Jukka Takala speaks to Azza Taalab of the ILO's landmark decision to fight asbestos globally The International Labour Office (ILO) is enforcing a global ban on asbestos, the world's biggest industrial killer. The landmark decision came with the adoption of a resolution on 14 June 2006 at the ILO Conference in Geneva. Jukka Takala, the newly- appointed director of the European Agency for Safety and Health, was Director of the ILO when its resolution was adopted. He spoke to Al-Ahram Weekly of what it will take, to make the world asbestos-free? What has been the ILO response to the asbestos resolution? The ILO will intensify its support for the existing campaigns related to asbestos and, in particular, the elimination of the future use of asbestos, and asbestos-containing materials. As the French minister of labour, M Larcher said, the ILO should have a campaign of its own to eliminate future use of asbestos, and properly manage asbestos in place today. Furthermore there seems to be a genuine interest by the European Union to be involved. The ILO could join hands with the Senior Labour Inspectors' Committee (SLIC) campaign to reinforce asbestos-related inspection systems. The Global Unions have also their own campaign that needs to be linked to the ILO campaign. How serious is the problem of asbestos trade, and use? Every year, some two million tonnes of asbestos are produced and taken to use worldwide, and some of it is even recycled, such as that in ship breaking. While recycling of useful materials is important, recycling of hazards must be stopped immediately. All these asbestos problems continue to cause a massive global epidemic that is increasingly hitting the developing world, in addition to the industrialised countries. These developing economies do not have the means to protect themselves, have outdated policies and legislation, poor inspection systems, and lack of knowledge to tackle the problem. It has been estimated that every 170 tonnes of asbestos is responsible for one mesothelioma -- a fatal cancer of the linings of the lungs -- and for two lung cancers. And in Arab countries, how serious is the problem of asbestos trade and use? No Arab country has so far ratified the ILO Convention Number 162 on Asbestos. No Arab country has so far prohibited or severely restricted the use of asbestos. While the exact amount of asbestos in each country is not known, it appears that the Arab region is well on its way to develop an asbestos epidemic if nothing is quickly done. Are there major regional differences in the gravity of asbestos trade and use? The biggest users are in Asia, and in many Asian countries, all types of asbestos are practically freely used. In the European Union, USA and Japan, trade and use of asbestos is either forbidden or -- as in the USA -- the litigation procedures and heavy compensation claims have practically stopped the use of asbestos. I have anot heard of asbestos restrictions in the Arab region. The resolution calls on ILO to actively promote the elimination of all asbestos use. What is the ILO's timetable for achieving an end to the trade/ use of asbestos? Unfortunately, we will see asbestos-related deaths still at the end of this century. The task is now to increase the number of countries that have already eliminated future asbestos use from the present 40 countries to at least 100 in the coming 10 years. This should certainly radically reduce asbestos use. The priority order is to concentrate on the present biggest producers, importers, and users of any kind of asbestos. How important is a priority for the ILO in achieving an end to asbestos trade and use? Personally, I think this has top priority. Asbestos is the most important single factor causing death and disability at work, some 100,000 fatalities a year. The most fundamental right at work is the right to life and health. Has the ILO any targets for achieving the goal of an end to asbestos use? Any serious campaign should have measurable targets and time limits, this is exactly what we were talking about in the discussion on the new Promotional Framework on Occupational Safety and Health. Member States should set up their own campaigns, deadlines and targets. ILO targets will be the summary of those. If there are no targets, when would the ILO hope to see an end to the trade in/use of asbestos? No targets, no indicators, no deadlines will result in no progress. ILO should take this seriously. This means also that funding, resources and support are located for the promotion of elimination measures. One of the targets is to convince decision-makers -- in ILO and in member states -- of the importance and urgency of the issue. What will be the ILO's first measures to meet the requirements of the new resolution? What will it do and when? ILO will have to make its own plans for setting up both global and national campaigns, identify responsible units and persons for such campaigns, prepare an implementation programme, implement the plan, and to follow up and continuously adjust and improve such implementation plans. The tools at the ILO's disposal are: standards and their national compliance, advocacy and awareness measures, knowledge management and information exchange, technical collaboration and international collaboration. What about chrysotile (white asbestos)? There are differences in opinion regarding its elimination. What do scientists think? While some asbestos types are more powerful carcinogens than others, all of them are carcinogens. The ILO Convention on Occupational Cancer (ratified by Egypt, Lebanon and Syria) is very straightforward in dealing with any carcinogen. Critics view that stopping trade in asbestos and its use has implications on workers, ie causing unemployment. What is your view? What is the ILO response? An efficient production facility -- asbestos mine -- can produce 200,000 tonnes of asbestos ready to use with a workforce of fewer than 1,000 workers. One worker produces more than 200 tonnes annually. Compare this to the figure above that says that every 170 tonnes of asbestos kills three users later on in the user chain -- without recycling. Referring to the employment issue is not a credible justification to continue asbestos use, while the workers of asbestos mines and plants should be assisted and supported in finding other replacement jobs, for example, in substituting safer materials production. The asbestos industry lobby claims that it is possible to "use safely" asbestos? We will try to make sure that the resolution will be known by all those who will use this argument. There is no "safe use" of asbestos. The ILO, however, will not have an "international labour inspection force" and we will have to rely on national enforcement, media, trade unions, and responsible employers to make sure that asbestos use will gradually disappear. It is a long journey, but the resolution is a good tool for that. Any final comments on future steps at the national level, especially in Arab countries where construction and urbanisation are on the rise?
