Chris Ketter (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support the motion that has been put forward by Senator Hanson. While I welcome her new-found interest in and awareness of this issue of asbestos, I would like to inform her that the issues that she's canvassing are matters that on this side of the chamber have been very well ventilated in recent history. I also want her to be aware that the unions, which she often pillories in this place, are at the forefront of trying to address this modern-day scourge and tragedy for working people. The unions that she criticises so vehemently have been working very hard to address this issue.

For the information of Senator Hanson, as she didn't make reference to it in her contribution today, the Senate Economics References Committee conducted an inquiry into non-conforming building products. In fact, that broader inquiry is still ongoing, but we did take the opportunity to have a particular look at asbestos, given the significance of that issue. It was part of our inquiry into non-conforming building products. The report was handed down in November of last year. I am very proud to be the chair of that committee and to be responsible for that report.

The committee conducted hearings across the country on this matter, and we heard from workers and asbestos support groups in Brisbane, Perth, Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide. One of the things that particularly concerned me was the number of times the committee heard that frontline workers and community advocates were the last line of defence in identifying asbestos in building and consumer products. All too often it is the workers that alerted management, whether it be a building company or a subcontractor, to the fact that asbestos was being found in products—building products, in particular. But I will mention that it is not just building products. We still have asbestos coming into this country in the most surprising forms, and I will deal with that.

We've just had recent examples of asbestos being found on building sites in Brisbane, for example. We found it in the form of gasket jointing sheets on 1 William Street, Brisbane, a state government building. It was only the workers who had been trained in identification of asbestos who actually discovered this material and were able to put a halt to its installation. We also saw asbestos in unitised roof panels at Perth's children's hospital in July 2016 and asbestos-contaminated plant equipment in the Nyrstar project in Port Pirie, in South Australia, in August 2016. In many cases, what is going on here is that the asbestos material is being imported by Chinese companies from Chinese manufacturers. Yuanda Australia is a company name that has come up a number of times in the course of our inquiry.

We noted in the course of our inquiry that the national asbestos ban has been in place since 2003. That is a total ban on asbestos coming into Australia since 2003. In fact, to his credit, it was then Minister Abbott who implemented that ban at the time. However, one of the concerning aspects of the inquiry was that we found Border Force did not issue any regulatory notices until 2016, some 13 years later, to give effect to the ban and to properly notify those involved in the importation of building products as to their obligations in respect of asbestos. It was 13 years down the track. On a matter of life and death, which this is, it's not good enough.

Our inquiry also highlighted inconsistencies in the definition of asbestos used across countries around the world and how this, along with the lack of due diligence on the part of importers, has led to Australians being exposed to asbestos and is why it continues to come into the country. We know that asbestos is one of those products which has no known safe exposure limit. So, whilst we say that we have got a ban on asbestos coming into the country, unfortunately, the track record is that that ban is not effective, and more needs to be done in that regard. As Senator Hanson has noted, we have, in this country, the highest reported per capita incidence of asbestos related disease in the world. It's predicted that around 25,000 Australians will die from asbestos related disease over the next 40 years. The stories of those affected by asbestos are really heartbreaking stories.

I want to talk about the fact that what Senator Hanson is raising is, in effect, going over something of old ground. It was canvassed by the Senate Economics References Committee and was the subject of a majority set of recommendations. Unfortunately, coalition senators did not support the majority recommendations in their entirety and they made some additional comments—and I'll talk about that. But Senator Hanson's point about having a coordinated approach to the issue of asbestos is well made. In fact, recommendation No. 1 of our inquiry was:

The committee recommends that through the Council of Australian Governments, the Australian Government pursue a coordinated and consistent whole of government approach to strengthen federal and state legislation and regulations to address the illegal importation of asbestos.

Recommendation 2 was:

The committee recommends that the Australian Government adequately fund the Asbestos Safety and Eradication Agency—

which Senator Hanson has referred to—

so it is able to deliver the next National Strategic Plan for Asbestos Management and Awareness and to carry out its other functions, both current functions and new functions set out in recommendations in this report.

This is contrary to Senator O'Sullivan's contribution, where he indicated that there has been a doubling of funding for the agency. I would be very interested in where that information is and how old that information is. During the course of our inquiry we had the opportunity of speaking with Mr Peter Tighe, the CEO of the Asbestos Safety Eradication Agency, and he raised concerns back in October about current funding arrangements and the ability to deliver on future strategic plans. I'm going to quote from Mr Tighe:

It's quite clear, though, when looking at our operational budget, including a financial report that was done in relation to the agency some 18 months ago, that the costing for operation is probably double what is in appropriation. I don't think that even touches on the work that will need to be done in relation to establishing the next phase of plans. Whilst my appointment expires in August, I'm more concerned about whether the agency would be in a position to deliver the policy position that government wants to take forward. Unless we get some appropriation that exceeds what's currently earmarked, there will be some problems.

He then went on to say that he's taken proposals to the minister and he's working with the department. I will quote him again:

The difficulty is the work that has to be done in relation to the development of the next national strategic plan, providing the evidence to the jurisdictions to support that plan and the work that is required by the group that I have in my office—we wouldn't be able to fulfil that. It would, basically, neutralise the agency, where we would have to reduce the staff dramatically to, probably, an executive officer and a chair. We still are required under our legislation to deliver certain things. I don't think we'd be able to meet the objects of our act if that money's not provided.

That's direct evidence from Mr Tighe in October of last year. That is a huge concern for people around Australia.

We want to see the government take a leadership role. They should take a leadership role in this matter. The asbestos agency, if I can call it that, is well placed to provide the planning and the research that's necessary for that, but the government does need to coordinate with other jurisdictions. It's not good enough for Senator O'Sullivan to draw out the fact that this is a state issue. I know he is not pinning his entire argument on that, but that doesn't derogate from the need for the Commonwealth to take a leadership role to address this issue. It needs a leadership role at the border to stop the material coming through but also in terms of legacy asbestos products out there, which are ticking away as a time bomb. There is a need for coordination so that that huge problem can be dealt with.

We are constantly seeing examples come up where this issue recurs. We've had the situation of the people who lived around the Wittenoom asbestos mine in Western Australia. We know that more than 2,000 people, many of them the wives and children of mine workers, have died due to exposure to asbestos at the nearby mine or in the town of Wittenoom itself. In 2014 we heard of the terrible situation of the Wunderlich factory in Victoria at a place called Sunshine North, where it emerged that dozens of people who lived around that factory had contracted cancer, asbestosis and other conditions after asbestos was left unsecured at the site. We heard of Mr Chris Frohlich, whose mother lived about a kilometre from the factory for about 20 years. She had died in September 2013 of aggressive lung cancer. Her father had died of pulmonary fibrosis and her brother of mesothelioma—a terrible tragedy. This is a product which we should give top priority in terms of attention. So I do welcome Senator Hanson's focus being put onto this issue, but there has been a lot of work already done to try to address this issue. I note that, with regard to the Senate Economics References Committee report on asbestos back in November 2017, we are waiting for a government response in relation to that aspect of the report.

The risks of asbestos remain—and not just through potential landfill contamination, as Senator Hanson has pointed out. We are now seeing the third wave of victims who might have been exposed to asbestos through DIY renovations in older homes and product importation, whether it be substations, gaskets, insulation, vehicles or even children's toys. I'll take a minute to highlight once again that we have things like children's crayons and beaded toys being found to contain asbestos. I think a lot of people out there—particularly the mums and dads of Australia—would be very concerned to know that things like crayons have been found to contain asbestos. There is also the CSI game, named after the TV program, which involves police inspectors. Part of this toy is a package of what is known as dusting powder for fingerprints. But that dusting powder actually was found to contain asbestos. These are the sorts of things that people need to be aware of.

Products that contain certain types of talc are also known to contain asbestos. There are gloves that are known to contain asbestos, as well as fire blankets; electrical cloth and tapes; brake linings or blocks; textured paints or coatings; yarn and thread; cords and string, whether plaited or not; and mineral samples for display or therapeutic purposes. There are a whole range of products out there that have been found to contain asbestos. That is a pretty scary list, and during that inquiry I was gobsmacked when I learnt that there could be asbestos in children's toys in our country. That doesn't tell me that the issue is under control. That doesn't tell me that the government has taken all appropriate steps to address this issue.

One of the recommendations of our inquiry was that the Australian government establish a national public asbestos register. I feel particularly strongly about that matter. As I say, the mums and dads of Australia absolutely need to know if they are giving their children asbestos crayons to chew on.

I will take some time to go through some of the other recommendations from our inquiry, because they are important recommendations, and I encourage the government to provide a response to us in respect of this. Recommendation 8 was particularly important. It talked about 'mandatory asbestos awareness training for a wide range of occupations in the construction industry' and providing 'adequate funding for nationally accredited training for this purpose'. As I mentioned earlier, all too often we are finding it is actually left to the workers to discover the use of this asbestos material, and it's only because they've received this training that they are in a position to do that.

Recommendation 10 was the recommendation that the asbestos agency that I referred to 'develop a one-stop shop website to provide a single point for participants across the supply chain to access information regarding the illegal importation of asbestos'. Recommendation 20 is also worth noting:

The committee recommends that Commonwealth, state and territory governments work together to develop nationally consistent legal obligations to require the removal and/or disposal of illegally imported asbestos (if it is safe to do so following consideration of the hazards likely to be faced by the workers undertaking the work) and to make importers responsible for the cost of such removal and/or disposal of asbestos.

Finally, recommendation 25 went to the issue of the national public asbestos register, a very important initiative that I certainly commend to the government.

Senator Hanson talked about the Asbestos Safety and Eradication Agency, so I won't detail that any further, but I do think it does a lot of good work. Again, I thank Senator Hanson for raising the issue and lending her support to a cause that Labor has been pushing for years. The union movement has been pushing this issue for years. I urge Senator Hanson and others on the crossbench to take up this issue with the government and to ask the coalition to properly fund the agency so it can implement not only the work that it is currently tasked to do but also the new measures that have been recommended and that may be picked up. These are measures that can save lives going into the future.

I'd like to take the opportunity to thank others who provided evidence to the inquiry and who take up the fight against asbestos day in and day out: the ACTU; the CFMEU; the AWU; the AMWU; the ETU; the MUA; the Nurses' Union; other workers rights groups; the Australian Asbestos Network, with a special mention to Vicki Hamilton and the support and advocacy groups right across the country; and, lastly, the Queensland government, for leading the way in its response to non-conforming building products with its groundbreaking legislation on supply chain responsibility, which hopefully can be seen as a template that other jurisdictions will follow.

In conclusion: unfortunately the government senators described our recommendations as overreaching. They said that the ASEA has enough money. That's not the case. It's time for the government to step up on asbestos.