Prosecutions for asbestos related offences (FOI)
Prosecutions for asbestos related offences (FOI)Produced by the Freedom of Information office
Authored by States of Jersey and published on 19 December 2018.
Prepared internally, no external costs.
I would like a response to the following questions relating to asbestos in Jersey -
How many people have been prosecuted in Jersey for asbestos related offences?
How many organisations have been prosecuted in Jersey for asbestos related offences?
How many organisations have been prosecuted for not having an asbestos management plan?
How many buildings run or owned by Jersey Property Holdings (JPH) have been fined or prosecuted or given a warning from the Health and Safety Inspectorate (HSI) following checks.
How much money has been spent in States run schools to manage asbestos? (Breakdown last 5 years if possible)
Note: The data relating to prosecutions is limited to prosecutions taken under health and safety at work legislation since 1997, when specific Regulations relating to work with certain types of asbestos were first introduced into Jersey legislation.
Five individuals have been prosecuted for asbestos related offences.
17 organisations have been prosecuted, (taking the definition of an ‘employer’ under the Health and Safety at Work (Jersey) Law 1989 (the HSW Law) to represent an ‘organisation’ for the purposes of this response)
None - failure to have an asbestos management plan is not an absolute offence under health and safety at work legislation.
The Attorney General is the ultimate Authority in respect of all prosecutions in the Island, and any decision to prosecute under the HSW Law is taken by the Attorney General, not the Health and Safety Inspectorate.
The States Employment Board (as the employer as defined under the HSW Law) was prosecuted by HM Attorney General, on 30 July 2009, for a failure to manage the risks of asbestos-containing materials during the refurbishment of Housing owned (not JPH owned) properties on Le Clos de Roncier Estate.
The Health and Safety Inspectorate (HSI) is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the HSW Law. Article 20 of the HSW Law places strict controls over the disclosure of information gained by Inspectors whilst exercising their powers provided by the HSW Law, which prohibits the release of information relating to inspections and / or interventions taken by the HSI against named duty holders, including the States Employment Board.
Consequently Article 29 (Other prohibitions or restrictions) of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 has been applied in respect of information relating to inspections of JPH properties by the HSI.
It has only been possible for JPH to report on expenditure to manage asbestos in States run schools for the past three years. Whilst information is held relating to previous years it is estimated that it would take in excess of 12.5 working hours to locate, retrieve and extract the information from our pre- 2016 legacy systems. Article 16 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 has therefore been applied.
The figures set out below include all “provided schools” as defined under the Education (Jersey) Law 1999.
Expenditure reports have been run from the 1st January 2016 to current date. This expenditure covers –
1. Annual asbestos re-inspections
2. Asbestos Management Surveys
3. Asbestos Refurbishment and Demolition Surveys
4. Production of Asbestos Management Plans
5. Air monitoring
6. Material sampling
7. Asbestos remediation – covering removal or encapsulation, and so on
These annual expenditure figures do not pick up any costs associated with reinstatement works or new materials following any asbestos removal.
2016 expenditure £21,817.50
2017 expenditure £57,660.00
2018 expenditure to date £55,065.00
Article 16 A scheduled public authority may refuse to supply information if cost excessive
(1) A scheduled public authority that has been requested to supply information may refuse to supply the information if it estimates that the cost of doing so would exceed an amount determined in the manner prescribed by Regulations.
Regulation 2 (1) of the Freedom of Information (Costs) (Jersey) Regulations 2014 allows an authority to refuse a request for information where the estimated cost of dealing with the request would exceed the specified amount of the cost limit of £500. This is the estimated cost of one person spending 12.5 working hours in determining whether the department holds the information, locating, retrieving and extracting the information.
Article 29 Other prohibitions or restrictions
Information is absolutely exempt information if the disclosure of the information by the scheduled public authority holding it –
(a) is prohibited by or under an enactment;
(b) is incompatible with a European Union or an international obligation that applies to Jersey; or
(c) would constitute or be punishable as a contempt of court.