P

DO NOT USE THIS PAGE

SCROLL DOWN

YORK VISIONTuesday October 27th, 2009

VISION INVESTIGATES: CAMPUS' TOXIC SECRETSNEWS4 YORK VISION

Tuesday October 27th, 2009NEWS 5

TOXIC ASBESTOS information is being suppressed by the Uni-versity, Vision can exclusively reveal.

The University has repeatedly failed to give details about the lethal substance, even breaching the Free-dom of Information Act (FOIA) to prevent the data from going public.

FAILUREThe persistent failure to provide

information accompanies an asbes-tos policy which is leaving students in the dark over campus’ toxic dan-gers.

Coordinator of the FOIA Centre, Mark Watts, has slammed Uni se-crecy. He told Vision: "They have no choice but to answer these requests. By not responding, the University has acted improperly."

He added: "Clearly it's a student issue and they have the right to know. In the end, students want an answer."

But when asked to provide stu-dents with more information on asbestos, Uni top dogs have continu-ally suppressed statistics. Countless requests to see documents have been ignored and denied, even though students legally have the right to know details on asbestos. In total, 3 out of 4 separate inquiries have been turned down since the summer.

In August, the University turned down a Freedom of Information request. A blunt email response stated: “the University does not feel that it is appropriate (to report asbestos statistics)... Asbestos is an extremely emotive subject.”

UNINFORMEDWidespread unawareness of

asbestos is making it unlikely for students to report potentially toxic hazards.

Resistance by the University to release information may be dam-aging to its asbestos management. The substance only becomes lethal when broken, meaning that on campus it is vital for all damage to be reported.

Investigations by Vision began after finding a broken ceiling tile that was speculated to contain as-

bestos. Although it later turned out to be safe, dozens of students and staff have gone months without re-porting the potential threat because they were completely unaware about asbestos risks at the Univer-sity.

DENIALDirector of Facilities Manage-

ment Keith Lilley has since admit-ted that everyone should be entitled to the information. However, no ex-planation or apology has been given for the apparent secrecy or neglect of Freedom of Information laws.

The University denied accusa-tions of secrecy, claiming: “We have always been open that there is as-bestos on campus. Indeed, the Uni-versity has a website dedicated to the issue.”

But Government rules in the Freedom of Information Act state: "public authorities must comply with your request promptly, and should provide the information to you within 20 working days."

CLUELESSUni secrecy is leaving students

with no idea about the York's hidden dangers. According to a poll by Vi-sion, 67% admitted they had no idea about where asbestos might be and how it can become a threat.

A further 82% said they would not report any damage unless they were certain it contained asbestos. Given the apparent lack of transpar-ency within the University, very few hazards are likely to be reported by students quickly.

One 1st-year student told Vision: “I would feel a lot safer on campus if I knew where the asbestos was.”

She added: “I’m sure the Uni have it under control, but it’s re-ally bad that students are never told much about it. They really shouldn’t keep so quiet about it.”

SILENCEDBefore Vision's Freshers’ Week

edition, Uni bosses pressurised the paper to drop an asbestos article in a last-ditch attempt to prevent damn-ing reports reaching York's new students. Without any backing, the newspaper was forced to withdraw articles from the publication.

York’s silence over asbestos is particularly worrying for students given the levels of the substance on campus.

A statement from the University claimed: “The health of students and staff at the University is not at risk from asbestos.”

LEGACYAsbestos use in the construction

industry peaked in the late 1960s when much of the University was built. Uni bosses have since admit-ted that campus has been left with a “legacy of asbestos installations to manage.”

Data obtained by Vision in 2003 showed that areas worst plagued by the substance include the main blocks of Langwith, James, Vanbrugh and Derwent colleges.

Buildings including the infa-mous 'Cell Block C' in James College, Fairfax and Hes Hall are largely free from asbestos.

BY MARTIN WILLIAMS

For FOUR MONTHS, Uni top dogs have supressed campus asbestos data. They have de-nied a lack of transparency but emails from the

University suggest otherwise...

July 31st FOI request sent asking for details on asbestos in student bedrooms.

August 13thUni break Freedom of Information laws by re-fusing to give Vision data. An email stated they did “not feel that it is appropriate” because it “could lead to possible inflammatory reac-tions.”

September 16thUni receives a fresh request, this time to access asbestos database. Although they previously admitted Vision was allowed to see this info, they failed to give the data or give any explana-tion.

August-OctoberVision repeatedly made requests for ANY sta-tistics on asbestos installations on campus. Uni staff failed to provide any documents, arguing it would “depend on how Vision would use it.”

October 5thUni fails to show up at a meeting with Vision.

October 6th

Damning investigation report sent to Univer-sity.

October 7thEmergency meeting called. After Vision accuse Uni of breaching FOI laws, top bosses agree to accept a new inquiry but do not explain their secrecy.

October 9thUniversity pressure Vision to drop asbestos reports for Freshers’ Week edition.

October 23rdUni issues a statement refuting secrecy over asbestos. They do not apologise for breaking laws or denying asbestos info.

"Buildings across the Uni-versity campus do contain asbestos but this is inevi-table given the widespread use of asbestos as a building material for much of the 20th Century. Any building, in-cluding homes, schools and

hospitals, constructed before 2000 can contain asbestos.

It is not the presence, but the management of asbestos which is the key to safety and we have a comprehensive strategy in place to meet our legal duties and the duty of

care we have to our staff and students.

The health of students and staff at the University is not at risk from asbestos.

We have always been open that there is asbestos on campus. Indeed, the Uni-

versity has a website dedi-cated to the issue that con-tains substantial amounts of information and contact details for anyone with as-bestos-related concerns."

A SUMMER OF SECRETS

"We have always been open that there is asbestos"

From the Uni's offical statement.

How Uni bosses kept silent over

asbestos "THE UNIVERSITY

HAS ACTED IMPROPERLY...

STUDENTS HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW."Coordinator of

Freedom of Information

Centre, Mark Watts

Director of Facilities Management, Keith Lilley

CENTRE OF THE STORM:

"In the end, students want an answer"

THE VOICE OF

Four months ago we started emailing the University about the asbestos situation on campus. When we did

this, one thing became immediately obvi-ous - they didn't want us to know.

If the University start acting secretly about such serious issues, we're in a very worrying situation.

Most people presume that this place is riddled with asbestos, but the truth is, most of us really have no idea. When you break something in your student bedroom, are you sparking a potentially lethal hazard? Will the University health and safety team come to the rescue straight away, or should we go and report it?

These are questions most of us don't have answers to. But we should!

It is understandable that the University want to keep its students calm, but emo-tions can't be prioritised above health. Whilst it is true that most asbestos is only a danger when it is broken, wouldn't it make sense to know where it is so we can report it when it gets damaged?

The University's confidence that they are doing a good job to manage the sub-stance will do little to brush away the fact that they repeatedly refused to give out the details on campus' dangers.

Vision is still awaiting an explanation or apology from the University for its stub-born refusal to grant students the right to get this information.