No progress months after rushed Roberts St demo

Back on 1 April 2008, I received an email from a director at the Office of Housing regarding my asbestos concerns in the demolition of the 47-unit derelict public housing estate at Roberts Street, Northcote. Given WorkSafe approval, he said, 'there is no need to further delay the work as the sooner we start the sooner tenants can be housed and I am sure you would support this.'

Indeed I very much support the timely housing of public tenants, but given that five months later the site is still lying vacant - the demolition having been completed in April - the community is entitled to ask just what was the rush to demolish the contaminated estate given valid residents' concerns about the management of asbestos in the process?

Readers of this blog will recall that just days before asbestos removal started on a day of extreme winds in Melbourne (Wednesday 2 April), the Office of Housing and Northcote MP, Fiona Richardson, were pressured to hold the only public meeting on the issue in the face of a raft of unanswered questions that were to remain inadequately addressed when the works started.

With the land now lying vacant for months despite a 40,000-strong public housing waiting list, it seems the real rush was to kill the asbestos issue. Gone from Housing's redevelopment site is the asbestos audit, and indeed any mention of asbestos on the site. They're pretty good at cleaning up public interest information. It's almost as if the issue never existed, but you can still read all about it here.

Update on WorkSafe response

It's been a while since I wrote an update on the Roberts Street issue, so, with the flats now well and truly gone, it's high time I reported the outcome of my attempts to get useful information out of WorkSafe about asbestos inspections during the demolition.

The last time we left our trusty workplace safety watchdog (14 May), I had received a call from Executive Director, John Merritt, and was unusually hopeful of some answers. A bit later that day, I received a call from a senior officer at the local WorkSafe office, whose statements, in my view, raised more questions than they answered. I perhaps somewhat impolitely instructed him over the phone to get back to me with some answers, and fired off another email to Merritt detailing the shortcomings of the response so far.

The following day (15 May) I received a string of bullet points from our safety guardian that...failed to answer the central questions about this issue. Merritt's response varied from that received over the phone a day earlier from the local office regarding the nature of the works undertaken on 2 April and the time inspectors were on-site. It should also be mentioned there were a number of differences between the account by the local office on 14 May and the account it gave on 2 April, the day asbestos removal works began at the Roberts Street Northcote site. Anyhow, I suppose we are to take Merritt's response as the official line.

That being the case, Merritt states in his 15 May email that no external works took place on 2 April, and that the works that did proceed took place inside, in 'confined areas'. These last words were a new addition to the WorkSafe account, and presumably put there to counter the unseemly possibility that 'inside' meant inside the units at Roberts Street that had broken windows or missing window frames and that were therefore potentially open to the extreme wind conditions on the day.

There was no mention in Merritt's email of what was meant by 'confined' and what checks were made to ensure that no work was done inside the units open to the outside.

Merritt also states in the email that the inspectors, in the course of their inspection on 2 April, discussed procedures for removing asbestos in 'adverse weather conditions', and also discussed the 'inclement' conditions themselves. Judge for yourself whether this answers the central question, asked time and time again, as to whether WorkSafe advised or directed that works finish early that day (as two accounts suggest they did) due to the weather conditions - namely, extreme winds that left thousands without power across Melbourne.

What WorkSafe's response really highlights is that they are unwilling to meaningfully answer hard questions where it involves the actions of a government department, and the potential for political embarrassment of a government that has touted exemplary asbestos safety in a major public housing redevelopment. It would be a very bad look indeed if WorkSafe publicly stated that asbestos removal had proceeded on a day when weather conditions argued against it, even if, as WorkSafe has stated, internal removal works under the prevailing conditions were permitted under the asbestos regulations.

A few hard questions and WorkSafe becomes so tangle-footed they're lucky they're not up on a building scaffold. And what does this show about the WorkSafe ads Tim Holding cites when defending the Victorian Labor Government's excessive advertising spend? They're a rather black joke - propaganda about public safety is not the same as accountable and transparent action to protect it.

WorkSafe silent after radio challenge

A couple of weeks ago (30 April), I happened to catch WorkSafe Executive Director, John Merritt, talking about workplace safety on Radio National's Australia Talks program. As WorkSafe had failed to respond to questions I raised with them about video footage of an asbestos-contaminated Roberts Street Northcote demolition site, I thought I'd challenge John on air about how disclosure by regulators - or in this case, non-disclosure - might contribute to creating a culture of safety in the workplace.

As an example, I asked John whether it should take two calls and six emails to WorkSafe to get a response on an asbestos issue. He said that it shouldn't, and claimed WorkSafe had been corresponding with me on the matter. I pointed out that I had received no response on the video footage, including to emails I had sent to him personally. He said he was 'happy to take it offline' and I left my details with the program - not, I must say, with any high hopes for any answers. Guess what? I was right. Complete silence has been the only response from WorkSafe following my on-air radio challenge.

If you go to the page for the Australia Talks workplace safety program, about two-thirds of the way through the audio you can hear for yourself my questions and John's response, including his happiness to take the issue offline. You can also read my post in the guestbook. Also online, however inconvenient for WorkSafe, are links to the Roberts Street asbestos coverage on my blog from Holding Redlich's OHS magazine, as well as the OHS magazine of Trades Hall, SafetyNet (see under 'Asbestos News').

For more background on the specific questions arising from the video footage, see this earlier post.

So, are we going to get a response, John? You'll know about this post, because I'll be sending it straight to your inbox, as well as to the WorkSafe information email address. Please feel free to leave a comment. Maybe you can explain the lack of a response by your organisation, or even answer the questions I've asked about the video footage.

Update: Early this morning (Wednesday 14 May) I received a phone call from WorkSafe Executive Director, John Merritt, and again put forward my case for a response from the safety watchdog on asbestos removal works at Roberts Street Northcote on Wednesday 2 April. It is the first response of any kind from WorkSafe following my referral of video footage taken on the day, and I hope it will lead to some answers. Watch this space.

WorkSafe yet to respond on asbestos video

WorkSafe, a division of the Victorian WorkCover Authority, is yet to respond to questions asked last week surrounding film of asbestos workers on a public housing redevelopment site on Wednesday 2 April, a day of extreme winds in Melbourne.

On that day, asbestos removal began at the derelict Roberts Street Northcote estate, with workers filmed on-site in full protective gear, including half-face respirators.

Following a report to WorkSafe's advisory line at about 9.30am, advice received from WorkSafe late in the afternoon indicated that a morning inspection sometime after the filming found that works were proceeding 'in accordance with regulations'. Worksafe also advised that regulations permitted asbestos removal inside on such days. Works did, however, finish around midday (earlier, according to one resident), with the watchdog saying this was likely because of the wind.

The as-yet-unanswered questions arise because the film of workers on-site on 2 April taken together with an earlier film of the estate cast doubt on whether asbestos removal inside actually meant inside units with smashed windows and, in at least one case, no window frame at all. What WorkSafe has so far failed to answer is whether any asbestos removal work on 2 April took place in units open to the outside extreme wind conditions in this way. Was this question even asked on the morning of its own inspection? Did it in fact order or advise that the works be stopped because of the wind?

Queries about the film were sent to a number of senior WorkSafe officers, including WorkSafe Executive Director, John Merritt. A written response was requested, given that WorkSafe was clearly aware of community concerns about asbestos safety with this project because it had attended a public meeting on 28 March in the adjacent park.

Since the minister for housing, Richard Wynne, the Office of Housing, and Northcote MP Fiona Richardson have all been touting the asbestos safety measures for the project, it is beholden on WorkSafe to hold the government to account and prove it is not a toothless tiger when it comes to asbestos safety. It should answer the questions posed by the two videos, and come clean about what questions were asked and what action was taken during its inspection on Wednesday 2 April at Roberts Street Northcote.

The films about asbestos at the Roberts Street estate are available at:

http://www.youtube.com/lewinhill

Housing continues its slack public disclosure

You wouldn't know from the Office of Housing's Roberts Street website that asbestos removal works started on the site yesterday. As of about 6.00pm tonight, the site still showed that works had been delayed, even though they'd updated the site yesterday to put the control plan up. The bureaucrats may just be slow, but for community members who have only recently become aware of the issue, a Google search will deliver the site as the top search result and they will consequently be misled about what's going on in their local neighbourhood.

Slow web updates aside, what you also can't expect from the Office of Housing, housing minister, Richard Wynne, and Northcote MP Fiona Richardson is any kind of explanation about why they directed or were prepared to allow works to proceed on such a windy day. I have sent WorkSafe a link to my video taken in yesterday's extreme conditions and have requested their response to the issues I believe it raises. At the very least, the video provides quite reasonable grounds for concern and valid questions in the public interest.

Add to that the start of the works just days after the government's only public meeting on asbestos safety in the project, the lack of any commitment to release the results of further testing, let alone the results of air monitoring (including for yesterday), and you can clearly see that the poor public disclosure on this project results in as few people as possible becoming fully informed about what is going on.

The good news is that the YouTube videos made of the site are reaching a few people courtesy of this blog (55 views for the first video and 13 for the second as of this writing). To see an update on viewer numbers, have a look at my YouTube video profile page Viewers who happen to find the videos independently at YouTube are also directed to further information on this site and to my email to ensure they have the full details, can ask questions, or leave comments – whether they agree with me or not. How long will it take Housing to get its far better resourced website up-to-date?

As usual, questions, comments and debate are most welcome.

Roberts Street asbestos removal on film

As promised, here's a short YouTube video of asbestos-related activities at the Roberts Street Northcote public housing estate covering from Monday to yesterday morning. I speak to the workers from outside the safety cordon towards the end of the clip.

To play the video, hit the triangular button at the bottom of the embedded video, or view it directly at the YouTube site.

To read about my dealings with the Office of Housing, WorkSafe et al during the day, please read the previous post, 'WorkSafe visits a very windy Roberts Street'.

Comments and email are most welcome.

WorkSafe visits a very windy Roberts Street

Having reported the asbestos works at Roberts Street in today's windy conditions to WorkSafe around 9.30am this morning, as 4.00pm approached I decided to follow up, given there had been no phone response on the mobile number I left with them.

Instead of again calling the advisory line, I decided to call Steve Peters, a senior WorkSafe officer from the Preston office who had attended last Friday's public meeting and provided useful information.

Steve said a WorkSafe inspector had attended the site later this morning following my visit to the site between 8.45 and 9.15am. He advised that, while WorkSafe was bound by privacy provisions, and the inspection was between WorkSafe and the company, the inspector had found works proceeding in accordance with regulations. He added that works stopped at lunch and agreed this was likely because of the wind. Steve further advised that asbestos removal proceeding inside would not be a problem on a windy day.

Soon I will post YouTube footage taken on-site over three days, including the start of works today (the likely start advised by workers yesterday did not pan out, for whatever reason). The footage raises questions worthy of further investigation in that hammering noises on the footage appear loud enough to be external to the flats, window frames (and quite possibly doors) are missing on some units, and workmen in full protective gear were filmed with a ladder on one of the upper-level walkways visible from the High Street frontage.

While the time of WorkSafe's visit has not been confirmed, it seems to me that between my visit and theirs, there was plenty of scope for works to proceed that were quite arguably inappropriate given the conditions. The point I made to Steve in our discussion this afternoon was that, on its face, the circumstance of asbestos removal proceeding on a day of very high winds was at the very least concerning.

I hope the Office of Housing, in particular, appreciates this perspective – especially given the demonstrable lack of disclosure about asbestos on the site and the closeness of the start of the works to its only public meeting on the issue last Friday.

The 6.10pm response from Housing's Ed David to the 10.56am email to Steve on which Ed was copied was simply: 'Noted. WorkSafe have been in discussion with us. It is under control.' In fairness, I had earlier alerted Ed by phone and he had said an inspector would be sent out there. However, one is justified in asking what is under control? – hopefully it's the asbestos management on site. Of course, so-called 'privacy' means we are unlikely to find out what actually took place on-site, let alone in Housing's 'discussion' with WorkSafe.

Needless to say, there has as yet been no response from Richardson and Wynne on this issue, despite contact with their offices this morning by phone and email – unsurprising, really.

Finally, this post was significantly delayed by my phone service being interrupted this afternoon. What can I say? It was just too windy.

Public meeting too close to start of asbestos works

There'll be more on this soon, but here are my initial thoughts on yesterday's well attended public meeting about the asbestos-contaminated Roberts Street Northcote public housing estate. The meeting was held by the Office of Housing at the adjacent Baden Morgan Reserve.

WorkSafe representative, Steven Peters, advised that notification of asbestos removal had been received by WorkSafe that day, allowing the works to proceed on Tuesday 1 April (next week). This is only a day later than the 31 March date I had been told over the phone by senior Housing official, Ed David, and shows what little regard for public concern is held by the Office of Housing – there's really just this weekend and Monday between the expression of quite a few unaddressed concerns and the start of the works.

Remember also that Housing was ready to proceed back on 11 March – without the so-called FAQs they posted on their website only on 14 March, without releasing the asbestos control plan, without telling us who the asbestos removalist is (WorkSafe told us anyway), without a commitment to release the results of further testing, and without last night's public meeting, which was forced by community pressure that has included an independent community meeting held at the park on 5 March.

Last night Northcote MP Fiona Richardson, who chairs the community advisory committee for the project, said little, avoiding questions raised with her consistently since November last year, including in unanswered letters in January and earlier this month. Despite her prominent role in the project, Richardson's approach was to allow Housing officials to take all the heat.

Ed David, Director of Housing's Property Services and Asset Management Division, was among them. He avoided confirming a start-date but was undone by WorkSafe's advice about the notification it had received that allows the 1 April start mentioned above. Despite being just days away from the start of the works, the asbestos control plan, according to David, was still not in its 'final form'. He would also not commit to the release of the plan, and seemed unaware of a commitment to do this in the FAQs published on Housing's own Roberts Street redevelopment website

Nor would he commit to the release of results from asbestos air monitoring to be undertaken during the removal and demolition works. A local resident raised the strong point in this regard that by the time monitoring showed safe levels had been exceeded, it would already be too late.

A theme to emerge from Housing was that it would follow proper procedures with asbestos regardless of the effectiveness or otherwise of any public communication. I noted in response that asbestos laws did not guarantee there would be no breach in safety, and that, regardless of the legal framework, any increased transparency would result in greater government accountability – a good thing when it came to asbestos.

Points raised about the demolition contractor's track record on asbestos, and about the very low fixed price of the demolition contract ($161,150 including asbestos removal) were skated over by Housing, but remain of concern.

They were also dismissive of the fact that the asbestos removal sub-contractor, while legally licenced by WorkSafe as a class B removalist, is not included in Victorian Trades Hall Council's register of recognised removalists (List 80). The sub-contractor has therefore not signed the VTHC's stringent code of conduct that goes beyond the legal asbestos licencing requirements administered by WorkSafe.

The VTHC advised me before the meeting that improvements could be made with regard to asbestos safety in Victoria, and that WorkSafe last year agreed to work with the VTHC by re-establishing an asbestos activities reference group to look at strengthening inspections and addressing problems.

The meeting left unclear the status of the park during the demolition. Again, just days before the works begin, clear details about what will happen with the park did not really emerge, and a likely road closure of Roberts Street was raised without a commitment to publicise the details well in advance.

Were there any positives to emerge from the meeting? Yes. The fact that it happened at all was a good thing, despite an agenda having been set without public notification, the poor timing of the meeting, and the inappropriate proximity to the start-date of the works.

There was also some clarification of what will happen with asbestos 'mastics' (rubbery asbestos containing sealant used on panels in the flats). There appears to have been a shift from the position indicated in the tender documents, such that mastics will not now be left to fall with the rubble, but will be carefully removed beforehand. Good.

Another positive was the level of community engagement. People clearly responded to the community letterboxing, despite poor promotion of the meeting by the Office of Housing. There were just a few among the audience not wanting an open debate, but they were not across the detail and were ineffectual in the face of a clear public will to get some answers. There were also many good questions from active local residents apart from myself, while many others have worked to publicise the meeting among local families.

Also positive has been the responsiveness of WorkSafe in answering my inquiries, and in the attendance by Steven Peters at the meeting. Steven advised that residents could ring the WorkCover advisory number 1800 136 089 should they see anything happening on the site that causes concern. He also told me after the meeting that an incident board would be installed near the site, providing up-to-date information about incidents/issues of concern during the asbestos removal and demolition process – a positive step.

Victorian Trades Hall Council has also been very responsive on this issue with information and advice in the lead-up to the meeting, and in facilitating contact with WorkSafe and other relevant parties. The VTHC clearly has a key role in advancing occupational health and safety, including the appropriate management of asbestos.

What should happen now? Well, Fiona Richardson took down some questions she's really already had quite a few times over past months, so these should be published with responses on the redevelopment website without delay. Among the information to be provided, we should have all results of further testing on the site, a response to the call for the public release of air monitoring results, an honouring of the commitment in the Housing FAQs to release the asbestos control plan, and clear explanations of what will be happening with the park (including how it will be protected) and the closure of Roberts Street.

There's a lot here still not on the table given the proposed 1 April start. That start must therefore be delayed for at least a week after all the above information has been provided and publicly notified through a letterboxed update. That way there will at least be some minimal timeframe within which the released information can be publicly scrutinised and further questioned as needed. Fiona Richardson and the Office of Housing must be open and quickly responsive to any new questions that arise in that period. Unless these steps are taken, last night's public meeting will be mere lip-service to public concerns about asbestos at Roberts Street.

Questions? Send me an email, or call 0404 526 555. You could also email Fiona Richardson or call her electoral office on 9481 5777 to express your concerns.

Stay tuned for more following review of the digital video recorded at the meeting.