Delays in Asbestos Removal Put Gauteng Schoolchildren at Risk

Nearly three decades into the 21st century, dozens of schools in Gauteng, South Africa, still harbor buildings made of or containing asbestos, putting thousands of schoolchildren at risk of serious health issues. Despite a clear mandate issued by the Department of Basic Education in 2013, which set a strict deadline by 2016 for the removal of all asbestos-containing structures in schools, a recent report indicates that significant progress is lacking.

As of 2024, at least 29 schools in Gauteng are reported to have asbestos within their structural materials. Bronwynn Engelbrecht, a member of the provincial legislature and the DA Gauteng education committee, has voiced significant concern over the government's apparent negligence. "This is a disgrace on the part of the Gauteng government," Engelbrecht remarked, pointing out the unnecessary risk posed to learners, teachers, and school staff.

Asbestos, a once-popular building material favored for its versatility and fire-resistant properties, was widely used in South African school constructions during the 1970s and 80s. However, it was later found to pose severe health risks, including lung cancer and asbestosis, particularly when the material is disturbed and its fibers become airborne.

The complications of asbestos removal are considerable. Leonard Momberg from Simplified Industrial Business Solutions detailed the rigorous procedures required, which include strict containment measures, special waste handling, and protective gear for workers to prevent any escape of asbestos fibers during the removal process.

The ongoing presence of asbestos in schools has drawn fierce criticism and action from various quarters. Equal Education, a prominent NGO focused on educational rights, has been particularly vocal, staging demonstrations and demanding accountability from the government.

In response to inquiries, the Gauteng Department of Education deflected responsibility to the Department of Infrastructure Development, which has yet to provide a satisfactory update on the progress of asbestos removal. Meanwhile, Engelbrecht cited schools like Everest Primary and Noordgesig Primary as examples where asbestos removal has completed, suggesting that successful removal is feasible with adequate attention and resources.

The Department of Labour underscores the legal implications, noting that any exposure to asbestos that puts individuals at risk is prohibited under national health and safety laws. Contractors handling asbestos must adhere to stringent regulations and obtain necessary certifications to ensure safe and effective removal.

Community disruptions and non-performative contractors were cited as reasons for the stalled asbestos removal. However, these explanations have done little to mollify public and political outrage over the dangers that these delays pose to children's health.

With the health risks well-documented and the public's patience wearing thin, the calls for a definitive timeline and increased transparency in the management of asbestos removal projects have intensified. The community expects regular updates and clear accountability from those in charge as they demand a safer learning environment for all children.