Environment Minister Pamela Gordon yesterday challenged would-be asbestos waste disposers to prove they can get immunity for the Island against claims for damages in the future.

She was speaking after two separate offers to get rid of Bermuda's asbestos problems in US waste dumps.

Government said US landfill was not an option because of the huge expense of insurance policies which would be needed to protect Bermuda from claims for health damage in the future.

But the two businessmen insisted they could arrange indemnity for Bermuda -- a claim backed by a spokesman for a South Carolina landfill site involved in one of the proposed deals.

Ms. Gordon said: "Not one of these statements we have heard have been clear about third party indemnity.

"If they have got information we don't have and they can prove it, then obviously we are ready to come to the table.'' But she added that the best advice Government had got was that an open-ended insurance policy would be needed "forever'' to counter possible claims for damages in the future.

Ms. Gordon said that Government was aware that indemnity could be obtained for transit of waste and for the burial site.

But she questioned what might happen after a site closed and said there would be a limit on insurance after a waste tip ceased operations.

And she added: "People can actually sell a landfill site for future use -- we can't take the risk of something happening if we are not covered by a site's insurance.'' The Government said its advice was that the US government refuses to give immunity to countries which have potentially hazardous waste buried on its soil.

A spokeswoman for the US Environmental Protection Agency said the precise legal situation on asbestos originating from a foreign country was unclear.

She said: "Asbestos is a bit of an anomaly because it's not handled under the regular waste laws.

She added that she had been told Bermuda would not require an insurance policy of its own -- but added that "there might be some kind of binding requirement''.

The spokeswoman said the waste would be subject to shared responsibility between the government which originated it and the disposal company.

But she added: "The EPA doesn't have a specific requirement saying the Bermuda government has to be insured in perpetuity -- but they have to sign on as a party to the disposal.

She admitted she could not say for sure if Bermuda might lay itself open to legal action in the future if it did not carry its own insurance.

But she said: "If they are handling the waste properly, it would seem to me there wouldn't be a problem.'' There are currently 165 containers awaiting disposal. Government is known to favour dumping at sea as the safest and cheapest option because cancer-causing asbestos is only dangerous if particles become airborne and are breathed in.

But international green guerrillas Greenpeace, however, have vowed to campaign against sea dumping and disrupt operations if sea disposal is chosen.

The Greenpeace threat came despite Government assurances that Britain has said sea dumping is legal, while the London Convention on marine pollution is set to change its protocol on sea-dumping to take account of the problems of small islands like Bermuda -- although still forbidding the dumping of waste by larger, richer countries.