Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 10 Hansard (Wednesday, 25 August 2004) . . Page.. 4204 ..

give construction practitioners that they engage a notice about asbestos on the property. The James Hardie inquiry has served to remind all of us that Australians are still continuing to suffer from, and ultimately die from, asbestos-related diseases. Along with the recent boom in home renovations, the inquiry has again brought to the public consciousness the presence of asbestos throughout Australian homes and building stocks.

This is a terrible legacy, the consequences of which we will live with for another generation. I commend Mrs Cross for her courageous initiation of debate on this important topic. Any measure designed to stem the incidence of asbestos-related disease is worth careful consideration, as are measures to increase awareness of the dangers for homeowners and occupants of dwellings containing asbestos. Nevertheless the approach taken in this bill is unlikely to stop asbestos-related diseases. The bill is targeted at changes in residential property ownership and occupation, without an effective link to the cause of asbestos-related diseases. People contract asbestos-related diseases because they are exposed to asbestos in a dangerous condition, and when they are undertaking dangerous activities. The bill simply does not target the hazards of asbestos, and this is the government’s fundamental concern.

The government has been accused of playing politics with matters of life and death on this issue. I reject this suggestion. The simple truth is that the government has been doing what it is obliged to do. It has been considering the broader spectrum of issues and implications raised by the existence of asbestos in some Canberra homes and buildings. It has been examining how we, as a community, can best understand and control the hazards this creates. We know that asbestos is most hazardous when it is loose, damaged or friable, and that exposure to asbestos fibres can result in asbestos-related diseases such as asbestosis and mesothelioma.

In most cases people who have suffered asbestos-related diseases have been exposed to the dangerous fibres through their occupation, particularly in the building, mining and product manufacturing industries. We know that asbestos was commonly used in private and public buildings, including residential dwellings, as fire-proofing, as sound-proofing, in wet areas, as insulation, and even for decorative purposes, until the mid 1980s.

We also know that measures were taken to remove very dangerous loose asbestos insulation from roof cavities in the ACT in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and that measures have also been put in place to rid schools of asbestos. This government is committed to finding a means of identifying the location and condition of asbestos materials in the ACT so that abatement and control procedures can be instigated when repairs or renovations are conducted. Similarly, it is the public policy of the ACT that asbestos removal work is done properly and safely, to protect public health and safety.

Asbestos and asbestos products are prohibited dangerous substances under the Dangerous Substances Act 2004. The import, manufacture and use of all forms of asbestos were banned in Australia from 31 December 2003. The ban came into effect with the making of new customs regulations by the Commonwealth, in conjunction with prohibitions on use and manufacture in all Australian jurisdictions. The Dangerous Substances (General) Regulations 2004 implemented the national ban in the ACT. They encompass prohibitions on the manufacture, supply, storage, transport, sale, use and re-use, installation and replacement of asbestos-containing material.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .