Amendments Nos. 121 to 124, inclusive, are related and will be discussed together. Is that agreed? Agreed.
SECTION 27.
I move amendment No. 121:
In page 32, subsection (1), lines 35 and 36, to delete "a product or substance" and substitute "any product, substance, component or packaging".
These are four drafting amendments to the definition of "deposit and refund scheme" in section 27 (1). Essentially, it is proposed to amend section 29 (4) (f) to make it consistent with section 29 (4) (h). The effect of the amendment will be to expand the reference to a product or substance to include any component of or packaging related to such product or substance.
The other amendments are consequential on this amendment and provide for requirements in relation to deposit and refund schemes.
I welcome the fact that the Minister is giving extra consideration to the return and reuse of packaging. Does he intend to introduce more specific requirements given that the dairies, for example, are being taken in by the packaging culture that avoids glass and more easily reusable products, or is that something which, as he told the IBEC conference yesterday, he hopes will be done voluntarily?
I am a very agreeable person.
I wish everybody would go along with that.
If IBEC is as agreeable we will be all right.
At an earlier meeting of the committee I produced a long list of companies which denied that they had any role to play or made any contribution to the waste stream and who claimed that they were justified in not contributing to Kerbside. Will the Minister introduce more detailed regulations or how long will he wait before we see any further action? The voluntary aspects has been cited but how long will the Minister give as a trial period?
We can deal with the Deputy's wishes more specifically under amendment No. 125 regarding life cycle assessment. That amendment demonstrates that I am concerned with not only the voluntary code which I expect the producers to develop but also a statutory provision that will be enacted if the amendment is accepted.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 122:
In page 32, subsection (1) line 38, to delete "the" and substitute "a".
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 123:
In page 32, subsection (1), line 39, after "any" to insert "component thereof or".
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 124:
In page 32, subsection (1), lines 42 and 43, to delete "or substance or, as appropriate, any packaging therefor" and substitute ", substance, component or packaging, as the case may be".
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 125 and 126 are consequential on amendment No. 133 and the three amendments will be discussed together. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I move amendment No. 125:
In page 33, subsection (1), between lines 2 and 3, to insert the following definition:
"‘life cycle assessment' means, in relation to a product, an assessment of the effects on the environment of the manufacture, distribution, marketing and use of the product and the recovery or, as appropriate, disposal thereof (including the use of energy and raw materials in, and the production of waste from, any of the said activities);".
This amendment proposes the insertion of a definition of the term "life cycle assessment" for the purposes of amendment No. 133. As the term suggests, a life cycle assessment should be a cradle to grave examination of all the environmental impacts arising from a product, including how much energy and raw materials are used and how much waste is generated at each stage of its product life. The proposed definition is a basis for a comprehensive assessment of a product for this purpose.
The purpose of the substantive amendment, No. 133, is to empower the Minister to require by regulation that a producer of a product carry out a life cycle assessment of that product in accordance with such procedures as may be specified. The amendment is intended to strengthen the provisions of the Bill to promote waste prevention and minimisation.
We are moving in the right direction in requiring a life cycle assessment. Does the Minister envisage a situation arising such as that which arose in Denmark where, for example and much to the annoyance of their colleagues, they decided not to use aluminium packaging in their mineral and beverage business because aluminium cans in their estimation do not fulfil the same criteria as glass for use as packaging? Does the Minister see this type of restriction stopping certain types of packaging being imported? If he does I would welcome that because all too often Ireland has been used in the past, quite understandably by producers looking for markets, as a place to offload certain products that, perhaps, were not allowed into other countries. Does the Minister see himself going that far down the line? Of course, he would not expect anybody to try to infringe that under the voluntary code but what does he envisage doing if that the code does not operate?
I have proposed taking powers to myself to make such an order. That is encompassed in the Bill. I do not wish to decide now what products might be banned or what decisions might be made. The power to prohibit is provided for in section 28 (2) (h). I make no apology for going as far as I can with a voluntary code because securing agreement to achieve the objectives is a more satisfactory way of doing this than requiring it to be done by statute. However, the statute power will be there. I am trying to insert the assessment mechanism with this set of amendments and I look forward to the Deputy's support in that regard.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 126:
In page 33, subsection (1), between lines 2 and 3, to insert the following definition:
"‘producer' includes such person as the Minister may specify by regulations to be a producer for the purposes of this Part (and such specification may include the importer or vendor of the product concerned);".
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 127 not moved.
I move amendment No. 128:
In page 33, subsection (1), line 9, to delete "identifying opportunities" and substitute "producing proposals within a definite timescale".
Does the Minister find this amendment acceptable?
The amendment would require that a waste audit, as defined in section 27, would have to incorporate an action plan with a specific timetable for implementation. The amendment would therefore involve an inappropriate amalgamation of the concepts of audit and action which are separate under the provisions of the Act. The Bill makes a clear distinction between a waste audit and a waste reduction programme — one refers to the evaluation and the other refers to the work. The import of what the Deputy seeks to achieve is well expressed elsewhere.
The term "identifying opportunities" appears to be promotional "bumpf" whereby a company would outline the opportunities without any——
To what is the Deputy referring?
I am referring to the phrase Deputy Dempsey was attempting to delete. Are the words "identifying opportunities" the strongest the Minister can suggest? It sounds as if he is looking for a brainstorming session rather than any kind of guidance or commitment.
Having heard my officials' advice, having looked at international practice and following consultation with the draftsman, that is the phrase at which we arrived. If the Deputy can suggest a sharper or stronger phrase I will be happy to entertain it.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 27, as amended, agreed.
It is now 1 p.m. and by agreement we will adjourn until 2 p.m. As I have a meeting of another subcommittee in the afternoon, I will not be here for the first part of the afternoon session. Either Deputy McCormack or another person will take the Chair if that is agreed.
I wish to inform the committee that I will not be back in the afternoon. I apologise in advance. The Minister of State, Deputy Allen, will take Committee Stage this afternoon.
We intend to adjourn this afernoon at 4 p.m. and we will be making arrangements to resume the Bill. Depending on our agenda and the Minister's diary, it will probably be the week commencing 7 November.
Will we be meeting on 7 November?
It will not be 7 November, but the week commencing 7 November, subject to it being cleared with the Whips and the spokesmen. I draw the attention of the committee to the fact that we have dealt with three sections this morning. We will now adjourn unil 2 p.m. sharp.
Sitting suspended at 1 p.m. and resumed at 2 p.m.