Winnipeg Free Press > Opinion > Bloggers > Capital Chronicles > The politics of asbestos

Capital Chronicles

Winnipeg Free Press - ONLINE EDITION

The politics of asbestos

By: Mia Rabson

9/04/2009 3:46 PM | Comments: 4

Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff participates in a town hall meeting earlier this week.

Enlarge Image

Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff participates in a town hall meeting earlier this week. (JEFF MCINTOSH / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

Michael Ignatieff is perhaps being reminded right now that as the leader of the opposition and -- theoretically anyway -- the prime minister in waiting, everything he says is going to be used against him in the court of public opinion by the lobbyists and pundits who seek to influence said public.

As I already wrote about in the paper last week, Ignatieff has crawled right smack dab into the middle of the debate over asbestos.

Two weeks ago he was doing town hall stops on Vancouver Island when the Raging Grannies confronted him about Canada’s continued exports of asbestos to developing countries and our resistance to adding it to an international convention that would require Canada to warn countries importing our asbestos that it is toxic and potentially deadly if breathed in.

Ignatieff -- probably not expecting the question -- admitted he might be jumping off a cliff when he said if asbestos is bad for MPs (hence the reason it is being removed from the Parliament buildings) it is bad for everyone and Canada should stop exporting it.

It was the first time the Liberal party had ever suggested a ban on exports, and the anti-asbestos lobby was thrilled.

The asbestos industry, not so much. And they fired off letters and press releases extolling the reasons for continued production and exports, including claims chrysotile asbestos isn’t as bad as the other forms, is safer now that it is only used in products like cement that don’t allow the fibres to become airborne, and is more studied than the synthetic alternatives which have yet to be proven safe by science.

So Ignatieff retreated a little. He claimed all he said in B.C. was that Canada should be warning people about asbestos. That heartened some people - like Manitoba MP Pat Martin - because it suggests Ignatieff would at least support adding asbestos to the Rotterdam Convention.

Martin worked in asbestos mines when he was young and his lungs have been scarred by the fibres.

But Martin, who wants asbestos banned completely, believes Ignatieff’s retreat came due to pressure from Quebec, where the last remaining asbestos mine in Canada is still operating. And where over 400 people would lose their jobs if Canada stopped exporting asbestos. (Canada doesn’t really use the stuff anymore. We export 90 per cent of it, mainly to developing nations where health and safety precautions are, let’s say, just a tad bit on the loose side of actually caring about health and safety.)

But the issue is not over for Ignatieff.

He got a letter this week from a bunch of Canadian doctors and scientists, laying out the case against asbestos pretty hard. Similar letters were sent to Carolyn Bennett, Keith Martin and Hedy Fry -- all Liberal MPs who were physicians before they were MPs.

The doctors accuse Ignatieff of putting industry lobbyists ahead of public health. Ouch.

I usually believe when a politician is put on the spot to answer a question they weren’t expecting and didn’t get briefed on, that we often get the closest glimpse we’ll ever see to how they actually feel about something.

So it’s likely Ignatieff’s personal beliefs on asbestos are somewhat close to what he said in B.C.

But his party can’t afford to upset Quebec. Sure he’s trying to win back support in the west but the only way the Liberals are getting back into government is by wooing La Belle Province and they have a far greater chance at that than they do wooing the west.

So what does he do?

Rock. Hard place. Meet Michael.

  • Rate this Rate This Star Icon
  • This blog is currently rated an average of 5 out of 5 (1 votes).

    • We want you to tell us what you think of our articles. If the story moves you, compels you to act or tells you something you didn’t know, mark it high. If you thought it was well written, do the same. If it doesn’t meet your standards, mark it accordingly.

    You can also register and/or login to the site and join the conversation by leaving a comment.

    Rate it yourself by rolling over the stars and clicking when you reach your desired rating. We want you to tell us what you think of our articles. If the story moves you, compels you to act or tells you something you didn’t know, mark it high.

4 Commentscomment icon

The so called complications surrounding the asbestos industry can readily resolved, but there is a lack of vision in Canada. Our foreign policy and development assistance are increasingly linked to a failed policy and strategy in Afghanistan. Where we once led in aid and development assistance in Africa (still the only region in the world to be losing ground regularly to all other regions, including India), we have lost any sense of leadership, vision, and creativity.
Asbestos roofing panels are used extensively in Africa and India (and other places) where asbestos fibers, combined with cement, create a great roofing product that is strong and inexpensive. If our foreign and aid policies weren't so locked up in failure, perhaps we could help developing nations cultivate bamboo for use in construction, textiles, furniture and so many other industries. A wonderfully renewable and non-toxic resource, bamboo has the potential to be a bit of a wonder product in developing nations. Perhaps bamboo fibers could substitute for asbestos in the construction of new, non-toxic roofing panels. With some development assistance, bamboo could be a great developing nations' cash crop, locally grown and processed, ending the need for imported asbestos. Create new demand for bamboo, and end demand for asbestos. Result? Asbestos mines closed and asbestos health issues arrested.
It's time for new vision and leadership to reshape how we think about issues. Banning exports is old and tired. Most problems can be solved by using approaches distinctly different from the the ones that got us into the trouble in the first place.
Why is there such a reluctance to ditch the same old, same old, in favour of something new and generative?

What's the position upon tobacco products given taxation from said products? Beyond me how science cannot come up with a permanent solution that individuals could take, such as permanent nicotine shots, pills, or something to that effect, rather than useless stop smoking products.

The business lobbyists are a foot and the Government is all too tax revenue happy...

Reminds me of alcohol and marijuana. The latter illegal probably due to alcohol lobbyists and Government taxation revenues than due to scientific findings...and the gateway drug line is comical...

As a transportation worker involved in the movement of this so-called safe asbestos (White Asbestos, Chyrsotile) I asked to be exempted from participating in abetting this crime. My employers answer...do it or your fired. I have nightmares of unknowing people in Pakistan, India and the far east opening those bags of slow death and working without protection. Dollars over lives once again.

Ah, Quebec. Once again the squeaky wheel gets greased.

The comment period for this story has ended.

letters

Make text: Larger | Smaller

Special coverage

Poll

Would you pay more to supersize your garbage bin?

View Results