.gif){kind=small}
BACK TO HOME
PAGE BACK TO HOME
PAGE EUROPEAN REVIEW
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION has decided to ban practically all remaining legal forms of asbestos. The 1976 directive on Dangerous Substances will be amended to extend its scope with regard to chrysotile or white asbestos which was previously only prohibited in 14 types of product. The only item to escape the ban after the amendment will be diaphragms used for electrolysis in chlorine plants for which no safer substitute could be found. At the Commission's request, the Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment undertook a comparative risk assessment analysis of chrysotile asbestos and its main substitutes. In September 1998 it confirmed that there are now safer substitutes which can be used for almost all applications of chrysotile asbestos. On 4th May, a qualified majority of Member States voted in support of the Commission proposal.
In practical terms the main items which will disappear from the market are asbestos cement products, mainly pipes and roofing, friction products e.g. brake and clutch linings for heavy vehicles and seals and gaskets. The directive requires the ban to be brought fully into force across the EU by 1st January 2005 but nine countries already have general prohibitions and many others may bring in bans earlier than this. The decision was based on evidence that all forms of asbestos are carcinogens, causing asbestosis (scarring of the lungs), lung cancer and mesothelioma (cancer of the lining of the lungs). Nearly 6,700 Europeans died of asbestos-related illnesses in 1995, according to the EU statistical office, Eurostat. Dr. Julian Peto, head of epidemiology at the University of London's Institute of Cancer Research published a report in the British Journal of Cancer in February, indicating that 250,000 people will die from asbestos-related cancers in Western Europe by 2035. This level of occurrence is likely to be repeated in the developing world.
Reaction to the ban was almost universally favourable, the The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) which represents 124 million workers worldwide warmly welcomed the decision, 'Trade unions all over the world have been gravely concerned about the very serious dangers of exposure to asbestos and many have concluded that a ban is the only sure way to prevent deaths. The EU's action will encourage unions in many other countries to press for similar measures to phase out the use of white asbestos.' commented Bill Jordan, ICFTU General Secretary. The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) pressed vigorously for the ban and has welcomed the new law. The only negative reaction is likely to come from the Canadian government in Ottawa and asbestos mining interests. As reported in the European Review issue 5, Canada is already pursuing a case against France before the World Trade Organisation (WTO) after that country banned the product. Asbestos mining is big business in Quebec, the French-speaking province which is politically sensitive. 'If Canada's export market collapses, so will 1,600 mining jobs, all of them in Quebec -a fact that has inspired Ottawa, the Quebec government and the Bloc Québécois [independence party] to rush to the industry's aid over the years' says the Toronto Star newspaper.
In two features earlier this year the newspaper highlighted the interests behind the Canadian industry and the damage that is being done to Canada's image by support for asbestos export: 'Ottawa has backed a $750,000 Responsible Use Program believing Canadian chrysotile asbestos can be controlled with technology in export markets' it reported, but quoted Dr. Peto as stating, 'But in practice you can't do it in England let alone in the Third World. When 17-year-olds become builders they're macho about everything: drinking, driving, smoking and sawing up asbestos in little rooms'.
MEMBER STATES WHICH have not fully complied with the 1992 EU directive on the health and safety of pregnant workers (see our last issue) have been sent infringement notices. On the basis of the returned questionnaires the Commission has found that Sweden, Italy, Luxembourg, France and Ireland have failed to totally transpose the directive into their national legislation.
The Commission has complained to Sweden that their legislation does not provide for the minimum two weeks of compulsory maternity leave required. In both Italy and Luxembourg, the Commission considers that the imposition of a general ban on pregnant women working at night, without any individual assessment of whether night work poses a risk to the woman in question, is contrary to the directive. In France legislation does not provide for women to be given leave from work if there is no other possible way to protect them from a risk to their health or safety. The Irish government has specified the working conditions which the employer must assess but has not allowed any others to be considered.
After the debate in the European Parliament which the European Review reported on in issue 6, the Council of Ministers has adopted a directive on landfill waste. The directive broadly follows the conclusions of the debate. It is designed to reduce the negative environmental effects of landfill waste.
Member States will have 2 years to pass national laws to give it effect and there are targets specified leading to a reduction, 15 years later, of 65% on 1995 levels. Stringent conditions are set for the granting of permits and bind the operator to paying for the closure and after-care of a site for 30 years. Existing sites must be closed unless an acceptable conditioning plan is received from the operator by 2002 who must then comply with the directive by 2009.
|
The new directive is published in the |
Official Journal of the European Communities- series L, no. 182, 16th July 1999 |
|
Back to |
Forward to |
Up to |
Back to |
