Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162) - Canada (Ratification: 1988)

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2011, Publication: 100th ILC session (2011)

A Government representative recalled that the Committee of Experts had asked the Government to provide up-to-date information on measures taken to give effect to Articles 3(1), 3(2) and 10(b) of the Convention. Canada had been providing detailed reports on the implementation of the Convention since its ratification in 1988. Implementation of the Convention was the responsibility of the federal Government and of Canada’s ten provincial and three territorial governments. Each of these jurisdictions had adopted and enforced laws and regulations prescribing the measures to be taken for the prevention and control of, and the protection of workers against, health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos, as required by Article 3(1) of the Convention. Relevant laws and regulations were periodically reviewed in accordance with Article 3(2) of the Convention. For example, a review of the federal Hazardous Substances Regulations was ongoing and reviews had been concluded in Manitoba, Newfoundland, and Labrador and Ontario. Since Canada’s last report to the Committee, Alberta had revised its asbestos abatement guide which described the principles to be followed when selecting the most appropriate techniques for the safe abatement of asbestos-containing materials. Newfoundland and Labrador had revised its Occupational Safety and Health Regulations to allow the Minister to designate a workplace or classes of workplaces that required an occupational health surveillance programme. With regard to Article 10(b) of the Convention, manufactured products containing asbestos used in construction were very limited and were governed by the Hazardous Products Act, as well as by provincial building code regulations. Article 14 of the Convention was implemented by the Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS), which was a national system that provided information on hazardous materials used in the workplace. In response to the comments of the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) concerning application of Articles 4 and 22(1), which required consultations with organizations of employers and workers, the speaker indicated that there was a strong commitment to tripartite consultation and involvement of the social partners in all aspects of occupational safety and health in Canada. There were training requirements specific to asbestos. The speaker provided such examples in the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan. Finally, the Committee of Experts had asked for further information on measures to ensure application of Article 17(2) which provided that the employer or contractor shall be required before starting demolition work to draw up a work plan specifying the measures to be taken, including providing necessary protection to the workers, limiting the release of asbestos dust in the air and providing for the disposal of waste containing asbestos. In this regard, renovations or demolition involving possible asbestos-containing material were highly regulated, as was the use of products containing asbestos. In many jurisdictions, work involving asbestos-containing material had to be conducted by a registered contractor who had been certified as a valid asbestos abatement contractor. This required demonstration that the workers had received the required training and the company had the specialized equipment necessary for asbestos abatement. In conclusion, the speaker recognized the dangers of exposure to asbestos in the workplace and recalled that the Government was committed to fully implementing the requirements of the Convention through measures for the prevention, control of, and protection of workers against health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos developed in consultation with workers’ and employers’ organizations and technical and professional experts.

The Worker members wished to make a number of preliminary remarks concerning the Convention, the application of which was not frequently examined by the Conference Committee. Even though knowledge of the harmful effects of asbestos, and particularly as to whether or not there was an exposure threshold, had evolved, the dangers of asbestos to human health have been known for a very long time. It was now known that prevention measures made it possible to avoid certain harmful effects, and particularly asbestosis. However, they were not able to eliminate other diseases, which were among the most harmful, such as cancer of the larynx and of the lungs, and mesothelioma, which have a long latency period, even following low levels of exposure, and could affect both workers and those close to them. Acceptable alternatives to asbestos now appeared to have been developed and mentalities had changed. It had to be recognized that the Convention reflected the state of knowledge, technical solutions and sensitivities which prevailed when it had been adopted, particularly in its distinction between two types of asbestos: blue asbestos, which was prohibited by Article 11, with exceptions; and white asbestos, which was not prohibited. The Worker members recalled the general obligations contained in Articles 3(1) and (2) and 10 of the Convention respecting the adoption of measures of prevention and control and of national legislation for the protection of workers’ health. They referred to the observations of the CLC on the application of the Convention, according to which technical progress and the development of scientific knowledge should lead to the revision of the legislation with a view to a total prohibition of asbestos, which was the sole measure that could prevent and control health risks (Article 3(1)), and its replacement by other materials (Article 10). According to the CLC, the legislation in force had not been the subject of consultation with the social partners, as envisaged in Articles 4 and 22 of the Convention. Canadian trade unions considered that taking into account the development of medical knowledge and technical progress, the only solution was the total prohibition of the use of all varieties of asbestos. Finally, the Worker members indicated that, in certain European countries, the use of asbestos was prohibited. They emphasized that in Europe, over recent years, the number of cases of diseases related to asbestos, such as mesothelioma, had been rising. With reference to Articles 3(3), 4 and 10 of the Convention, they strongly encouraged the Government to embark on dialogue with the social partners in view of the evolution of knowledge, techniques and sensitivities since the development of the Convention, in collaboration with the ILO, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).

The Employer members stated that the Conference Committee examined the application of the Convention by Canada for the first time. This Convention was a very comprehensive and technical instrument, aimed at securing the safety and health of workers working or having worked in the production of asbestos or related products. The Committee of Experts had taken note of numerous positive developments in terms of improvement of the relevant legislation in various Canadian provinces and territories. The remaining comments of the Committee of Experts related to the observations of the CLC, which, with reference to Article 3(1) and (2) and Article 10(b) of the Convention, called for the prohibition of asbestos and the discontinuation of asbestos exports. On the basis of this plea of the CLC, the Committee of Experts requested the Government to provide further detailed and up-to-date information on measures taken to give effect to Articles 3(1) and (2) and 10(b), taking into account, in particular, technological progress and advances in scientific knowledge. The Employer members observed that it remained unclear whether the Committee of Experts shared the view of the CLC that there was an obligation to prohibit asbestos and products containing asbestos. They stressed that the general prohibition of chrysotile asbestos (also called white asbestos) could not be construed from the relevant provisions of the Convention, which distinguished between the various types of asbestos and required in its Article 11(1) only the general prohibition of crocidolite asbestos (also called blue asbestos). The Employer members concluded that chrysotile asbestos and its processing should only be prohibited if the necessary health protection could not be guaranteed, which had not been asserted by the CLC. The Government could therefore merely be requested to provide information regarding the manner in which health protection was guaranteed on the basis of the existing legislative provisions and the current technological progress, and to supply statistics concerning, for example, asbestos-related occupational diseases, the occurrence of which had not been mentioned by the Committee of Experts. As regards the alleged recent lack of consultation with the most representative organizations of employers and workers in accordance with Articles 4 and 22(1) of the Convention, this observation contravened the statement made by the Government representative according to which the social partners participated in the work of the Federal Regulatory Review Committee on the revision of Part X (Hazardous Substances) Regulations. Finally, the CLC stated, with reference to Article 17(2) of the Convention, that asbestos should not be used in construction materials because of the impossibility of protecting construction workers. Again, the wording of the Convention did not allow such a conclusion. In the Employer members’ view, no direct breach of the Convention could be inferred from the comments of the Committee of Experts.

The Worker member of Canada stated that Canada had failed to review national laws and regulations governing exposure to asbestos and to take into account the advances in technology and scientific knowledge as called for in Article 3 of the Convention. By failing to consult the social partners on the impact of new information and technology, on the elimination of asbestos and on education and dissemination of information regarding asbestos-related hazards, and by pursuing a policy which ignored the findings of the world’s most competent authorities on cancer, the Government had not fully applied Articles 2, 3 and 22 of the Convention. It ignored the advice of the WHO, the IARC and the International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS), a joint programme of WHO, ILO and the United Nations Environment Programme, all of which echoed the same findings that chrysotile asbestos was a cause of mesothelioma, lung cancer and asbestosis. Making reference to a WHO publication and to a resolution adopted by the International Labour Conference in 2006, both calling for the elimination of the use of asbestos, he recalled that 50 countries had taken that decision. The Canadian Government continued to base itself on unreliable data despite the fact that a ban of the production of asbestos was supported by leading medical and public health agencies in the country. The speaker denounced the long history of manipulation of scientific data by the Canadian asbestos mining industry to generate convenient results, with the effect of corrupting the medical literature on which the Government relied. He condemned the attitude of the Government, which had practically banned the use of asbestos within its territory but continued to export it to developing countries. An asbestos-related epidemic was to be feared in the years to come. The Government should engage in proper consultations with the social partners in order to promote the use of replacement products and alternative technology substitutes and adopt a national programme based on the ILO–WHO National Programme for the Elimination of Asbestos-Related Diseases (NPEAD), and the ILO should assist it in moving towards a total prohibition of the production and use of asbestos. The reply to the Committee of Experts’ comments later this year would be an opportunity to delineate a positive way forward, through a tripartite process based on reliable knowledge and technology.

The Worker member of Australia, speaking also on behalf of the Worker members of Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, El Salvador, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Honduras, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom and Uruguay – all countries where asbestos was currently banned, stated that unions in these countries would welcome any effort by Canada to move towards the complete banning of asbestos and reiterated a call by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in 2005 for a global ban of asbestos, including chrysotile asbestos. The abovementioned countries had all banned asbestos because it was a dangerous substance that killed and injured workers and family members and affected entire communities. These countries were currently engaged in different degrees of transition towards an asbestos-free environment knowing that a just transition for jobs and social impact was both necessary and achievable. Countries having banned asbestos should encourage all ILO member States to work towards a complete and global banning of asbestos. As far as Australia was concerned, the Worker member stated that for several decades his country had had the highest per capita use of asbestos in the world. Asbestos had had devastating effects on Australian workers (miners, carpenters, construction workers, etc.) and their families, with many losses of life due to exposure to asbestos in the workplace or exposure to asbestos brought home from the workplace. The expected peak of asbestos-related deaths was between 2020 and 2030, and up to 18,000 Australians were expected to die of mesothelioma. Despite the previously high usage rate, the 2003 ban on importation, production and use of asbestos had not had any adverse effects on employment and industry. There had been no net job losses due to transitional measures, strict regulation governing the removal and disposal of asbestos and the use of alternative materials. In light of the above, the speaker believed that his country had the responsibility of warning others of the danger and sharing its experiences. He stressed the need to move quickly towards an asbestos-free world.

The Worker member of Argentina, speaking also on behalf of Building and Wood Workers’ International, referred to the growing number of deaths from mesothelioma and asbestos-related diseases in Canada, the increase in recognized cases of occupational diseases resulting from exposure to asbestos, the deaths from mesothelioma and the growing number of new cases affecting construction workers, and concluded that prevention and protection measures had been inadequate. She inquired about the measures that had been implemented by Canada, in view of the hazards connected with its status as a large-scale producer and exporter of the substance. The INSPQ (national public health institute of Quebec) had published a report concerning the excessive number of deaths in the mining village of Thetford Mines, with risk levels 17 times higher than in the rest of Canada and concentrations of asbestos fibres between four and 232 times higher than comparable measurements in the United States. The data indicated a failure in terms of prevention and control of serious exposure risks. Canada did not meet the requirements of the Convention with regard to risk prevention. The Government of Canada funded the Chrysotile Institute, a body that disseminated propaganda in favour of the supposedly controlled use of asbestos. The speaker cited the intervention of the National Director of Public Health with regard to the need to control asbestos risks, both in Quebec and in countries that purchased Canadian chrysotile asbestos. Finally, the Government did not label asbestos containers properly, since it did not use international terminology or symbols indicating the risk of cancer and prevention measures.

The Worker member of the United States shared the experience of workers in his country as regards asbestos. He stated that the use of asbestos had caused the greatest occupational health epidemic in the world’s history. Even strict standards were not sufficient to protect workers. But it was not only workers who were at risk: spouses and children had been affected by mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases due to asbestos brought home on workers’ clothes and the public had had to face community and environmental exposures. He stated that asbestos could not be used safely: once introduced into commerce, it posed a risk for decades. The only way to limit asbestos exposure was to ban its use.

The Worker member of Colombia, speaking also on behalf of the Worker member of Brazil, recalled the content of Article 10 of the Convention respecting the adoption of the necessary measures for the replacement or the total or partial prohibition of the use of asbestos. He reaffirmed that the State’s obligation was to progressively achieve the total prohibition of the use of asbestos. In that regard, the economic benefits could not be used as a justification for endangering the life and health of workers and of the population. All forms of asbestos, including chrysotile asbestos, had been classified by the IARC and the IPSC as human carcinogens. It had been demonstrated that the use and exposure to asbestos, even in minimal quantities, generated a high probability of causing many lethal diseases, such as lung cancer and mesothelioma. At the global level, over 100,000 workers had already died as a result of their exposure to asbestos, and it had been scientifically proven that there was no controlled use of asbestos that was absolutely safe for workers or the population in general. In that regard, the reduction of the authorized level of fibres per cubic centimetre announced by the Canadian Government was still insufficient. Indeed, Canada was increasing its investment in enterprises in Colombia and Brazil which extracted and used asbestos, without any intervention by the Federal Regulatory Review Committee. Nevertheless, even in developing economies such as those of Brazil and Colombia, there existed examples that demonstrated the possibility of the total replacement of asbestos. He emphasized that the Government of Canada had not replied to the observations of the CLC examined by the Committee of Experts, which demonstrated the violation of a crucial element of the Convention, i.e. the obligation of consultation. In conclusion, he stressed that it was essential for the Government of Canada to accept ILO technical assistance with a view to taking immediate measures leading to the definitive prohibition of the use of asbestos.

The Worker member of Brazil, with reference to the statement made by the CLC before the Conference Committee, indicated that other Canadian trade union confederations did not share these views, as they supported the safe use of chrysotile asbestos. She asked whether that information had been brought to the attention of the Conference Committee and whether the position of the CLC had been duly discussed with the other workers directly linked to the sector in Canada.

The Government representative reiterated that all Canadian provincial and territorial governments strictly regulated and strictly enforced high standards aimed at protecting workers from health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos and that there had been extensive consultations with employers, workers and experts in developing and applying the legislation. She noted that some presentations made had gone beyond the application of the provisions of the Convention. The speaker recalled that there were divergent views on the issue among Canadian trade unions. The Canadian Worker member attending the International Labour Conference in 2006 had not supported the resolution adopted that year on asbestos, and the trade unions representing asbestos workers in the province of Quebec not only supported the continuation of mining but an increase in investments in this industry. She assured the Conference Committee that Canada would continue to provide the Committee of Experts with complete and detailed reports on its implementation of the Convention.

The Employer members took due note of the information provided by the Government representative concerning the diverging positions of Canadian trade unions on the subject. While acknowledging that countries having banned asbestos might have had good reasons to do so, no violation by Canada of the requirements of the Convention could be deduced from the wording of this instrument. The Conference Committee was not a law-making body and could not call for a prohibition if the relevant Convention did not foresee one. In the Employer members’ view, the Committee of Experts could therefore only request the Government to report on the manner in which health protection was guaranteed, and to supply statistical information concerning asbestos-related occupational diseases.

The Worker members recalled that the Canadian trade union organizations considered that the only solution was the total prohibition of the use of all types of asbestos, in view of the evolution of medical knowledge and technical progress. While they were aware of the limits of the Convention, they called on the Conference Committee to ask the Government to begin consultations with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations, in accordance with Articles 3(3), 4 and 10 of the Convention. These consultations, which could be held in collaboration with the ILO and with other international bodies such as the WHO or the IARC, needed to take into account the evolution of knowledge, techniques and sensitivities since the adoption of the Convention. The Government needed to provide information on the concrete measures taken for the holding of these consultations and statistics on the cases of occupational diseases, for their examination by the Committee of Experts at its next session.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the oral information supplied by the Government representative and of the discussions that followed.

The Committee noted that the issues raised in this case concerned the need for information on: the periodical review of legislative measures in the light of technical progress and advances in scientific knowledge; the total or partial prohibition of the use of asbestos or of certain types of asbestos; and the nature of consultations undertaken as required by the Convention.

The Committee noted the detailed and comprehensive information provided by the Government representative concerning the ongoing reviews of federal, provincial and territorial legislation concerning the matters covered by the Convention with concrete examples from various jurisdictions. She referred to the sharing of good practices between jurisdictions, the ongoing tripartite consultation process in place and the reliance by all jurisdictions in Canada on the most up-to-date scientific data and technical knowledge. The Government representative referred to the ongoing review of the federal Hazardous Products Act and the Asbestos Products Regulations, as well as to the Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS), a national system that provides information on hazardous materials in the workplace. Information was also provided on training requirements specific to asbestos and on information and awareness-raising efforts with the ultimate objective of better management of asbestos-containing materials in establishments and in construction sites. The Government representative indicated that her country recognized the dangers of exposure to asbestos in the workplace and that it was committed to fully implement the requirements of the Convention in consultation with the workers’ and employers’ organizations and technical and professional experts.

While noting the commitment of the Government to fully implement the provisions of the Convention, the Committee highlighted the importance of adopting the strictest standards limits for the protection of workers’ health as regards exposure to asbestos. In this regard, the Committee noted that the Convention placed an obligation on governments to keep abreast of technical progress and scientific knowledge, which was particularly important for a country like Canada which is one of the main producers of asbestos.

The Committee requested the Government to continue to provide all relevant information to the Committee of Experts for its review, including statistical data on health protection measures and cases of occupational diseases caused by exposure to asbestos. It invites the Government to continue to engage in consultations with the employers’ and workers’ organizations on the application of Articles 3(3), 4 and 10 of the Convention, in particular, taking into account the evolution of scientific studies, knowledge and technology since the adoption of the Convention, as well as the findings of the World Health Organization, the ILO and other recognized organizations concerning the dangers of exposure to asbestos.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Previous comment on Convention No. 162

Articles 3, 4, 10 and 11 of the Convention. Measures to be taken for the prevention and control of health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos. Periodic review in the light of technical progress and scientific knowledge. Consultation with the most representative organizations of employers and workers. Replacement of asbestos and the total or partial prohibition of the use of asbestos. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes with satisfaction the indication in the Government’s report regarding the adoption, in 2018, of the Prohibition of Asbestos and Products Containing Asbestos Regulations. The Committee notes that these Regulations prohibit the import, sale and use of asbestos and the manufacture, import, sale and use of products containing asbestos in Canada, subject to certain defined exclusions, such as the transfer of physical possession or control of asbestos or a product containing asbestos to allow its disposal, or the import, sale or use of asbestos and products containing asbestos for display in a museum or for use in a laboratory. The Prohibition of Asbestos and Products Containing Asbestos Regulations also contain permit provisions in certain limited circumstances. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Article 15(2). Exposure limits or other exposure criteria updated in the light of technological progress and advances in technological and scientific knowledge. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the exposure limit values for asbestos in the Yukon are established in Table 10 (“Mineral Dusts”) of the Workplace Health Regulations of 1986. The Committee observes that the values under Table 10 appear to be higher than the value in other provinces and territories (0.1 fibres/cm3 for airborne asbestos, based on threshold limit values established by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists). The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to review and update the exposure limits or other exposure criteria in the Yukon,in the light of technological progress and advances in technological and scientific knowledge, in accordance with Article 15(2).

Article 17. Demolition work. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding the different legislative provisions in force regarding demolition work in the provinces and territories. The Committee observes, nevertheless, that up-to-date information on measures giving effect to Article 17 of the Convention has not been provided for all provinces and territories. The Committee thus requests the Government to provide up-to-date information on the following points: (i) measures, including relevant legislative provisions, taken to give full effect to Article 17(1) (measures to ensure that demolition work is undertaken by employers or contractors who are recognised by the competent authority as qualified) in Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan; (ii) measures to give full effect to Article 17(2) in Alberta, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario and the Yukon (measures taken to ensure that employers or contractors shall be required, before starting demolition work, to draw up a work plan specifying the measures to be taken); and (iii) measures to give full effect to Article 17(3) (measures to ensure that workers or their representatives shall be consulted on the work plan) in Alberta, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Quebec and the Yukon.

Article 20. Monitoring of the work environmentand of the exposure of workers to asbestos.In the absence ofup-to-date information on this issue, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give full effect to: (i) Article 20(2) (keeping records of the monitoring for a period prescribed by the competent authority) in New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, the Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Saskatchewan and the Yukon; (ii) Article 20(3) (giving workers concerned, their representatives and the inspection services access to these records) in New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, the Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Saskatchewan and the Yukon; and (iii) Article 20(4) (the right to request the monitoringof the working environment and to appeal the results of the monitoring) at the federal level, in Alberta, British Columbia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, the Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Saskatchewan and the Yukon.

Article 21. Notification of occupational diseases caused by asbestos and application of the Convention in practice. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the statistics provided by the Government, indicating that there were 555 fatalities due to mesothelioma, and 233 due to asbestosis, in the period 2018–20. The Government indicates that, for the 2018–20 period, asbestosis and mesothelioma were responsible for 83 per cent of time-lost injuries related to asbestos, and responsible for about 73 per cent of the 1,083 asbestos-related fatalities recorded. According to the Government, not all asbestos-related injuries and fatalities are reported to the Canadian Workers’ Compensation Boards and Commissions, so the real numbers of asbestos-related injuries and fatalities may be higher. The Committee requests the Government to provide up-to-date information on the measures taken to give effect to Article 21(2) in British Columbia, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland and Labrador (measures to ensure that the monitoring of workers’ health is free of charge and, as far as possible, during working hours). The Committee also requests the Government to provide up-to-date information on the measures taken to give effect to Article 21(3) in British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Saskatchewan and the Yukon (informing workers in an adequate and appropriate manner of the results of their medical examinations). The Committee further requests the Government to provide up-to-date information on the measures taken to give effect to Article 21(4) in British Columbia, New Brunswick, the Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Prince Edward Island and the Yukon (measures to provide workers concerned with other means of maintaining their income when continued assignment is medically unadvisable). Finally, the Committee requests the Government to provide up-to-date information on measures taken to give effect to Article 21(5) in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Ontario (measures to develop a system of notification of occupational diseases caused by asbestos).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Article 14 of the Convention. Adequate labelling of containers and products. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that the information provided by the Government regarding labelling of hazardous products referred only to domestic labelling requirements and practices, and the transportation of dangerous goods. In this regard, the Committee notes that the Hazardous Products Regulations which came into force on 11 February 2015 modified the Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS) 1988 to incorporate the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). With reference to its observation noting the proposed regulations to ban asbestos products, the Committee notes that the consultation document on the proposed regulations indicates that sale of asbestos and products containing asbestos that were manufactured or imported prior to the coming into force of the regulations would continue to be subject to applicable laws and requirements under Occupational Health and Safety legislation and the WHMIS.

Article 17(2). Protection of workers and limiting the release of asbestos dust in the context of demolition work. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the information provided by the Government concerning the application of Article 17(2) with respect to Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Quebec and Saskatchewan. In this regard, the Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s report on the measures in place in Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia, and the developments underway in Manitoba and Alberta, to give further effect to Article 17(2) of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on measures taken, including in the provinces of Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island as well as the territories, to ensure the obligation of employers or contractors to establish a work plan prior to the undertaking of demolition work in accordance with this provision of the Convention.

Article 21. Notification of occupational diseases caused by asbestos and application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the statistical information provided by the Government concerning compensated asbestos-related time-loss injuries and fatalities for the period of 2011–13. The Committee notes that there were 438 asbestos-related injuries and 1,153 asbestos-related fatalities compensated by the Canadian Workers’ Compensation Boards, among which mesothelioma and asbestosis were the most recorded injuries and fatalities. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of asbestos-related injuries and fatalities disaggregated by year.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

The Committee notes the observations by the Confederation of National Trade Unions (CSN) and the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) received in 2015.

Articles 3, 4, 10 and 11 of the Convention. Measures to be taken for the prevention and control of health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos. Periodic review in the light of technical progress and scientific knowledge. Consultation with the most representative organizations of employers and workers. Replacement of asbestos and the total or partial prohibition of the use of asbestos. The Committee previously noted that Canada was one of the main producers of asbestos and along with the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in 2011, requested the Government to ensure the adoption of the strictest standards limits for the protection of workers’ health as regards exposure to asbestos. It also noted that since 2011 there had been no asbestos production in the country.

The Committee notes the statement by CLC calling for the ban of asbestos, citing scientific and technical information that points to the need for a total ban of the product. It also notes that the CSN considers that compliance with the Convention requires the prohibition of all types of asbestos and that it calls on the Government to undertake a revision of the national legislation regarding exposure to asbestos in this respect, along with a programme to assist workers in this industry with such a transition, including retraining.

In this respect, the Committee notes with interest that in December 2016, the Government published a Notice of intent to develop regulations respecting asbestos that would prohibit all future activities respecting asbestos and products containing asbestos. The Notice of intent received comments from three industry associations, eight labour organizations and non-governmental organizations, and six regional stakeholders. It notes that, subsequently, a consultation document describing the proposed regulatory approach was published in April 2017, and that the responses received to the document will be considered in the development of the proposed regulations. The consultation document indicates that the Government is proposing to develop regulations under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act to prohibit the import, use, sale and offer for sale of asbestos, as well as the manufacture, use, sale, offer for sale and import of products containing asbestos. The consultation document indicates that following public consultations, it is hoped that regulations will be published in the autumn of 2018. The Committee welcomes the Government’s initiative and requests it to pursue its efforts for the prevention and control of, and protection of workers against, health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos. It requests the Government to provide a copy of the regulations developed in this respect under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, once adopted.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Further to its observation, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the following points.

Article 14 of the Convention. Adequate labelling of containers and products. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that suppliers of hazardous products intended for use in the workplace must label containers and transmit a safety data sheet, in accordance with the requirements of the Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS) of the Hazardous Products Act (HPA) and Controlled Products Regulations made under the HPA, as a condition for sale and importation; and that labelling requirements also exist in the Asbestos Products Regulations (APR) made under the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act (CCPSA). In addition, the Government reports that, in New Brunswick, a code of practice for Working with Materials Containing Asbestos mandates the employers to identify “where practicable” the asbestos containing material by the use of “color coding, label placards or any other mode of identification,” and, in Quebec, the information system on hazardous substances used in the workplace (SIMDUT) requires the French language to be used on labels. As regards the transport of dangerous goods such as asbestos, the Committee notes the information that Canada follows the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code for transportation of dangerous goods and that it meets all international requirements for the transportation of asbestos. The Committee notes that the information provided appears to only refer to domestic labelling requirements and practices and the transportation of dangerous goods. With reference to its previous comment, the Committee would again like to note that according to Article 14, the Government is required to ensure that producers and suppliers of asbestos and manufacturers and suppliers of products containing asbestos, are made responsible for adequate labelling of the container and, where appropriate, the products, containing asbestos in “a language and manner easily understood by the workers and the users concerned” and that it follows from the preparatory work that this expression was intended also to include the languages of the countries where the products were sold. The Committee reiterates its request to the Government to provide further information on measures taken, in law and in practice, to ensure full and effective application of Article 14.

Article 17(2). Protection of workers and limiting the release of asbestos dust in the context of demolition work. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government is limited to a reference to an enforcement initiative carried out in Ontario to ensure compliance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any further measures taken to ensure the application of this provision of the Convention.

Part V of the report form. Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes that according to the statistical information provided by the Government based on data from the Association of Workers’ Compensation Boards of Canada (AWCBC), there has been a significant increase both in the number of cases of asbestosis and of mesothelioma. Based on the statistical data submitted for 2009 and 2010, the total number of injuries increased from 150 to 407, of which the number of cases of asbestosis increased from 59 to 71 and the number of cases of mesothelioma increased from 59 to 209. The Committee asks the Government to provide further information on measures taken to examine the causes for this significant increase in the number of cases of asbestosis and mesothelioma, and to continue to provide information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice, together with references to relevant inspection reports, including information on the number and nature of the contraventions reported and the number of occupational diseases reported as being caused by asbestos.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

The Committee notes the information that the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act (CCPSA) entered into force on 20 June 2011, but that, substantively, there has been no change in how the Convention is applied in legislation as the workplace hazardous materials information system (Part II of the Hazardous Products Act), the Asbestos Products Regulations (APR) as well as previous prohibitions made thereunder remain in force, with minor amendments made to the APR in order to make them consistent with the new CCPSA regime. The Committee welcomes the information provided by the Government that in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission and the Occupational Health and Safety Branch of Service Newfoundland and Labrador released the 2011–13 Strategy for prevention for Known Occupational Diseases, developed in consultation with the social partners, which provides a framework for educating and raising awareness about all known occupational diseases in Newfoundland and Labrador. It is a broad-based strategy aimed at reducing the burden and incidence of occupational disease in the province including asbestosis and mesothelioma. The Nova Scotia Department of Labour and Advanced Education has established an employer/employee advisory committee that provides advice to the Minister on occupational health and safety matters including matters related to asbestos in workplaces.

Follow-up to the conclusions of the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference 100th Session, June 2011)

Article 3(1) and (2) of the Convention. Measures to be taken for the prevention and control of health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos and periodical review in the light of technical progress and scientific knowledge. Article 4. Consultations with the most representative organizations of employers and workers. Article 10. Replacement of asbestos and total or partial prohibition of the use of asbestos. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government and received on 30 August 2012 that, since November 2011, there has been no asbestos production in Canada. Against the background of the conclusions of the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference, 100th Session, June 2011) after the discussion of this case, the Committee welcomes this information which it deems to be of great significance. It notes, however, that the report contains no further information in these respects. The Committee further notes the information that consultations regarding the current federal review of Part X of the Canada Occupational Health and Safety Regulations on Hazardous Substances, referenced in Canada’s previous report, continues to be conducted by a tripartite working group, including representatives of the Canadian Labour Congress. With reference to the foregoing, its previous comments, and the provisions in Article 3(2) and 10, the Committee requests the Government to provide further information on asbestos production in Canada, including on whether the currently halted asbestos production is a temporary or permanent measure and whether it is a result of a formal decision to halt production. It also requests the Government to provide further information on the outcome of any relevant legislative reviews, including on the review of Part X of the Canada Occupational Health and Safety Regulations on Hazardous Substances.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Further to its observation, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the following points.

Article 14. Adequate labelling of containers and products. The Committee notes the reference made by the Worker member of Canada during the discussion in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards of the case of Canada at the International Labour Conference at its 100th Session (June 2011) to the fact that Canada had practically banned the use of asbestos within its territory “but continued to export it to developing countries”. With reference to the terms of Article 14, the Committee notes that the Government is required to ensure that producers and suppliers of asbestos and manufacturers and suppliers of products containing asbestos are to be made responsible for adequate labelling of the container and, where appropriate, the products containing asbestos. This Article also provides that the labelling be made in “languages understood by the workers and the users concerned”. It follows from the preparatory work that this expression was intended also to include the languages of the countries where the products were sold (ILC, 71st Session (1985), Report VI(2), pages 28–29; ILC 71st Session (1985), Provisional Record No. 33, page 8, paragraph 61 and ILC 72nd Session, Provisional Record No. 29, page 10, paragraphs 76–77). The Committee also wishes to refer to Paragraph 20(2) and (3) of the Occupational Health Services Recommendation, 1985 (No. 171), which provides that:

(2)  National laws or regulations should require that the label be printed in the language or languages in common use in the country concerned and indicate that the container or product contains asbestos, that the inhalation of asbestos dust carries a health risk, and that appropriate protective measures should be taken.

• (3)  National laws or regulations should require producers and suppliers of asbestos and manufacturers and suppliers of products containing asbestos to develop and provide a data sheet listing the asbestos content, health hazards and appropriate protective measures for the material or product.

The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on measures taken, in law and in practice, to ensure full and effective application of Article 14.

Article 17(2) of the Convention. Protection of workers and limiting the release of asbestos dust in the context of demolition work. Renovations or demolition involving possible asbestos-containing material are highly regulated in Canada, as is the use of products containing asbestos. In many jurisdictions work involving asbestos-containing material must be conducted by a registered contractor who has been certified as a valid asbestos abatement contractor; a demonstration that the workers have received the required training; and that the company has the specialized equipment necessary for asbestos abatement. In addition to the information provided in the context of the application of Article 10(b) of the Convention examined in its observation, the Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government regarding relevant provisions and prescribed measures in law and in practice in Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Quebec and Saskatchewan. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any further measures taken to ensure application of this provision of the Convention.

Part V of the report form. Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the statistical information provided by the Government based on data from the Association of Workers’ Compensation Boards of Canada (AWCBC) for 2009 indicating that, out of a total number of 150 injuries reported, there were 52 cases of asbestosis and 59 cases of mesothelioma. The Committee further notes the reference made to the Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS) which is a national system that provides information on hazardous materials used in the workplace and which is based on reporting requirements in the Hazardous Products Act and the Controlled Products Regulations. This legislation requires, inter alia, that suppliers of hazardous materials provide material safety data sheets and labour products as conditions of sale and importation. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice, together with references to relevant inspection reports including information on the number and nature of the contraventions reported and the number of occupational diseases reported as being caused by asbestos.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2012.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government in its latest report in response to the comments by the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) in 2010, to the conclusions of the Conference Committee in 2011, as well as to the comments by the CLC and by the Confederation of National Trade Unions (CSN) attached to the Government’s 2011 report.

Follow-up to the conclusions of the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference 100th Session, June 2011)

The Committee notes that, following the discussion of this case in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards, which highlighted the importance of adopting the strictest standards limits for the protection of workers’ health as regards exposure to asbestos and noted that the Convention placed an obligation on governments to keep abreast of technical progress and scientific knowledge, which was particularly important for a country like Canada which is one of the main producers of asbestos. It also requested the Government to continue to provide all relevant information to the Committee of Experts for its review, including statistical data on health protection measures and cases of occupational diseases caused by exposure to asbestos and invited the Government to engage in consultations with the employers and workers’ organizations on the application of Articles 3(3), 4 and 10 of the Convention, in particular taking into account the evolution of scientific studies, knowledge and technology since the adoption of the Convention, as well as the findings of the World Health Organization (WHO), the ILO and other recognized organizations concerning the dangers of exposure to asbestos.

Legislative measures and other measures undertaken. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding legislative developments in British Columbia and Ontario. According to this information in British Columbia Schedule B of the Workers Compensation Act has been modified to provide for presumptions in favour of workers who have primary-site lung cancer where there is airborne exposure to asbestos dust associated with bilateral diffuse pleural thickening over 2 mm thick and who have been exposed to airborne asbestos dust for a period of ten years or more of employment in one or more of the following industries: asbestos mining, insulation or filter material production, construction (where there is disturbance of asbestos-containing materials), plumbing or electrical work, pulp mill work, shipyard work, and long shoring. It notes further that Ontario Regulation 833 Respecting Control of Exposure to Biological or Chemical Agents under the Occupational Health and Safety Act has been amended to provide for an exposure limit to all forms of occupational exposure to asbestos of 0.1 f/cc and that firefighters and fire investigators are also subject to the exposure limits prescribed for asbestos.

Article 3(1–2) of the Convention. Measures to be taken for the prevention and control of health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos and periodical review in the light of technical progress and scientific knowledge. Article 4. Consultations with the most representative organizations of employers and workers. Article 10. Replacement of asbestos and total or partial prohibition of the use of asbestos. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government regarding measures taken to prevent and control health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos in Alberta, British Columbia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Labrador, Manitoba, Ontario and Saskatchewan.

The Committee further notes that the Government states that, in conducting reviews and updating laws and regulations related to workplace asbestos exposure, provincial governments rely on available scientific data and technical knowledge including the most up-to-date information from the American Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists and from other scientific sources which may be cited by participating worker and employer representatives and technical experts and that in all Canadian jurisdictions, reviews of occupational safety and health laws and regulations are undertaken in consultation with representatives of workers and employers, in full compliance with Article 4 of the Convention. The Government refers to the current federal review of Part X of the Canada Occupational Health and Safety Regulations on Hazardous Substances being conducted by a tripartite working group, which includes representatives of the CLC. The federal Workplace Hazardous Materials Information (WHMIS), implemented in 1988, was developed by a tripartite steering committee with membership representing the federal and all the provincial and territorial governments, industry and labour. New Brunswick has established a Technical (Stakeholder) Committee to review occupational hygiene issues including threshold limit values for asbestos and the regulation on a code of practice for working with material containing asbestos. Nova Scotia’s occupational safety and health legislation and regulations are reviewed on a periodic basis by the Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Council which is made up of both employer and worker representatives and is mandated to advise the Minister. Similarly, Manitoba’s legislation requires a review of legislation every five years by a Tripartite Advisory Council. Under Saskatchewan’s legislation, the Occupational Health and Safety Council reviews the act and regulations at least once every five years, including Part XXIII of the regulations which establish the requirements for the use, inspection, handling, disposal and training of employees in the handling of asbestos.

With specific reference to the application of Article 10(b) of the Convention, the Government states that the use of manufactured products containing asbestos in construction is very limited and is regulated by the Hazardous Products Act; that Schedule I of this Act and the Asbestos Products Regulations generally prohibit asbestos products that are destined for application by spraying, and prohibits the use of products containing crocidolite fibres and that similar provisions are also included in provincial and territorial legislation, as for example in section 37 of Manitoba’s Workplace Safety and Health Regulation. The Government also indicates that Ontario encourages the substitution of hazardous substances with less hazardous ones where possible; that the Nova Scotia Building Code bans the use of any form of asbestos that could enter ventilation systems; and that section 41 of the Occupational Safety and Health Regulations in Quebec prohibits the use of crocidolite, amosite and any product containing either one of these substances unless their replacement is not reasonably and practically feasible.

The Committee notes that the CLC and the CSN consider that the state of current scientific and technical information point to a need for a total ban of asbestos and that the Government has not taken due account of this information. According to the CSN, the fact that the Convention does not provide for an outright ban on the use of asbestos is merely a reflection of the fact that it relies on scientific knowledge at the time and that this knowledge was not as developed in 1986 as it is now. In support for their positions regarding current scientific and technical information, the CLC and the CSN both refer to the conclusions of the Conference Committee and the cited authorities. The CSN also refers to research and studies carried out by the National Public Health Institute of Quebec (INSPQ) and that INSPQ considers that, based on current knowledge, there is no threshold level where workers exposed to asbestos can be protected from cancer. The CSN further indicates that based on two studies covering exposure to asbestos in the periods 1982–96 and 1988–2003, the INSPQ concluded in 2005 that chrysotile asbestos must be considered to be a carcinogen and that the safe use of asbestos is difficult, if not impossible, in sectors such as construction, renovation and transformation of asbestos. The CSN also refers to a statement published in 2009 by medical doctors, toxicologists, industrial hygienists and epidemiologists that the scientific evidence that chrysotile asbestos causes asbestosis and cancer deaths is now irrefutable and that this conclusion is supported by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). The CSN further cites a study by the Workplace Safety and Health Committee in Quebec of occupational diseases of workers above 45 years of age for the period 1999–2008 which concluded that the fatality rate had increased and the fatalities recorded were mostly related to exposure to asbestos as seven out of ten fatalities were attributable to asbestos. In support of the position that the Government has not taken due account of the ILO and the WHO positions, the CLC refers to a statement by the Government in the House of Commons in Canada that chrysotile can be used safely in a controlled environment. The CSN further affirms that a total of 11 research reports published by the INSPQ since 2003 contradict this official Canadian policy that asbestos can be used safely.

In response to these arguments, the Government refers to the extensive information it has provided in the current and previous reports demonstrating that all provincial governments have adopted and enforced laws and regulations that prescribe measures to be taken for the prevention and control of and the protection of workers against health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos. In response to the CSN comments regarding the situation in the Province of Quebec, the Government states that the most recent data provided by the Canadian Society of Safety Engineering indicates 90 fatalities caused by exposure to asbestos (mesotheliomas asbestosis and cancers) were recorded in 2010 and that in 94 per cent of these cases, exposure had been initiated prior to 1980. Among the 20 workers who had died from cancer, 14 had a cumulative exposure time of 20 years and 18 of them had been exposed before 1980, whereas the exposure in the remaining two cases were initiated in 1982 and 1983 respectively. The Government emphasizes that all these cases predate the awareness of the dangers related to exposure to asbestos which subsequently led to the development of national programmes for the control and monitoring of exposure to asbestos, including in Quebec, as well as, at the international level, the development and adoption of this Convention in 1986. The Government also maintains that relevant laws and regulations in Quebec including section 3.23.3 of the Act on Security in Construction (c. S-2.1, r.6) and section 41 of Occupational Safety and Health Regulations are in full conformity with the provisions of the Convention as they provide that the use of crocidolite, amosite or any products containing either one of these substances is prohibited unless their replacement is not reasonable and practicable. The Government also underscores that, according to section 12 of the Occupational Safety and Health Regulations, the employer has an obligation to ensure that a reduced minimum level of exposure to asbestos for workers applies even when the prescribed threshold limit values are applied.

In their submissions, the CSN and CLC both express their view that Canada should follow up on the recommendation by the Conference Committee to engage in consultations with representative organizations of employers and workers on a review of national legislation regarding exposure to asbestos and that, in this context, account should be taken of the evolution of scientific studies, knowledge and technology since the adoption of the Convention. They also maintain that, in this context, account should be taken of the findings of the WHO, the IARC and the International Programme on Chemical Safety, the ILO and the United Nations Development Programme which should lead to a ban on the use of asbestos and to the implementation of a transitional programme including retraining for workers in this industry. The CLC adds that such consultations should be included in the periodical review of laws and regulations which is called for in Article 3(2) of the Convention.

As regards the tripartite consultations held in application of Article 4 of the Convention, the Government affirms its strong commitment to tripartite consultation and involvement of the social partners in all aspects of occupational safety and health. The Government underscores that Article 4 requires that “the competent authority” shall consult the most representative organizations of employers and workers concerned on the measures to be taken to give effect to the provisions of this Convention and that, accordingly, in all jurisdictions in Canada, reviews of occupational safety and health laws are undertaken with representatives of workers and employers. The Government also indicates that, in the province of Quebec, the Government has recently benefited from an exchange of views with the relevant stakeholders including the local authorities in the context of the reopening of the Jeffery Mine, in Asbestos, and that most trade unions, the largest of which in Quebec is affiliated with the CLC, supported the reopening of the mine, while reiterating their commitment to the safe use of chrysotile asbestos.

In light of the comments of the CLC and of the CSN, and the Government’s response, taking into account that Canada is one of the main producers of asbestos and that Canada is required to adopt the strictest standards limits for the protection of workers’ health regarding exposure to asbestos, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide further information on consultations held with the most representative organizations of employers and workers pursuant to Article 4 of the Convention on measures taken to give effect to the Convention, in particular regarding the provisions in Articles 3(2) and 10, taking into account the evolution of scientific studies, knowledge and technology since the adoption of the Convention, as well as the findings of the WHO, the ILO and other recognized organizations concerning the dangers of exposure to asbestos.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2012.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Further to its observation, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the following points.

Article 2 of the Convention. Definitions. The Committee notes the response provided by the Government which indicates definitions of the relevant terms to the Convention under the New Brunswick Asbestos Regulation 92-106, and information concerning the establishment of a Technical (Stakeholder) Committee to review and recommend changes to this Regulation. The Committee also notes the response regarding the conformity of asbestos regulations in Ontario with the definitions of the relevant terms to the Convention. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure full application, across all provinces and territories in Canada, of the definitions in Article 2 of the Convention.

Part V of the report form. Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government concerning the application of the Convention in practice across all provinces and territories, including the provision of asbestos abatement training to workers in Alberta, and the development of guidelines/resources on this subject; the development, by WorkSafe British Colombia, of a proposal to implement a harmful substances exposure registry, which would document any exposure to harmful substances (including asbestos); the development of various guidelines/resources concerning asbestos developed by the Workplace Safety and Health Division in Manitoba; the launch, by the Ministry of Labour in Ontario in July 2008, of an inspection blitz on demolition and renovation projects in the construction industry which among other hazards focused on asbestosis; and the commitment by the Workplace Health and Safety Committee in Quebec since 2006 on the importance of prevention interventions concerning safe work practices in the presence of asbestos. The Committee further notes the statistical information provided by the Government, obtained from the Association of Workers’ Compensation Boards of Canada (AWCBC), who administer the National Work Injuries Statistics Program (NWISP), the primary purpose of which is to collect data from the provincial/territorial jurisdictions and maintain a national database of occupational injury and disease statistics, including data for the federal jurisdiction because the provincial/territorial workers’ compensation authorities administer workers’ compensation claims for the federal jurisdiction as well. The Government indicates that the number of asbestos-related occupational disease and occupational fatality claims accepted for compensation by a workers’ compensation authority came to a total of 164 in 2005, 177 in 2006, 164 in 2007 and 176 in 2008; that during 2000–08, 6 per cent of work-related fatalities accepted by the Workers Compensation Board of Manitoba were caused by asbestosis; that the number of asbestos-related lung cancers and mesothelioma claims accepted by the Newfoundland and Labrador Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission during the period of this report were 21 lung cancers and 2 mesotheliomas; and that there were 16 accepted claims at WorkSafe New Brunswick between 2006 and 2010 with the source of injury being asbestos. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the application of the Convention in practice.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its latest report, including information concerning the application of the Convention, in law and practice, in a number of the provinces and territories. It also notes the statistical information on the application of the Convention, which has been dealt with in a request addressed directly to the Government. As regards legislative and other measures undertaken, the Committee welcomes the information indicating that representatives of the Canadian employers’ and workers’ organizations are participating in the Federal Regulatory Review Committee on the revision of Part X (Hazardous Substances) Regulations, and that this Committee has proposed lowering the occupational exposure limit on asbestos from 1 to 0.1 fibre/cubic centimetre, as well as new provisions that would specify requirements for an asbestos management programme for asbestos removal from any building/facility in federal jurisdiction. The Committee notes that following extensive consultation with industry, labour and technical experts, comprehensive new Workplace Safety and Health Regulations, which include new requirements to address asbestos hazards, took effect on 1 February 2007 in Manitoba. The Committee also notes the revised Occupational Health and Safety Regulations of 1 September 2009 in Newfoundland and Labrador; and the replacement in Ontario of Regulation 837 Respecting Asbestos by the O. Reg. 490/09 Designated Substances (effective 1 July 2010), which maintains worker protections while easing compliance for employers. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the legislative measures undertaken concerning the Convention.

The Committee also notes the comments by the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC), concerning the application of the Convention which were transmitted to the Office together with the Government’s report, but which were not specifically addressed by the Government in its report.

Article 3(1) and (2) of the Convention. Measures to be taken for the prevention and control of health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos; periodical review in the light of technical progress and scientific knowledge. Article 10(b). Total or partial prohibition of the use of asbestos. The Committee notes that according to the CLC there is a compelling body of evidence showing that the most efficient way to eliminate asbestos-related disease is to stop producing and using it. The CLC indicates that the views of the ILO, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in this matter must be respected as the main legitimate source of information. With reference to the Ninth International Conference on Occupational Respiratory Diseases in Kyoto in 1997 (Kyoto Conference) the CLC states that chrysotile is contaminated by tremolite and other amphibole group fibres and that these cannot be separated which is reason enough to justify a prohibition of all forms of asbestos. The Committee also notes that the CLC states that, in their view, the Canadian Government should introduce a total prohibition of the use of asbestos or products containing asbestos in work processes within the country, and for the phasing out of asbestos exports. The CLC refers to the “National Programme for the Elimination of Asbestos-Related Diseases” (NPEAD) – a programme specifically designed by the ILO and WHO for countries that use chrysotile asbestos but wish to eliminate asbestos-related diseases – and states that NPEAD is designed as a national institutional framework for strategic preventative strategies for the regional to the enterprise levels to take account of health, economic and social aspects of the problem, including indirect costs such as loss of potential income and the number of jobs offset by any changes. The CLC also indicates that if planned properly, job losses can be effectively offset by developing a positive employment transition process that is linked to the prohibition of asbestos and the promotion of alternative technology. The CLC also refers to the ILO Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122), ratified by Canada, and its accompanying Recommendation, together with the ILO Resolution on Social and Economic Consequences of Preventive Action at the 59th Session (June 1974) of the International Labour Conference, as important guideposts for establishing and implementing such an employment policy. The CLC also notes that NPEAD envisages the replacement of asbestos by other materials or products or the use of alternative technology. In the light of these comments by the CLC, the Committee requests the Government to provide further detailed and up-to-date information on measures taken to give effect to Articles 3(1) and (2) and 10(b), taking into account, in particular, technological progress and advances in scientific knowledge.

Articles 4 and 22(1). Consultation with the most representative organizations of employers and workers. The Committee notes the allegations by the CLC that, to their knowledge, consultations as required under these provisions of the Convention have not taken place in the recent past. The Committee asks the Government to respond to this comment by the CLC and to provide further information on measures taken to ensure a full application of these provisions of the Convention.

Article 17(2). Protection of workers and limiting the release of asbestos dust in the context of demolition work. The Committee notes that in its comments the CLC also refers to the WHO International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS), which in their view makes it clear that asbestos should not be used in construction materials because of the impossibility of protecting construction workers, their families and building occupants. The Committee requests the Government respond to the comment by the CLC and to provide further information on the measures taken to ensure a full application of this provision of the Convention.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2011.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

1. The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report and the attached statistical information.

2. Article 2. Harmonization of definitions relevant for the application of the Convention. With reference to its previous comments regarding the application of this Article of the Convention, the Committee notes that the Government’s report is silent on this issue. The Committee reiterates its request to the Government to provide information on measures taken and envisaged to harmonize the legislation in the country in accordance with the definitions set forth in this Article and to provide further information on the efforts of the Occupational Health and Safety Committee of the Canadian Association of Administrators of Labour Law in this respect.

3. Part V of the report form. Appreciation of the application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that national detailed occupational injury and diseases statistics are compiled through the National Work Injuries Statistics Program (NWISP), which is administered by the Association of Workers’ Compensations Boards of Canada (AWCBC). It notes that the primary purpose of NWISP is to collect data from all Canadian jurisdictions and maintain a national database of occupational injury and disease statistics, and that the data collection is administrative in nature, meaning that all cases are documented in the statistics and these statistics are harmonized by AWCBC which converts data submitted under different coding structures into a standard coding structure. The Committee notes with concern that, according to the submitted statistical tables for the period 1998-2004 for accepted claims for asbestos-related injuries, the number of cases caused by mesothelioma have doubled (from 29 to 58 in 2004) while the number of cases of injuries related to asbestosis have remained relatively stable. As regards fatalities, the number of mesothelioma-related fatalities have also doubled, while the number of fatalities caused by asbestosis for the same period increased from 30 to 55. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide relevant statistical information as well as information on further measures planned or envisaged to curb what seems to be a significant increase of asbestos-related injuries and fatalities.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

1. The Committee notes, with interest, the information in the Government’s report and the information on legislative amendments including amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada providing for criminal sanctions for disregard of duties to protect employees and public safety (Bill C-45 November 2003); the 2002 amendment to Part II (Occupational Health and Safety) of the Canada Labour Code providing for increased responsibilities relating to occupational health and safety for employers and workers respectively, for safety and health committees in workplaces with more than 20 workers, an increased emphasis on prevention, the right of a worker to call for a monitoring of the working environment and to appeal decisions related thereto; the amendments to Part X of the Canada Occupational Health and Safety Regulations providing for risk assessments as well as relevant legislative changes in the different provinces. Furthermore, it notes the decision rendered by the Canada Appeals Office in Occupational Health and Safety reaffirming the health and safety committee’s right to participate in a hazard investigation and to be consulted prior to the qualified person preparing their written report to the employer.

2. Article 2 of the Convention. Harmonization of definitions relevant for the application of the Convention. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous comments on this issue, the Government refers to the activities of the Occupational Health and Safety Committee of the Canadian Association of Administrators of Labour Law, which meets on a regular basis to discuss issues of consistency in OSH legislation and enforcement thereof. The Committee notes, however, that the information provided from the different provinces indicates that there is still no uniform definition of the terms "asbestos", "asbestos dust", "airborne asbestos dust", "respirable asbestos fibres" and "exposure to asbestos" in the legislation of the different provinces. The Committee therefore reiterates its request to the Government to provide information on the measures taken and envisaged to harmonize the legislation in order to ensure uniform interpretation of these terms, in accordance to the definitions set forth in this Article of the Convention.

2. Part V of the report form. Appreciation of the application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes that in reply to the Committee’s previously expressed concerns about the increase of the number of workers who have contracted asbestos-related diseases in the last decade, the Government states that this "apparent" increase might reflect the long latency period for the manifestation of asbestos-related diseases and that the diagnosis of such diseases occurs only decades after exposure thereto and that it might also be an indication of improved reporting of occupational diseases. The Committee also notes that the Government reports that the provisions of Part II of the Canada Labour Code, regulate occupational health and safety in 45,506 workplaces across Canada, that at these work sites 15,215 employers are responsible for 1,373,410 workers and that for the period 1 July 1999 to 31 May 2005 a computer research revealed no occupational diseases reported as a result of exposure to asbestos. The Committee notes that no additional statistical information was included in the report. The Committee requests the Government to clarify which records were examined in this computer search, and in particular to indicate whether this computer search also covered statistics related to compensation claims. The Committee also requests the Government to provide further statistical information, also regarding the evaluation of compensation claims, as well as information regarding the reporting methods applied and an appreciation whether available statistics, at the federal as well as the provincial levels, adequately reflect the incidence of asbestos-related diseases in the country.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2006.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee notes the Government’s last report. It notes with interest the Government’s reply to its previous comment concerning the application of Articles 11 and 12 of the Convention. It also notes the Occupational Safety and Health Regulations of the different provinces, adopted in application of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, 1996, which, inter alia, address specifically asbestos-related issues. It further notes the various training activities for workers carried out in the provinces, the manuals issued to this effect as well as the guidelines issued to ensure the safe use of asbestos. However, the Committee notes from the statistics available that, in spite of the above measures, the overall number of workers who have contracted asbestos diseases has increased in the last decade. The Committee therefore encourages the Government to continue to take the necessary measures to improve the protection of workers exposed to asbestos in the course of their work.

Article 2 of the Convention. Definition. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes again that there is no uniform definition of the terms "asbestos", "asbestos dust", "airborne asbestos dust", "respirable asbestos fibres" and "exposure to asbestos" in the legislation of different provinces. It accordingly requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to harmonize the legislation in order to ensure uniform interpretation of these terms, in accordance with the definitions set forth in this Article of the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information in its next report on the measures taken or envisaged at federal and provincial levels to ensure an effective application of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

I. The Committee notes with interest the detailed information provided by the Government in its first and second reports. It notes the indication in the Government's second report that the province of Newfoundland adopted the Asbestos Abatement Code of Practice, Regulation 194/91 on 4 October 1991 and that the Northwest Territories have adopted the Asbestos Safety Regulations on 27 March 1992. The Government is invited to furnish copies of these texts with its next report.

II. Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government's indication that, at the federal level, the definitions set forth in this provision are not specifically laid down in the legislation but that the existing legislation is in conformity with the intentions of these definitions. It notes, furthermore, that Saskatchewan legislation has only defined "airborne asbestos dust", "respirable asbestos fibres", "exposure to asbestos", and "workers' representatives", and Ontario has specific definitions in its legislation only for the terms "asbestos" and "asbestos fibres". Newfoundland and Yukon do not appear to have any specific definitions in their legislation for the terms set forth in this Article of the Convention. The Government is requested to keep the Office informed of any steps taken or envisaged to harmonize the legislation in order to ensure uniform interpretation of these terms in accordance with the definitions set forth in this Article.

Article 11. The Committee notes that Annexes I and II of the Hazardous Products Act prohibit the sale or importation of crocidolite (a substance not produced in Canada). Section 5 of the Hazardous Products Act, however, permits the Governor in Council to make regulations authorizing the advertising, sale or importation of any restricted product and prescribing the circumstances and conditions under which and the persons by whom the restricted product may be advertised, sold or imported. The Government is requested to indicate the manner in which the most representative organizations of employers and workers concerned are consulted with respect to any derogation made by virtue of section 5 and to keep the Office informed of any exceptions made concerning the use of crocidolite either at the federal or the provincial level.

Article 12. The Government has indicated that section 40 of Part I of Schedule I of the Hazardous Products Act prohibits the spraying of all forms of asbestos except in the case of "a mixture of asbestos fibres and bituminous or resinous-based binding materials where the fibres are encapsulated with the binder during spraying and the resulting materials are not friable after drying". The Government is requested to indicate the manner in which the most representative organizations of employers and workers concerned were consulted concerning this exception and to keep the Office informed of any other derogations made with respect to the spraying of asbestos either at the federal level or in the provinces.

III. Point III of the report form. The Committee notes with interest the judgement of the Quebec Superior Court concerning the prohibition of the use of crocidolite annexed to the Government's second report. The Government is requested to continue to provide the Office with any other court or tribunal judgements rendered involving questions of principle relating to the application of the Convention.