FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Montreal, July 4, 1996 -- "There is no doubt that politics, not science, are behind the French government's decision to ban almost all uses of asbestos. It is disturbing that this initiative comes not even five years after the Court of Appeals overturned a proposed ban of asbestos by the United States Environmental Protection Agency because the scientific evidence demonstrated that a ban was likely to do more harm than good." explained Mr. Scott Houston, Director General of The Asbestos Institute.
Mr. Houston was responding to the announcement by the Government of France on July 3, 1996 that it will be banning the manufacture, import, sale and use of all asbestos-containing products, including asbestos-cement, effective January 1, 1997.
Over the past year, there has been tremendous political pressure on the newly elected French government to react to concerns over the risks of friable asbestos insulation in buildings. Several months ago, the French government responded by adopting new legislation aimed at monitoring and controlling exposures to asbestos in buildings. This newest legislation comes as a surprise to industry analysts and seems to be an attempt to diffuse the perceived crisis which the current French government inherited early in its mandate.
The irony of the proposed ban is that it comes at a time when the French asbestos manufacturing industries have demonstrated the effectiveness of their substantial investments in workplace controls. At today's low levels of exposure, scientific evidence demonstrates that the risks to workers, if there are any at all, are undetectably low.
"The French government took a very creative approach to the asbestos issue", noted Mr. Houston, "it decided to address concerns over asbestos in buildings by banning asbestos cement products and brake linings. The use of friable insulation that is the source of the French controversy was discontinued in the mid-1970s - and banning modern products will do absolutely nothing to address the issue of the insulation products already in place. It defies all logic."
Implicit in the new legislation is that all types of asbestos fibres and all types of asbestos products are equally hazardous. This assumption is totally inconsistent with the current international scientific consensus on chrysotile asbestos and its present day products, and sets a terrible precedent for the future of science-based public policy making.
"It will be interesting to see whether the French government will take a similar hardline approach with other natural and man-made fibres, some of which may be more hazardous than chrysotile asbestos", added Mr. Houston.