Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 29 April 2004
6 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government his plans for the introduction of deposits on aluminium cans, PET bottles and other such containers to encourage reuse of packaging, which happens in other EU member states and which is recommended in the national anti-litter strategy of July 2000. [12277/04]
View answerDirective 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste is based on the concept of producer responsibility, which effectively requires producers to contribute to the waste management costs of products which they have placed on the market at end of life. Under the directive, Ireland was required to achieve a 25% recovery rate of packaging waste by 1 July 2001, increasing to a 50% recovery rate by 31 December 2005. Practical implementation of the directive in Ireland is organised mainly through a collective industry-based compliance scheme operated by Repak, which is working successfully and which met the target of 25% packaging waste recycling required under the directive in 2001.
The progress of the scheme is now being further facilitated in a number of ways. As indicated in the recently published Taking Stock and Moving Forward policy statement, copies of which are available in the Oireachtas library, implementation of waste management plans is advancing, assisted by my Department through the environment fund.
Second, the 2003 packaging regulations require those who place packaging on the market to segregate their back door packaging waste and have it collected by authorised operators. Bottles and cans sold and consumed in pubs, clubs and hotels are all covered and must be recycled. The latest indications are that Ireland is on course to meet the higher recovery and recycling targets for end 2005.
Successful deposit and refund schemes operating internationally are generally located in those countries where there has been no break in the continuity and cultural tradition of deposit and refund arrangements. This is not the case in Ireland and it is likely re-establishing deposit and refund arrangements would involve significant costs. Account would also have to be taken of the impact on existing compliance arrangements. Given that these arrangements are achieving the desired result in terms of meeting recycling targets, the introduction of deposit and refund schemes is not under consideration.
Ba mhaith liom buíochas a gabháil leis an Aire Stáit as an freagra. He said there are many reasons not to take up initiatives but we should try to find ways to improve policy and follow best practice. The national anti-litter strategy, Taking Pride in our Environment, dates from July 2000. One of its key recommendations is to address litter pollution through a system of returnable deposits. Is the Minister of State turning his back on the recommendation? Having invested in the report, will he follow through on it? Has he another proposal to reduce waste given that the Government has overseen an increase in waste year on year? Does he agree that, according to best practice in other countries, deposits on returnables works and that it worked in Ireland previously? It should be reintroduced.
Deposit and refund schemes for used beverage containers operate in a number of countries and the Scandinavian countries feature prominently in this regard within the EU. Sweden has used deposits on cans since 1984 and on PET beverage containers since 1994. Recovery rates in excess of 75% and, in some cases, of more than 90% have been achieved in respect of the beverage containers to which the deposit and refund arrangements apply. The only other EU member state offering a deposit and refund scheme is Germany, which has only recently introduced such a scheme on non-refillable containers that hold carbonated soft drinks and water. However, the scheme has experienced serious operational problems. I accept recommendations were made in the national anti-litter strategy in 2000.
In black and white.
I accept recommendations were made. A total of €13 million per annum is available through the plastic bag and landfill levies and I have not turned my back on the recommendation completely. However, I must examine the overall context and take into consideration what has happened in Germany, the logistics involved and the problems the retail sector could face.
I refer to the contribution to Repak by vested interests in the retail sector. Will the Minister of State outline the scale of Repak's investment? There is a concern at the lack of investment, despite the significant charges that are levied. The responsibility for administering the previous returnables scheme fell to retailers. I agree with the Minister of State that, unless another methodology is employed to administer the scheme, it will be fraught with difficulty. Repak is levying significant charges. Will he explain the scale of its investment and where it is taking place?
Does the Minister of State accept the following recommendation in chapter 3.4.11 of the national anti-litter strategy: "Beverage cans and PET bottles are significant sources of litter pollution, which could be addressed by means of a system of returnable deposits and, because of the danger they involve and their impact as litter, glass bottles should also be considered for inclusion in such a system"? Is he turning his back on the recommendation or will he implement it? Does he accept a similar scheme worked in Ireland previously and countries outside the EU consider it successful in terms of minimising litter and waste overall?
The Deputy has raised the litter problem resulting from fast food packaging, ATM receipts and chewing gum and the economic sanctions that could be taken. A number of recommendations have been made and they are under consideration. My previous reply referred specifically to PET packaging.
With regard to Deputy Perry's question, I do not have the information on investment he requires. However, Repak is playing an important role in recycling. It was established by industry as a voluntary producer responsibility initiative to promote, co-ordinate and finance the collection and recovery of packaging waste, with a view to achieving Ireland's packaging waste recovery and recycling targets specified under the EU directive on packaging waste. Member companies pay annual fees based on the type and volume of packaging material placed on the market and they are used to subsidise the collection of waste from both the household and commercial sectors.
Repak is playing an important role and Ireland is on course to achieve the target set down by the EU of 50% by end December 2005. Repak processes all packaging waste whether it is cardboard, paper or glass, wood fibre or aluminium. We must continue to support it and remind all consumers and businesses that they have a responsibility to the environment. It is not the Government's country but the people's country, and people have that responsibility. We are making major advances, although perhaps not as quickly as we would like.
The level of waste is growing.
We are victims of our success.
It is failure.
