All agencies were aware of the need to manage asbestos risks and had registers and AMPs. This is a significant improvement on our 2007 findings when none of the agencies had complete and up-to-date registers and AMPs. However, just three of the seven agencies managed their known asbestos risks well and demonstrated better practice. These agencies had regular inspections, remediated high-risk asbestos as a priority, kept up-to-date records, provided staff with training and communicated the risks to staff and others.

We identified elements of better practice in the other four agencies, however they had room for improvement. These agencies remediated or removed known high-risk asbestos as a priority, but their registers and AMPs were incomplete or not up to date. In addition, weaknesses in their training or communication meant staff and others were not adequately informed of the presence of asbestos. These issues could mean that staff, workers or other occupiers of the building inadvertently disturb asbestos or do not take appropriate measures to avoid exposure. If the register is not updated following remediation, the agency could also incur additional costs.

BMW effectively managed asbestos in capital works projects and the government properties it looks after. However, it needs to improve the asbestos inspection and register services it provides to other agencies.

Since 2010, there has been no single agency responsible for coordinating asbestos management. This led to inconsistent reinspection timeframes and risk ratings for asbestos and duplication of inspections. In addition, it is not possible to advise what it costs government to manage asbestos as there is no central agency collecting this information, and only three agencies we looked at kept these records.