Asbestos sites left unlabelled over public “upset” fears

Tuesday 25 September 2018

Sites containing cancer-causing asbestos in the hospital, schools and other government buildings are not being labelled over fears of “upsetting” the public, it has emerged.

Over 180 States of Jersey buildings are known to contain asbestos – a known carcinogen that can lead to incurable mesolthelioma – but only some of those areas feature visible warnings to the public.

One area to feature labelling is the General Hospital building, but it has now been revealed that this has only been done “where practical” and in places that do “not pose a risk of upsetting patients and visitors.”

The revelation came in an asbestos assessment of the premises only recently released into the public domain under the Freedom of Information Law. It described asbestos labelling as an “emotive issue”, but added that areas accessed by maintenance staff and engineers did contain clear warnings.

Pictured: Not all areas of asbestos in the hospital have been labelled.

Questioned by Express, a States spokesperson then said that this was standard practice across all States buildings in line with national standards.

“…It should be labelled with suitable asbestos warning signs, except where it may cause undue alarm, such as in public places,” they said, adding: “When it is enclosed, encapsulated or bonded, asbestos carries no risk to the health of staff, patients or public, and to label it would risk causing unnecessary concern.”

The spokesperson further reassured that the States was “responsible” in its management of the hazardous substance, and had “identified the location and condition of all asbestos within all public buildings”, as well as maintaining “survey reports, plans and locations, with photographs, of all the asbestos.”

But local campaigner June Summers-Shaw, who lost her husband to mesothelioma, which she believes he contracted as a result of exposure to the substance during his work at Highlands College, says this isn’t good enough.

“It’s insulting the intelligence of the population by saying that we’re too sensitive to be told about the asbestos,” she told Express. “Why hide it? It seems like they don’t want people to know because there’s so much of it.”

She said that she felt the island was behind the times in dealing with asbestos, recalling operation she underwent at a Birmingham Hospital nearly 20 years ago: “Even then, I remember all the asbestos in the hospital was identified: ‘Asbestos - do not disturb’.”

But above all, Mrs Summers-Shaw said she was appalled that schools were not heavily marked, questioning why areas cleaners and maintenance workers access were better labelled than those for the children.

So far, the States have openly addressed asbestos at the hospital and testing conducted recently at South Hill, while Fort Regent has had areas closed down. 

Mrs Summers-Shaw is currently campaigning for a compensation scheme for victims of asbestos-related illnesses, like her husband. She recently joined forces with the family of former construction Brian Coutanche, who passed away in July due to mesothelioma.

Pictured: Mr Brian Coutanche passed away from an asbestos-related illness. His family are now campaigning for compensation.

A petition launched by the campaigners has now garnered over 1,300 signatures, prompting the Minister for Social Security, Deputy Judy Martin, to look into the viability of a scheme – one of which already operates in the UK.

In response to a question by Deputy Carina Alves this morning, she revealed that such a scheme would cost around £150,000 to £200,000 annually.

“The Social Security Review will consider an industrial diseases compensation scheme and any recommendation for a benefit would then be funded by Social Security contributions. Implementing a scheme outside of the Social Security Scheme would require additional tax-funded monies,” she explained.

In response to a separate question by the St. Helier Deputy, the Minister for Infrastructure, Deputy Kevin Lewis, said that there was no “monitoring” schedule for islanders working in a building with asbestos, but that, “where there has been a potential for exposure to an individual a record of this exposure will be kept within the individual’s personal file held by Human Resources.”