A PERCEIVED threat to civil liberties and a deep suspicion of health

board motives were prime factors in yesterday's overwhelming rejection

of fluoridation by Strathclyde councillors.

By 56 votes to 16 councillors rejected requests by the four

Strathclyde health boards to fluoridate public water supplies as a means

of combating the region's apalling dental health record.

Last night Greater Glasgow Health Board condemned the decision as a

retrograde step and one that meant the region would continue languishing

at the bottom of Britain's dental league table.

However, Mrs Kay Allan, campaign secretary for the Anti-Fluoride

Movement, declared: ''I'm delighted and relieved that the councillors

had the sense to see the dangers that are involved in such a project.

I'm relieved that our children have been spared from life-long

absorbtion of this substance into their bodies.''

Ironically the motion in favour of fluoridation was put by Dr Malcolm

Green, chairman of the council's environmental sub-committee, and the

amendment to reject it was presented by Councillor Alex MacLean,

chairman of water and sewerage.

Dr Green urged members to think of the public interest. Health was not

just a private matter. The community had a right to expect basic health

precautions and good dental health was part of that.

He said: ''Our social strategy is in question here. Premature loss of

teeth is greater among disadvantaged people in areas of priority

treatment. What we have here is an argument for social justice.''

Councillor James Gilmour (Conservative), a retired dentist, said the

measure should have been introduced 50 years ago. This would have saved

thousands of children the trauma of tooth extraction.

The crucial issue of civil liberties was championed by Labour

back-bencher Councillor James Mackechnie, who pointed out that community

groups in his area had decisively rejected fluoridation.

He declared: ''I find it quite astonishing that four health boards,

which appear to be repeatedly having difficulties in delivering an

adequate service to the people, have been able to spend this amount of

money on a glossy public relations exercise. Civil liberties are

crucial. They have to be addressed before we consider the medical

arguments.

''You cannot justify compulsory mass medication, which is a practice

alien to a democratic country. I call on the council to reject what is a

really sinister threat to our civil liberties and reject force feeding

with chemicals.''

Liberal Democrat leader Dr Christopher Mason, said the most scaring

thing about the health boards' case was the idea that the poor could

never aspire to a proper level of dental care.

He added: ''Our social strategy should be about empowering people to

make their own decisions. What the health board is saying is, 'Don't

waste your time tackling that difficult question. They'll never learn

how to do it. You can't trust them'.''

Labour Councillor Charles Gordon argued that perceptions were often as

important as fact.

He added: ''While there may be benefits in terms of dental health from

fluoride, clearly public opinion has yet to be convinced. We've got a

responsibility to exercise that doubt in favour of the public.''