Asbestos concerns glossed over by health authorities

Calls to remove a decaying asbestos roof adjacent to the Malta Competition and Consumer Affairs Authority (MCCAA) offices in Blata l-Bajda, which potentially constitutes a health hazard to over 100 employees, have so far fallen on deaf ears.

The MCCAA was moved to the offices just over a year ago, after the government leased Mizzi House in Blata l-Bajda for €300,000 per year. It later transpired that there are asbestos panels on a roof adjacent to the MCCAA offices; and the authority's air intakes of the heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) system are in close proximity to the carcinogenic material.

Faced with complaints from employees, the authority claims that the 'legal value' of asbestos has not been exceeded inside the offices; however the amount of asbestos needed to cause health hazards, including cancer has never been scientifically determined.

Tests were carried out by Dr George Peplow, allegedly an old acquaintance of the MCCAA chairman, Francis Farrugia. However he is neither a toxologist nor a health scientist.

Moreover, various EU and international standards stipulate what kind of HVAC and filtration systems should be in place at workplaces. Employees have confirmed with MaltaToday that the systems installed at the MCCAA are not adequate, especially considering that the offices are situated in a heavily polluted area.

Ironically, the authority houses the Standards and Metrology Institute which among other things, sets standards for and enforces quality of life, safety, health and the protection of the environment.

After coming under the scrutiny of the media, the authority this week decided to make some changes in the HVAC system, and replaced pieces of foam intended to protect the motors of ventilators with a Honeywell ACA-5018E pre-filtering equipment which could be bought online for around €25.

Although this is a minor improvement on the ventilation system, it does not constitute a major improvement needed to filter the pollution.

For months, the employees have been demanding action to be taken but until recently neither the unions representing the employees nor the Occupational Health and Safety Authority (OHSA) took the authority to task over the health hazard.

In recent weeks, the General Workers Union and the OHSA issued a number of statements, however the only tangible result so far was a confirmation that the situation was being monitored. Yet, employees at the authority insisted that while monitoring the levels of asbestos was important, the problem can be easily resolved by removing the asbestos panels.

The 10-year lease the government signed for Mizzi House in October 2011, with Mizzi Estates Limited stipulating that the government will pay €300,000 per annum for the first two years rising to 427,000 in 2021. 

Over the 10-year period, the government will be paying €3.55 million to lease the main building and an additional €207,500 to lease the garage.

Mizzi House belongs to the Mizzi Organisation, which holds various business interests including automotive; tourism and leisure; manufacturing; services; real estate and mechanical and engineering contracting.

Before entering the political scene, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi was the company lawyer of the Mizzi Organisation, for whom he also served as Group Chairman between 1989 and 1997.

OHSA reaction

In a statement, the Occupational Health and Safety Authority said that there was no law that requires an employer to remove asbestos at his place of work.

"As a matter of fact, asbestos which is in a good state of maintenance and repair should be left in place to avoid creating new and unnecessary risks which would be very difficult to control," an OHSA spokesperson said.

In the situation that is described, the risk is being created by a third party, which is not covered by OHS laws. "OHSA is not empowered at law to order the 'third party' to remove the asbestos solely because, in theory, it may cause a hitherto undemonstrated risk to neighbouring establishments," the authority's spokesperson said.

"What OHS legislation requires is that the employer, in this case the MCCAA, evaluates the situation and to quantify the risks, if any, of exposure. OHSA has ensured that the necessary hazard evaluation and risk assessment have been carried out according to the requirements of the law, meaning that such an analysis is carried out by a suitably competent person.

"In actual fact, OHSA is convinced of the professional integrity and competence of the person contracted by the employer to carry out such evaluations. OHSA will also be ensuring that the situation will continue to be monitored by the employer, and should the circumstances change, and warrant any enforcement action, OHSA will not hesitate to ensure that all protective and preventive measures are taken."

The OHSA said it is not in a position to divulge, for reasons of confidentiality, the results of the analysis concerning (a) the state of the asbestos roofing and its level of deterioration, and (b) the airborne asbestos fibre count. However, OHSA confirms that these results are well below internationally acceptable standards.

(v) OHS legislation also requires an employer to make available all documentation on any matter that may affect the workers' health and safety.

"The relevant regulations also give the right to workers of being consulted through their health and safety representatives appointed according to the General Provisions at Work Places Regulations.

"On this matter, such workers should make full of their right and seek to obtain copies, if these have not been made available, of all analysis, measurements and assessments."