Each edition we feature the views of a Local Government Association President. The following is from Councillor Peter Woods, President New South Wales Local Government Association.
Local Government considers that the National Packaging Covenant is flawed in that it does not require the packaging industry to close the loop and take responsibility for their packaging waste.
The concerns with the Covenant, as determined and resolved by the Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) early in 1999, and reaffirmed at every subsequent meeting, are as follows.
- Its definition of product stewardship is based on a principle of ‘shared responsibility’, not extended producer responsibility.
- It does not commit industry to paying a fair price for recyclables, and only requires them to pay market prices.
- It is totally reliant on kerbside collection as the means of recycling, and does not explore other proven initiatives such as industry run collections/ drop offs and container deposit legislation
It is worth examining some of the questionable claims made about the Covenant.
This is a world first in terms of getting industry to the table voluntarily. All industry is being asked to do under the Covenant is pay market prices for recyclables while they benefit from a subsidised collection service.
Local Government is only holding out for a better offer.
Industry have committed some $17.5 million over three years nationally. This will be matched by the State Governments that have signed, providing a total national pool of some $35 million.
The Covenant specifically excludes use of funding for the ‘gap’ between collection services and returns.
Systems involving Point of Sale levies, ‘Compliance Taxes’ and return schemes such as CDL will undermine kerbside or jeopardise its viability.
A system of point of sale deposits and refunds ensures that the ‘legwork’ is done by the users of the product. It also ensures a quality product.
Far from jeopardising kerbside, deposit systems will actually reduce the losses currently incurred by Councils in collecting a relatively valueless product.
If Local Government is not ‘on board’ or ‘at the table’ we run the risk of becoming irrelevant or sidelined.
Local Government will never be sidelined or not consulted in the implementation of the Covenant.
Already LGSA NSW, a non signatory Local Government Association, has been approached by the EPA to assist with a Covenant funded major kerbside contract investigation.
The public have shown overwhelmingly that they are prepared to pay a price for the clean up and for keeping kerbside alive.
Industry funded studies which have uncovered this ‘overwhelming support’ for kerbside continually fail to objectively ask the community what they would like, or provide options from which to choose.
The community have been brainwashed by successive industry funded campaigns to believe that sorting and recycling equates to ‘doing the right thing’.
The principle of product stewardship implies a ‘shared responsibility’. Local Government, as part of the production chain, is best at collecting, and should take on the responsibility for collection and its associated costs.
Part 4 of the Covenant includes Governments as part of the ‘supply chain’ for packaging.
Local Government rejects this assertion as Councils derive no profit or benefit from their involvement in recycling.
Only by being a signatory does Local Government get to sit at the table and have a say in what happens.
On the Covenant Council, Local Government was only ever going to have two seats at the table of some 12 representatives of State Government, Federal Government and Industry.
By sitting at that table, representatives of peak National Local Government organisations would be giving credence to a document and process that is clearly at odds with the goals of industry accountability or waste minimisation.
The Covenant and its associated plethora of studies may to some extent bring about greater efficiencies in the provision of kerbside.
This will not, however, resolve the financial crisis facing recycling, which results from basic economic forces in an unregulated market.
From Local Government’s point of view, unless these market forces issues are addressed, there are no real benefits in signing the National Packaging Covenant. Signing up means selling out on a basic principle that industry is accountable for the waste it produces, and that life cycle responsibility extends beyond the supermarket shelf.
