Asbestos Still Kills

ASK Podcast Christmas Special 2025

• Jason Milner / Robert McAllister / Dr. Terri-Ann Berry

Share episode

The Asbestos Still Kills (ASK) Podcast team reunites for a 'Christmas Special' in 2025.

We discuss.....

- How the ASK podcast started.
- Asbestos found in Coloured play sand
- Asbestos Contaminated Fire Doors
- ACOP (Approved Code of Practice) versus the GPG (Good Practice Guidance)
- Podcasts planned for 2026....Exciting times ahead!

The ‘Asbestos Still Kills Podcast ® (A.S.K.)' Team provides another exciting Podcast which will not leave viewers disappointed.

Presenters:

Robert McAllister - FAMANZ Director

Dr. Terri-Ann Berry - Environmental Innovation Centre (EIC); Associate Professor, AUT, School of Future Environments

Jason Milner - Asbestos Management Consultants Ltd (AMC)

Website: www.asbestosstillkills.com

Email: asbestosstillkills@gmail.com

The Asbestos Still Kills Podcast ® is Sponsored by:

Asbestos Management Consultants Ltd - Expertise you can trust

https://asbestosmanagementconsultants...

The Environmental Innovation Centre

https://www.environmental-innovation.nz/

For information on asbestos-related diseases or to contact the Mesothelioma Support and Asbestos Awareness Trust please go to:

https://www.msaatrust.org.nz/

🎙️ Podcast Disclaimer — Asbestos Still Kills

The Asbestos Still Kills Podcast ® is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The views and opinions expressed by the hosts and guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of any individuals, organisations, employers, or affiliated bodies.

While every effort is made to ensure accuracy, the podcast may discuss topics involving health, safety, legal, or environmental matters. This content should not be taken as professional, legal, or medical advice. Always consult qualified professionals regarding asbestos-related issues, workplace safety, or health concerns.

The creators, hosts, and producers of Asbestos Still Kills accept no liability for any loss, injury, or damages arising from the use of, or reliance on, the information discussed or displayed. Listener discretion is advised, as some episodes may contain sensitive or distressing content related to asbestos exposure and its impact on individuals and communities.

The creators, hosts, and producers of the Asbestos Still Kills podcast ® accept no liability for any loss, injury, or damages arising from the use of, or reliance on, the information discussed or displayed. Listener discretion is advised, as some episodes may contain sensitive or distressing content.

Viewers' discretion is advised before listening to the Asbestos Still Kills Podcast ®. Viewers are encouraged to use their own judgment and caution when deciding whether to watch or listen to the Asbestos Still Kills Podcast ®©.

Thank you for listening.

Don't forget to like and subscribe for future podcasts.

More Information is available at www.asbestostillkills.com

Contact us via email at: asbestosstillkills@gmail.com

Thank you for listening.

Don't forget to subscribe for future podcasts.

More Information is available at www.asbestostillkills.com

Contact us via email at: asbestosstillkills@gmail.com

SPEAKER_02:

Asbestos still kills.

SPEAKER_05:

Asbestos fibres found in children's sand products. They've been used in schools and kindies. So it's been a pretty concerning time for lots of parents across New Zealand and also in Australia.

SPEAKER_00:

Really coming from Leftville for me today has been the establishment of the Facebook group, which was set up from New Zealand Kinetic Sand Facebook Group, and this was really parents clumpered together and actually talking to each other. And are we on importation testing or doing some random testing of particular materials coming in from those high-risk countries?

SPEAKER_02:

Also, is the ACOP still fit for purpose? Especially in regards to swab sampling. And because some of these are subcontractors, they're too scared to ask for the asbestos information because they're scared of losing the contract.com. Thank you. The Christmas and New Year's special. So in this podcast special, we will be discussing 2025 and looking ahead to 2026.

SPEAKER_00:

We'll be discussing the ACOT and GPGs, asbestos containing fire doors, asbestos in colored sands, to name a few things.

SPEAKER_05:

So since it's our first year, we're going to be talking a little bit about how the Asbestos Still Kills podcast was created. And we're going to talk a little bit about what we'd like to achieve in the future. So tell us all about it, Jace.

SPEAKER_02:

Well, it started off as an idea talking to yourself, Teddy Ann, and also Rob, that there were no podcasts out there about asbestos, and I just thought people need we need more education on the dangers of the exposure to to asbestos. So I picked up the phone, I called Rob, and then I called Teddy Ann. And they probably thought it were crackers at the time. But basically thought it was a great idea. So what what did you think, Rob, when I rung you about the podcast?

SPEAKER_00:

Well, I've I've got to say, absolutely hit the nail on the head. It needed to be done. And when you said it, it just made sense, if I'm honest. Um for the longest time, all I could think of is that you know we all in our own way try and uh reach as many people as we can relating to this subject. And we often find ourselves in silos, in organisations, and and in groups, and not really spreading it wider. So when you when you called me up and gave me an opportunity to come on, I was I jumped at it and I thought, well, I think that'd be great. Uh but then in my mind I thought, well, who who could really finish this off and have a trifecta and have people across all the sections and and areas that we'd be covering. So um was also delighted when you mentioned that you'd be reaching out to Terry Ann. So uh Yeah, it goes to you, Terry Ann.

SPEAKER_05:

Well, thank you very much, boys. I have to confess, when you first said it, Jace, my my first thought was, oh my god, I can't do this, it's way too hard. Um, but actually, it's actually been really good fun. And what I love about it is knowing how addicted the rest of my family, especially my husband, are to podcasts. You know, they're always listening to podcasts. It's just a great way to learn, it's a great way to immerse yourself in a new topic. And I suddenly thought, yeah, the reach we're gonna have is gonna be huge. We can cover some really important topics, um, we can get lots of exciting guests in, we can learn ourselves, but we can also, you know, just try and get some better awareness in the country, which isn't great. We all know it isn't great, and we have to be honest about that. Um, so this is a way of improving it, but in I suppose in a kind of 2025 type way, you know, and it's really exciting to be involved. So I'm really grateful that you started it up, Jace, and that you both invited me along.

SPEAKER_02:

Yeah, and especially in regards to the names as well, asbestos still kills, because because it does, not just in New Zealand, Australia, but also also around the world. So people around the world, we've had viewers, uh, also put listeners on the podcast all over the world, from America to Asia, Australia, the UK, Europe. So it just shows that people are interested. Uh, because asbestos, even though it's present in countries where it's supposed to be banned, uh it's still sneaking through in certain products, which we will cover a bit later on. Uh, but it it's still a bit a big problem, and to warn people about the dangers uh could save someone's life, basically.

SPEAKER_05:

So while we're on that topic, why don't we move straight into that and start with one of our topics for our Christmas special, which is all around asbestos in sand. Um, so over the last few months, we've had some um asbestos fibers found in children's sand products. They've been used in schools and kindies, they've also been used in um crafts as well, craft purposes. Um, now that discovery has meant that there's been some outreach from groups like WorkSafe and Health NZ and MB, um, and lots of questions around what, okay, what do we do about it? Lots of concerned parents, um, lots of quite expensive uh remediation required, understandably. Um, and then just recently there was a whole load of products where the recall that was sent out was then retracted. And so then there's the message that actually, no, some of them are safe, and and and that can be quite worrying because we probably don't have information for all of the different products out there. So it's been a pretty concerning time for lots of parents across New Zealand and and also in Australia. And I just wondered if you would both like to comment on um on the situation and and how we see this moving forward. So maybe we'll start with you, Rob.

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah, I mean yeah, if I take a few steps back, I mean it's been a real roller coaster over the last few weeks for pretty much everyone in our industry and obviously the wider public, which is something that's touched a lot more people than would normally happen. Um but I suppose coming going back to our uh one of our earlier podcasts that we had in relation to uh transmission electron microscopy, you know, um Jason and I were just having a chat, and it came up that there was um some coloured sand, and there's you know, there could be some asbestos in that. And if I'm honest, I went away from that podcast and and I Jason and I had had that conversation afterwards about how appalling that would be. And then overnight, and for a few days afterwards, if I'm honest, it just didn't sit well. You know, I was thinking about it at night, and I was like, oh no, this is not good. So I had a um meeting with our WorkSafe representatives over here in New Zealand, and I was like, wow, um, I need to raise this initially. And first and foremost, when I said it, it was like a bit of a a bit of a comment, you know, that you throw out there in some of these technical meetings that we have from through um Founds and WorkSafe, and I I've mentioned it, and and the whole meeting stopped, and everyone went coloured sand. There was there was a sort of a little bit of a shock initially, and then you could see the concern really coming down. So that sort of really gave birth to that, and obviously our WorkSafe in New Zealand did a great job. I mean, the first thing they did contacted Australia, they were seeing whether it was there because obviously the lab was based there, and and then a snowball event happened, and then uh it sort of got out into the media. Uh, I was chased by the media to put some comments in, which I did. Um and and it really from there on it's just grown and grown and grown. And and I think really I'm really pleased that through the podcast, and that's one great thing what we're doing here, that we give the opportunity to to be exposed to some of this information that many people don't know, but also spread it to a wider audience, and uh hopefully what we're all here to do is minimise exposure to asbestos and promote uh people's knowledge in that area, you know. So I think from there it just it just snowballed down. So um I'll pass to Jason. There's a couple of bits I will touch on when we go a bit further into the subject, but um up to you, Jason.

SPEAKER_02:

Yeah, it it was shocking when we found out in the TM podcast about the asbestos coloured sand. And we were worried whether it whether it was over here in in New Zealand. Uh, and it was great, Rob, that you that you took that forward and you spoke to WorkSafe. And like you said, WorkSafe were brilliant. Uh and of course, in the rigs, if you are ensuring a risk, you've got to presume it is high risk until proven otherwise. Going forward, there will be further investigations in regards to the viability of the sand, uh, which we hope to cover on a future podcast as well. But I simpath sympathise with the parents. We don't yet know the the risks and we don't know the the factors and we don't know what's gonna happen in 20 or 30 years' time. Uh but just god forbid that the the kids are safe.

SPEAKER_03:

Yeah.

SPEAKER_05:

And I I think just to add to that briefly, and I'm gonna come back to you, Rob, but before we go on, I just wanted to add that uh some of the testing that we are looking to undertake as a group will actually be able to establish whether those fibers are airborne during the interactions with sand. And I think the importance of this is that we may well be able to turn around at some stage and give good reassurance to parents. That's what we hope. In an ideal world, that's what we'll be able to do. Um, and so I think this set of experiments is going to be really important, and we'll come back and we'll talk about that, as Jace says, so we'll have a chat about that. Um, but by having a podcast like this, we're hoping that we can help people to deal with these sorts of scenarios as terrible as they are, but in a calm manner, and in a way where we're actually reaching out and providing some education around it. I'm not saying it's not scary, of course it's scary, but I think also we we are trying to reassure people that actually, if you know it's there, these sorts of situations can be managed. So, Rob, over to you again.

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah, I think as well, I mean, something that really coming from left field for me uh today has been the establishment of the Facebook group, which was um set up from New Zealand Kinetic Sand Facebook group. And this was really parents clumping together, uh, you know, and actually talking to each other and seeing the amount of information running through there, you know, well over a thousand members now, and and seeing them interacting with each other, talking about different sand, different product, product batches, batch numbers, and so forth. It's actually been really, really positive to both calm people's concerns, but also alert people to the dangers. I think that's been a really good balance through there. And I'll just make a comment about a number of people I've seen on there. There's been some consultants that have jumped in on that group, and I have to say they've been giving some really good, solid advice to the public. And again, they're doing that, they're not getting paid for that, they're doing this out of the you know, because they're seeing the situation unfolding and they're they're trying to share their knowledge, and that's what we're all about, and I think that you know, I just want to put that shout out to those individuals that are doing that out there. Um, that that is a great thing, and we really support that being done. And um, you know, latest updates from MB, latest updates from WorkSafe are all published on there, people's personal experiences. What do they do when they have a positive sample versus a negative sample? How do they clean up? I mean, it goes on and on, and and I think you know, that's the first time I've experienced that um group culture on a Facebook or an app like that, where it actually went to the greater good. So yeah, I just wanted to really push in on that one and say that's been great. I mean, initially, if we look at um what we did as Famans, you know, first thing we said is who's doing testing here, and there was limited people doing testing with a regulator and so forth. So we stepped up and said, look, we can fund some of this initial testing, which we did. And we were some of the first people out there to actually um get some of this testing done, and also share that information back with MB and and other um government organizations as well, just to try and get it started. But it was massively dwarfed with the um with the Facebook group set up because we had hundreds and thousands of points of contact and results, which has uh definitely driven our knowledge further and further.

SPEAKER_02:

I'd just like to add to that uh that in my professional opinion I don't agree with the cancellation of the recall. And the reason being is that I've not seen any any test results either under polarized light microscopy, PLM, or under TM, transmission electron microscopy, to actually validate that decision. Uh, but I'd like to see those those test results being released to the public so they can they can make up their own mind.

SPEAKER_05:

Yeah, absolutely. I I I agree with you there, Jace. I would like to see those results. I think that that's actually really important. But I do agree, it's almost great to see the asbestos community come together to provide support and to provide that you know reassurance where they can and advice that's really good and practical and useful. I think that they've there's a lot of people doing incredible stuff out there. Okay, so I think probably it's time to move on to the next topic. And so next we're going to talk about asbestos containing fire doors. So over to you, Jace.

SPEAKER_02:

Yeah, so next up is asbestos containing fire doors. So this has been the second incident this year. Uh, prior to the coloured sand, the asbestos consultants have definitely been busy this year. So, first of all, with the fire doors and then with the colours coloured sand. Now, initially, this was a shock to a lot of people, but when you look at the source of the product, which incidentally is the source of the colour coloured sand as well, allegedly. So the company named by WorksNave and MB in their advice release, specific fire doors have supplied numerous firedors to a lot of projects in the public sector and also privately as well. However, there could be other suppliers that have asbestos contamination in their fired doors as well. So there are further investigations by MBI and WorkSafe, which are ongoing. So watch this space. So I'm just going to put it out to the team. Uh, what are your thoughts, Rob?

SPEAKER_00:

Well, absolutely, and what you said there, Jason. I mean, fire resistant cores historically used asbestos. I mean, this was something that was done historically. Uh, so it's not really surprising um that this contamination has resurfaced essentially. Um, you know, we we are importing these materials from countries that have different asbestos regulations than than we do, and look at asbestos in a different light than than we do, is fair to say. It's not necessarily one supplier as well, I just want to be clear on that. Um, we are hearing things that we can't really repeat, but we we are hearing words that it's probably more suppliers that are sourcing the materials from similar locations, yeah. Yeah. Um if that country still uses asbestos legally to some degree, then contamination is not really an abnormal thing to occur in a product that's being shipped in. I think my real concern comes back to the supply chain, if I'm honest. I mean, if you understand that a country has different rules to you, you have got a full ban in place and you don't want that product coming into your country, and um, you know, you're you're purchasing a product from a country that doesn't have a full ban, then you really need to look at the supply chain. Is it being properly audited? Mandatory verification testing, are they submitting test results from products they're sending in? And are we on importation testing or doing some random testing of particular materials coming in from those high-risk countries? Yeah, it's bigger than one manufacturer. It's really a system issue that I would like to see because I mean, obviously, similar ways to the sand. We've got a very similar supply chain and a very similar outcome on things. So, yeah, my personal view is that that's where the focus really needs to be, because we've got this disjointed um system where we have a full ban and they don't, and we buy a lot of our products from from that country. So uh we need to put appropriate controls in place as a country, and that could be various different things to to fix that. But I suppose, you know, throw it over to you, Terry Ann, and say, you know, from your perspective, yeah, where where are you coming from with it?

SPEAKER_05:

Yeah, I mean, I'm in a similar opinion, but I one of the things that really concerns me at the moment, I mean, the asbestos in the sand in in toys is just terrific. But what I'm more concerned about in the long term is the fact that we're likely to see more building products come in from overseas. Um, and although that would be great in terms of seeing some of the costs of building products in New Zealand and things, but you know, building's expensive, right? We know the products are expensive. So having a more competitive market, having overseas products coming in is a great thing in many ways. But like you, I I I'm really concerned about how we're going to be able to police what's coming in in those products. And when I say this, I'm not just talking about asbestos, I'm talking about other things as well that might end up in there. That we don't know about. And I think two things. Firstly, the fact that they're there and that the testing might not have happened. But secondly, products that are non-homogenous. So products where you might have contaminants like asbestos or lead, where they're not proportional throughout. And that, you know, is the testing going to be good enough to actually pick up if there's some of that particular contaminant in one place on the product and not in the other? Like, how do we make sure that we really know what's coming into the country? And so, yeah, I do I do have concerns, and I do have concerns, particularly for building products, because we are expecting more to be coming in from overseas in the near future. So definitely something that we should be thinking about and and planning how we're going to approach this that might go beyond just asking for a material data safety sheet. It might go beyond that point.

SPEAKER_02:

Definitely. You've got to stop it at source, haven't you? But that's a difficult, that's a difficult prospect, really. Especially when you've got a lot of people say they order from an overseas supplier. I'm not going to mention the supplier, but there's a really cheap supplier. And they can order things in half as half the price or a third of the price. The quality's not as good, but if you're ordering a coloured sand from these suppliers, then it won't have been checked by the suppliers within that supply design within New Zealand.

SPEAKER_01:

AMC. Expertise you can trust. There is a new dawn in New Zealand. Property owners and organizations face increasing asbestos responsibilities. Asbestos management can be a complicated maze to navigate. Independent, impartial asbestos experts, helping you develop and implement effective asbestos management strategies. From document reviews and management plans to policies and asbestos training. AMC provides asbestos compliance solutions you can trust. Based in Auckland, trusted nationwide. AMC is one of New Zealand's most experienced asbestos consultancies. AMC, asbestos management consultants expertise you can trust. Visit our website to start your asbestos management journey today. Visit our website at www.asbestosmanagementconsultants.co.nz.

SPEAKER_02:

It can't be checked. Yeah.

SPEAKER_05:

And it's definitely that's definitely one of the problems, isn't it? Because you know, if a product comes in and it's checked out by a company like uh sorry, not a company, an association like brands, then awesome because they're going to go in and do the checks and they'll be doing structural checks and all the other things you'd expect of building products. And they're not the only ones. There's another one as well. I think it's called Qualmark or Safe Mark. Um, but that also, you know, they go through those processes, but it's things that are that are slipping in that might not end up going through those checks first, that perhaps we need to be thinking about and and how do we protect ourselves, especially we've become a nation of being able to order whatever we want from any country whenever we want, um, which is great, but slightly worrying.

SPEAKER_02:

Especially when the economy is down and people want to save money. So instead of spending$100 on some brake pads, I don't know how much brake pads cost,$100 over in New Zealand, they could maybe get them abroad from maybe$30. So they'll be saving$70, just for example.

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah, I mean, if if you think about it at source, you would say the introduction of mandary, mandatory pre-export certification. Long word there for me today. But I mean, that's really where I'm sort of looking at things, you know. Um, suppliers really should provide independent accredited confirmation that goods are asbestos-free. I mean, that should be standard. At the border, we should have that to reference when we get situations like this, you know. But then going on to border force and saying, what's wrong with a product like this where we've got history, you know, that makes a case that randomized border testing could be done. Uh, I mean, we're not saying test every item coming into the country. I think that would be massively unreasonable. But what we would say is the higher risk products like this that we're identifying should have a level of randomized testing done. Even if you know you're working in that space, it's gonna catch some of those things. So, for example, the fire doors, the cores were coming in. Did did anyone sample test that? And as you're saying, Terrianne, new products coming into New Zealand soon, which is again great. Um, but again, where did those products originate? I mean, we may be able to export in from Australia and Europe, but where did it come from originally? It could have bounced over two or three supply countries before it went round. And the question then lies in was it tested? You know, what what did we do to do it? And um, you know, I I I'm not necessarily in agreement with regulated supply lists because you do restrict what the industry can provide to you, as you talk about, because you push prices up, but I do think that randomized or or mandatory pre-export certification should be implemented because at least that gives us a level of assurity.

SPEAKER_02:

I I know recently they had the wind turbines over in Australia and the brake pads on that that are asbestos. So there's new products or there's new items coming out that are asbestos all the time that that people don't know about, and that's that's a frightening thing.

SPEAKER_05:

It's well it's really scary. Um sorry. It's really scary, I think. Um it's really scary, and I think one of the things we would need to define is when we're talking about asbestos free, does asbestos free mean the same thing in every country? Yeah, I mean for us, asbestos free means zero, it means none. Um, but I I don't know necessarily that it means the same in other countries, and so that needs to be established and and and kind of worked, you know, making sure that we communicate in that that we have a ban, and so for us it means no asbestos, and also just as you said, Rob, I think being able to look at those products and target the ones that you've got a fair suspicion that asbestos has been used for that product in the past, it may well still be, or really, especially in terms of the sand, anything that's mined, there is potential for traces of asbestos to get into that mined product. So it really should be checked. And so you don't necessarily, as you mentioned, again, check every single product because we we wouldn't be able to afford to do that. But I think just having uh you know some good lists and some good ideas around what might contain asbestos.

SPEAKER_00:

Absolutely. I mean, when you talk about the the wind turbines, I mean, I suppose we've all invested decades of our careers into managing asbestos safely that was put into our buildings. We've all been really happy when they banned those products and they've put controls in place to minimize the risks of people being exposed to it. But then to turn around after a fall ban in 2016 in New Zealand, everyone was overjoyed when that happened. To, you know, a decade later now, and seeing products, new products. I mean, wind turbines, you know, yeah, they they've got it. And you just think to yourself, really, another layer of checking, because we're trying to deal with what we've got in the country at the moment, and adding additional material to it is not really helping the case, you know, you're sort of going backwards in this as an industry. So, you know, I definitely support the ban, but as you say, Terrian, working with our uh neighbouring countries and and probably raising awareness with them around what we believe asbestos is from our determination and what they think it is, and uh finding a common ground, really.

SPEAKER_02:

Yeah, and should we prioritize children's products like the face paints, like the crayons, like the like the sand, because they're at the highest risk.

SPEAKER_05:

Oh, absolutely. I think without a doubt, we should be prioritizing those. And and I think again, we should be looking beyond asbestos, we should be looking at all the other things that might end up in children's toys that you know, because children don't behave like adults, you know, they they they do stuff that we wouldn't do, you know, things go in the mouth, things get thrown, and so we really have to just be aware about the use that and oh, and also the fact that they're smaller, their respiratory system's not as well developed. Um, and I'm not a medical professional in any shape or form, but you know, we're aware that they're developing, and and so we need to be protecting them. And and in the case of um harmful substances that can bioaccumulate, and those types of substances, when you're really young, you've you've got you know many years for that substance to start taking effect in your body, and so you know I think we need to be very aware of that. Um, someone told me something once which I hadn't ever considered, but that males produce sperm continually through their life, but females, the egg cells are already there at birth, and then they develop into the egg. So if you're exposed to harmful chemicals as a young female, then that actually can have an impact on the eggs that you produce for the future. Um, and you don't get a new load, they're there from birth for life. And and that I found that quite a worrying thought that you know it's another reason why I think we have to be really careful with protecting our young children, um, because you yeah, might might have something that has long-term effects. All right, so on to the next subject, and one of our favorite subjects, which is the approved code of practice versus the good practice guidance. Um, we're gonna have a little discussion about those two. And first of all, we're gonna pass over to Jace, and he's gonna explain a little about what they both are. And Rob's gonna tell us his honest opinion about both of those documents. So over to you first, Jace. Tell us a little bit about both documents.

SPEAKER_02:

So, as we know, the Health and Safety at Work Especials Regulations came out in 2016, and then later on in 2016, the approved code of practice, the ACOP, came out, which basically explains how to follow the regulations. So this year the WorkSafe have been working on new guidance, the good practice guides, they are aiming to remove the ACOP and replace with the good practice guide. So people have been saying that they both have different legal standing. However, if you were to prosecute a PCBU for especially related charges, would they not prosecute under the asbestos regulations, not the ACOP? Also, is the A COP still fit for purpose, especially in regards to swab sampling, which we will get into in a moment, which is no longer irons accredited. So, what are your thoughts, Rob?

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah, so this is uh a contentious one. I suppose just to give some history, uh coming in in um I come to New Zealand in 2015, uh, the year before we kicked off, really, and before we got the ACOP document. And coming from the UK, uh, for those that are from the UK, they realize that there's a whole suite of documents that are really designed around asbestos management in the UK. And if I'm honest, it can be quite frustrating because there is so much to go through and some conflicting stuff within those documents that we found. So really, when we got the ACOP that was um when it came out and I first read it, I was really happy. I was like, hey, we've now consolidated all this asbestos information into a simple document and it's user-friendly, images, the layout was pretty good, um, it wasn't overly wordy. I liked it. However, I will say quite quickly, you realize that it's more of a summary document of various areas, so the technical detail was sort of left out, really, and it was quite light on some of that. So working in the space for you know uh around five, six years, just doing that every day. I realized that actually there's quite a lot of grey areas here. We've got a lot of questions coming backwards and forwards on removals, responsibilities. You know, wording in the ACOT was, you know, you may it was seemed very weak to me in the way in which it determined what you should and shouldn't do. So that was quite disappointing. And just, you know, anecdotally seeing different people's interpretation of the same thing was also um pretty disappointing. So when WorkSafe contacted us and said, hey, we're looking at updating this, initially there was some discussion around updating the ACOP, which we know fully support that, uh, because obviously times change and things advance, and we'd learn a lot in that time. So you know, we started to work on that process with them, and then it came into the you know the discussion around the GPG good practice guides, which we've also got plenty of across the area, and they just provided that extra layer of detail and clarification to try and dispel some of that stuff. So, you know, disclaimer I was part of the group that done some work on that, um, and really helped work say through that definition process for the GPG. So, but we did notice quite quickly um people's when it was initially released that they were thinking about going for a GPG opposed to a ACOP document, there was some negativity thrown out there, and I just suppose to dispel some of that negativity, and from what I could see, is that a GPG document is far more nimble, it's is able to be updated as the systems change, as technology changes. What you really want is you know a way of explaining how to do things really clearly that can also be adjusted and edited by WorkSafe directly without the level of complexity required to update an entire ACOP and the resources required to do it, and then get it passed by by the minister. That takes an incredible amount of time. And for our industry being so wide and vast, and different areas of what we're trying to do, and technology changing so quickly, you know, my viewpoint was always that actually any document that provides a really good guide, the ability to adjust and update quickly without really complex interactions inside WorkSafe and up through the minister and so forth was something that I felt the industry would definitely benefit from. And to your point, Jason, absolutely. If the GPG is the document that we have in New Zealand, good practice guides for each of the areas of asbestos removal, they are the gold standard for what should be done under that. But ultimately, legal actions are generally now, there has been some under the ACOP, but generally they fall under the asbestos regulations and also the health and safety at work regulations where breaches occur. So I do think that there's some inconsistency in messaging out there, and that could have been much clearer uh from our work safe colleagues around that, but I do appreciate the position they're also in. But ultimately, everyone who has fed back really is looking to improve the industry and make sure that we are constantly going. But I suppose on one of the points specifically, I'll pass over to you, Jason. I mean, one of the points in the original ACOC, what's been a bugbear for all of us, is around swab sampling.

SPEAKER_02:

Yeah, so swab sampling. So you get a bit of tape and you collect some dust on a bit of tape, and you get one fibre on that tape, and it comes back, so it's basically presence and absence. So there's no quantity, you can't quantify that. And by disturbing that one expressed fibre, does it mean that it will exceed trace level, which is not point not one fibres per mil? It doesn't. So just going back to the regulations and the four-stage clearance, in the regulations it says that you've got to do surface testing. In the ACOP, the swab is an interpretation. Hopefully, in the future we will move over to dust disturbance as part of the uh stage three, as part of the air monitoring, because at least you'll get an ions accredited result. Whereas now with the swabs, uh you don't get an ions accredited result because the the swabs are no longer ions accredited. But there's also a lot of green areas around the swabs as well. So, for example, if you had a license inspection, so the visual inspection was fine, the air monitoring was fine, but say one of three swabs came back and it was positive that found a fiber of the asbestos on there. Now, this tester can make them clean the area, maybe a square meter where they've taken the swab from, capacity area again, or they can get them to clean the whole area, or they can just say you don't have to do any cleaning. So there's no rules connected to the swabs. It's just the surface testing that's mentioned within regulations. But as we're going into the swabs as well, there is historic evidence within the asbestos industry where consultants will go out and some of the clients within within construction or the public sector are not educated in asbestos. So they rely on the consultants and sometimes they may open a ceiling void, they might take a hundred twelve, and one comes back positive. And then suddenly you've got to clean the whole, the whole ceiling void, which is which is not right. And There should be some education out there in regards to swabs. And in my professional opinion, they should not be using swabs going forward.

SPEAKER_05:

And so I just want to say something to the listeners out there. If you're listening out there and you're thinking to yourself, oh, hang on a minute, these guys have already said that there's no safe level of exposure to asbestos. And now you're wondering why we're saying that you know a swab with one fibre doesn't necessarily mean that you have to do a full overhaul and a decontamination. It's because asbestos is actually part of our environment. So it's really not realistic to think that you will never find a fibre in a public building or going down a main high street. That's not realistic to think that your background amount of asbestos is zero. And so that's why we, you know, it's really important in this situation that you're having experts interpret that. And the problem with the swabs is that that doesn't always happen. Um, and so I I mean I've been in a situation, as you've described, the whole swab situation where it's all gone very, very wrong. Um, and lots of money was spent um very unnecessarily in this instance. So I'm totally with you on that one, Jason. But just in case you were wondering, that that that's the explanation. Um, Rob, over to you. Have you got anything else you wanted to add about that that conversation?

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah, no, definitely. Uh in personal experience, I mean, if we use an example, I always like to to do that. If we've got uh, you know, an aircraft hangar type uh environment, which is an enclosure where they're doing removals, and you go, okay, there's massive enclosure here, and there's one fiber found. Depending on the assessor doing the work, they can request a full reclean of that entire area. And that can take several days to do. And and that can also be deemed to be unreasonable on that basis, Terri. And so you could argument that if you say that one fibre there, if you run air monitors and disturbed it, it wouldn't exceed trace level. So it you may capture it, but it still wouldn't exceed trace level. So the likelihood of that uh being a danger to that level would would be negligible, if anything, at all. So in that space, you could up you could see you know why some of the removalists are getting frustrated out there in industry, where one assessor would pass that off reasonably, and another assessor would interpret it differently. Because when you actually read the ACOP to the word, it does give you the ability to be able to pass that off, even though one of them is positive. Maybe you did 10 swaps and one was positive. But depending on how you interpret it, most people go, Well, it's not really, it's a risk, you know. I'm a licensed assessor, I don't want to lose my license for you know passing something off that's deemed to be positive. So you end up getting that what I'd like to call the grey area that we've dispelled with the new GPGs, good practice guides, so that that is not one of those situations. I think I just want to be clear to everybody out there when you have good guidance like that that stops those types of events occurring, you reduce friction across the board. It looks like, hey, you've got more documents, but I would, you know, leave in and breathe in it, hopefully not breathing with my mask. Um, the situation for years, you're in a situation where you've removed that friction, you remove cost for the client, and and the job gets done quicker without as much stress. And as an industry, we need to also look at those things as well, because you know, it is quite scary for people when they see all these people with white suits coming in to do this removal. Um, but that said, we can make it easier for people and make it still safe but also practicable. So I think, and that's my view on it, is that this is only going to be a great, a great um improvement going forward really for the industry if this is something that is is passed and approved.

SPEAKER_02:

I also think that since uh they didn't have proper regulations before 2015 with the Health and Safety at Work Act and then the Health and Safety at Work and Specialist Regulations in 2016. So I think some of the asbestos industry people are scared to let go of the swab because that's that's all they know, and they don't they don't really fully understand it, in my opinion. So I'd agree. So I think going forward, uh like Teddy Ann is saying, there's no safe level of asbestos, but there is an acceptable level, which is 0.01 fibres per mil, which is the reoccupation, the acceptable reoccupation level uh after after you've uh done asbestos removal.

SPEAKER_04:

The asbestos still kills podcast could not be possible without another one of our sponsors, the Environmental Innovation Centre, EIC, are front runners in uniting innovation, research, and environmental solutions. EIC is an impartial, independent and science-based consultancy who will provide robust, reliable and independent evidence of your commitment to sustainability, practical, science-based solutions for ongoing environmental problems to support your longer-term journey. A single consistent voice to communicate complex scientific and technical issues to staff and customers. If you have publicly stated that you have sustainability goals, we are the team to help you achieve and validate them. For more information, go to www.environmental hyphen innovation.nz. EIC leading the change for a sustainable tomorrow.

SPEAKER_02:

Yeah, I think we've all stood in our salt boxes, especially me and Robin Rob, in regards to that. There may be people disagree with us. That's fine.

SPEAKER_00:

Is that we all know and we've all been working in the space and we understand things like um transmission uh transmission electromicroscopy testing, and the use of that can be really useful at various times throughout the asbestos process identification and/or clearances. And I would say that you know having a GPG gives the regulator the opportunity to include those into future revisions of that document without it being locked down like an an ACOP, which is generally updated every five to ten years in the making. And you know, we've made some really good inroads into TEM testing, especially for the asbestos and sand, um recently. So I would like to see the ability for that to be even considered as an option in future documents as well. So um, yeah, well, that's my point, as I said before, Jason, and I'll just leave it there. That's fine.

SPEAKER_02:

So moving on. So 2025, has it been a good year for the asbestos industry? Personally, I think it's been very quiet. So if the construction industry is quiet, then the asbestos industry is quiet because generally they go hand in hand. So what needs to change in 2026? How can we improve industry? Is it all government-led? So, what are your thoughts then, Rob?

SPEAKER_00:

Well, I've got a couple of key thoughts really for 2026 and what I'd like to see change. Really focusing on standardized testing and reporting. You know, it's been a bugbear of mine where industry goes out surveys and and and records information in all different formats, and it's really difficult for the client to understand what the risks are. We've got different risk ratings with different um different entities that define their own stuff. So that sort of really moves on to the work in the ACOP and GPG space because if the new GPGs do and are released, they do give that guidance. And that would be great for the industry because it gives standardized formatting, the requirements for things like a material assessment and a priority assessment, you know. So it's not just the material, it's about the likelihood of coming into contact with that as well. All of these things will just serve and help our help clients understand more the risk, and it takes it out of the area of oh, we don't understand that into the area of oh, that makes sense from a standard risk assessment. Also, I'd love to see some real strengthening and competency across the industry. Uh, and that's something with Famance that we are pushing really hard to do. And I've developed some courses myself. We're working with BOHS, so we're going to be run rolling out the um uh P402, P405, P404 in this year coming, uh, along with some other uh courses that we're developing in-house relating to uh TEM work in relation to collection of samples, you know, um, and also interpreting results because there's a different different skill set there. So really that will hopefully improve that competency. But a big part as well, and some work that you're doing in the space already, uh Terrian, is is going out to the public, going to your mitre 10s, you know, talking to the public, the people that are working in a home. So not just competency in the industry, but also competency outside of the industry when it comes to the public. Um, and what I'd like to see, and this is a bit of a tall order, uh, but something I'd love to see in 2026, is a national asbestos data system. As a government, we are a country of five million, okay? We showed through the COVID um event that we can, if motivated by the right motivations, we can gather together and work together, we can understand data on a national scale. Um, and I just really think that we've got vast sums of data around across New Zealand, which could easily be packaged up into a data system that we have, and there's plenty on the market we could use, but something like that sponsored or backed by the government and the regulator so that we all feed into a source, and you know, then we understand how much asbestos as a country we have, we understand the current uh risk rating of that particular asbestos and how it's been managed as a country and not individually. So, yeah, I think for 2026, um it could be a really positive year for us as an industry if we have the right support. Um, but ultimately, yeah, I would definitely like like to see that change in 2026.

SPEAKER_02:

Tania, what's your thoughts?

SPEAKER_05:

Yeah, well, I'm gonna go in reverse here because I I mean, Rob, you are absolutely speaking my language because as a scientist, I'm an absolute data geek. For me, the data bit's so important. And and we have, you know, myself and many many colleagues who are involved in research, because remember, research is my field. I don't I don't work in the asbestos industry, but within research, we've we've you know created big projects that look at exactly what you're describing. So, where is asbestos? Where are the hotspots in the communities? Where are the products we should be concerned about? Let's bring data and evidence together to actually provide frameworks for things like you know, if there's a flood or if there's a big fire, so that we've actually got great ways of not only informing the community, but also thinking about our emergency services and those guys being, and I should say guys and girls, but guys is just the term I use, um, though those people being those first responders first on the scene. Now, if they've got some idea that there might be asbestos there or there is asbestos there because we've got the data to back it up, imagine how that might change their approach and it might keep them safe for the future. So for me, a hundred percent, I'd love to see 2026 as the year of the big data gather. Um, will it happen or not? I I I suspect not, but we can only keep hoping. And then to come back to something else you said, Rob, and again, really love this idea that it's not just about the asbestos industry, and one of the things I love about the the good practice guides is that actually it does look at well, what about if you're in the trades? What do you need to know in the in that particular environment, which I think is brilliant, because we talked about a downturn maybe in the asbestos industry, and we and Jace, you said, yeah, you know, there's been a downturn in the construction industry. For me, having a lot of links with construction, I would really like to see better awareness in construction and trades. I'd like people who are involved in things like deconstruction and renovation to be much more aware of what might be lurking in buildings and also to be able to use the right language to ask for evidence to give them confidence that they're all clear and not just rely on the is there asbestos in it? Oh no, it's all good, I think. Because that isn't good enough, and I've heard that story too many times, particularly when we're talking about handling waste. Um, so I would like to see uh a recognition and an understanding so that people do feel that they can ask. And again, I've heard stories in with tradies, and one that came to my house, an electrician came to my house and and was telling me that you know he'd been told by his boss that he was had to drill through a ceiling and he suspected it was asbestos, and when he went, I don't really want to, his boss went, just do it, just get on with it. And and we need these young people to be able to say, actually, no, I'm not doing it, and and actually be able to do that. And that's that's a really big thing to be able to speak up. I think that's really a tough and brave thing to do, but the more we talk about it, the more will people will feel that they can do that, and I think that's important, especially moving forward. We're gonna be seeing more and more renovations as our building stock gets older. So, yeah, sorry, that was a bit of a reverse of what Rob said, but actually the same points.

SPEAKER_02:

Yeah, um absolutely, in regards to the workers on site, I've given asbestos awareness training before for the trades, and I've said, Have you ever asked for the asbestos survey on site? And because some of these are subcontractors, they're too scared to ask for the asbestos information because they're scared of losing the contract, which which is shocking, and it shouldn't be like that. They should be able to speak up. That's why they've got risk assessments on site. All all these companies got risk assessments, they ought to start using them.

SPEAKER_05:

So you're just giving me a really good idea. This is what we need to do, right? Let's do a podcast that's all about speak out, and we can actually give people information about you know what should you request? What terminology should you use? What do these things mean so that people have got the confidence to actually be able to go? Actually, I'm going to be doing this on this building. I would like to see this, this, and this. And and and maybe maybe that will help all round. And if you're listening to this podcast and you like that idea, let us know. Um, but maybe that's one for the future.

SPEAKER_02:

Absolutely. So just going back to 2025, I think we need to acknowledge the great work, Teddy Ann, that you've done for MSA Trust, uh, with your team over there, uh, with the board.

SPEAKER_05:

Thank you very much.

SPEAKER_03:

It's absolutely a team effort.

SPEAKER_02:

Yeah, absolutely, and and the research. Uh I don't I don't think you you get enough of uh appreciation really for all the hard work you've done. But also uh a shout out to Rob and also Craig over Craig Mansell over the Ministry of Education. Um they have put out a tender, they're gonna have a list of accredited suppliers, but also part of that is going to be the ISO 17020, which which we go back to standards, we about improving the quality of of the inspection surveys, and that will that will improve the quality of of the expenses, not only the inspections and the surveys, but also hopefully the quality of the false stage cleanances as well. So shout out to yourself, Rob, who started off NAMP and Craig, they're both doing a fine job over at Ministry Education.

SPEAKER_03:

So absolutely.

SPEAKER_02:

So moving on now, what do we have in store for the listeners and viewers coming up in 2026?

SPEAKER_00:

Rob well, a lot. We've lined up some major episodes coming up, starting off with um asbestos cement water pipes. We've got a Canadian specialist joining us to finally answer our asbestos fibers getting into our drinking water.

SPEAKER_02:

Interesting. Well about Teddy Ann, what else have we got coming up?

SPEAKER_05:

Oh, we've got some really exciting stuff. So, first of all, we're gonna be doing a really cool podcast on asbestos on beaches. So we had a concerned parent approach us to talk about the fact that he had found quite a lot of asbestos um on beaches in an area of Auckland, and he was really concerned about children getting into contact with it and what that might mean. And so we're gonna speak to him a little bit about what he's been doing and have some great discussion in that space and talk a bit about the research as well and what's been found in other places in the world. So that's first off, and then secondly, just to add to that, um, we are going to be taking the whole team over to Italy to meet with the University of Torino. No, only joking, we're not really going there, but we're gonna join with the University of Torino, and we have the wonderful Professor Elena Belusso. Now, Elena uh leads the way in terms of um looking at asbestos risk in our community, and one of the really exciting things she's been doing is looking at using um animals to actually track the movement of asbestos in the natural environment. And the great thing about animals, and in particular horses, the great thing about horses is that when you can see damage to lungs or evidence that there's been asbestos in that lung network, you know that you've actually removed any of the other competing factors. So things like smoking that can really make a massive difference in terms of developing cancer if you've been exposed to asbestos. Smoking isn't the horses do that we know of. So we can take some of those variables out, which means that we can actually get a better link with environmental asbestos tracking. So that's what she's doing over in Italy. She's gonna tell us all about it, and then in 2027, she's coming to New Zealand, everybody, and we're gonna have a look at whether or not there's animals that we can use in New Zealand to do that same sort of tracking in our natural environment. Very excited.

SPEAKER_02:

That sounds very exciting. We've also got asbestos in project management. So, for all you PMs out there, we talk about the seven steps to success. And we'll also have a project manager on. On the podcast talking about her experiences and how she's dealt with asbestos in her projects in the older buildings. So that's something to very informative and something to look forward to.

SPEAKER_00:

And also we have asbestos in homes. This is a big point for us. This really talks to all you DIYs out there, the DIY risks, legalities, disposal rules, everything homeowners need, but never really clearly get explained. So 2026 is all about education, clarity, and raising the national standards.

SPEAKER_05:

Brilliant. So with that very exciting lineup, we're just going to give a shout out. If there's anyone out there who might be interested in coming and taking part uh taking part on our podcast, we'd love to have you. We are looking for any guests who might be interested in talking about asbestos or any other really important environmental issues that you would like us to cover. If you are keen, please reach out to us and give us an email at asbestos still kills all one word at gmail.com. Please get in touch and we look forward to meeting you.

SPEAKER_02:

And finally, we would like to thank all of our viewers and listeners and wish you all a very Merry Christmas, a relaxing holiday, and a prosperous new year in 2026. Okay. Merry later.

SPEAKER_00:

Merry Christmas and Bobby. See you in 2026.

SPEAKER_02:

The Asbestos Still Kills Podcast. All rights reserved. Thank you for listening to the Asbestos Still Kills Podcast. Presented by Robert McAllister, Farman's Director, Dr. Terry Ann Berry, the Environmental Innovation Centre, EIC, Jason Lolner, Asbestos Management Consultants Limited, AMC. For more information on the Asbestos Stillkills Podcast, go to www.asbestasstillkills.com For more information also to read and accept the podcast disclaimer before viewing or listening to this podcast go to www.asbestillkills.com or contact us by email at asbestosstillkills at gmail.com For more information on the Merc Teleoma Support and Asbestos Awareness Trust please go to www.msatrust.org. Thank you.