Vol. 522 No. 4
4 Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government when the proposed levy on plastic bags will come into operation; the steps being taken to ensure that retailers provide shoppers with alternatives to plastic bags; if he intends to apply the levy, on a pro rata basis, to other larger plastics bags, such as those used for fertilisers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18845/00]
Following a public consultation process regarding the 1999 consultancy report on plastic shopping bags, I recently brought proposals to Government with regard to the implementation of our commitment to tax such bags. The Government has agreed to the introduction by the Revenue Commissioners of a levy to be imposed on the manufacture in Ireland, or the importation into Ireland, of plastic shopping bags for use in the Irish market. The proposed levy will be at a rate such that, when VAT and retailers' costs are included, it will result in a flat cost to consumers of 10p per bag. This levy will be complemented by a requirement on retailers to apply an equivalent charge per bag.
The implementation of the proposed levy requires enabling primary legislation. Requisite legislative provisions are being regarded as a matter of priority and will be incorporated into the earliest available legislative vehicle. It is my intention that the proposed levy will be introduced early next year.
The primary purpose of the proposed measure is to directly influence consumer behaviour and achieve a significant reduction in the consumption of plastic shopping bags dispensed at retail outlets as their current widespread use is unnecessary and is a primary source of litter. I make a distinction between such bags and plastic bags used as primary packaging for products such as fertiliser. I do no have proposals at this time to levy such primary packaging.
It is a matter for decision by retailers whether and to what extent they are prepared to provide customers with alternatives to plastic shopping bags. It is of course open to customers to utilise reusable bags or other containers for shopping purposes.
Why did the Minister depart from the recommendation contained in the consultant's report to the effect that this charge should be levied on supermarkets and the suppliers of plastic bags rather than consumers? Why has the Minister now decided to impose the charge on the consumer? Does the Minister agree that the type of primary packaging such as plastic fertiliser bags to which he referred causes huge environmental problems and has, in particular, caused huge land drainage and flooding problems in recent years? The Minister drew a distinction between primary packaging and plastic shopping bags. Does he intend to levy a charge in regard to unnecessary plastic packaging on products such as sliced bread, meat, fruit and other products?
It would be a waste of time and energy to levy this charge at source as it is consumers who are responsible for the bags ending up as visible litter pollutants caught in flagpoles, ditches, hedges, telephone poles or lying on the roadside, along canal and river banks, etc. It is the end customer, not the retailer, who is causing the pollution. The imposition of a charge at source would not have any effect from a litter point of view and this levy is primarily an anti-litter measure.
On primary packaging such as fertiliser bags and land drainage, I am aware of the problems to which the Deputy referred, particularly in County Galway. There was huge concern about this matter at one stage. There has been an improvement in this area since those incidents occurred. It was silage wrapping rather than fertiliser bags which allegedly caused the problems in Galway. The Irish Film Producers Packaging Association has a fantastic record on the re-use and recycling of such plastics.
In regard to the differentiation between so-called biodegradable shopping bags and ordinary shopping bags, it does not matter to members of the public or make a difference to the litter problem whether a plastic bag which is fluttering in the breeze is biodegradable as it is still an unsightly piece of litter. The biodegradable bags have the advantage of disintegrating over a period of three, four or six months, but members of the public or tourists would not find it any more acceptable to see biodegradable plastic bags fluttering in the breeze. It would be extremely difficult to make a distinction—
The time for this question has expired. We must proceed to Question No. 5.
