Summary Report - UK Asbestos Taskforce
Monday 26th January 2026

 

A report by Jamie McGovern FRSPH MIIAI. CWU H&S Policy Assistant

 

Attendees included Shelly Asquith, TUC and Derek Maylor, MAVSG(previously Chair of NW BT Unions Health & Safety Co-ord)

Background
The roundtable was convened to discuss the potential for collective action, in the form of an ‘asbestos taskforce’, to take forward actions that can lead to the Government’s adoption of the Work& Pensions Select Committee recommendations and ultimately the phased removal of asbestos from buildings in the UK.

The idea of an Asbestos Taskforce was discussed with the Minister, Sir Stephen Timms, in December 2025. The minister strongly encouraged the establishment of such an approach, recognising that uniting the efforts of campaigners, unions, and industry to speak with one voice, would be more effective than disparate campaigning.

The Minister made it clear that while he is sympathetic to the cause, the government is unlikely to initiate a national removal programme without significant external pressure. So more effective campaign work is needed to provide robust, indisputable evidence—to gain leverage over the
government, HSE and the Treasury. The Minister was particularly interested in evidence to contest the HSE’s predictions that asbestos deaths will drop off significantly by 2040.

Consensus for a taskforce
There was broad consensus that a taskforce could be a useful campaign vehicle, although unions felt that securing agreement would be subject to acceptable Terms of Reference (TOR) outlining strategic aims and objectives, composition and constitution, secretariat functions etc.
However, the point was made that a taskforce would need to be ‘lean and agile’ to be effective. It was agreed, following the meeting, that a draft TOR would be circulated for comments and revision.

Priorities for action
The group discussed priorities for action which the taskforce would need to focus on.

1. Contesting the HSE "Death Rate" Graph
A central pillar of the discussion was the need to debunk the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) projection that asbestos-related deaths will naturally resolve itself. The group discussed the need to address the problem of missing data: The current statistics are criticised for ignoring younger victims and the potential for "another wave" of deaths coming from environmental exposure in public buildings, which are not currently reflected in the official industrial disease data.

2. Shifting the Public Narrative
The group discussed the failure in public awareness, particularly among younger generations and professionals, as well as the challenges that this presents.

▪ "Old Man’s Disease": There is a persistent, incorrect belief that asbestos only affects retired shipyard or construction workers.
▪ Union Awareness: Young workers often do not identify asbestos as a workplace risk. Even well- informed teachers were found to be unaware that asbestos is a potential airborne threat.

The group identified opportunities for coordinated action to raise public awareness through delicate messaging that would avoid causing panic. This would involve working with national print media to keep the "emotional" impact of the issue — especially risks to children — in the public eye. Additional media interest could also be sought, via TV, radio and social media.

3. Closing the Evidence Gap: Air Monitoring
The Taskforce discussed the aim of proving that asbestos is not "safe if left in situ" by undertaking a
research project, with a credible research institution, to monitor air in public buildings for the
presence of asbestos particles.

▪ The School Crisis: CLASP schools were suggested as a possible focus for such a project. CLASP
schools are riddled with inaccessible asbestos and are now beyond their intended design life. It is
estimated there are roughly 4,000 to 5,000 of these high-risk buildings in England alone.
▪ Anonymised Data Collection: Industry representatives suggested collecting air samples during
routine annual re-inspections to build a database showing actual exposure levels without
penalising individual building owners.

Summary roundtable discussion: Asbestos Taskforce

▪ TEM vs. PCM: The use of Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), was also suggested for this purpose. TEM is a superior international standard that can detect much smaller asbestos particles than Phase Contrast Microscopy (PCM), which is the UK standard.

4. Sector-Specific Risks and "Psychological Harm"
The discussion highlighted that asbestos is no longer just a physical health risk but a significant workplace welfare issue.
▪ Deteriorating Estates: Thousands of tons of asbestos remain in BT Openreach and Royal Mail estates, where the fabric of buildings is failing.
▪ Workplace Stress: There is "out of control" stress and psychological harm among workers who realise they are working in proximity to deteriorating asbestos.
The group considered a national survey of workers to quantify the levels of workplace stress caused by asbestos exposure, which a taskforce might take forward.

5. Overcoming Policy and Fiscal Barriers
The roundtable addressed the systemic reasons why progress has stalled for decades.
▪ Treasury Orthodoxy: There is a belief that the Treasury views the current level of asbestos deaths as "tolerable" because the alternative - a multi-billion-pound national removal and rebuilding project—is seen as too expensive. Further cost-benefit analysis will be required.
▪ HSE Underfunding: The regulator is described as "monstrously underfunded," resulting in them having no budget for proactive air monitoring or new research. The point was made that a lack of funding does not explain institutional resistance to new thinking or adoption of international best practice.
▪ Lack of Political Engagement: Outside of a few specific MPs, there is a "solitary" lack of interest from the wider Parliament, with many previously engaged MPs having lost their seats in the last election. Unions could help raise awareness and mobilise greater political engagement,
particularly among Labour MPs. There are opportunities to engage with ministers responsible for health and for housing.

Next Steps & CWU considerations
It was agreed that the headline action coming from the meeting is to draft ‘Terms of Reference’ for further discussion and iteration. Formalising constitutional arrangements for a taskforce will allow trade unions and industry bodies to formally affiliate.

Consensus opinion in the meeting was that the starting point (of the task force) would be to ‘Agree to disagree’ with HSE statistics and contest the HSE project death graph whilst a long term aim would be to disprove their advice to leave asbestos in situ was safe, others countries do not align with HSE Opinion such as Australia and Canada and consequently they are much further down the line than the UK towards eradication.