Ahead of tomorrow's meeting about the Paddington Cemetery asbestos issue (7pm at Kilburn Housing Co-operative, Kilburn Square, Victoria Road, Kilburn, NW6 6PT.) there has been further correspondence between Cllr John Duffy and Brent Council.
John Duffy's email is published below:
John Duffy's email is published below:
Thank
you for your email, however I have some serious concerns about some
of its content..
Firstly
you say in your email the council has been open, transparent and public and
worker safety focussed throughout this matter. Any examination of the fact show
the opposite is true. The council decision to take the report to an audit
committee , where the public and press were banned cannot be considered
public , open or transparent . To stop a democratically
elected councillor from having a copy of the Audit Advisory
committee Report (AAC) before the meeting and only allowing
him to view the report in front of two bodyguards cannot by
any stretch of the imagination be consider open, transparent and public.
Neither
does the decision of the council Audit Investigator not to interview the
workforce who were mostly exposed to the asbestos suggest to me you
were focus on worker safety. The neglect of the workforce is also borne out
by the council decision not to suspend all work on the
mound while awaiting asbestos analyst .
The
decision to bus in workers to carry out work on the mound , without
protective clothing on June 24th 2017 was reckless. The council must be
aware the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 set minimum
standards for the protection of employees from risks related to exposure to
asbestos. Employers should also take account of people not directly employed by
them but who could be affected by the work being done on asbestos including
employees of other employers, people occupying buildings, members of the public
etc.
The
main issue has always been how did the asbestos get to Paddington Cemetery .We
known there were three " finds "of Asbestos one in August 2015
in Carpenders Park. This was found while preparing a load to infill
section 3D which is an area on the mound in Paddington Cemetery
.The Asbestos was separately bagged and sent to West London waste Authority.(WLWA)
.The waste was classified as Hazardous waste and weighted 60 kgs .The council
officer ,who had attend asbestos awareness courses confirmed in the AAC report
that he believe the" find " was asbestos cement.. However
you in your latest email have change that account. You are now saying
that it just was a (one) small plate made of asbestos in among the
60 kgs. As you kno I used to be Head of Environmental Enforcement for
Westminster City council and I have always found a change in narrative
concerning. However Iam hoping you will
explain how bags filled with Asbestos cement , can suddenly become a
small asbestos plate ? In my role Head of Enforcement I have
always believe that stories can change but the facts
remain the same. The fact is on the 15th August 2015 the council sent 60
kgs of waste which found in a load bound for Section 3D in
Paddington Cemetery to WLWA for deposal and it was all classified as
"hazardous Waste" with or without the "small asbestos
plate".
The
next position of the council is in my mind completely untenable, Your email says the council removed the
original 60 kgs of contaminated soil in 2015 . The council sent completely
different waste to Paddington cemetery shortly after from a random spoil
from previous dug graves within Carpenders Park. The load was sent to
backfill 3D in Paddington Cemetery .The chances of two random
unrelated loads both being contaminated ,can mean one of two things
either Carpenders Park is contaminated throughout which is very
serious or the council failed to screen the 2nd load properly believing
they had remove all the Asbestos before sending it to
Paddington Cemetery.
The
second "Find” of Asbestos was located in section 3D on the May 9th
2017 .The find was made after grave diggers were preparing for a burial .I
understand well over a hundred pieces of asbestos were found and these
were found all the way down the dig .The pieces of asbestos were not as
you suggested just at the level of 6 or 7 feet some of it was near or on the
surface .The spoil transported to Paddington cemetery in 2015 was used to
backfill a hole that had appear after the removal of a very large tree and its
roots. The pour of the waste did go to 6 or 7 ft as the level of the
removed roots were that deep. Your assertion that because the level
where some the asbestos was found , makes the asbestos pre-2010 has no
evidence to support that view.
On
the 19th May the third "find "was also found in section 3D
again on or just below the surface. Nothing concerning this find or the
find that took place previously was mentioned or highlighted in the councils
AAC.
On
July17 2017 you sent me an email (see below) ) following an enquiry I made on
behalf of a residents it said.
Dear
Cllr Duffy,
I
understand a small number of pieces of asbestos have been dug up alongside
bricks and other building materials during a grave excavation in the
mounded area at the rear of Paddington Cemetery.
These
are small items, and tests have shown them to be a low-risk type asbestos.
Also, of course, they’ve been buried and are therefore damp so pose no risk of
particles being released.
They
will be disposed of in the appropriate manner
We’re
working with Veolia and our in-house H&S team to establish the extent of
the problem and, while we do that, we’re not burying there. As far as I’m aware
though, there is absolutely no risk to the public here.
This
email is misleading there was not a small number of pieces as you described, there
were over a hundred pieces of asbestos found and many of them were large
,will you confirm the number as I believe your reply to me underplayed the size
of the asbestos find. Also the test you mentioned that you say
"showed low risk type asbestos", has never been
published .Just to clarify I am requesting the release of the test
results that were carried out on the asbestos found on the 9th
May mentioned in your email along with the consignment notes for the
asbestos found on 9th May and 19th May 2017, and the size of both those
finds.....Hopefully the quick release of this information will lead to
Brent residents having a complete picture.
As
you are aware Eaton Environmental group showed of the 60 pilot holds drilled
(after the removal of the over one hundred pieces of asbestos) 28% were
still found to have asbestos trace and just under 25% of them
including one sample which states " several large chunks of cement
"were of "high content". i believe this is being underplayed by officers.
Also neither the Eaton or Deltasimmon report consider the tests results
you mention in your email , therefore both the consultants conclusions
are flawed as they do not consider the asbestos from "finds"
two and three in their overall results. I believe without those test results ,
Grave-owners , residents and parents will be unable to make up there own mind
on past and future risk.
The
other point of most concern is the storage of the contaminated
waste on the footpath outside the Green-space .I witnessed over many
weeks that the asbestos was clearly visible. I wrote to you in early in
December 2017 that were not following the basic Health and safety regulations
on the removal of Asbestos. Most importantly, the Council did not
carry out the basic courtesy of alerting the school whose
garden is immediately adjacent to ensure that no children went out into
the Green-space during the operation. Nor did the Council cordon off the
surrounding area to ensure members of the public did not enter.The use of the
giant mechanical shovel on a open back lorry was completely inappropriate
and bound to create plumes of hazardous airborne dust. The waste was then
placed in an open lorry rather than a locked skip (which is required under
COSHH ) which would ensure the journey of the hazardous waste
would be registered and the load could not be neither tampered with or
mixed with other waste. No protective sheeting was placed on the lorry as it
drove off, leaving several pieces of asbestos (see photos on the Perfect
storm email) scattered along the path.
Albeit
you were sent photographic evidence of the waste being loaded into a open
back lorry, you seemingly just ignored this and on the 9th December you
sent me another email.
Dear
Cllr Duffy,
The
contractors have advised the sealed container is still in the depot awaiting
a date and time slot for it to be taken for final disposal/treatment in
Swindon.
Apparently,
there is a booking system rather than a ‘just turn up’ system.
We
will advise as soon as we have further information.
Kind
regards,
There
was no sealed container as the photographs in the perfect storm email confirms.
The lorry when to yard and was off-loaded onto the floor. It is because of
Brent Council’s unwillingness to follow COSHH guidelines and ensure the
waste was collect in locked skip no one will be able
to guarantee the integrity of the load collected from outside the
green-space for testing.
I
understand from the Head of Finance that the councils Audit officer
,who himself recognises he is not an H+S expert. He will now
interview the staff. This again is just an attempt to ensure the
investigation is not open or transparent .It was only a few months ago the
audit officer believed these people who were most exposed to asbestos were not
worth talking to ,he also did not seek out important consignment
notes to ensure the committee had all the facts and the public have all
the facts. Of course once he has investigate the decision will go back to the
Audit Advisory Committee and the press and public will once again be
excluded from the meeting .It will be the same result. Brent council will
mark it own homework without any scrutiny from the public.
I
believe the council lack of openness has caused considerable anxiety to
many local residents not just about their health and well-being, it also brings
alarm that a big juggernaut like Brent Council can continue to ignore them
and hide behind locked doors in the Civic Centre and they are helpless to do anything
about it. I am still hoping the council will announce an independent
investigation today (Monday ) prior to Tuesday meeting , which I believe the
local residents will welcome and will lead to a calm and sensible
conclusion that will be in the public interest ..
You
mention the affect on some staff which are employed by Brent, which I really
do consider. You can rest assured I am not motivated to get anyone disciplined.
I believe you can see from my defence of the workers in the graveyard rights to
be heard, because that I am not that kind of person . However I believe
there are lessons to be learn be it extra H+ S and COSHH
training , changes in protocol , better contract management , better reporting
systems or other solutions…...Mistakes can be made but they can be
rectified , but they should'nt be hidden behind secret meetings that
excluded the press and public.
As
I say I will be at the Civil Centre today ( Monday approx. 1pm), where
hopefully you will be able to give me the test results you mentioned
in your email and the consignment notes, which were all missing from the
AAC report, so they can be studied before Tuesday’s meeting .
