Alarming asbestos confusion

We do not concern ourselves necessarily with the details of the time-line of when the asbestos- containing materials were discovered on the compound at St Ann’s.

More disturbing is the revelation that the State does not seem to have had reliable systems in place over the last few decades to track potential asbestos hazards and to take action to remove materials.

Asbestos is a natural mineral that at one stage was hailed for its strength. While it was widely used in construction all over the world (the US military used it extensively on its buildings) it was discovered to be highly toxic and phased out in the 1980s. Today asbestos is a known cause of mesothelioma cancer, and is banned or restricted in more than 50 countries.

Many buildings in Trinidad and Tobago were constructed using asbestos and some have been demolished.

Yet, despite this issue being well-known, it seems the State has not properly taken stock of its assets. It has now discovered, belatedly we are told, that a room at the Office of the President, is lined with materials containing asbestos.

Udecott, confusingly, denies the asbestos-containing materials have been disturbed; denies the presence of asbestos itself; and, in the same breath, says it is seeking a contractor “for the removal of asbestos- containing materials”. President’s House, however, has already ordered staff to undergo medical checks. Over the years, what checks, if any, were made by the State in relation to this hazard? If there was a reliable system in place, this whole confusion would not be taking place. The compound that houses the Office of the President is an important, historic one. President’s House is next door. It has hosted dignitaries from around the world, including Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II, and for years it was the place where the finest of the finest would gather for National Awards, toasting those who have achieved the highest level of success in all manner of spheres.

The contempt with which President’s House has been treated since its collapse six years ago is the proper context in which this latest “discovery” must be understood.

The neglect of this historic building has been such that even issues relating to is annexures are inadequately understood.

We join the nation in hoping for the best for all persons employed at these premises. Workers should not have to be subject to these kinds of fears. It is imperative that this matter is fully investigated by the Occupational Health and Safety Authority and its agency. If there is good reason, the State must be held accountable for any lapses.

It is clear that as a society we tend to take these matters of health and safety for granted. How many companies in older premises have conducted reviews to rule out an asbestos threat? Asbestos was recently found at a court at San Fernando and, years ago, at the Salvatori Building.

It is true that if asbestos is not disturbed it is harmless. However, its mere presence is a potential risk as natural events can occur which could render damage to buildings.

If there is one silver lining from all of this, it is that this should encourage careful review of procedures relating to the State’s buildings and how they are tracked and managed. A review of communication between different state entities such as the Ministry of Works, Udecott and the offices they touch upon is also clearly needed. Let’s get to the bottom of this.