ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT REVIEW

Transcription

1 ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT REVIEW ISSUES PAPER RESPONSE FORM Please complete in RICH TEXT or WORD DOCUMENT Format Individual or Organisational Name: New South Wales Business Chamber Chapter 2: A National Strategic Plan 2.1 Aim of the National Strategic Plan Questions 1. Is elimination or reduction of asbestos related disease in Australia a suitable aim for a national strategic plan to improve asbestos awareness and management in Australia? If not, what do you think the aim of the plan should be? Comments NSWBC supports the goal of reducing asbestos related disease in Australia and that this should be central to a strategic plan for improved asbestos awareness and management. Note: The aim refers to the incidence of asbestos related disease in Australia. There may be instances where asbestos related disease in acquired is non- Australian jurisdictions consequently but is diagnosed in Australia. Therefore it may be preferable, and more correct, to express the aim in term of eliminating or reducing the acquisition of asbestos related diseases in Australia. 2.2 Priority Areas under a National Strategic Plan 2. Are the priority areas suggested above appropriate for a national strategic plan? Are there any other priority areas which should be addressed in a national strategic plan? If so, please specify the activities which you considered are required to support the additional priority areas? The key priority areas for a national strategy should be: Education and raising public awareness Identification, removal, handling, storage and disposal practices Information ( data) management and reporting on associated health matters Asbestos Management Review 1

2 Collaboration and cooperation between jurisdictions on asbestos related matters There seems to be a particular focus in the Issues Paper on the removal of asbestos from all environments. While this is an outcome that might be achieved over time, the removal of all asbestos containing materials, including those where leaving them in place is the least risk option, may result in an increase in the risk of asbestos related disease. 2.3 Coordination and management of a National Strategic Plan 3. Is there an existing organisation or body that could take responsibility for oversight, administration and/or coordination of a national strategic plan? If so, which organisation or body could do this and what features make it suitable for this role? 4. Alternatively, is a new organisation or body required to oversee, administer and/or coordinate a national strategic plan? What would the role and functions of a new organisation be? The Tasmanian, South Australian, NSW and ACT governments have all announced strategies to address asbestos related matters. Clearly there is a willingness and desire by governments to commit resources. It is governments at the state and territory level in, conjunction with local government, who are best placed to focus effort where it is most needed. There is merit in jurisdictions collaborating and cooperating to share learnings and to leverage initiatives beyond state/territory boundaries. For example the Tasmanian Government asbestos web site contains much useful information and could be readily amended to be applicable in other jurisdictions.. Safe Work Australia (SWA) could be considered as the body for the coordination of the national strategy. SWA already has role in the coordination of workplace safety and while the issues arising from asbestos extend beyond the workplace eg domestic premises, even in those circumstances they might be expected to acquire a workplace safety dimension at some point when work is carried out on the premises. As an alternative, models recently adopted by NSW and the ACT which bring together those parts of government (including local government) to coordinate activity could be considered nationally. A new body in not required - See above In the event there was to be a decision to create a new body its brief must not encompass any regulatory activity and it must be genuinely tri-partite in its membership. What would its membership be? How would it be established? How would it relate to existing Commonwealth, state and local agencies? Should it have a finite life and a sunset clause Asbestos Management Review 2

3 if so, to which organisation(s) would any residual functions transfer? What would be the relationship of local government to such an agency? Chapter 3: Activities under a national strategic plan 3.1 Identification of Asbestos 5. Should a national audit to identify the location and condition of asbestos be carried out? If so, what would the process of such an audit involve? What information should be included in such an audit? Who should have access to such information? How should this information be kept up-to-date? The commentary in the issues paper suggests it is highly likely a national audit is only likely to confirm that which is already known. The funds invested in such an audit and in maintaining its currency would be better spent dealing with specific asbestos issues as and when they arise. Eg specific targeted activity when the need is identified and clear as was the case with the Asbestos Removal Program in the ACT. The Model Work Health & Act will result in all Australian jurisdictions requiring the registering of identified asbestos in work places. 6. Should owners of private property be legally required to identify the presence of asbestos in their property? If so when should such identification take place? If so should the identification process involve an assessment of the condition of the asbestos containing material i.e. risk of exposure from airborne fibres? No. The imposition of this obligation on home owners is likely to see high levels of noncompliance, resentment and unnecessary anxiety particularly if the financial burden falls on home owners. Providing home owners with more readily accessible information eg the Tasmanian web site and at the right time eg when they are engaging in DIY repairs, renovations etc. would in our view be a more productive approach. Recruiting DIY suppliers may be an effective strategy eg educational materials being strategically placed in store and training sales personnel to remind buyers about asbestos when people are engaged in home repairs. 7. What activities, if any, should be included in a national strategic plan in relation to the identification of asbestos? Who is best placed to deliver these activities? A National Strategic Plan needs to address education and awareness raising, reducing the impediments to compliance generally and the facilitation of specific actions in those areas of greatest need/ risk. A plan should be sufficiently flexible to accommodate differences between and within jurisdictions. Workplaces are or will be required to record identified asbestos, more effort is required to educate and assist domestic premises owners. For example should local government be funded to provide asbestos identification services to householders at no cost to the house holder. Asbestos Management Review 3

4 3.2 Management 8. Is a standard risk management approach sufficient to protect against the risk of exposure to asbestos fibres? Yes. The danger, as identified in the Issues paper, of the Prioritised approach is it is likely to result in increase in risk through the disturbance of otherwise safe asbestos. Consequently there has to be a serious questioning of the advisability of a blanket objective of total removal. 9. Are there any measures, including possible research, that could be undertaken to inform improvements to current management approaches? Are there safe alternatives to asbestos removal? Are there any examples of practical methods to permanently and indestructibly bond asbestos fibres into other non-friable substances? 10. What would be the advantages of a prioritised removal program for asbestos in the built environment? How would they outweigh the costs and risks involved? How would it operate in practice? How would the timeframes be determined? 11. Should a prioritised removal program apply to: Privately owned properties such as residences? Workplace? Government properties? The Issues paper does not provide any insight into the likely cost/benefit from the prioritised removal of asbestos from the built environment. Asbestos related disease is understandably a highly emotive subject however we need to be careful that the objective consideration and response to the issue does not get distorted. It is established practice that it is often best to leave non- friable asbestos in place. A deliberate program to remove asbestos which might otherwise not require removal may well have the opposite outcome to that intended. An accelerated program will also undoubtedly put demands on limited resources and expertise. The safety risks arising from accelerated programs have been recently demonstrated with parts of the Stimulus Package following the GFC. Removal should be determined on the basis of need not simply on the basis of ownership/use or some presumptions about capacity to pay. In the event a policy position is established that asbestos is to be removed under priority programs then it would be unreasonable to expect property owners to have that cost imposed on them particularly if the asbestos is not immediately a risk and might otherwise be left safely in place. Are there particular types of properties and structures that should be targeted first as part of a prioritised removal program? Which ones and why? How could such a program be monitored and enforced? Who should bear the costs of a prioritised removal program? What incentives might apply to Asbestos Management Review 4

5 such a program? 12. What activities, if any, should be included in a national strategic plan to support a Prioritised Removal Program or improved risk management approach? It is our view a Prioritised Removal Plan is not the appropriate or safest approach to the management and removal over time of asbestos related materials. 13. What activities, if any, could be included in a national strategic plan to reduce the risks posed by asbestos during and following natural disasters? Management of asbestos should be included in disaster management and recovery plans by the appropriate emergency services and any other bodies that may be created post an event. 3.3 Removal and Handling 14. If it is not possible to ensure that removal of asbestos by homeowners from private properties is undertaken safely, should it be allowed at all? Are there any measures that could be applied to improve safety of homeowners when removing asbestos? Should a permit be required for asbestos removal from private property by homeowners? Should an inspection regime apply in these circumstance? Just as it may be impossible to ensure the removal of asbestos from private premises is carried out safely it would be equally impossible to prohibit removal. Improved safety depends on homeowners being able to identify asbestos materials in the first instance and then for them to act appropriately eg encapsulation v removal. Any regulatory constraints should be consistent with those applying to workplaces. Compliance will also be improved if the barriers to safe removal and disposal can be lowered/removed eg local councils being able to provide an identification service, guidance on safe removal, removal of differential charging for asbestos waste disposal, council based/ approved asbestos collection services. The obvious challenge is cost. Local government is not likely to be in a position to absorb additional expenses so how this activity might be funded will need to be considered. How would this work? 15. Are risks posed by naturally occurring asbestos appropriately covered by existing OHS and mining safety legislation? Is there sufficient data such as airborne fibre counts to conclude that naturally occurring asbestos in open-cut mines does not pose a potential risk? Asbestos Management Review 5

6 16. What responsibility should governments have in relation to the removal of asbestos from former government owner properties that have been sold or otherwise disposed of? What responsibility should governments have for the presences of asbestos in circumstances where it came about as a consequence of the specification of government agencies at the time? It is difficult to understand why governments might be treated differently to any other former owners of properties containing asbestos and why government should have obligations that are different to former owners of property. Government should be subject to the same requirements as other property owners. 17. What activities, if any, should be included in a national strategic plan in relation to the removal and handling of asbestos? Who is best placed to deliver these activities? > Education & awareness raising > Low or no cost diagnostic services (for domestic premises) and no disposal surcharges > A focus on assistance and facilitation not on penalties and forced compliance State agencies and authorities, local government, DIY retail outlets. 18. Should incentives be provided for homeowners to identify asbestos and if so what kind of incentives would be appropriate? It is difficult to envisage most home owners actively looking for asbestos on their property even with incentives. A more productive approach might be to facilitate engagement when asbestos is more likely to be an issue for the home owner eg when doing repairs and maintenance etc. and in a way which does not add complication and excessive cost e.g. a free of charge inspection service to identify if asbestos is present and to provide advice. 3.4 Storage and Transport 19. Is there a need to regulate the storage and transportation of asbestos that has been removed by homeowners from domestic premises? If so, how could this be achieved? What incentives for safe transportation of asbestos material might be provided? There is sufficient regulation in place. The issue is how to encourage compliance not how to force compliance. For example local councils provide regular garden waste and white goods collection services. A similar service might be provided with respect to asbestos with councils also providing appropriate plastic bags/sheeting/ seals and markings at cost. 20. What activities, if any, could be included in a national strategic plan to improve safety when transporting and storing asbestos materials? The national plan will need to understand and address the drivers of behaviour with respect to the transport and storage of asbestos materials. Asbestos Management Review 6

7 3.5 Disposal 21. Are there adequate asbestos disposal sites and facilities throughout Australia?. 22. Are the fees that are charged for the disposal of asbestos containing waste a disincentive to safe disposal - or do they encourage illegal dumping? Are there additional factors that contribute to the illegal dumping? 23. Should all asbestos containing materials that have been appropriately removed and packaged be able to be disposed at these sites at no additional cost to standard waste disposal fees? Alternatively, how could the cost of accepting and processing asbestos containing waste be reduced? The fees charged for the disposal of asbestos would appear to be a disincentive to safe disposal for some however it is likely the reasons for illegal dumping are multifaceted. For example if materials are being dumped illegally then perhaps they have not be removed, wrapped and transported properly as well. How accessible is an approved waste facility? For example does a decision like that of Brisbane City Council not to take asbestos waste at its transfer station result in increased dumping because appropriate disposal facilities are not readily accessible. Part of a national strategy should be to develop a better understanding of behavioural drivers and use that information to shape initiatives If disposal charges are found to be a significant disincentive to the use of proper facilities then consideration should be given to removing or lowering this impediment. How that might be achieved given disposal facilities need to meet their own legitimate commercial objectives will need to be considered. 24. Should uniform national regulations apply to all asbestos disposal sites and facilities? It would make sense for these to be harmonised 25. Are current approval and monitoring processes sufficient to ensure the long-term safety of the disposal sites that accept asbestos? 26. What activities, if any, should be included in a national strategic plan in relation to the disposal of asbestos? Who is best placed to deliver these activities? There are a number of initiatives which have and are occurring within jurisdictions. The body charged with coordinating a national strategy should consolidate those initiatives and facilitate collaboration between the jurisdictions. With respect to delivery those best placed are the relevant state/ territory bodies including local government & disposal facility operators under the guidance of the lead agency in the state/territory. 27. If incentives are provided to ensure safe disposal of asbestos, what sort of incentives would No Comment Asbestos Management Review 7

8 be appropriate and who should provide those incentives? 3.6 Awareness 28. What existing activities or information sources could be used to raise awareness of asbestos? What networks not currently used could be utilised to raise asbestos awareness? Who should be responsible for coordinating these efforts? How should this be undertaken? There are established networks and agencies which can be used. Eg State WHS agencies, local government, DIY and other appropriate retailers, industry associations. Coordination needs to occur at the jurisdictional level via the designated lead agency. 29. What are the barriers to raising asbestos awareness in the community, and for employers and workers, and how can these be addressed? For non- workplace environments awareness raising needs to be targeted when people are more likely to be open to taking on information eg when engaging in home improvements, repairs etc. That suggests a communications strategy using hardware stores and building materials suppliers which not only addresses the dangers associated with asbestos materials but also the appropriate responses and sources of advice and assistance. Local government is also a potential channel given it is the point for the lodgement of building approvals etc. It is evident that whatever strategy might be adopted asbestos related issues are going to be present over a protracted period of time so awareness raising strategies will need to capable of being sustained and refreshed over time. Eg Communications strategies like the Tasmania Government web site which can be updated, relaunched, refreshed etc. at relatively low cost. Within workplaces there are very specific requirements under Work Health and Safety. 30. What activities should be included in a national strategic plan to improve asbestos awareness in the community? Who is best placed to deliver these activities? A national strategy should contain an overarching communications element which could include mechanism for the sharing of existing materials and joint development of others. That strategy should be driven through existing state and territory based agencies and not independent of other activity they may be undertaking. 3.7 Education 31. Are there further examples of education No Comment Asbestos Management Review 8

9 activities that are already being undertaken? How successful have these been? How could they be improved? 32. What are the educational needs of: Private property owners? Private property owners? See earlier comments Employers? Employers? Workers? The general public? Are these needs being met? If not, how can these needs be addressed? The educational needs of employers with respect to asbestos relate to their obligations under work health and safety legislation and are addressed as a matter of course by regulators. For those employers engaged in the removal; of asbestos there are very specific requirements which are also covered by local regulators. The changes arising from harmonisation have been identified as being beneficial but comparatively expensive to implement 1 Consequently any additional initiatives should not be contemplated at this point. Workers? See employers above. The general public? We would question the cost / benefit of any general awareness raising program. Activity needs to be targeted to subsets of the general public where there is an identified need/opportunity eg home owners. 33. What activities should be included in a national strategic plan to improve asbestos awareness in the community? Who is best placed to deliver these activities? See above 3.8 Remote, Rural and Regional Issues 34. What are the barriers to dealing with asbestos issues in remote, rural and regional communities, The needs of specific groups should be accommodated in any communications strategy. It is not apparent how the issues 1 Harmonisation of WHS Regulations and Codes RIS Deloitte Access Economics July 2011 p 125 Asbestos Management Review 9

10 and how can these be addressed? Are there any existing information opportunities that could be capitalised on? arising from asbestos would be different however communications strategies may need to be different 35. Should a national strategic plan address remote, rural and regional issues as a stand alone priority area, or as an element in each of the proposed priority areas? What would be the benefits of the preferred approach? See above 36. What activities, if any, should be included in a national strategic plan to improve asbestos awareness and management arrangements for remote, rural and regional communities? Who is best placed to deliver these activities? See above 3.9 Medical Data 37. Is nationally consolidated information or a database on all asbestos related diseases required? If so: How can this data be collected? The need for consolidated and reliable data is important. The Australian Mesothelioma Registry provides a possible model which might be capable of expansion to encompass other asbestos related diseases. Who should provide the data and when? And how often should it be updated? Who should be responsible for the coordination of data collection and reporting? Who should be able to access the data and under what circumstances? Identify any privacy issues that need to be addressed in relation to the collection of data and reporting on asbestos related diseases? How Asbestos Management Review 10

11 should they be addressed? How should provision of data be enforced? 38. What activities, if any, should be included in a national strategic plan with respect to collection of medical data? Who is best placed to deliver these activities? See above 3.10 Location Data 39. What options are available to provide information to identify locations where asbestos containing materials have been disposed of on public land? 40. Should the disclosure of disposal sites be mandatory for those entities and persons who have knowledge of such sites? What would this achieve? Should an amnesty be provided to any persons or companies providing such information? Mandatory disclosure is unlikely to produce any result if it is not accompanied by some form of anonymity/amnesty. 41. Have arrangements such as in SA and ACT proved useful in management of ACM in the domestic sector? 42. Should disclosure of the location of asbestos materials be required for private property? If so: Should such disclosure be limited to knowledge of the owner? Any statutory requirement on the owners of domestic premises to disclose the presence of asbestos on or in the property should be limited to their knowledge. Disclosure should occur when it is pertinent eg on change of ownership. When building works are contemplated in areas where the asbestos is known to exist. What information should be disclosed? When, how and to whom should such disclosure Asbestos Management Review 11

12 be made? 43. Is consolidated information on the location of asbestos required? If so: How can this data be collected? Who should provide the data and when? And how often should it be updated? The issues are what benefit will be derived from a consolidated data base and what will be the cost of building and maintain that information. We do not have any data on which to make an assessment however prima facie it would be our view establishing and maintaining consolidated information on the location of asbestos will be difficult and the cost prohibitive. Who should be responsible for the coordination of data collection and reporting? Who should be able to access the data and under what circumstances? Are there privacy issues that need to be addressed in relation to the reporting and subsequent disclosure of the location of asbestos? If so, how should they be addressed? How should provision of data be enforced? 44. What activities, if any, should be included in a national strategic plan to improve reporting and disclosure of information on the location of asbestos? See above 3.11 Exposure Data 45. Are existing requirements for reporting of workplace exposure to asbestos adequate? If not, Yes Asbestos Management Review 12

13 what further measures are required? 46. Do we need a centralised system for reporting public exposure to asbestos? The issues paper identifies the difficulties associated with recording public exposure to asbestos. A mandatory reporting requirement is unlikely to be successful. What purpose would a centralised exposure register serve? How would such a system operate? Would reporting be mandatory? What controls would be required to ensure the data collected adhered to current privacy laws and had the requisite degree of integrity so it could be effectively used by government and for research purposes? Who would be in charge of collecting, collating and storing such information? 47. Can you provide the Review with any examples of exposure registers that are considered to be successful? 48. What activities, if any, should be included in a national strategic plan with respect to collection of exposure data? Who is best placed to deliver these activities? 3.12 Import and Export Controls 49. What are the challenges to enforcing Australia s ban on the import and export of asbestos containing Asbestos Management Review 13

14 materials, and how can they be overcome? 50. Should Australia take a more active role in encouraging an effective ban on the international trade in asbestos? Who should be responsible for this activity? Should this be a priority under a national strategic plan? 51. Should import and export controls be a priority area under a national strategic plan to improve asbestos awareness and management in Australia? What activities, if any, could be included in a national strategic plan to strengthen the efficacy of Australia s import/export controls? Final Comments Any other matters you wish to bring to the attention of the Review? Asbestos related disease is properly a significant issue within the Australian community. The use of asbestos in Australia was widespread. Getting rid of asbestos from workplaces, public buildings and homes is an ideal outcome but it is not immediately achievable. Consequently it the view of the New South Wales Business Chamber the management of asbestos in Australia needs to focus on following established practices and protocols and to encourage the voluntary participation of business and homeowners in the effective management of asbestos, including its removal and disposal where that is the appropriate action. It is our view establishing new structures and processes rather than leveraging that which is already in place is more likely to have a negative impact on the effective management of asbestos rather than improving the situation. Asbestos Management Review 14