1. The Situation in Europe

A survey was done before the Conference on: whether there is a ban on use of asbestos, any plans for safe removal of asbestos from buildings, whether there are groups campaigning about asbestos and/or supporting people suffering from asbestos related diseases. The results are attached. At the workshop we also collected information from:

Italy: Asbestos banned since 1992, but problem is to find out where asbestos is already. Campaign in Taranto steel industry - out of 22,000 directly employed there have been 16,000 requests to be recognised as haveing had exposure to asbestos. Schools - have two years to check on asbestos.

Problem of disposal of waste asbestos.

Problem of military/navy - 15 people have been exposed on one contract. When contractors work on military/navy contracts, they have to sign to say they accept working in the presence of asbestos.

Greece: No legislation to ban asbestos, asbestos cement still used widely in new buildings; no plans to remove asbestos; no groups who campaign. Big companies stop any campaigns. Asbestos is important part of Greek economy - very cheap material. Greek trade unions not informed about asbestos dangers, and concerned about problem of unemployment if asbestos was banned. Greece is joining the European Federation of Building Workers.

France: Ban on asbestos from 1 January 1997, except for a few minor exemptions until 2001. Some French companies which produced asbestos have been preparing for years in case of a ban, and are switching to producing substitutes. Some of Saint Gobain plants were closing anyway. No plants have closed yet, but soon will. Trade unions were ambivalent - in some plants they had been campaigning for a ban, in others they are concerned more about unemployment. They did make demands to try and protect members - such as extra pension rights (did not win that), exposure certificate and a real assessment of the risk and history of exposure in the plants.

Agreed: We could pass on useful information to Greeks (some was given to them at the workshop). If they organise a meeting to try and inform trade unions, we could arrange for a speaker to attend.

A complaint is under preparation, to the EC, because the Canadian companies are concerned about their exports of asbestos, particularly to France. 99% of Canadian production of asbestos is exported, much of it going to Indonesia and Asia. Even if they don't pursue the complaint, they are trying to lobby to reverse the ban in France (and possibly elsewhere in Europe).

In Canada 2,500 people may lose their jobs because of bans on chrysotile. For every 500,000 exported tons of asbestos from Canada there will be 10,000 deaths worldwide. So to protect 2,500 jobs in Canada there will be 160 deaths per job.

There was a general feeling that any countries with a ban would not reverse that now - in Holland there will be the same number of asbestos deaths as traffic deaths, so there won't be any move to 'liberalise' the laws concerning asbestos; in Germany there is no plan for exemptions from the ban; extremely unlikely that France would withdraw the ban.

The Nordic countries have drawn up a draft proposal to the European Metalworkers Federation for a campaign strategy to get asbestos banned throughout Europe. They want to ensure that EC legislation does not allow asbestos to come in to countries where it is now banned through the 'free flow of products'. The European Federation of Building and Wood Workers is also campaigning for a Europe wide ban, and is thinking of employing someone short term to run the campaign.

1) We need to ensure that the European Directives concerning asbestos are properly implemented - we should work on that within our national networks.

2) DGIII has compiled a list of all the European Community legislation. We can probably get summaries of this, possibly through MEPs, and/or through people working at the 'expert' level in the EC.

3) Link up with workers from Berlaymont (EC) building in Brussels - 80 cases already of asbestos illnesses; they have a help group.

4) We also need to look at issue of regulation and checking of hazardous substances generally: since 1993 the EC has said that a list of 1800 chemicals have to be risk assessed, but only 40 are being done each year. DGIII has the power to ban some materials - regulation of the market.

5) Groups should write to EC - DGIII and DGV - through MEPs, about demolition, maintenance work where there is asbestos - in situations of high risk, what should be done, what are the safest ways of removing asbestos (eg, wet stripping).

6) We should not set up a new network, but instead work with the existing 'Ban Asbestos Network'. Annie Thebaud-Mony will put all the Workshop attenders on the mailing list. The BAN is planning a 'project of resolution' to the European Parliament.

7) Possibility of organising a demonstration in Brussels - at an appropriate time, when European Parliament is debating about asbestos. The experience from the British campaigning groups is that we can be effective with a small number of people. We should ask MEPs each to fund one person to go to a demonstration.

8) Share information - about compensation and benefits; media coverage (such as TV programmes in Britain and France which raised awareness about effects of asbestos on health).

In France there is meant to be an assessment of buildings to see if they contain asbestos, but it is not always done, it depends on whether the information is available - when trade unions put pressure on they can get the information.

In Holland, before demolition of a building, there has to be an assessment about asbestos, and removers have to be certified.

In Britain, the GMB trade union is campaigning for proper management of buildings which contain asbestos. They are calling for a register of buildings which contain asbestos, starting with public buildings. The union in the London Region is setting up a database on members - where they have worked where they may have been exposed to asbestos.

For all asbestos products there are substitutes. DGIII has been looking at substitutes, and at numbers of victims. Concern whether fibreglass and other manufactured mineral fibres are safe. It is more expensive than asbestos - information about contract for water pipes in France, where a fibreglass firm did not win the contract, and they are to be made of asbestos - discussions on the tender took place in December 1996 just before the ban came into force.

Action: What about health problems from substitutes? We need to find out what work the companies have done. There is an Association of Manufacturers Against Asbestos.

There might be a possibility of getting funding for victims groups, from EU and national governments; also, in Britain - UCATT (building workers trade union ) has funds - possibility of getting some for asbestos support groups.

France is starting a group supporting victims. In Holland, the trade unions have asked the government to do something for victims, because compensation takes so long.

Action: Possibility of organising Europe wide meeting for victims / representatives of victims groups. Ask MEPs how to get funding.