MADAM,

A letter in the Beacon dated 26th April 2017 from S. Kneafsey (21st Century Schools) told us that each building demolished on the Monmouth Comprehensive School site was subjected to a full and intrusive survey to identify asbestos and other notifiable elements. Done by professionals, the results were submitted with plans for removal to Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and when approved a licence was issued before work started. He also said that small bits could remain in the ground.

This letter was written after demolition had been completed and construction had started. It was written in response to my letter also in the Beacon of the same date, in which I had said that I had seen children in close proximity to workers in protective clothing amongst the rubble. Mr Kneafsey made no mention of ‘unanticipated’ asbestos found on the site. In last week’s Beacon (12th September 2018) the council tells us of a £350,000 clean-up bill for ‘unanticipated’ asbestos on the site. Mr Kneafsey made visits to the site.

The article tells that the development was part of a £90 million investment in new-build schools by the council and Welsh Government. In the Beacon dated 13th September 2017 the council told us the budget figure was £85 million. By simple arithmetic applied to the figures in that article, the budget figure for the two schools was £34 million. Say £17 million each.

Last week’s article also said that the site was fenced off and posed no dangers to pupils.

Recently in the national press, I read of a man that died at the age of 62 from mesothelioma.

This was put down to the fact that as a youngster he had played football in a field near an asbestos factory. Asbestos dust carried in the wind does not stop at fences. When lime was spread on the site, the visible white powder did not stay within the school grounds. Children should not have been on the site.

I wonder if Health and Safety visited the site and approved the removal of the ‘unanticipated’ asbestos and the spreading of lime. It’s my opinion that both MCC and HSE did not consider the safety of pupils.

G Powell

(Monmouth)