Natural Resources Canada states chrysotile, one of the fibres that make up asbestos, is not as dangerous as once thought. According to their fact sheet, "current knowledge and modern technology can successfully control the potential for health and environmental harm posed by chrysotile".
In May 1998, Canada requested consultations before the WTO and the European Commission concerning France's 1996 prohibition of the importation and sale of asbestos. Canada said that the French measures contravened provisions of the Agreements on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures and on Technical Barriers to Trade, and the GATT 1994. The EC claims that substitute materials have been developed in place of asbestos, which are safer to human health. It stressed that the French measures were not discriminatory, and were fully justified for public health reasons. The EC claimed that in the July consultations, it had tried to convince Canada that the measures were justified, and that just as Canada broke off consultations, it (the EC) was in the process of submitting substantial scientific data in favour of the asbestos ban.
The Canadian federal government has in response claimed that chrysotile is much less dangerous than other types of asbestos, and Canada does not export the other asbestos fibre. Chrysotile continues to be used in new construction across Canada, in ways that are very similar to those for which chrysotile is exported. The Chrysotile Institute, an asbestos industry funded organization, said that the use of chrysotile does not pose an environmental problem and the inherent risks in its use are limited to the workplace. The Canadian government continues to draw both domestic and international criticism for its stance on chrysotile, most recently in international meetings on the Rotterdam Convention hearings regarding chrysotile.
No comments:
Post a Comment