We are pleased to appear before the committee. Deputies on this committee will be aware that the Dáil debated this matter in February 2005. A motion was moved to introduce a national waiver scheme but the Government moved an amendment, supported by a majority in the Dáil. This gave the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government an opportunity to set out the Government's policy on the issue. I will set out that policy and update the committee on developments since the debate.
Waste management services have the particular characteristic of being planned, administered and delivered at local or regional, rather than national, level. The Minister referred to waste management services as being the quintessential local service. The Government provides the national policy context and the Oireachtas provides the legislative framework in which the services operate. This has implications for the charging decisions taken at local level but, ultimately, decisions on service provision by local authorities, private contractors or a combination of both are made at local level, as are decisions on charges and waivers.
Everyone appreciates that we have moved rapidly to a more sustainable approach to waste management than was the case in the past. Traditionally, very little was invested in waste management and we relied on low-technology landfills. Waste management consisted of digging a hole in the ground and burying waste in it. There was little emphasis on recycling and little discussion of ideas such as waste prevention and minimisation in the early 1990s. In a short time everything has changed. The Oireachtas has introduced a comprehensive legal framework, the Government has introduced a comprehensive policy framework and we manage our waste in a manner that supports sustainable development. We have the capacity to support the rapid economic expansion, social development and population growth that has occurred while ensuring that the environment and human health are protected.
Comprehensive infrastructure, such as recycling facilities, had to be set up so that we could attain high rates of recycling. Whatever waste goes to final disposal — at present it is all sent to landfill — should be dealt with in the most environmentally sustainable manner. The Government, local authorities and the private sector have made a concerted effort to achieve a modern framework. We have far fewer landfills than we had and every landfill must be licensed to operate to the highest environmental standards. Old landfills that did not meet this standard have been closed down. A large recycling network has been set up, with bring banks and civic amenity sites. The number of households with access to segregated collection of dry recyclables, namely, green bins, has increased dramatically from approximately 70,000 in 1998 to more than 500,000. I previously got into trouble by describing the bins used as green because the colour coding in some counties is different and the green bin is not for recyclables. I use the phrase in its generally understood context.
More than 50,000 of those households now have a third bin, reflecting the start of the roll-out of segregated collection of organic waste. A great deal of money was invested in this expansion by local authorities and the environment fund. More recently, additional Exchequer funding was also provided. A capital grants scheme established in 2002 has provided in excess of €50 million to more than 90 recycling projects. All of this has paid off with quite dramatic improvements in our recycling performance. In 1998, 9% of municipal waste throughout the country was recycled. The Government published a policy statement setting a target of 35% to be achieved by 2013. In 2004, the figure was 34%. In six years, Ireland achieved a target which it had given itself 15 years to reach.
However, this development comes at a price. The scale of the investment and ongoing maintenance of modern high-tech systems operating to extremely high environmental standards must be reflected in charges levied, whether by public or private sector operators. The setting of such charges is a matter for individual local authorities or private operators, subject to the national policy context set by the Government. It has been the policy of successive Governments that these charges should take account of the polluter pays principle, in line with EU and wider international best practice. In other words, charges for waste services should reflect the real costs of providing them and should be paid by those who generate the waste. The Oireachtas included an explicit provision to that effect in the Waste Management Act 1996. The past number of years has seen a switch to use-based charges, such as pay by weight or bin tags. This is intended to reward those who generate least waste and who are most active in recycling. Obviously, the precise charging mechanism in any given area depends on local circumstances and costs and the technology which is chosen.
Every local authority has the power to make a waiver scheme where it is the service provider. Where it is not the service provider, it has the power to make appropriate arrangements with the private sector. In this way, local solutions can be tailored to local circumstances with proper application of the subsidiarity principle. Ideally, any such arrangement should not be a blanket waiver but should seek to reflect the polluter pays principle and incorporate an incentive to recycle waste. Most of the waiver schemes already introduced, particularly in local authority areas, tend to be blanket waiver schemes. If one qualified, one paid nothing and if one did not qualify, one paid everything. That has begun to change during recent years.
From the surveys we carried out we see that in practice, where the local authority provides the service directly, waiver schemes are available but where services are provided by private collectors, waiver schemes are not available. However, local authorities have the power under existing provisions to make special arrangements in the case of hardship if they consider it necessary. Some local authorities do so, although on an extremely limited scale.
Waste management was the subject of a special initiative under Sustaining Progress. In that context, my Department worked with the Department of Social and Family Affairs to see whether we could identify any scope to provide assistance towards waste collection charges within the income support system. The social partners made a number of calls for such a scheme. However, the Department did not feel this was the appropriate course to take. It felt that waste charges arrangements and waivers must be tailored to local circumstances whereas social income support schemes are national schemes and one-size-fits-all throughout the country.
Waste charges, waste charging arrangements and waivers have to be tailored to meet local circumstances, whereas social income support schemes are national. As there is a one-size-fits-all approach to such schemes, it was felt they could not provide a solution.
We made some progress in the context of the special initiative. During the discussions with the social partners it was put to us that paying the waste charge in a lump sum presented a particular difficulty for people on low incomes. It was suggested access to a pay-as-you-go type arrangement such as the bags or tags available in some areas would help to address this difficulty. We wrote to all local authorities asking, as opposed to directing, them — ultimately they have core responsibility — to request private household waste collectors to provide customers with the option of making smaller payments more frequently.
One further development has the potential to be very relevant and may provide a solution to the problems identified. The Minister is reviewing the overall regulation of the waste sector and recently published a consultation paper to advance this process. Stakeholders and the general public have been invited to make submissions on whether a regulator is needed for the sector. In that context, I am referring to an economic regulator. The Environmental Protection Agency looks after licensing and all operators in the waste business must meet various environmental standards. However, there is not currently economic regulation of the sector.
The question to be answered is whether there is a need for an economic regulator. If so, we must decide what type or model would be appropriate and what powers a regulator should be given. Among the possible options discussed in the consultation paper is the power to impose a public service obligation, a feature of regulation in other sectors. Effectively, contractors are required to operate a cross-subsidisation system in order that services can be provided where it would not otherwise be economically feasible to do so. It could be argued that local authorities which provide waivers for low income groups in respect of waste charges are effectively operating such a system. In that context, if there was an economic regulator of the waste sector, he or she might have the power to impose a requirement on all collectors, whether public or private, to put cross-subsidisation schemes in place to meet the needs of local groups. The consultation process is taking place; 6 October is the closing date for receipt of submissions. The Minister will examine the submissions made and decide what policy proposals he should present to the Government.
In summary, central government has never taken on the role of determining operational matters with regard to waste management. Waste collection is one of the oldest services provided by local authorities. The Government expressed the view, in the debate to which I referred, that local authorities, while working to national and EU environmental standards, should be free to tailor services to meet local needs. In that context, there should be a local approach to determining charges and any waivers in respect of same. Waivers are generally available to low income groups where a local authority provides the waste collection service, but only very limited arrangements in cases of hardship are provided for by some local authorities where the service is provided by private collectors. In the consultation paper on the possible regulation of the sector the idea of a public service obligation which could offer a way forward on the issue is discussed.
That concludes my presentation. Within the constraints under which all public servants operate when they appear before a committee in not commenting on the merits, or otherwise, of Government policy, I will be happy to answer questions.
