The lethal impact and current status of asbestos in British universities

Despite the UK banning all forms of asbestos since 1999, some of Britain’s leading universities are struggling to fully manage the extensive asbestos still in their buildings.

Following a review of thousands of pages of internal documents obtained through public records requests for 35 universities founded before 1985, Confront can reveal the extensive impact of asbestos on universities. We found at least 60 to 81 people have made claims against the universities for contracting potentially fatal asbestos-related diseases, that most campuses examined still had significant amounts of ‘high-risk’ or ‘medium-risk’ asbestos, and multiple instances of universities seemingly failing to fully comply with the regulations designed to protect people from exposure today.

Because asbestos-related diseases can lie dormant for many years before symptoms begin, people exposed today often won’t become ill for decades. But once they do, it is usually fatal. So, to understand the harm done by asbestos, we must examine past exposures.

Michael Williams was exposed to asbestos as an undergraduate at the University of Birmingham, where he studied physics between 1970 and 1974. In his final year he worked in a service tunnel conducting experiments on the speed of light. Also in the tunnel was thermal insulation for pipework, containing asbestos.

The lagging on the pipework had degraded, and asbestos fibres were airborne. Williams spent no more than 78 hours in that tunnel. It was enough for him to later develop mesothelioma, a terminal cancer – with no known cure – almost solely caused by asbestos exposure. The husband and father of three children died in 2006, aged 54.

The Williams’ claim against the University of Birmingham was unsuccessful. The court ruled while he was exposed to asbestos in the tunnel, the university was not liable, given the lack of information on asbestos it had at the time.

Major asbestos companies and the government, however, were aware that even brief exposures to certain types of asbestos could cause cancer by the mid-1960s. While five types of asbestos were banned in 1985, it took until 1999 to implement a complete ban on all asbestos. After this, the government was left with a choice on how to manage the millions of tonnes of asbestos in Britain’s buildings.

In 2002, it chose a strategy of managing the legacy asbestos in situ indefinitely, making owners of commercial and non-domestic buildings legally and financially responsible for ensuring the asbestos it had was not airborne. Schools, hospitals, and universities, among others, had to comply with new regulations known as the ‘duty to manage.’ This can be an immense undertaking for universities, which sometimes own hundreds of buildings.

Asbestos can be found in walls, paint, cement, flooring, old appliances, rope, ceiling tiles, insulation, fire doors, and electrical components. It can be everywhere, from student accommodation, lecture theatres, and boiler rooms to offices, sports halls, and laboratory equipment.

To uncover the extent of asbestos in university buildings, Confront requested information on the amount of known asbestos-containing materials.

We found that the average number of known asbestos-containing materials among the 21 universities we have information on is 4,276; the highest numbers are at the University of Cambridge (7,768) and University College London (7,711).

All asbestos-containing materials can release fibres into the air, however some pose a greater risk than others. Asbestos-containing materials that are well maintained and have the fibres encapsulated don’t present an immediate risk, but this can change if they degrade, are disturbed or damaged. This can happen over time, or through accidental disturbance – such as from tradespeople, construction or maintenance workers.

Therefore, all known asbestos materials are assessed by risk on a scale from low to high. This is determined by several factors, including the type of asbestos fibre, its condition, its likelihood of being disturbed, and its location.

Eleven universities that provided a full breakdown of the asbestos on their campuses had some classified as ‘high-risk.’ This includes the University of Liverpool with 208 instances of high risk asbestos in its register, University College London (UCL) (142), Cambridge (108), Leicester (53), Queen’s University Belfast (QUB) (35), Durham (27), Oxford (24), Bath (24), Bristol (7), and Newcastle (4).

In some instances, Confront has been provided with information on the location of high-risk asbestos. For Liverpool, Bath, and Newcastle, the high-risk asbestos-containing materials are contained mainly in plant rooms, ceiling voids, or vacant buildings. For QUB, a surveyor has been unable to access the spaces to complete a survey.

Medium-risk asbestos is far more widespread and is often found in communal spaces, including corridors and offices. The University of Oxford had the highest percentage of medium-risk asbestos (46%).

Not all universities shared details about the extent or risk profile of the asbestos in their buildings. The reasons given varied.

Some had the information Confront requested but did not disclose it. Aston University cited an exemption that the information was commercially sensitive, refusing to share even an overview of the amount of asbestos in its buildings, writing, “Please note that this data is commercially sensitive. We confirm that we hold the information requested, but we consider that it would be contrary to the commercial interests of the University to release it.”

An Aston University spokesperson later added, “Details of the entries on the asbestos register are commercially sensitive for the reasons set out in our response to your freedom of information request. The University commissions annual reinspection and surveys of the asbestos by an external company, reflected in the Asbestos Management Plan.”

The London School of Economics (LSE), Leeds, Nottingham, and Sheffield provided the number of asbestos-containing materials but not their risk profiles.

Four universities, Warwick, Reading, Keele, and Glasgow, did not provide summaries or documents on the volume and risk of asbestos due to how the information is currently stored. Information for seven universities that have provided information or are in the process of doing so will be updated in due course.

To prevent future deaths from asbestos, there are strict rules in the UK for those with a duty to manage asbestos.

Central to this is awareness of where the asbestos is and what condition it is currently in. Therefore, an up-to-date asbestos register is mandatory. Per the regulator for asbestos management, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), at a minimum, an asbestos register must include “all known and presumed asbestos-containing materials in your buildings, its type, how much asbestos there is and its condition, including dates of the original and last inspection,” alongside assessments on the potential for fibres to be released and the likelihood of disturbance during the day-to-day running of the building.

Yet from documents Confront has obtained, two university’s asbestos registers appear not to meet the minimum standard set by law, one university is still using asbestos surveys for some buildings from 1994, another university is without a functioning asbestos register, and contractors at one university weren’t routinely being given information on the location of asbestos they could accidentally disturb. Several universities also refused to disclose documents, or their contents, which would shed light on how they have been managing their asbestos.

Since we first approached the University of St Andrews in September 2024, it has not had a working asbestos register. It explained that it no longer had access to its old register, that it was creating a new one because the old register was on a third-party system and it had not retained a copy. It would not say when it would be done.

Responding in November about what it was doing in the interim, a university official responded saying: “A process is in place to a) review the scope of works against the asbestos information that is currently held e.g. existing asbestos survey reports relevant to the locations where work is to be carried out; b) carry out an asbestos information gap analysis; c) fill any gaps identified by surveying (where required); and d) provide the required information to the contractor.”

The University of Aberdeen’s asbestos register obtained by Confront did not include information on the condition of the asbestos, nor the dates of the original and last inspection. When asked, the university did not provide further comment.

Newcastle University’s asbestos registers obtained by Confront also did not include dates of the original and last inspection. The registers included 165 examples of comments citing “urgent” actions or to “restrict access” that are supposed to be taken – sometimes for medium-risk asbestos, with no information on when these comments were made, or whether the actions were completed.

“All our buildings built before 2001 have an asbestos management survey,” a Newcastle University spokesperson said, “which are regularly reviewed through inspections which take place at least annually.” They also added that Newcastle has “a fully compliant Health and Safety Executive (HSE) asbestos register.”

The University of Kent did have information on inspection dates in its asbestos register, but the version obtained by Confront had 261 instances of asbestos inspections which appeared overdue by a year or more. The university has not responded to requests for comment.

In 2023, the University of Bristol commissioned an audit of its asbestos management processes for the over 4,400 different asbestos-containing materials across its campus. The audit examined 63 categories on a scale from 1 (‘outstanding’) to 5 (‘inadequate’).

All 63 categories were marked as requiring minimal improvement (30%), requiring moderate improvement (50%), or inadequate (20%).

The audit further revealed:

• “omissions in the provision of asbestos data, some high/medium risk materials with no auditable control measures in place.”
• “a lack [of] routine checks by staff and contractors to assess the presence of asbestos in their work area, including where the fabric of the building is to be disturbed.”
• “those requiring access to information on the location of [asbestos-containing materials] are not routinely accessing the [register] nor in turn providing information on the presence of [asbestos-containing materials] to contractors, this poses a significant risk to the University of Bristol.”

The university shared details of actions and progress made since the audit to improve its processes, including creating a task force and hiring new staff. A University of Bristol spokesperson said, “Over the years, we have removed asbestos from properties undergoing refurbishment, where this is achievable as part of the project, and maintain the campus with the help of specialist consultants and contractors. … Our Asbestos Policy and Management Plan ensures that any risk to our staff, students, contractors, and visitors is managed effectively. We comply with building and safety regulations to ensure this always remains the case.”

Imperial College London also had an audit covering asbestos management in 2024. Several issues were identified.

It said that Imperial’s primary source of information on its asbestos is still a college-wide survey conducted in 1994, supplemented by more recent and detailed local surveys and projects when applicable.

The audit also found that reinspections had not adhered to the recommended frequency, that the asbestos registers were not consistently maintained, and that the asbestos management plan was out-of-date — with the position granted legal responsibility for implementing the management plan being “no longer valid.” The report found that these factors combined “poses a risk to effective asbestos control.” Imperial did not provide a comment.

Several others, including Oxford, Nottingham, UCL, and LSE, have not disclosed any information about the outcomes or contents of their audits in response to Confront Freedom of Information requests.

A UCL spokesperson said: “As with many buildings constructed in the 20th century, some buildings on the UCL estate contain asbestos-containing materials. To manage this we have a stringent Asbestos Management Plan, based on best practice national guidelines and requirements, as set out in the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012. These measures are designed to ensure there is no risk posed to our students, staff, or visitors to our campus.”

Some universities have had recent audits – and told Confront they had passed – including Queen’s University Belfast and the University of Southampton.

When asked why several universities appear to have had issues in their asbestos management processes, the regulator HSE did not respond to comment.

In total, 19 of the 32 universities that supplied information to Confront have had at least one claim relating to asbestos exposure. These universities confirmed between 60 and 81 recorded claims made for contracting asbestos-related diseases. The range is because some universities did not disclose the exact number, citing data protection exemptions. Furthermore, 11 universities only provided partial records, and some have withheld the information completely.

Queen’s University Belfast (12 claims), Imperial College London (8), University of Bath (7) and University of Cambridge (6) reported the highest numbers of claims. The universities of Kent and Oxford cited data protection exemptions and did not supply any information. The University of Reading is in the process of supplying its data to Confront, albeit only since 2020, as it cited an exemption of being ‘manifestly unreasonable’ to manually interrogate documents which would give a fuller historical picture.

Not all claims against universities were successful. Some claims are ongoing, were rejected, or were withdrawn. In some instances, it would not be possible to prove that the person developed their asbestos-related disease from the university — if, for example, they worked multiple jobs and had other potential sources of exposure.

This was true for Nicholas Brett, who worked as a clerk of works for the University of Reading from 1983 to 1988. He died of mesothelioma aged 75 in 2001. A Court of Appeal judge said: “While the evidence was sufficient to enable the court to infer that Mr Brett came into contact with asbestos in the course of his work at Reading University, it was not sufficient to show, or to support an inference, that the university had failed to take necessary steps to protect him from inhaling it.”

HSE says that for every mesothelioma death from asbestos exposure in the UK (2,268 in 2023), there is another death from lung cancer caused by asbestos exposure – though some scientists argue this is an underestimate.

Mesothelioma is almost always caused by asbestos exposure and makes up a vast majority of asbestos claims across the UK, according to multiple lawyers Confront spoke with. Lung cancer from asbestos exposure is far more complicated. It has numerous potential causes, and proving liability can be complex. The victim may also not know asbestos contributed to their illness, especially if they weren’t working extensively with it.

In part due to misinformation by the asbestos industry, public awareness about the risks of asbestos developed unevenly. Their campaigning extended to universities.

“The asbestos legacy in the UK is shameful, it is a tragedy that just keeps going on and on”

In 1967, the University of Leeds Safety Committee produced a memorandum outlining the health risks of asbestos. Leeds was proposing measures to limit the risks from asbestos in its buildings, such as a total ban on blue asbestos and certain guidelines to prevent asbestos fibres from becoming airborne inside its buildings.

These discussions came to the attention of the largest asbestos company in the UK, Turner & Newell. In internal company documents seen by Confront, they were “very much concerned about this memorandum and its dissemination.”

Major asbestos companies insisted that only very dusty conditions caused asbestos diseases and that these conditions were from a bygone era before the industry knew of its harms. In response to an enquiry from the University of Sussex, they wrote, “There is no evidence to show that anyone has ever had their health impaired by occupying a building where asbestos or asbestos-based materials have been used in the construction.”

The asbestos industry body, the Asbestosis Research Council (ARC) also discussed travelling around universities and colleges where research on asbestos was being done, in order to “hold discussions with the people concerned and endeavour to persuade them not to rush into print with alarmist statements unless they are sure of their facts.”

Turner & Newell, among other companies, were also aware asbestos causes asbestosis (a potentially fatal lung condition) by the 1920s. The industry also knew of a connection between asbestos and lung cancer by the 1940s. Nevertheless, global production of asbestos did not peak until 1977.

These misinformation campaigns enabled asbestos products to continue being sold, particularly in the 1960s and 1970s, despite the health risks. The UK has one of the highest rates worldwide for mesothelioma. According to HSE, over 5,000 people a year die from asbestos-related diseases in the UK – more than road traffic accidents and homicides combined.

There is also a financial cost to universities. Asbestos removal is expensive, so the cost of managing and cleaning up this asbestos today is not insignificant for universities – some of whom are facing broader financial difficulties.

Confront has information on 13 universities for how much they’ve spent on asbestos removal. The nature of the responses makes a like-for-like comparison impossible – as some provided details for all asbestos costs, and some could only provide partial figures due to how asbestos costs are categorised. Nevertheless, since 2014 these 13 universities have spent in excess of £88 million on asbestos removal and associated costs.

This includes over £20.05m for Sheffield, £16.27m for Edinburgh, £10.23m for Leeds, £8.4m for Cambridge, £8m for UCL, £7.5m for Exeter, £5.9m for Glasgow, £3.32m for St Andrews, £2.9m for Nottingham, £2m for Aberdeen, £2m for Imperial, and £1.92m for Queen’s University Belfast.

Campaigners warn as asbestos products in older buildings age and deteriorate, a new national plan is required to better manage the risk. A Department for Work and Pensions House of Commons Select Committee in 2022 proposed a phased removal plan of asbestos over 40 years. The government at the time, led by the Conservative party, declined the proposals.

“The asbestos legacy in the UK is shameful, it is a tragedy that just keeps going on and on with no end in sight unless something changes,” said Liz Darlison, CEO at Mesothelioma UK. “It’s everyone’s problem as no one is spared the risk but it needs government to really grasp it, to bring people together and put the wheels in motion to address the situation.”

If you want to reach out to Confront with any tips or leads, you can do so here.