Government Declines Petition for Asbestos Removal and Registration Over 40 Years

A petition, backed by over 10,000 signatories, calling for the eradication of asbestos within four decades and the establishment of an asbestos register has been turned down by the UK government. Despite being known to cause cancer upon inhalation, asbestos remains the predominant reason for work-related mortalities in the nation.

The petition pointed out that the primary zones of concern are educational institutions and healthcare facilities. Yet, the government's response emphasised the need for concrete proof to validate that the duo of suggestions would enhance health outcomes.

Annually, asbestos-related diseases account for the deaths of over 5,000 individuals in the UK, as reported by the Health and Safety Executive.

Petition's Background

Originating from the 2022 work and pensions committee's findings on asbestos handling, the petition pressed for the government's nod on two key recommendations. It highlighted the uncertainties surrounding the exact locations of all asbestos in the country. Thus, a centralised register was proposed, alongside a comprehensive plan for its safe removal spanning 40 years.

In its findings, the committee strongly urged the government to strategise the clearance of asbestos from public and commercial edifices within the 40-year time frame. Despite its ban over 20 years prior, asbestos continues to be the most significant factor in work-related fatalities across the UK.

Around 300,000 non-domestic structures reportedly still contain asbestos. The committee also underscored the inadequacy of the prevailing asbestos regulations, especially considering potential disturbances from net-zero retrofitting initiatives.

The government, acknowledging concerns about asbestos presence in buildings, reassured that it would deliberate ways to enhance the system, ensuring reduced exposure risks. Yet, they maintained that their approach, via the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012, reflects the most robust evidence available at present.

Risks vs. Benefits

The government highlights that the process of asbestos removal could inadvertently release its fibres, escalating exposure dangers. It advocates for a more aggressive asbestos clearance strategy only if the amplified exposure risks during the removal are balanced by diminished risks to building occupants. As of now, the government asserts that such evidence is non-existent.

Liz Darlison, the helm of Mesothelioma UK, emphasized the widespread backing for governmental intervention, as the lethal implications of asbestos persist. Advocating for measures to address the ongoing crisis, she stressed the urgency of governmental action, underlining the cross-party endorsement for a national asbestos registry and phased elimination.

The work and pensions committee critiqued the passive approach of leaving asbestos intact in buildings, even if they appear secure and well-maintained. They argued that relying on these materials to degrade naturally before acting is a nonviable long-term strategy. A consolidated asbestos registry could illuminate actual compliance levels and foster a more potent, risk-centred enforcement methodology.

Notably, mesothelioma, a cancer correlated with asbestos, lacks a cure and sees up to 2,700 fresh diagnoses annually. The Health and Safety Executive pledged to assess and incorporate any emerging evidence that can positively impact health outcomes.