Asbestos Task Force Meeting Tuesday 20th October 2026

NEU – London

Here, retired CWU Branch Health & Safety Co-ordinator and now a member of the Trustees of Liverpool's Merseyside Asbestos Victims Support Group; Derek Maylor, provides a brief report:

Chris Emmett (Chair) opened the meeting thanking those who had travelled.
Minutes from last meeting agreed, and matters arising included agreeing the updated TF Terms of Reference, the Parliamentary Library request being ongoing and the letter to PM, and response from, were noted. Mark had collated the Call for Evidence Built Environment and this was submitted 12 August.

It was noted that the UK is falling behind other countries regarding safe asbestos limits/levels, even Ukraine with all its bomb damage has better, safer and lower rate than the UK. The NEU commented that the HSE has not published the science behind its decision to leave the exposure limit at 0.1f/ml.
Global Asbestos Forum in Birmingham, Charles Pickles is speaking, sharing the latest innovations and best practices, the aim is to prevent new asbestos victims - because asbestos diseases are preventable.

Minister Sir Stephen Timms entered the meeting so agenda was suspended.

Yesterday evening changes to the two statutory compensation schemes for dust-related diseases: the Pneumoconiosis etc. (Workers’ Compensation) Act 1979 Scheme and the 2008 Diffuse Mesothelioma Scheme reached their next stage in Parliament. These changes do not affect benefits paid under the Industrial Injuries Scheme, including Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit and associated allowances.

Some time ago the previous recommendation of a national asbestos survey of public buildings to create a database was rejected, so it was suggested that it be Government buildings, that to was rejected so a survey of DWP buildings was agreed and undertaken. At first look the date looks of limited value, too many in the “presumed asbestos” column for example, also leading to questioning the value of the data if the condition of the asbestos is not known.

There was a presentation by John Cherrie, Emeritus Professor of Human Health at Heriot-Watt University and retired Research Director at IOM in Edinburgh.

The pattern of exposure has changed as the workforce ages, the workplace changes and importantly as the asbestos that has been used in the workplace ages. Around 4,000 deaths per year and 9% of lung cancer deaths in men attributed to asbestos. It was thought that people working with asbestos were in danger, but people likely to be exposed today are not just those removing ACMs. There’s being in the vicinity of removal works, accidentally disturbing ACMs in buildings, maintenance or telecom workers, buildings containing ACMs such as teachers. When we consider exposure there’s more to think about than just the level in the air.

To assess the population risk, then we also need information about, number of people exposed, number of days exposed each year and the number of years exposed. Such a data set can then be used to estimate disease burden, the number of cases of asbestos diseases that may be coming over the horizon.

Isabel Emerson was welcomed onto the TF to give us a parent’s voice, there is no parent organisation that campaigns for asbestos to be removed from schools and yet children are vulnerable to asbestos exposure. New representatives from RCN and Community Union were also in attendance.

Jamie McGovern updated the meeting of the support he is getting from the CWU Young Workers which is positive and to be encouraged.

Media engagement, excellent coverage in the Daily Mail with two recent articles, on death rates and asbestos disposal. Can we look at further engagement with media including locally.

Professor Daniel Murphy again raised his concern from his research that the incidence of lung cancers related to asbestos exposure is much higher than HSE currently support, the scale of the problem based on a ratio of 1 mesothelioma death to 1 other asbestos related disease is vastly underestimated and this questions the HSE’s projection for a drop in the UK asbestos mortality rate.

Takeaways for MAVSG/CWU:

• Could we seek a positioning statement from bodies such as RSPH, IOSH, IIRSM, BOHS, BSC, i.e. if prevention is a major issue for them do they support the eradication of asbestos rather than leaving it in situ?
• Look at conferences - ask unions for a slot, fringe meeting at their national conferences to discuss TF aims / objectives.  
• CWU could look at data from BTs asbestos surveys to see how common is “presumption of asbestos”, as a percentage of inspections. All national Coord Chairs could do a sample of ten asbestos surveys in their area, to collate the % of presumption. If this is too high it does raise the value of the survey(s). The Minster is questioning what is the point of him recommending a national asbestos database if the data within it is of little value.