Government must solve asbestos issue within 40 years

CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF EMERGING THEMES AND TRENDS FRONT DESK

08

Smart building ecosystems: an interconnected future, but what is FM’s role in it?

10

How can buildings data be linked to making people feel be er?

13

Newsmakers: key stories from Facilitate online in the months of March and April

15

What happens now that the building safety manager role has been scrapped?

ASBESTOS

Government urged to solve asbestos peril in real estate within 40 years

by Herpreet Kaur Grewal

Last month, the government was told by a group of influential MPs that it must commit to a strategy to remove all asbestos from public and commercial buildings within 40 years.

They argue that the longer it takes to remove asbestos, the more the risk to health “is likely to increase as buildings are adapted with the move to net zero”.

The report from the Work and Pensions Committee highlighted how, despite being banned more than two decades ago, asbestos persists as the single greatest cause of work-related fatalities in the UK. There were more than 5,000 deaths in 2019, including from cancers such as mesothelioma.

It says it is regrettable that an endeavour meant to make buildings more energy efficient and the health of the general planet and populations better should have such a problematic consequence.

The increase in retrofitting in response to net-zero ambitions means that more asbestos-containing materials will be disturbed in the coming decades, states the select committee.

Many of these deaths will relate to exposures from 35 or more years ago. The available evidence indicates that cumulative exposures are much lower now for younger age groups, but more data is needed to understand the current picture.

As asbestos remains in about 300,000 non-domestic buildings and a likely dramatic increase in disturbance from netzero retrofitting is likely, the committee says that reliance on the current asbestos regulations will not be good enough. It concludes that a cross-government and “system-wide” strategy for the long-term removal of asbestos is required.

The report calls on the government and Health and Safety Executive (HSE) to back

up its stated goal of removing all asbestos by committing to a clear time frame and strategy. The plan should strengthen the evidence base on safe and effective asbestos removal in the first instance before prioritising removal from the highest-risk settings, including schools.

The government must also guarantee adequate funding for HSE inspection and enforcement of the asbestos regulations, which has declined in recent years.

Professor John Cherrie, emeritus professor of human health at Heriot-Watt University and principal scientist at the Institute of Occupational Medicine, told the committee that “although we know that the exposures are most probably less than they were in the past, we have very little idea about current situations”.

He said there was “no systematically collected information” on how many people “may be exposed or the levels of exposure that they may experience.” Moreover, he added that there was “no attempt to systematically collate that evidence and use it as intelligence to understand what the problem might be for the whole of the UK.”

Hence, the report also recommends that the HSE should develop and implement “a robust research framework for the systematic measurement of current asbestos exposures in nondomestic buildings, using a range of measurement and sampling techniques and informed by international experiences and approaches”. It should also ensure that adequate consideration is given to exposure measurement in schools and other public buildings. It recommends that the HSE should publish its framework by October 2022 and produce findings at frequent intervals thereafter.

A spokesperson for the HSE told Facilitate: “HSE can confirm it has

While the late-20th century exposures are behind us, the risk remains real

Stephen Timms MP

received the select committee report and will consider its findings and respond in due course to any recommendations and observations contained within it.”

Stephen Timms MP, committee chair, said: “Asbestos is one of the great workplace tragedies of modern times and while the extreme exposures of the late20th century are now behind us, the risk from asbestos remains real.

“The drive towards retrofitting of buildings to meet net-zero aspirations means the risk of asbestos exposure will only escalate in the coming decades. Falling back on regulations that devolve responsibility to individual building owners and maintenance managers will not be sufficient to protect people’s health.

“Setting a clear deadline of 40 years for the removal of asbestos from nondomestic buildings will help to focus minds. The clock is ticking and the government and HSE must now come up with a strategic plan which builds the evidence on safer removal and prioritises higher risk settings such as schools.

“This is no time for laissez-faire. The government needs to fund the HSE properly to allow it to reverse the decline in enforcement activity seen in the decade before the pandemic and ensure that asbestos, and its removal, is managed safely and effectively.”

Raising awareness

Becky Crosland, head of health & safety at the Building Engineering Services Association told Facilitate that the report was welcome because “further education was needed” on the safe removal of asbestos from buildings and “more focus is needed on this before we start ripping asbestos out of buildings [for retrofitting”.

“There is still an awful lot of asbestos in non-domestic buildings. Mistakes are made every day by workers. I regularly get calls of someone on a site disturbing asbestos,” she said.

Crosland added that asbestos surveys “aren’t common” and “a lot of our housing stock is really old”. But the onus will be on the building owner in the newly passed Building Safety Act 2022.

She states that the HSE “needs to secure extra funding” to action greater regulation and control of how asbestos is managed. “[The report] is commendable but we have a lot of buildings that are falling apart and we have to have better education, training and awareness [regarding asbestos removal]… before making buildings zero carbon.”

Focus

This is a message echoed by Ruth Wilkinson, head of health and safety at the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health. “We support the recommendation for there to be an overall ‘plan’ developed by the government and Health and Safety Executive, but we urge caution over doing this without research and evidence around safe removal and disposal.

“Removing asbestos is something which is fraught with risks, so any decision to do so is something which cannot be taken lightly. Full consideration must be given to how the people removing it are protected and where the asbestos goes from there, including its packaging, transportation and final disposal – particularly when considering the large number of buildings this plan will relate to.

“So we would expect to see that any such plans will include detailed information on how these risks will be managed to prevent significant exposure during this process.”

Wilkinson added that should a 40-year plan be set, there would still be a risk for anyone coming into contact with asbestos during that time. “It is crucial that greater protection is offered to these people, and that a risk-based approach is taken as recommended by the committee.

“There is currently a lack of consistency in managing asbestos among duty holders and a lack of awareness and knowledge about it among those who are coming into contact with it, particularly in smaller businesses. We would like to see a collective effort by policymakers, government, regulators, employers and worker representatives. This should include improved training for employees in how to deal with asbestos, clearer guidance around working with asbestos and more awareness-raising about the dangers of exposure.”