Students Campaign to End Abestos Exportation
A legislative bill written by Canadian students will be presented this week that calls for a federal government ban on the export of asbestos. The bill was written by students in response to an invitation from MP Nathan Cullen to write a proposal on how they would improve the country. Asbestos production and exportation is a highly controversial topic in Canada right now, and a group of students decided to speak out against it.
Asbestos is a naturally occurring silicate mineral mined from the ground or extracted from rocks. Known for its durability, thermal insulating qualities and chemical and erosion resistant properties, asbestos was once widely used in many industrial and construction materials.
It is now widely accepted that exposure to asbestos has a strong relationship to lung cancer, asbestosis, and pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma. Because of this, asbestos use is banned completely in the United States and Australia and either banned or strictly regulated in 50 other countries.
Despite knowing asbestos is carcinogenic, Canada continues to mine and export the toxic mineral to developing world countries. Canadian officials that support the continued mining and exporting of asbestos claim that they meet their obligation by giving warnings about the risks for public health to the countries they export to. However, many of these countries are the poorest in the world where citizen and worker safety is not held as a high priority and the risk of exposure is assumed to be high.
In 2006, Canada was the only Western nation to oppose adding asbestos to a list of hazardous chemicals under the UN Convention. Canada is the fifth largest exporter of chrysotile asbestos in the world. The Province of Quebec is the main producer of asbestos in Canada. Conservatives in favor of continued exportation argue that hundreds of jobs in Quebec would be lost. Students who wrote the proposed bill and others in favor of banning asbestos argue that other non toxic industries are available as a replacement livelihood and that continuing production and exportation for the sake of money at the expense of human lives should not be an option. Many health and environmental organizations worldwide support the proposed ban.
