RECOGNITION AND COMPENSATION OF ASBESTOS-RELATEDDISEASES IN EUROPE
Laurie Kazan-Allen
Presented at seminar: Asbestos – Still a Killer
European Parliament, Belgium, June 30, 2011
A quotation by the Roman poet Publius Ovidius Naso (Ovid) makes a fitting start totoday’s discussion about the Recognition and Compensation of Asbestos-RelatedDiseases in Europe. Ovid wrote: “Act, before disease becomes persistent through longdelays.” 1 It is , as we all know, the delays in acting on asbestos which are responsible forthe global epidemic claiming more than 100,000 lives every year. Within Europe thesituation is dire with an excess of 500,000 asbestos-related deaths expected during theperiod 1995-2029. 2Although, the first national legislation on the asbestos hazard was enacted in Europe
over 80 years ago, the regional prescription of signature asbestos diseases occurredhaphazardardly over many decades. While asbestosis was recognized in the UK as an
occupational disease in 1931, it took a further 38 years for Belgium to do so. In 1942,
Germany included lung cancer caused by asbestos on a list of occupational diseases; inItaly this did not happen until 1994. The year when the deadly asbestos cancer
mesothelioma gained official recognition in West European countries varies from 1959
onwards. 3 Even today some Eastern European governments refuse to acknowledge theasbestos hazard; as major asbestos producers and consumers they have billions of reasons
not to do so.
European Asbestos Production and Consumption, 2010
Production
tonnesBelarus
Kazakhstan
RussiaUkraineUzbekistan
Total

214,000
1,000,000
1,214,000

European/GlobalRanking
2/4
1/1-Consumption
tonnes
26,714-1,371 4
263,03760,347
98,635447,362

European/GlobalRanking
4/12
1/3
3/9
2/5

1

Ovid 43 BC- AD 17.
Peto J, Decarli A, et al. The European mesothelioma epidemic. British Journal of Cancer (1999) 79, 666–672. http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v79/n3/abs/6690105a.html
3European Forum of the Insurance of Accidents at Work and Occupational Diseases. Asbestos-related
occupational diseases in Europe. Eurogip, 2006.
4The consumption figure for 2010 seems to be an anomaly; asbestos consumption in Kazakhstan for thethree previous years, averaged over 110,000 t/ year: 40,217 t (2007), 185,625 t (2008), 108,951 t (2009).
21

From this data, we see that:•••

European asbestos production accounts for 60% of global output;
European consumption accounts for 22% of global usage;
62% of European countries (31 out of 50) have banned asbestos; 38% have not.

The entrenched pro-asbestos policies of Russia, Kazakhstan, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan
have stymied efforts by international agencies to protect public and occupational health.
Comments and information supplied by delegates from those countries to a Europeanasbestos conference earlier this month are revealing:•••"We do not have asbestos diseases, we have no cancer from asbestos."
Asbestos waste is treated the same as other construction waste.
The support for banning asbestos evidenced by the WHO and IARC is based on
faulty premises.

Last week, three of the five Member States which initially blocked the inclusion ofchrysotile asbestos on Annex III of the Rotterdam Convention were from Eastern
Europe. 5

Asbestos Issues within the European Union
The EU, according to official sources, “actively promotes human rights anddemocracy.” 6 That being so, how can it stand idly by while the asbestos epidemic
predicted to take 500,000+ lives sweeps through the region. 7 In the context of this paper,
particular areas of failure (discussed below) are injustices towards victims and the lack ofa coordinated medical research initiative.
Injustices towards Victims
Asbestos victims in some EU Member State receive government benefits, civil
compensation, medical treatment and counseling; indeed, in France the asbestos-exposed
can retire early without loss of pension or other rights. In Austria, a coordinated program
to diagnose asbestos diseases at an early stage in order to maximize health care options
has been operational for a number of years; no such scheme exists in the UK; what about
Belgium? Bulgaria or Greece? Is compensation available as a matter of course for all
victims of mesothelioma or only for those whose exposure was occupational? Do the vast
majority of those who contract asbestos-related lung cancer fall through the cracks as
they do in the UK? How is it that pleural plaque sufferers in France and Scotland areentitled to compensation, but victims in Spain and England are not. As is readily apparent
from the questions asked, throughout EU Member States there is a huge disconnect
between what sufferers should receive as their due and what they in fact do receive. Each5

The dissenters were Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, India and Vietnam.
http://europa.eu/about-eu/basic-information/index_en.htm
7
Peto J, Decarli A, et al. The European mesothelioma epidemic. British Journal of Cancer (1999) 79, 666–
672. http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v79/n3/abs/6690105a.html
62

EU asbestos victim has an equal and inalienable human right to receive appropriate
medical treatment, equitable compensation and practical support.
RECOMMENDATION 1: ADAPT EU LEGISLATION MANDATING EQUALRIGHTS FOR ASBESTOS VICTIMS.
Within Europe there are 55+ asbestos victims’ support groups, all of which work on
shoestring budgets and the majority of which have little or no impact on government
decision making processes. This is both undemocratic and wasteful as the members ofthese groups have a grass-roots expertise which should be valued. The daily needs ofasbestos victims and their families require an immediate and comprehensive response;
the experience of the groups which represent them is an invaluable resource to inform EU
policy on the optimum response to the human tragedies caused by asbestos exposure.
RECOMMENDATION 2: EU POLICYMAKERS RECOGNIZE THE VITALROLE OF VICTIMS GROUPS.
Lack of a Coordinated Medical Research Initiative
As the indications became ever clearer of the heavy price Australia would pay for its
asbestos heritage, in 2006 the federal government provided the finances and politicalsupport to set up a national, coordinated research program into asbestos-related diseases:
The National Research Centre for Asbestos-Related Diseases (NCARD). A collaborativeplan was drawn up with defined research streams which were identified through a peerreviewed process. 8 This initiative was progressed by the government of a country of 22
million people which had been told that between 1945 and 2020, 18,000 deaths frommesothelioma could occur. 9And yet, the European Union with a population of 501 million of whom more than
250,000 will die from mesothelioma by 2029 has implemented no dedicated medical
research, diagnosis or treatment program for asbestos-related diseases. Is this acceptable?
RECOMMENDATION 3: THE EU ESTABLISHES A EUROPEAN RESEARCHCENTRE FOR ASBESTOS-RELATED DISEASES: ECARDRegional Asbestos Issues outside the European Union
Nineteen non-EU European states have not banned asbestos; these include two of theworld’s top asbestos producers and five of the world’s biggest users.
In Russia, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan and elsewhere in Eastern Europe,
populations are fed a diet of pro-asbestos propaganda. Powerful industry forces colludewith asbestos vested interests in governments, lobbying bodies – like the Ukrainian8

http://www.ncard.org.au/news/2006.11.20_Asbestos-Centre.html
Leigh J, Driscoll T. Malignant Mesothelioma in Australia, 1945–2002. INT J OCCUP ENVIRONHEALTH. VOL 9/NO 3, JUL/SEP 2003.
93

Chrysotile Association, the Confederation of Employers of Kazakhstan –and groups likethe International Chrysotile Alliance of Trade Union Organizations (Russia) and theTrade Union of Building and Building Material Workers (Ukraine) to manipulate
national asbestos agendas with the sole aim of protecting the image of chrysotile asbestos.
Efforts are being progressed by international agencies, regional bodies and nongovernmental organizations to impact on regional asbestos agendas; progress is slow.
RECOMMENDATION 4: COLLABORATIVE EFFORTS WITH CIVIL
SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS IN EASTERN EUROPE TO RAISE AWARENESS
OF THE ASBESTOS HAZRAD SHOULD BE MADE A HIGH PRIORITY.

Conclusion
The impact asbestos has had on the European population and environment is almost
incalculable. During today’s discussions we have touched on some of the problems
remaining in the post-ban countries: protecting workers from asbestos hidden within
national infrastructures, assisting the injured, removing asbestos from society… the list
goes on. In countries which have no bans, the list is even longer.
RECOMMENDATION 5: AN EU ASBESTOS COORDINATOR BE APPOINTEDTO INITIATE AND OVERSEE A EUROPE WIDE PROGRAM TO TACKLE
THE CONTINENT’S ASBESTOS HERITAGE.
Tomorrow is Action Mesothelioma Day in the UK. To raise awareness of the deadly
diseases caused by asbestos, events are being held by victims groups, charities andcampaigning organizations throughout the country. At church services, conferences,sponsored events, asbestos roundtables and informal get-togethers, tributes will be paid tothose whose lives have been sacrificed in the name of asbestos.
RECOMMENDATION 6: TO HIGHLIGHT THE CONTINUING THREAT TO
ALL EUROPEANS, THE EU SHOULD IMPLEMENT ASBESTOS AWARENESSWEEK.

4