ever, to properly assess the effectiveness of water fluoridation, and Peel’s own commissioned study of 2007 showed zero difference in cavities but double the visible harm from fluoride in our fluoridated vs. unfluoridated 7 year old school children: 34% vs. 16% with dental fluorosis, which is permanent harm to affected teeth that can result not only in discoloration but pitting.
Earlier this year, at the insistence of the Region’s Community Water Fluoridation Committee Members who had spent the previous two years hearing from experts and examining evidence regarding the safety and effectiveness of water fluoridation, Council formally admitted uncertainty on the effectiveness of HFSA in drinking water for preventing tooth decay and that there are no proper toxicology studies on this chemical (see their letter to Ontario’s Health Minister, copied to all MPPs, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, all Ontario Municipalities, Nancy Polsinelli, Commissioner, Health Services, Region of Peel, and Dr. Eileen de Villa, who was at that time Medical Officer of Health, Region of Peel: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Resolution-2017-68-Motion-for-CWFC-1-2017-for-Minister-of-Health.pdf).
Yet Council continues to have our drinking water fluoridated, and continues to use HFSA. [Most communities in Canada and across the world do not fluoridate their water.]
The Community Water Fluoridation Committee has been indefinitely suspended since March 9th, 2017 (see Council’s Resolution 2017-185).
I and other residents have delegated to Regional Council several times on this issue in the last year, for example, on February 9th, 2017 (my presentation slides are publicly available here: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/FFP-delegate-Feb-9-2017-v2-1-slide-per-page.pdf). (We were allotted roughly 5 minutes per delegation, despite the enormity of the issue.)
On March 30th, Council passed a further resolution stating:
“…. that the requests for delegation related to community water fluoridation appearing on the Regional Council Agenda for March 30, 2017, and all further requests for delegation, correspondence and requests of any nature from any source on this matter, be referred to the Community Water Fluoridation Committee, when they reconvene, as per the Committee’s process, for determination.”
(See page 2: http://www.peelregion.ca/council/council_minutes/2010s/2017/rcmin20170330.pdf)
This resolution has prevented any questions or delegations from residents or experts for an indefinite period of time, while Council continues to have HFSA added to our drinking water every single day.
For months now, I have wished to delegate again to Council with important questions regarding the Region’s new water fluoridation chemical (which was selected without any public input, and we are told is another hydrofluorosilicic acid product, from a new supplier, allegedly derived from calcium fluoride and with lower levels of arsenic and lead contamination; the Region has provided no further details regarding its manufacture, or its contaminants other than arsenic and lead, to the public). Many of my questions linger to this day.
I also continue to have questions about a reference made in Council’s Resolution 2017-185 of March 9th, 2017, and also verbally at Council meetings, and in writing in various Regional documents, to so-called “provincial standards” for fluoride concentration in drinking water for the purpose of preventing tooth decay. No such standards appear to actually exist, as confirmed for me in writing by the MOECC (I forwarded this communication to the Region). [The MOECC, not the Ministry of Health, sets the “standards” for drinking water contaminant levels, including the standard for fluoride. Section 20 of the Safe Drinking Water Act prohibits the addition of toxins like fluoride, which is not added for the purpose of making water potable.] I have pointed this out repeatedly in emails to Council, Public Health Staff and Commissioners, and asked what standards they keep referring to, and have been consistently ignored. The Region’s website refers to a technical document that contains no such “standards” and states clearly on page 1 that nothing in the document should be interpreted as allowing for the degradation of a water supply (water fluoridation is the intentional increase in fluoride, a regulated water contaminant, with arsenic, lead, etc. also being increased as a result of contaminants in the fluoridation chemical).
I have also had questions about the Region’s new target concentration for fluoride in our drinking water. I asked Council to state the new target concentration when I delegated to them on March 9th, 2017, but was never provided an answer even though they had previously resolved to lower the target concentration to the “lowest level in accordance with” [nonexistent] “provincial standards” for the reduction of tooth decay.
I was listed in the agenda for the March 30th Council meeting and planned to ask Council these questions again in an attempt to finally receive answers. My presentation slides, which were provided in advance to the Regional Clerk, are attached. As you can see, I had many important questions. However, I was denied the opportunity to ask any of my questions due to the passing of the resolution cited above, which occurred at the outset of the meeting.
The new target fluoride concentration of 0.65 ppm was never divulged to the public until the publication of the July 6th Council meeting agenda. It had been falsely reported to be 0.5 ppm by the Brampton Guardian on March 9th. I suspected (based on conflicting and confusing statements made during the Council meeting that day) that the March 9th article was incorrect and wanted to know the true concentration. For some reason the reporter refused to do any proper fact-checking, and apparently no one at the Region or Ontario Clean Water Agency who knew the true target level bothered to advise the reporter of his error. The public was mislead for 4 months on this issue, which could have been cleared up on March 30th if I had been allowed to delegate and ask my questions on that day.
Again, I requested to delegate at the Council meeting of July 6th, 2017. I was denied the opportunity based on the resolution, which, as the Regional Clerk explained, is “broad” (see her email further below).
I am not the only resident who had already requested to delegate prior to March 30th on the topic of water fluoridation and who has been denied the opportunity for the past 4 months.
However, the July 6th Council meeting agenda lists an “Update” on water fluoridation from the Region’s Commissioner of Health Services, Nancy Polsinelli, and the (then) Acting Medical Officer of Health, Dr. Lawrence Loh (item 10.4). I did not attend this meeting, but my understanding is that Council allowed this item (the meeting minutes are not yet available to the public).
It was troubling enough that Council passed such an anti-democratic resolution as they did on March 30th.
For Council to muzzle both experts and concerned residents at their public meetings, and to stifle all questions and requests of any kind from any source, in blatant violation of Bylaw 1-2017, but then accept a communication from the Region’s pro-fluoridation Medical Officer and Health Commissioner is exceedingly disturbing.
Further, the “update” provided by the Medical Officer and Health Commissioner pertained mostly to actions that were taken by others who are not even part of the Public Health Department.
OCWA, not the Health Commissioner or Medical Officer, lowered the fluoride concentration and switched to a new fluoride acid.
The Regional Chair, not the Health Commissioner or Medical Officer, sent a letter to the Ontario Premier and the Health Minister.
A Legislative Assistant in the Clerk’s Division, not the Health Commissioner or Medical Officer, circulated Regional Council Resolution 2017-185.
The only “update” from the Health Commissioner and Medical Officer relating to Peel Public Health was a misleading one claiming that “Peel Public Health continues to monitor oral health status in Peel, particularly among school-aged children, as well as evidence related to the effectiveness and safety of community water fluoridation.”
In fact, Peel Public Health has not been monitoring or reporting on dental fluorosis among Peel’s school-aged children in a remotely meaningful fashion, as shown in the Region’s newest oral health report (which was only made publicly available after I requested it) and in the response I received in reply to my official complaint regarding the unscientific and stunningly misleading statistic contained therein (which I consider to be blatantly fraudulent and intentionally deceptive).
The truth is that no one at the Region, including Commissioner Polsinelli and Dr. Loh, has to my knowledge indicated the slightest interest in getting to the bottom of this statistic, which I have repeatedly drawn attention to since it was published.
And, the Health Commissioner and Regional Medical Officers (whose profession is largely responsible for the adverse health and environmental effects, financial waste, and human rights and legal violations caused by water fluoridation over the years, via unfounded and grossly implausible assurances of safety and effectiveness), have never, to my knowledge, indicated the slightest interest in monitoring residents for any other adverse effects of fluoridation (skeletal fluorosis, for example) or learning how to properly diagnose fluoride toxicity. I and others have, over the years, repeatedly raised the issue of the lack of monitoring.
Further, the Health Commissioner and Medical Officer’s “update” included misleading references to the aforementioned non-existent “provincial standards”, unproven and hotly contested “oral health benefits”, and an unsupported comparison of the alleged “oral health benefits” from “Fluoride” (HFSA) derived from calcium fluoride and the Region’s previous industrial waste fluoride acid (also HFSA).
You are probably aware that Council is also now looking at a new policy that would allow the Regional Clerk to dismiss this very complaint on the grounds that he/she considers it to be grounded in “conspiracy theory”.
This is the sort of behaviour one would expect in an oppressive regime. It is not how legitimate, transparent, democratic governance works.
I believe that the actions taken by Council and the Chair, described above, have violated the sections of Regional BY- LAW NUMBER 1-2017 cited at the outset of this letter. I therefore request that you address this appropriately in your capacity as Integrity Commissioner for Peel Region.
[I wish to make clear that I consider Councillor John Sprovieri, who has worked tirelessly for years now to educate himself, Council and the public on the issue of artificial water fluoridation, innocent in all of this.]
Thank you, and best wishes,
Christine Massey, M. Sc.
************************************** EMAILS REQUESTING TO DELEGATE ON JULY 6, 2017 ********************************
Christine Massey <cmssyc@gmail.com> |
You deserve to have the absolute best treatment possible so that you can get back to my place” Even though these dirty pick lines are pretty funny, they almost get viagra australia never work. It is a well known fact that men having heart disease often experience erectile dysfunction. order viagra viagra There are other methods that spammers will employ to viagra super get their grimy hands on your email address. Later on it was found that the medication also cheap cialis generic proved effective in boosting various sexual abilities.
Jul 4
| to ZZG-Regionalcl., Veronica |
Dear Kathryn and Veronica,
I wish to delegate to Council on July 6th.
Please let me know if I can do this, as I will need time to prepare.
Christine Massey
Spokesperson
Fluoride Free Peel
905 230 4155
Topic:
Questions regarding Peel’s water fluoridation program.
I will need equipment for a formal Powerpoint presentation.
Best wishes,
Christine
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Christine Massey <cmssyc@gmail.com> wrote:
Correction: I wish to delegate to Council on July 6th.
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Christine Massey <cmssyc@gmail.com> wrote:
Correction: I wish to delegate to Council on June 6th, as mentioned in my subject line.
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Christine Massey <cmssyc@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Kathryn and Veronica,
I wish to delegate to Council on March 30th:
Christine Massey
Spokesperson
Fluoride Free Peel
905 230 4155
Topic:
Questions regarding Peel’s water fluoridation program.
I will need equipment for a formal Powerpoint presentation.
The Region’s website states:
“Any individual who wishes to appear before a Committee or Council meeting may request to do so by notifying the Regional Clerk’s office in writing or by completing the Request for Delegation Form”
Best wishes,
Christine
Christine Massey <cmssyc@gmail.com> |
Jul 4
| to Curtiss |
Hi Curtiss,
The Clerk has not replied to my emails below. Is she on holiday?
Thank you,
Christine
Lockyer, Kathryn |
Jul 4
| to me |
Good evening,
I apologize for the lateness of my reply. You are correct, I was on vacation but am now back.
As per the existing Council resolution, I will add your request to delegate to the next meeting of the Community Water Fluoridation Committee when it reconvenes.
Thank you.
Kathryn Lockyer
Regional Clerk
Sent from my iPhone
Christine Massey <cmssyc@gmail.com> |
Jul 4
| to John, Jim, Carolyn, Johanna, Annette, Michael, Karen, Frank, Kathryn |
Dear Kathryn,
Thank you. I’m confused as to how this is going to work.
Council passed a motion saying that “.. the Community Water Fluoridation Committee suspend meetings until such time as the Province clarifies its role in community fluoridation; or until such time as Regional Council reconvenes the Committee;
And a March 30th motion initiated by the pro-fluoridation CWFC Chair Carolyn Parrish states: “…that the requests for delegation related to community water fluoridation appearing on the Regional Council Agenda for March 30, 2017, and all further correspondence, communications, items and requests of any nature from any source on this matter, be referred to the Community Water Fluoridation Committee, when they reconvene, as per the Committee’s process, for determination.”
Chair Parrish assured Councillor Sprovieri on March 30th that she would reconvene the CWFC when he points out to her that “a pile” of delegation requests have been received, yet this claim is not reflected in any motion that I know of and it’s not clear to me how Councillor Sprovieri can be expected to know when “a pile’ of requests have been made, or what is meant by “a pile”. Is the Chair legally obligated to honour her assurance, and if so, how will Councillor Sprovieri know when “a pile’ of requests have been made?
Also, if the Province never “clarifies its role in community fluoridation” (which would not be surprising since the province was not asked to “clarify” anything, rather the Health Minister was asked to 1) perform toxicology studies on HFSA and 2) to “take” legislative responsibility for the regulation and administration of HFSA… something he will never do since adding HFSA to drinking water violates multiple federal and provincial laws), what else could ever trigger Regional Council to reconvene the Committee given that no one on the face of the planet is allowed to communicate with Council on the topic of water fluoridation and Chair Parrish’s stated attitude was that it was “not productive” to even allow the public to ask questions about the mysterious new industrial fluoride acid drug added to their drinking water.
Also, who is the public able to communicate with on this topic at the Region? Anyone besides yourself? Or do all communications, even to staff members, Commissioners and the CAO, now get referred to the indefinitely-suspended CWFC?
Best wishes,
Christine
Lockyer, Kathryn |
Jul 5
| to me |
Good morning,
I have reviewed the items that have been referred to the Committee for when it reconvenes and note that there are the two delegations from the March meeting that were referred to the Committee and your subsequent request to delegate. No other requests to delegate have been received on this topic.
The resolution referring items to the Committee is broad and includes “…correspondence, communications, items and requests of any nature from any source…” be referred to the Committee. If you have any such items, you can provide them to me and I will add them to the list of items to be referred to the Committee.
Thanks,
Kathryn
Kathryn Lockyer
Regional Clerk and Director
Regional Municipality of Peel
*************************************************************************************************