space Press Releases, News Stories

ENDS Daily

Nor, says the decision, does France have to pay any compensation to Canada. Canada complained that chrysotile or 'white' asbestos was not dangerous when correctly handled. The ruling finalises an interim decision delivered to the two parties last month but widely leaked (ENDS Daily 16 June).

The four WTO arbitrators found that the French decree was not a technical regulation and so could not fall foul of rules on "technical barriers to trade." They consulted experts on the pathogenicity of chrysotile, risk assessment methods, the feasibility of controlled use and the risks of alternatives. While the decree violates WTO equal national treatment requirements and discriminates in favour of alternatives, it is "justified" as a measure for protecting human health says the still confidential report. The European Commission has proposed a ban on all forms of asbestos throughout the EU, and wants to see chrysotile outlawed by 2005. It says that no safe, non-carcinogenic level of exposure has yet been scientifically established.

Five EU member states - Spain, Portugal, Greece, Ireland and Luxembourg - still permit import and use of chrysotile. Canada contended that France's outright ban was not based on adequate science. And it argued that chrysotile was safer than many alternative products when used and installed with adequate safety measures. However, the EU said that such measures were not always possible in practice. The ruling remains subject to appeal by the Canadian government, which is keen to protect 2,500 jobs related to chrysotile mining in Quebec province. Canada is the world's leading exporter and second largest producer of chrysotile after Russia, producing some 320,000 tonnes in 1998, and accounting for 18.2% of global output worth around euros 212m annually. Follow-up WTO (http//www.wto.org), tel +41 22 739 5111.