PRESENTATION TO PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE

24 JUNE 2003

 BY MR NOAH BANDA

    1. PUBLICITY SENSATIONALISM

      2. In the past 20 years, people in many countries, the world over have been subjected to a " barrage"barrage" of subjective publicity and misinformation about the effects of asbestos, such that many now believe that any form of exposure to this common occurring mineral fiber carries with it a material hazard of developing asbestosis and such other diseases. Such misconceptions and misperceptions have in the past led to unwarranted anxiety and unnecessary removals of asbestos containing products and applications, resulting in uncalled for social costs completely out of proportion to possible benefits. In some instances, wild suggestions about asbestos related epidemics have been regrettably spread notwithstanding scientific facts to the contrary.

      Cases of asbestos related desises in South Africa are true and real and it would be irresponsible for us to try and conceal this fact.

       

    2. ASBESTOS ASSOCISAITION OF SOUTH AFRICA

During the month of April this (2003) Business South Africa invited all companies that deal in asbestos or asbestos containing products to give views on the issue of asbestos.

During these submissions the following points became clear:

A number of institutions where using asbestos in one form or another. In some cases it would take some organizations unto 30 years to change from asbestos and that too is not guaranteed.

The asbestos users group was being represented by people who where representing other organizations interest.

The regulations regarding asbestos where being made without the input of the people who are dealing with it.

ItsIt’s from this forum that we ( as(as companies and organization in South Africa )Africa) realized that we needed an organization that will be able to assist both government and private companies in the safe use and handling of asbestos or asbestos containing products.

3. ASBESTOS RATIONALITY

Despite the negative publicity campaigns in the past, in recent years this asbestos sensationalism appears to be tapering off, mainly due to:
      1. The USA led in unbanning the use of asbestos;
      2. Incontrovertible scientific evidence and facts that the asbestos health risks are so minuscule and barely measurable;
      3. A better and modern day understanding of responsible use/application of asbestos and its derivatives;
      4. Objective knowledge of the different grades and risks of the asbestos fibre , and
      5. That asbestos is a common occurring mineral fibre with peculiar application but controllable risks just like most products in daily use of the public.

Rationally , Objectivity and sense appear to prevail now in the international debate on asbestos, and calls for more scientific evidence have resulted in conclusive evidence that the dangers posed by asbestos exposure in the general population is undetectably low, and manageable.

 

    1. ACREADITATION

      2. The Asbestos Association of South Africa is now a full member of Asbestos International Association as from May 2003. We also attended the AIA governors meeting recently in Portugal.

      We have also been invited to an international conference on Chrysotile Asbestos in India from 10th to 12th November 2003.

       

    2. SAFE AND RESPONSIBLE USE

      3. We are pleased as the Asbestos Association of South Africa, to accept that there is risk associated with asbestos, just as is the case with most, if not all, products including daily foodstuff such as vegetables, beef and even water.

      Our aim as an Association is to promote the responsible and safe use of

      asbestos containing products to further reduce and/or minimize any

      danger to the public as they use our products which have been safely in application for centuries.

       

    3. GUIDELINES FOR A REGULATION ON SAFE AND

RESPONSIBLE USE OF CHRYSOTILE ASBESTOS

In 1986, the International Labour Organization (ILO) unanimously approved Convention 162, "Safety in the use of asbestos". This Convention advocates the strict regulation of chrysotile, but does not provide any prohibitions, other than banning of crocidolite and sprayed-on asbestos. This Convention, along with recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO) at a meeting held in
Oxford in 1989, is still the international point of view favoring the controlled-use approach for chrysotile asbestos.

Countries are encouraged to ratify ILO Convention 162 in order to ensure that chrysotile asbestos is safely used in their country. For countries that choose not to formally ratify this instrument, they should endorse its controlled-use approach in a national legislation
covering all the activities involving exposure of workers to asbestos in the course of work. This is the case for a large majority of
chrysotile consuming countries in the world nowadays.

CONCLUSION

We would like to conclude by assuring you that we as an association would not ignore the danger of careless use of asbestos in any form. We intended through different organizations to educate and promote the safe use this product without any health risks to the user public.