From the 394 councils in England whose data was taken from Defras Municipal Waste Statistics 2008/9 the top recycler was Staffordshire Moorlands District Council with a staggering 61.58% of all waste recycled and Cotswold District Council close on their heels with 60.83%.
My own council, Kingston upon Thames, the smallest of the Greater London boroughs, came in at number 214 with a "could-do-better" 35.36%. This is despite the introduction of fortnightly waste collections and weekly doorstep recycling collections including compost. If this hadn't been promoted they might have ended up as LB Newham with an abysmal 15.40% and at the very bottom of the league tables.
A step in the right direction for Kingston, but research has highlighted that the recent economic slump is the biggest single factor when it comes to the reduction in our rubbish amounts.
The recession has changed peoples shopping habits. This single act has measurably reduced our rubbish and according to Dr Adam Read, waste management specialist, councils should be re-enforcing positive behaviours now, before we try to shop till we drop again.
In last months Journal for Waste & Resource Management Professionals, the industry feebly attempted to plead innocence when it came to the environmental impacts of packaging and the cost and effect on councils. Jane Bickerstaffe, INCPEN Director, reminds us of course that the product has to be delivered safely, undamaged and with "an ever increasing amount of information". Fair enough so far. She goes on to remind us that there are areas "where there is no room for change" since "enormous reductions have already been made over the last 30 years."
But the job of the packaging industry is to sell the product to the buyer, and when that product is of high value it normally includes high value packaging. High value packaging means more rubbish. Waste that is complex, involving layers of plastics and papers can be more difficult to open and recycle. But the more the seller can make the product look expensive and of high value, the more likely the buyer will be to purchase the product.
That is the job of packaging. That is the job of advertising, media, marketing and promotion. The dilemma is that there is no longer a hiding place from the effects of waste on costs, pollution, industry.
Has it really taken Jane Bickerstaffe 20 years to work out that local councils waste management pays for and sorts out all the mess at the end? She admits now that "Councils cannot dictate what shoppers buy but, because they are responsible for collecting and dealing with discarded materials, they need to minimise both goods and packaging and to optimise the potential for recycling to help them reach their landfill diversion targets."
But other than wanting to talk now with councils, she doesn't fully accept responsibility for her industries actions. The achievements of the last 30 years, and those hard won campaigns including the Waste Minimisation Act, championed by Women's Environmental Network (www.wen.org) some years ago, challenged at a fundamental level the work of INCPEN and others. But the public have paid, through local taxes, as their waste has risen, the cost has risen.
Billions of pounds spent sorting and dealing with what I believe to be unnecessary waste, created by a blinkered industry. The Polluter Pays Principle has never been more pertinent and important and government centrally has to take centre stage. Local authorities
The manufacturing, consumer and packaging industry has spent the last thirty years creating a consumer society that is itself blinkered, shopping not thinking and having no say whatever on the product or process other than to be rewarded for purchasing in increasing amounts: free gifts; two-for-one; re-purchasing vouchers; free memberships; loyalty cards; free credit.
Don't forget that the packaging industry is a carbon polluter and accounts for at least 6% of our nations energy use.
The Polluter Pays Principle needs to be discussed carefully and fairly but it should alongside agreements on fair trade, sustainability indexes, carbon, water and energy use and waste minimisation in order to achieve One Planet Living, as defined by the Surrey based BioRegional Development Group. The entire production loop must be closed, cleaned and sustainable, and paid for and that means everthing.
Their policy is clear - Zero Waste
"Waste from discarded products and packaging creates disposal problems and squanders valuable resources" They also join up the dots regarding fair trade and equality with ten excellent principles for one planet living.
This is still a huge conversation for the likes of INCPEN who are unlikely to act in anything other than self interest, as they have for years already. Any legally binding solution will probably have to be forced on industry by central government in order to have a powerful tax and cost benefit for local authorities.
OK, here is the political parties response to this issue, or what they relate on their websites:-
The Labour Party:
"We believe that the green agenda is fundamentally rooted in Labour values. Labour’s environment, energy and climate change policies are about securing fairness, creating jobs and building strong communities as well as tackling carbon emissions and improving the quality of life. By taking the action we need to tackle climate change and reduce waste we can drive economic growth, make Britain more energy independent, and make it easier for people to live in greener ways." The Conservatives: Britain is struggling to cope with mountains of waste. We will introduce a new approach, one which minimises waste and promotes recycling. A Conservative government will introduce a Responsibility Deal on waste – a voluntary arrangement among producers to cut back on the production of waste and improve its disposal. We will put a floor under landfill tax until 2020 to give businesses long term certainty to invest in new forms of waste disposal and we will encourage councils to adopt a scheme which gives incentives to families that recycle."
The Liberal Democrats: No waste policy, but they do have an interesting policy paper on the Liberal Democrat domestic responses to globalisation.
"Globalisation has brought enormous benefits to the UK, but we also recognise its challenges: from an unbalanced economy over-reliant on particular industries, for example, or to regions suffering from foreign competition, or to communities facing a sudden influx of migrant labour. Unless government develops effective solutions to these challenges, many people may come to see globalisation as a threat, rather than the opportunity that it should be – particularly in the midst of a major recession.
The below policy paper therefore sets out the Liberal Democrat response to the impact of globalisation on the British economy and society.
Our key proposals are:
- Working to make the UK economy competitive and well placed to respond to the challenges of globalisation, ensuring that the UK workforce is as skilled, innovative and adaptable as possible, and promoting greater diversification of the economy.
- Welcoming and managing immigration, and protecting the wages and employment conditions of migrant (and non-migrant) labour.
- Ensuring that moves towards environmental sustainability are not achieved simply by exporting polluting industries offshore."
The Green Party:
- Adopt a Zero Waste strategy, to minimise waste and maximise recycling.
- Ensure all households get comprehensive weekly doorstep recycling and compost collections.
- Introduce a law banning new waste incinerators and setting the earliest practicable date for phasing out any existing incinerators.
- Invest in new sustainable waste technology to create renewable energy.
- Support the recycling industry and create new green jobs.
- Eliminate the use of free, throwaway carrier bags.
- Promote business recycling.
- Implement a law requiring local authorities to set and meet targets towards zero waste.
There are many economic advantages of a zero waste strategy and recycling. It is not just environmental organisations and waste swamped local authorities that are adopting zero waste strategies, many authorities are beginning to realise the benefits as well. Businesses of all sizes have used Zero Waste to improve productivity and increase profits.
Reusing waste is usually better than recycling, in terms of conserving energy and avoiding pollution, but can also generate economic benefits such as a creation of more jobs.
Recycling is a huge economic benefit as it saves lots of money. Taxes on landfill sites are rising continuously in order to reflect the scarcity of the land."
It will be a brave politician who starts to discuss waste and consumption properly, holistically, at this election. Because they know and we all know, that we must reduce our consumption massively in order to start living within our means and the means of planet earth. At the moment the citizens of Kingston upon Thames, and most of the UK where I live are responsible for using three planets worth of resources to feed our consumer lifestyle. Only those people living close to poverty with meagre incomes, are living within the One Planet Living (www.oneplanetliving.org).
There are no realistic alternatives to this reduction of purchasing when it comes to sustainability. We need to learn to live within our means. One way or another.
Om shanti!
No comments:
Post a Comment