Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2002, publiée 91ème session CIT (2003)

Convention (n° 139) sur le cancer professionnel, 1974 - Islande (Ratification: 1991)

The Committee notes the Government’s report. With reference to its previous comments, it draws the Government’s attention to the following points.

1. Article 1, paragraphs 1 and 3, of the Convention. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that new Regulations on carcinogenic substances are in preparation which are intended to replace Regulations No. 621/1995 on the same subject. It therefore requests the Government to supply a copy of the new Regulations once they have been adopted.

2. Article 2, paragraph 1. The Committee notes the adoption of Regulations No. 379/1996 on asbestos, amending Regulations No. 75/1983 on asbestos, the adoption of Regulations No. 870/2000 on restriction on importation and use of asbestos, amending Regulations No. 74/1983 on the same subject, as well as the adoption of Regulations No. 154/1999 on occupational limit values for pollution and action to reduce pollution at work, amending Regulations No. 401/1989 on threshold limit values. It notes the Government’s explanations as to the objectives of each of the regulations and on the measures to be taken in consequence pursuant to these regulations. The aim of the two regulations on asbestos is to restrict the use of asbestos and to prevent pollution and damage to health resulting from its use. For this purpose, the Government indicates that Regulations No. 870/2000 on restriction on importation and use of asbestos contain a general rule that asbestos and products containing asbestos are not to be imported, manufactured, sold, used or handled. However, Regulations No. 154/1999 on occupational limit values for pollution and action to reduce pollution at work provide for exceptions that might be granted from this principle in certain cases by the Administration of Occupational Safety and Health, that is the maintenance or reparation of buildings, machines or other equipment necessary to preserve their value, however, under the condition that the use of other less harmful materials is not possible. The Government adds that exemptions granted for the use of asbestos are generally limited to cases in which it cannot be replaced "reasonably" by another substance. Moreover, the handling of asbestos is permitted in relation with demolition work of buildings or equipment upon approval of the Administration of Occupational Safety and Health after a workplan has been submitted to the latter. In this case, the above Regulations No. 154/1999, although they are not exclusively applicable to asbestos, prescribe measures to be taken to minimize the pollution generated by the handling of asbestos as well as the measurement and the handling of asbestos waste. The Committee, noting the Government’s indications, requests the Government to specify the way the term "reasonably" is legally defined and to indicate the criteria applied to this effect, i.e. to explain whether the feasibility to substitute asbestos represents the sole criterion or whether other factors such as economic considerations might represent a decisive momentum in this regard.

The Committee finally notes the Government’s indication that a new Anti-Smoking Act No. 95/2001 has been approved by Parliament, amending Anti-Smoking Act No. 74/1984. According to the Government, the innovations of this new Act consist in the inclusion of provisions providing for: the determination of the maximum level of harmful substances in tobacco and tobacco smoke; the interdiction of smoking in all premises to which the public has access and in which cultural and society functions are carried out, in particular tighter restrictions on the permission to smoke in restaurants; and the confirmation of the employer’s obligation to ensure that the worker’s right to work in a smoke-free environment is respected. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to supply a copy of the new Anti-Smoking Act for further examination once it is promulgated.

3. Article 3. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the Government’s indication that a special campaign on the registration and monitoring of the use of carcinogenic substances was planned, since no register concerning the number of workers covered by the legislation was set up. Since the Government’s report does not contain any information in this respect, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether this campaign has taken place in the meantime and, if that is the case, to provide information on its outcome.

4. Article 6(c) and Part IV of the report form. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Administration of Occupational Safety and Health inspects the workplaces on a routine basis. The Government further indicates that measurements of hazardous substances in the workplace are rarely conducted, i.e. only in cases where there are concrete grounds to suppose that regulations are not respected. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to specify the indicators conducting the inspectors to the conclusion that regulations are infringed and therefore the measurement of hazardous substances is to be carried out in the workplace. The Committee further notes that, according to the Iceland cancer registry, between the years 1965 and 2000, a total number of 22 men and seven women were diagnosed of being affected by the disease mesothelomina, of which ten cases have been reported since 1995. However, the interrelationship between the disease and the occupational exposure of these persons to asbestos is not known. The Committee, noting this information, requests the Government to indicate whether these cases are analysed in order to determine whether or not the above disease was induced by their exposure to asbestos in the course of their work. Moreover, it invites the Government to continue to supply information on the practical application of the Convention in the country.