re: Ozone hole bigger than ever.
As far as I recall they said it would have a delayed affect, and it was this delayed affect which provided the strongest argument to ban.
As far as I know we simply didn't have enough science to support this ban, but the risk was high if the prediction were correct, and the costs were "relatively low" to take the precaution. And that was it was fairly easily banned. The supporter of GW would "like" to use this same model- predict dire consequences and underplay the costs. But it didn't work.
On a TV program I saw on it quite awhile ago, they said it would take 50 years for this stuff to work through the system, so I would guess they still have about 10 years left- before they are completely proven wrong.