Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 21 November 2017
38. Deputy Brian Stanley asked the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment the status of progress towards proposed changes to household waste collection charges; and if he has considered an alternative system of tendering the collection of household waste. [49249/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraMy question is on progress on the proposed changes to charges for household waste collection. Has the Minister considered an alternative means?
I thank the Deputy. The necessary regulatory steps have already been put in place to phase out flat-rate fees for household waste collection. The permits of household waste collectors have been amended in order that existing customers who are seeking to renew their contracts or new customers are not offered flat-rate fees. It is worth noting that this measure is not "new" for about half of kerbside household waste customers because they are already on an incentivised usage pricing plan - in other words, a plan that contains a per-lift or weight-related fee. As I announced in last June, mandatory per-kilogram pay-by-weight charging is not being introduced.
This phasing out of flat-rate fees is consistent with national waste policy. Research has shown that all-in flat-rate fees are the least successful pricing structure in preventing waste. However, it is a necessary measure because twice in 2016, local authorities had to exercise emergency powers to make additional landfill capacity available. If emergency measures had not been taken, there would have been no way for waste collectors to continue collecting household bins. In the past two years, the amount of waste disposed of in landfills has increased. We must act now to avert a return to over-dependence on landfill across Ireland.
Furthermore, Ireland faces challenging EU targets to achieve by 2020, including a household waste recycling rate of 50%. Failure to achieve such targets could leave the State open to infringement proceedings and potentially punitive fines. More ambitious waste objectives for 2025 and 2030 are currently being negotiated at EU level.
When introducing the measure to phase out flat-rate fees, the Government gave a commitment to consumers to carefully monitor the transition in the sector. Accordingly, a household waste collection price monitoring group has been established. That group has begun the process of tracking the rates charged by household waste collectors. In addition, the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission is undertaking an independent study of the market that will, inter alia, assess the nature and scale of consumer and operator issues in the household waste collection market and consider whether the introduction of an enhanced regulatory regime could efficiently address these issues in the short and long term.
I thank the Minister for the reply. The problem with what the Minister has done is that he has left a range of options open. Everyone wants to reduce the volume of waste being produced but the problem is that the Minister has left the system open for standing charges, pay-per-lift arrangements, weight bands, per-kilogram charging and weight allowance charges. There is a range of options, therefore, and they can be used in combination. That is the problem with what has happened. There is no control over this.
The Minister mentioned a monitoring group. Who is on the group? I understand the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission did not take up the offer to participate.
What we have is side-by-side competition. According to the Government's regulatory impact assessment in 2012, the household waste collection market in Ireland is unique. It is unique because it is very cumbersome. Poland has enacted legislation to switch away from side-by-side competition to a municipalities system. Finland has also switched from side-by-side competition to a franchise system. Has the Minister examined this? The current model in Ireland is unique among the models of OECD countries in that Ireland does not have either a franchise system or municipal system. Has the Minister considered either of these?
On the matter of having mechanisms other than side-by-side competition, mechanisms been considered and reports have been published on them. The results of the analysis of the household waste collection price monitoring group, in conjunction with the results of the study being completed by the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, will provide an evidence base regarding future monitoring and the potential need for changes to the regulatory regime or a different type of regulation or system. These are all being considered by the commission at present.
The members of the price monitoring group are the chairman, Mr. Frank Conway, a respected media commentator on financial matters, an economist and author of financial guides, Mr. Kevin O'Donoghue, principal officer within the Department, Mr. Eoin Deegan, assistant principal officer within the Department, Mr. Evin McMahon, an economist within the Department, and Mr. Colin Cotter, a statistician from the CSO. Shelfwatch, a marketing research company, has been contracted to carry out the mystery shopping mechanism that is being used to monitor prices.
The Competition and Consumer Protection Commission is not part of the price monitoring group. The reason is that because it is carrying out a review of the industry itself, it believes it would be compromised. It must make recommendations regarding the type of regulation that should be applied.
With regard to the model we are using, side-by-side competition, in some counties, such as County Leitrim, there is only one operator. Has this been considered?
I am concerned that the volumes of waste being produced by manufacturers are not being emphasised enough. If manufacturers are still producing the waste, along with the wholesalers, it is still finishing up in the wheelie bins, be they recycling bins or other bins. That is an issue.
While the gas and electricity markets are privatised, there is still a large number of controls. The Minister is familiar with this in terms of advertising, complaints procedures, etc. The option of franchising, which we have not considered in this State, should be considered. In the estate in which I live, several companies are racing in and out. While this may give an appearance of competition, the companies all charge the same prices, or almost the same prices. I am not sure side-by-side competition is the best model. It is not being used in the main in other OECD countries, where there tend to be franchise or municipal systems. I ask the Minister to review this.
On the Deputy's final comment, there is a review taking place. That is what the commission is doing. I am quite happy to consider the recommendations that emerge from that review.
My objective is twofold. First, it is to try to reduce the amount of waste generated in the first place. As the Deputy knows, we have set up a group involving the retailers and major supermarkets across the country to consider specifically waste being generated at supermarket level. Admittedly, we need to go back a step further in this regard. We are involved in negotiations at European level on the circular economy. At the end-user level, or on the domestic side, we have rolled out brown bins to every population centre of 500 people or more. My intention is to roll out a brown organic waste bin to every single home in the country that wants one and, in tandem, encourage people not only to use brown bins but also to get them to think about what they are putting into it them order to reduce the amount of waste being generated in the first instance.
